The numbers you can see in the image from wiki, so if they changed due to new data, the changed. Though I can’t see them changing dramatically.
The “lowest turn out since 2008” I got I think from a CBS article, but if the numbers changed, then that might not be so.
Still, I think the blue bars sever dip in numbers is still accurate, yes?
And I don’t take anything personal, I don’t have an agenda other than to educate and get the information out on what went wrong.
We can debate if the primaries where handed to Clinton all day. The problem as I see it is that there were plenty of people who thought that Sanders was given a bad deal and that Hillary and a corrupt DNC was a big part of that. True or not, the perception was enough to hand the election over to a moron.
It also looks vaguely like Rilke. Don’t ruin Rilke for me.
As Rilke once said:
Perhaps everything terrible is in its deepest being something helpless that wants help from us.
The cynic in me says Rilke died before WWII started, so what does he know. However, he does have a point. We are bigger and better than whomever our figurehead President is. We can overcome this, and we will overcome this. It will require a lot of work, but it will be work that desperately needed to get done anyway.
But until then, apparently we’ll have to lie to the electorate and tell them what they want to hear, not what we’ll do. Apparently we’re not smart enough to tell the difference between bullshit and truth. (Well, maybe not lie precisely; just leave out that we’ll only actually be able to accomplish step 1 before the next election)
I don’t regret voting for Clinton in the primary, and besides Bernie won my state anyway. But he might have been able to motivate the rust belt unions. And perhaps he might have been in the better candidate in that pie-in-the-sky bake-off we called an election. On reflection, Obama also made promises he couldn’t keep… And like Bernie he was not a national figure, not known by name to the entire country.
So yes, we need candidates with no history to promote big ideas we can’t accomplish, but will get us one step closer.
But ultimately, they are okay with wars against their fellow citizens… Also, thinking that Trump will have a different and less bellicose foreign policy is just laughable.
Aye, I forgot that truth means nothing. It doesn’t matter Clinton isn’t actually any more corrupt that your average Jane, or that the DNC didn’t rig the primaries; it looked like that to some of us, we told others of us, and we believed them. It doesn’t matter that Trump is incredibly corrupt, we told ourselves it was all lies spread by media in the can for Clinton.
In addition to the truth that there a lot of white people upset with the erosion of white privilege, and a lot of people in general unhappy with business as usual, I guess the other is… well, I’ll quote B5:
“The truth is sometimes what you believe it to be, and other times what you decide it to be. My task is to make you decide to believe differently”
It’s technically accurate (or at least was when it was made) but doesn’t really tell the whole story. Hillary is already outperforming every pre-2008 Democrat, and there are still ~3.5 million uncounted votes in California.
It’s just that everyone sucks compared to Obama, and that’s exaggerated when the baseline isn’t at zero. I fixed that and added results going back to 1984.
Clinton isn’t actually any more corrupt that your average Jane, or that the DNC didn’t rig the primaries.
Wait, so you are saying that statement is truthful?
Sure, but on the opposite end if you are going to run a major party aimed at smart, principled and sophistocated voters, treat them with respect and find a decent candidate that actualy stands for the things he is preaching instead of one that just gives lip service.
“It doesn’t matter Clinton isn’t actually any more corrupt that your average Jane.”
"It doesn’t matter that the DNC didn’t rig the primaries."
Does that pass your parser?
In millions of votes? I believe that.
But that’s like saying that Star Wars: Episode I outperformed all of the films of the first trilogy. It’s true… until you account for inflation. When you adjust for inflation, Star Wars outperforms Episode I by almost a factor of three.
How does she perform when you adjust for population growth?
Absolutely; they should field inspirational candidates for the top job. When they fail to, that is no excuse to sit on one’s hands and effectively give the job to a certified asshole. Millions of the GOP loathed Trump and still pulled the lever. It looks like a smaller proportion of Dems did the same.
Some are blaming the party for nominating Hillary, but I think the democratic voters share the blame by staying home. Clean hands are cold comfort if it means you’re eating a shit sandwich.
Sorry but I call BS on this whole “Field a lousy candidate than blame the voters for not voting” line of thinking.
BS calling duly noted. I said “share” the blame… Do you not agree that people staying home is a problem? Fucking crazy to me that if you aren’t offered EXACTLY what you want you pout and stay home and let captain crazypants burn it down.
edit: I’m also just trying to point out that the GOP is more traditionally unified than the Democrats. If liberals would come into the tent when voting for the president, we could fight that. Until we have ranked voting, protesting lousy candidates is net negative! (And I don’t mean you personally!)
Out performing other democrats… sorta. Remember we added nearly 100 million Americans since 1984. You can say the Obama numbers are unusually high, but it also shows the number of people willing to vote Democrat. Those are her votes to lose. This is why I never thought a nation that would vote in Obama twice would vote for Trump. THEY DIDN’T! But they also didn’t vote for Hillary. This is also why Trump was losing in the polls nearly the whole time, but those polled didn’t go vote.
The R numbers have been pretty flat for the last 4 elections (which is 16 years). So it isn’t like they had a surge in their base. People didn’t rush to Trump to let him win, some were enthusiastic fans, and others just held their nose and voted the party line. Voter apathy to prevent this is what lost Hillary the election.
This. I did vote, and in a swing state, I voted third party. If I announced this on Facebook, I’d be railed by many people I know, even though the state went to Hillary. There were other races I cared about, and honestly, it took a constitutional amendment for me to vote in the first place (I’m not a landowner.)
Actually, I take back my previous admiration of the chart. Charts that resort to jiggering with the y-axis are only trying the prove a point. The drop-off from the previous elections is no where near what is shown visually in those bars.
Horseshit.
I take it you don’t follow the news much?
I got caught by that. The 2016 number is from analysis with the ~10 million ineligible voters removed while 1984-2012 is all the FEC stats from all voting age people.
