Man, I’ve been losing since 1989, and I was 10 back then. I got used to it. My side loses, we’re the ones who will be sent to camps with the Jews and the Gypsies, my dad is in some police profiling and I’m probably in some stupid NSA report. That’s how it is. We lose. Which is why I’m often right when I say “this other guy is gonna win”. At least this time I actually put some money on it, it should pay for a few nice dinners.
I think this will be studied for a long time. My theory is undecideds who pulled unexpectedly for Drumpf last minute (possibly because of some last-minute factors). The models assume the undecideds are going to vote as they always do, which they clearly didn’t.
I’d also like to look at the turnout demographics… HRC was down by a bit in PA with young voters, for instance…
Prodi and Bersani were the only two able to beat Berlusconi at the political elections. Both of them have a heavy polical baggage.
Well, they did lose all 3 this time, and the supreme court is super-f**ked for sure. But I guess we’ll have 2018…
I’d say that Clinton played to her strengths in order to get the Democratic nomination. She’s not a fiery orator, lacks charisma and people don’t trust her. She believes that she has the stuff to be president. So she builds consensus, ingratiates herself with the party elite, builds a support structure within to enable it. It’s politics as usual and it didn’t fly and it sucks to be us, but really, it wasn’t DNC cheating or conniving. Bernie started from nothing. Clinton didn’t, because she knew she couldn’t win from that position, and why should she start from nothing?
I mean, there’s no way Clinton would beat Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden and even Joe Shlabotnik if they started on an equal footing in terms of party support or infrastructure, everybody inside and outside the whole process knew that. But why should she? I’d say that as a candidate she nullified her weaknesses as best she could in the hopes of being a strong president. It’s too bad she couldn’t overcome those weaknesses and now the rest of the world has to pay the price, but honestly, I can’t fault her.
That’s just not true. Jeb! dug his own grave. So did Christie and Rubio. They all just disintegrated.
No, dude. The starting gun for Trump was launched a long time ago. Boing Boing and the rest of the shitty media like you helped make this happen – and Trump won. You too often ignored the progressive candidate that would have beaten Trump in a general election and instead helped to prop up a weak corporatist, Republican-lite candidate like Hillary Clinton.
The incredibly important question today is…
Do you, @beschizza think of yourself as a progressive? You know, the kind that tries to learn from past mistakes and evolve as a human being? You and the rest of the staff on Boing Boing seem to act like you are. Your many posts that decry conservative agendas seem to point that way.https://bbs.boingboing.net/t/boing-boing-why-wont-you-properly-cover-bernie-sanders/62671
Oh, and to the Boing Boing commenters who offered support in private messages, etc. and at least attempted to understood my motivations while the rest of you circled the wagons around the Boing Boing staff and shit all over me.
I know I addressed you first, but please just stop talking to me. Your comments are like salt and I get the feeling you’re enjoying this, and will continue to do so until you personally are affected.
This is exactly what I’m talking about. Those “supernatural parameters” were there from day 1. Clinton was such a bad candidate, that everybody knew even the slightest suggestion of a skeleton in her closet, no matter how outlandish or flimsy, would have been big enough to ruin her chances. And still she got nominated. Whoever thought that was a good idea, should probably sit down next time.
Prodi had little political baggage when he ran. Bersani didn’t win, which is why someone else is running the country with his votes (and besides, by then Silvio was in pieces by his own actions).
I think that depends upon how many people are revolting.
There is a middle-ground where action can be forceful, but not violent. This includes restraining violent people. For example, if a cop threatens to shoot somebody in your neighborhood, is it more violent to tie up that cop, or not? If you do the former everybody might live, but if you do the former somebody might die. Teeth is having the force to enact your plans rather than petitioning somebody else to do it.
The real power of police is not their guns, but their organization. Such as their radios and dispatch. Cops take for granted that if they harass you, you can’t call for backup. So - they feel that they can do whatever they like, it’s all fair game. The ability to organize is what people need to prevail, guns won’t do anything without this.
Is it because she’s a woman, or because she’s the establishment?
A day that will live in infamy.
I think that this is going to be a year that will live in infamy.
Bernie would have fared better than Clinton, I believe.
Right now I see a lot of smug right wingers on twitter. Remember, it’s only smug when liberals do it.
Right… and Drumpf won because he lacked said skeletons? I think the assertion that the winnability of a candidate is correlated with their potential gotchas is pretty silly. What mattered is that her particular gotcha resonated with the anti-establishment message. That, coupled with a well-timed October surprise (intentional or not, maybe Guliani can tell us, or wait he doesn’t know anything) seemed like just the hit to knock her down ~3% a week before the election. Is she a bad candidate because she had this weakness? Well, hindsight sure is 20/20, ain’t it?
“Fascist elected President” doesn’t count as something worth freaking out over?
Trump’s first cabinet pick will be a toss-up between Chachi Arcola and Stephen Baldwin.