Support NeoGAF

[DiipuSurotu]

The worst part about her arrogance is that she and her family will be fine. The rest, the people who believed in her and posted dank memes, they will suffer.

Politicians man. Just can't.

I thought she was going to jail?

 

[Goodstyle]

Honestly, it comes down to more than what you guys are saying. It wasn't about turnout. Hillary could have gone to all those states just like she went to PA and Florida, but the result probably would have been the same.

https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn

Read this guy's twitter, he's onto something. It was about messaging. The Clinton campaign had none, they had nothing. Trump was riding a wave of something that resonated with white people in a way that was unheard of. We can't just reduce this to a couple of campaign foibles, Trump had a lot more. The thing is though, Hillary had no message to persuade people with. "America is actually doing alright according to stats and facts" isn't a message that resonates with white America.

 

[Rentahamster]

Just remembered: About a month back, there were rumblings from the Clinton Campaign that they couldn't believe they were "only" leading Trump by 4%.

 

[prwxv3]

She is fine man. All she will be mad about is not becoming President. Her life goal is over.

Its more then that she will be remembered as the candidate that got defeated by Donald freaking Trump

 

[Fury451]

This confirms how cocky they were about winning.

Her campaign was a disaster in approach here.

 

[maquiladora]

They really fucked up.

 

[KingBroly]

Dems are gonna have a hard time outselling Trump Halloween Masks in 4 years

 

[eyeball_kid]

Why/how does the dnc put her through over someone else? I dont understand how that works

edit: misunderstood your question

 

[old manatee]

Honestly, it comes down to more than what you guys are saying. It wasn't about turnout. Hillary could have gone to all those states just like she went to PA and Florida, but the result probably would have been the same.

https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn

Read this guy's twitter, he's onto something. It was about messaging. The Clinton campaign had none, they had nothing. Trump was riding a wave of something that resonated with white people in a way that was unheard of. We can't just reduce this to a couple of campaign foibles, Trump had a lot more. The thing is though, Hillary had no message to persuade people with. "America is actually doing alright according to stats and facts" isn't a message that resonates with white America.

The dank memes didn't resonate with you?

 

[Rentahamster]

Why/how does the dnc put her through over someone else? I dont understand how that works

http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...d-those-anti-democratic-superdelegates-213921

The argument for ditching the superdelegate idea is simple—and superficially convincing. Why should these “insiders” have the power to override the millions who voted in primaries and caucuses? Why should we return, in effect, to the back rooms and insider dealings four decades after opening the process to the people themselves?

Well, here’s why. There are some circumstances where the “will of the voters”—often the will of a plurality of voters—may well put the party on the road to a massive political defeat. Further, it may result in the nomination of a candidate who violates the most fundamental beliefs of that party. Or whose temperament and character might put a dangerous, unfit person into the Oval Office. Under those circumstances, the existence of a bloc of superdelegates means the presence of an “emergency brake,” a last chance to avoid disaster. And while it may be “undemocratic” in the narrowest sense of that term, our political system is replete with “undemocratic” elements that have served us very well.

 

[televator]

Its more then that she will be remembered as the candidate that got defeated by Donald freaking Trump

That is one massive fucking L to end a career on. Jesus. Beat by angry orangutan.

 

[StrategyFan]

Honestly, it comes down to more than what you guys are saying. It wasn't about turnout. Hillary could have gone to all those states just like she went to PA and Florida, but the result probably would have been the same.

https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn

Read this guy's twitter, he's onto something. It was about messaging. The Clinton campaign had none, they had nothing. Trump was riding a wave of something that resonated with white people in a way that was unheard of. We can't just reduce this to a couple of campaign foibles, Trump had a lot more. The thing is though, Hillary had no message to persuade people with. "America is actually doing alright according to stats and facts" isn't a message that resonates with white America.

she didn't need to be a good candidate. she just needed to outperform Trump, who is basically unelectable

it was about turnout. a few hundred thousand votes in a handful of states was the difference.

instead, she threw the election away

 

[Dabanton]

Good thing they didn't pay for all those fireworks.

 

[Garlador]

she didn't need to be a good candidate. she just needed to outperform Trump, who is basically unelectable

it was about turnout. a few hundred thousand votes in a handful of states was the difference.

instead, she threw the election away

It's both.

A "few hundred thousand votes" shouldn't even have been on the table for Trump, considering how quantifiably awful he was as a candidate.

She nether had the right messaging NOR the turnout needed to offset it. People need to accept some hard fact that many people who turned out for Obama in 2012 didn't vote this election, and even harder fact that many who voted for him voted for Trump this year.

I remember one of the GOP (Newt?) arguing with a report using "facts" versus his "feelings". "If the American people feel things are worse, they ARE worse." "The facts don't support that." "Well, you stick with your facts. I'll stick with their feelings."

He was right on the money. Feelings DO usurp facts with millions of desperate or irrationally upset people frustrated with the government, job loss, and typical politicians. "Numbers" don't win elections. You have to resonate with people on a deeper level, and Hillary failed to do so, either with her messaging, or to spur them to the ballots.

 

[NEO0MJ]

In hindsight, yes, Clinton was a terrible candidate and her campaign did countless mistakes.

But let's remember that two days ago, all available information suggested that Clinton would win straightforwardly. All the scientific polls. All the poll aggregators. All the aggregators of aggregators. Obama's high approval rating. The betting markets. The stock markets. Her three debate victories.

It's easy to rewrite history to make her a total failure, but she looked like she was doing a fine job and was on course to winning.

Thing is while it sounds kinda cheesy, Trump was a man who seemed to have defied all odds and was capable of making the impossible possible. He was supposed to be out so many times but only seemed to come back stronger. They should not have underestimated him.

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

Over confidence for Democrats is not a new theme. Obama warned about this:

POLITICS | Mon Aug 15, 2016 | 8:24pm EDT

"If we are not running scared until the day after the election, we are going to be making a grave mistake," Obama told some 60 donors who contributed $10,000 each to attend the fundraiser at a private home on the island.

"If we do our job, then Hillary will be elected president of the United States. But if we do not do our jobs, then it’s still possible for her to lose."

The remarks could foreshadow the president's role this fall in encouraging get-out-the-vote efforts for Clinton, his former secretary of state.

Obama has made clear his disdain for Trump, calling him unqualified for the White House. He told the donors he was tired of talking about Clinton's rival.

ALSO IN POLITICS

Trump and Obama set campaign rancor aside with White House meeting
In second day of anti-Trump protests, civil rights a top concern
"I don't have to make the case against her opponent, because every time he talks he makes the case against his own candidacy," Obama said.

The president is expected to campaign heavily for Clinton in October.

Analysts say the Clinton campaign risks breeding complacency among voters with its assumption of winning the White House Nov. 8, potentially depressing turnout and spoiling potential victories for Democrats down the ballot.
Publicly, Hillary Clinton is warning voters to keep fighting against Republican Donald Trump, but the former first lady’s light schedule and effort to run out the clock could backfire.
“This is not a race where Clinton wants to take her foot off the accelerator,” said Brandon Rottinghaus, a political science professor at the University of Houston who studies presidential politics. “Down-ballot Democrats are also leaning on the Clinton campaign for help in getting out the vote and picking up seats for Democrats.
“Letting up on the gas might make these candidates more vulnerable without cover from a national message. Overconfidence may yield to lack of focus from campaign staff, fewer volunteers and, most damaging, depressed voter turnout [among those] who are convinced that she will win.”
Behind the scenes, the Clinton campaign largely has moved beyond Mr. Trump and is rallying forces and millions of dollars for Democrats in key House and Senate race. Mrs. Clinton’s campaign speeches increasingly are as much about electing other Democrats — such as Tuesday’s pitch for Rep. Patrick Murphy, running to unseat Republican Sen. Marco Rubio in Florida — as they are about her own race.

 

[Diffense]

If you're unhappy with president Trump and want an entity to blame, look no further than the Democratic Party. There are leaked emails that show that the DNC wanted the more marginal or "Pied Piper" Republican candidates to be promoted as viable because they thought Hillary would fare better against them. They wanted to media to talk them up and present them as legitimate so they would have an equivalently flawed opponent to tear them down when Clinton's scandals surfaced. Then, of course, they infamously suppressed Bernie Sanders even when polls showed him doing better against Trump. Having paved the obvious path to victory they then conducted themselves with a certain arrogance that made the defeat we witnessed possible.

I decried the bogeyman, fear-based, herding tactics months ago and got banned because people didn't like the way I expressed my distaste for it. However, since I felt strongly I could only use strong terms and comparisons though no offense was intended. Nonetheless, I found it hard to imagine that a significant number of people would not be completely insulted and angered by what had happened and would not be able to support corruption even when presented with unpalatable choices. IMO, systemic corruption is a far bigger (and more insidious) threat to democracy than a singular undesirable president. Granted, it almost worked as HRC (barely) won the popular vote. Yet, they somehow managed to throw away an obvious win because of conspiring to present a corporatist candidate that a lot of their own people did not want. The disastrous convention told the story and wrote the ending we're now just reading.

 

[StrikeNinja24]

She is fine man. All she will be mad about is not becoming President. Her life goal is over.

She will be known as a main reason why the DNC fell to the most racist cheeto you've ever seen.

http://variety.com/2016/biz/news/disney-world-donald-trump-hall-of-presidents-1201915262/#respond

You let this happen DNC. Most of you will never have another political position in your lives again if the voters have anything to say about it. You are hated by both sides now.

 

[elrechazado]

http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...d-those-anti-democratic-superdelegates-213921

Dems still afraid of McGovern

 

[KingBroly]

she didn't need to be a good candidate. she just needed to outperform Trump, who is basically unelectable

it was about turnout. a few hundred thousand votes in a handful of states was the difference.

instead, she threw the election away

If you knew anything about hated candidates & low-energy v. high-energy candidates, you'd know that it plays PERFECTLY into why Trump won. The margin for error becomes greater, but since you're people are more enthused, you win. It's campaigning 101.

Hillary and Kaine couldn't draw flies without celebrities. That's all you needed to know.

 

[msdstc]

If you're unhappy with president Trump and want an entity to blame, look no further than the Democratic Party. There are leaked emails that show that the DNC wanted the more marginal or "Pied Piper" Republican candidates to be promoted as viable because they thought Hillary would fare better against them. They wanted to media to talk them up and present them as legitimate so they would have an equivalently flawed opponent to tear them down when Clinton's scandals surfaced. Then, of course, they infamously suppressed Bernie Sanders even when polls showed him doing better against Trump. Having paved the obvious path to victory they then conducted themselves with a certain arrogance that made the defeat we witnessed possible.

I decried the bogeyman, fear-based, herding tactics months ago and got banned because people didn't like the way I expressed my distaste for it. However, since I felt strongly I could only use strong terms and comparisons though no offense was intended. Nonetheless, I found it hard to imagine that a significant number of people would not be completely insulted and angered by what had happened and would not be able to support corruption even when presented with unpalatable choices. IMO, systemic corruption is a far bigger (and more insidious) threat to democracy than a singular undesirable president. Granted, it almost worked as HRC (barely) won the popular vote. Yet, they somehow managed to throw away an obvious win because of conspiring to present a corporatist candidate that a lot of their own people did not want. The disastrous convention told the story and wrote the ending we're now just reading.

Not to mention influencing debate questions, staging and preparing hillary with softballs and blindsiding Bernie, brainstorming ways to make him look bad. Two different heads of the DNC, caught working in cahoots with hillary when they're supposed to work with who the people choose.

 

[Puck Beaverton]

It's both.

A "few hundred thousand votes" shouldn't even have been on the table for Trump, considering how quantifiably awful he was as a candidate.

She nether had the right messaging NOR the turnout needed to offset it. People need to accept some hard fact that many people who turned out for Obama in 2012 didn't vote this election, and even harder fact that many who voted for him voted for Trump this year.

I remember one of the GOP (Newt?) arguing with a report using "facts" versus his "feelings". "If the American people feel things are worse, they ARE worse." "The facts don't support that." "Well, you stick with your facts. I'll stick with their feelings."

He was right on the money. Feelings DO usurp facts with millions of desperate or irrationally upset people frustrated with the government, job loss, and typical politicians. "Numbers" don't win elections. You have to resonate with people on a deeper level, and Hillary failed to do so, either with her messaging, or to spur them to the ballots.

Yep. I agreed with him then and still do.

 

[Juken]

I remember laughing at this and checking Mitchelvii's tweets every once in a while for a nice chuckle. The enthusiasm gap I laughed at him for describing was real...

 

[Permanently A]

YAAAAAS QUEEN SLAY

 

[old manatee]

I remember laughing at this and checking Mitchelvii's tweets every once in a while for a nice chuckle. The enthusiasm gap I laughed at him for describing was real...

There was a super PAC that spent 1 million dollars astroturfing social media with pro-Clinton posts.

They seemed pretty enthusiastic at least.

 

[Papercuts]

So much was riding on the winner of this, and they were given the easiest opponent possible and still managed to fuck everything up.

Nice work queeny. Atleast if we can get through 4-8 years of the walking cheeto we can take some solace in Hillary never getting a shot at this again.

 

[Azzanadra]

She is fine man. All she will be mad about is not becoming President. Her life goal is over.

Why does America idolize their presidents in such a way? She's a public servant, and she let us down. I don't care care what her fucking life goal was, she deserves all the scrutiny she has been getting for failing the people. This is her legacy, losing to the most unfavorable candidate in history and by god does she deserve it.

 

[Spooky Scary Skeleton]

Why does America idolize their presidents in such a way? She's a public servant, and she let us down. I don't care care what her fucking life goal was, she deserves all the scrutiny she has been getting for failing the people. This is her legacy, losing to the most unfavorable candidate in history and by god does she deserve it.

The truth

And we all will suffer for it.

 

[old manatee]

YAAAAAS QUEEN SLAY

The same people who kept regurgitating the Queen meme were the same people who were denying that her nomination was a coronation. With no sense of irony whatsoever.

 

[Azih]

So much was riding on the winner of this, and they were given the easiest opponent possible and still managed to fuck everything up.

Nice work queeny. Atleast if we can get through 4-8 years of the walking cheeto we can take some solace in Hillary never getting a shot at this again.

You kidding? Yas Queen Slay just lost you guys the Supreme court FOR ANOTHER GENERATION!

 

[reggieandTFE]

I work for a large national organization that said the turnout operation in Michigan from her campaign in Detroit was basically zero.

 

[aly]

YAAAAAS QUEEN SLAY

If there is any consolation, its that some people will stop saying this. Especially about her. What a shit show this entire thing was. How are they surprised that looking down your nose at people can come back to bite. They had nothing for those swing states. Nothing for rural white voters. The only thing she could offer to southern black voters is not being the other guy. Sorry but it ain't and wasn't enough.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

The same people who kept regurgitating the Queen meme were the same people who were denying that her nomination was a coronation. With no sense of irony whatsoever.

I was one of those people this past week.

After the nomination, I was sure that Dems would win but I never liked HIllary. Then I drank the koolaid this last couple of weeks. And boy oh boy the Hopium was real.

But we should've been running scared. We should have been.

 

[Phlebas]

Nvm

 

[KingV]

There was a super PAC that spent 1 million dollars astroturfing social media with pro-Clinton posts.

They seemed pretty enthusiastic at least.

The kind of enthusiasm money can buy... You racist sexist Bernie Bros.

 

[XenIneX]

Many people viewed Hilary Clinton as some kind of Criminal Narcissistic Sociopath, im not sure how her image fell that low.

A targeted, decades-long campaign of systematic character assassination and conspiracy theories.

A secretive, highly-rehearsed affect developed in self defense, leading people to see her as untrustworthy / "not genuine".

Unjustified suspicions validated by a small handful of high-visibility, low-impact judgement errors, which were subsequently drip-fed to the electorate at strategic intervals to keep trust and enthusiasm low.


I knew this crap would turn her presidential run into a shitshow; I just didn't expect it to happen before she actuallys made it into the Oval Office.

 

[KingV]

A targeted, decades-long campaign of systematic character assassination and conspiracy theories.

A secretive, highly-rehearsed affect developed in self defense, leading people to see her as untrustworthy / "not genuine".

Unjustified suspicions validated by a small handful of high-visibility, low-impact judgement errors, which were subsequently drip-fed to the electorate at strategic intervals to keep trust and enthusiasm low.


I knew this crap would turn her presidential run into a shitshow; I just didn't expect it to happen before she actuallys made it into the Oval Office.

She owns her image as much as anybody else. Were there unfair criticisms. Yes.

Did she also have thirty years of politically expedient flip flops and lies that were clearly designed to build some sort of false personal narrative? Yes

Did she have the charisma of the tin man? Yes

Was she Often detached and smug in public? Yes.

 

[StrategyFan]

If you knew anything about hated candidates & low-energy v. high-energy candidates, you'd know that it plays PERFECTLY into why Trump won. The margin for error becomes greater, but since you're people are more enthused, you win. It's campaigning 101.

Hillary and Kaine couldn't draw flies without celebrities. That's all you needed to know.

i'm not disputing why Trump won

i'm just saying that it wasn't inevitable that Hillary would lose.
against a strong Republican candidate? sure, she had no chance

but as awful of a candidate as she is, she still had a path to outperforming a clown

 

[orthodoxy1095]

A targeted, decades-long campaign of systematic character assassination and conspiracy theories.

A secretive, highly-rehearsed affect developed in self defense, leading people to see her as untrustworthy / "not genuine".

Unjustified suspicions validated by a small handful of high-visibility, low-impact judgement errors, which were subsequently drip-fed to the electorate at strategic intervals to keep trust and enthusiasm low.


I knew this crap would turn her presidential run into a shitshow; I just didn't expect it to happen before she actuallys made it into the Oval Office.

Even if we say for the sake of argument that everything was unjustified, why would you ever want to nominate someone with such a persistent image issue?

 

[Skellig Gra]

Even if we say for the sake of argument that everything was unjustified, why would you ever want to nominate someone with such a persistent image issue?

Exactly, another thing that made Obama great is he was totally clean.

 

[Big Green Anus]

Clinton was a Trump plant

Spoiler

kidding

Laughed at this way more than I should.

 

[A Link to the Past]

It's such a mess, really. Like, think about it - if Clinton did win, we'd have gotten a Republican eventually anyway in 2020. It was way too close for her to actually pull it off. And even then, she wouldn't have had the number of Senate seats required to get anything done with the Supreme Court.

 

[JustenP88]

We're only gonna die for her arrogance.

 

[StrategyFan]

It's such a mess, really. Like, think about it - if Clinton did win, we'd have gotten a Republican eventually anyway in 2020. It was way too close for her to actually pull it off. And even then, she wouldn't have had the number of Senate seats required to get anything done with the Supreme Court.

i think i'd prefer "a Republican" over Donald Trump

 

[chubigans]

Oh hey, the Clinton team is blaming everyone but themselves: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/hillary-clinton-aides-loss-blame-231215

Sexism. The media. James Comey.

On a call with surrogates Thursday afternoon, top advisers John Podesta and Jennifer Palmieri pinned blame for Hillary Clinton’s loss on a host of uncontrollable headwinds that ultimately felled a well-run campaign that executed a sensible strategy, and a soldier of a candidate who appealed to the broadest coalition of voters in the country.

Story Continued Below

They shot down questions about whether they should have run a more populist campaign with a greater appeal to angry white voters, pointing to exit polls that showed Clinton beat Trump on the issue of the economy. They explained that internal polling from May showed that attacking Trump on the issue of temperament was a more effective message.

They offered no apology for the unexpected loss.

Much more at the link.

 

[Sirpopopop]

Your assertion that because Clinton beat Bernie and Clinton lost to Trump, Bernie would have also lost is completely misguided.

First of all, it really does not matter how much conjecture we pull out our asses because Clinton lost in the contest that mattered. You're trying to pull attention away from blaming Clinton in every thread I see you by making Bernie a target instead.

It's pretty simple. I'm making a Bernie a target because he's being propped up as the better alternative.

A lot of you Bernie folks are saying, "But.. but.. if we only nominated Bernie." How do you know that?

Only information that we have is some polls from May.

Do you not see the stupidity of that considering how well polls worked in the GE?

There is no real proof that Bernie would have been a better candidate.

Second, you cannot interchange Bernie and Clinton against Trump like you're trying to do and assume they'll act like constant variables within a set equation. This isn't fucking power levels here, Clinton beat Bernie but that does not automatically mean Bernie would have lost to Trump.

It means he lost to Clinton. So, why automatically consider him the better candidate? That's what I see being done. We can't presume Bernie would have done better.

"Clinton lost to Trump. Bernie would have beat Trump. Clinton sucks. Bernie better."

We don't know how Bernie would have done if he was the democratic nom and we have no way of knowing. We do know though that Clinton did not effectively energize her base, she did not produce voter enthusiasm, her campaign trail was horribly mismanaged, and she sat on her laurels and took her base for granted. We also know that a lot of the enthusiasm for Trump among the people that did vote was centered around him being an outsider. That alone was enough to convince many voters to side with him despite their reservations about everything else. Clinton was a candidate uniquely unfit for this election against TRUMP. Bernie might have lost, again we don't know, but it's absurd to think he would have lost against Trump for the same reasons Clinton did or that he would have lost for the same reasons he didn't win the primary.

We do know that Bernie did not organize more voters than Clinton in the Democratic primary. We do know that Bernie did not galvanize the minority vote at all.

That's what we know. So why do you think things would have been better in the general? You don't know.

You're doing a post-mortem, saying it was a horribly mismanaged campaign, as if that actually mattered.

Ultimately, it didn't matter. Look at the Trump campaign. Are you honestly going to say that was masterfully managed better than the Clinton campaign? He ran through two campaign managers. He had a barebones operation. He got killed in the debates.

It didn't matter, because none of the conventional wisdom mattered. So, it's frustrating to see conventional wisdom being used as some sort of barometer as to how this election cycle was a failure for Democrats.

The GOP bucked conventional wisdom this cycle and won. Their postmortem said they needed to be more inclusive. They ignored that. It worked.

Edit:

Let me add the following from an exit poll:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/election-2016-national-exit-poll-results-analysis/story?id=43368675

True, the economy is the foremost issue. Voters were split on who would it handle better. Trump got the breaks when it came to immigration & terrorism.

I think this is the telling image. The voters clearly indicated they would prefer the status quo or someone more conservative.

 

[guek]

i think i'd prefer "a Republican" over Donald Trump

I'd take 4 more years of Bush/Cheney over Trump in a heartbeat

 

[ironmang]

If there is any consolation, its that some people will stop saying this. Especially about her. What a shit show this entire thing was. How are they surprised that looking down your nose at people can come back to bite. They had nothing for those swing states. Nothing for rural white voters. The only thing she could offer to southern black voters is not being the other guy. Sorry but it ain't and wasn't enough.

This is 100% how I felt her presence was here in PA. Basically every ad was why someone shouldn't vote for Trump. Nothing about her trying to earn the votes. Too much "it's her turn" and "i'm with her". Obama had like a dozen positive slogans that were about his vision and not just about him.

 

[Chie Satonaka]

Why does America idolize their presidents in such a way? She's a public servant, and she let us down. I don't care care what her fucking life goal was, she deserves all the scrutiny she has been getting for failing the people. This is her legacy, losing to the most unfavorable candidate in history and by god does she deserve it.

No lies detected.

 

[Deadbeat]

I'd take 4 more years of Bush/Cheney over Trump in a heartbeat

I wonder what Jeb would be like.