Big red X.
And even more of them vote GOP after this election. We're still in a process of mass realignment. It didn't stop in '08, it kept going.
New Study: Why Obama voters flipped to Trump...The Economy
- Thread starter Jas
- Start date
Psychoward
Banned
Ok? Where did I argue that she didn't? My point was that she did talk about her economic policies and aspirations multiple times.
So You're telling me this fucking guy:
Connects with the poor? He's gonna fight against the 1%?
I honestly can't even begin to understand what goes on in these people's heads. It's like trying to understand how cabbage thinks.
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
Where did trump voters get the idea that democrats economic policies favor the rich? The right says their policies would increase their taxes and hurt businesses.
I feel like what you're actually referring to is a research saying her ads focused more on Trump than her policies, not what she "spoke" about in general.
Trump won because Republicans liked him the most. He didn't "happen" to win or fall into winning, he legitimately and handily defeated all of his opponents. Similarly, Hillary decimated hers.
Well good news:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/12/16/13972394/most-common-words-hillary-clinton-speech
EDIT: gosh what did the gaudy billionaire racist do that made him connect more with poor whites? sadly we may never know.
EDIT2: DNC tells the middle class they'll cut their taxes too. gosh if only we knew why the party of transparent racism connects with them more.
entremet
Member
Middle class have been bearing a large tax burden. Unlike the wealthy, they don't have sophisticated tax avoidance practices. And they don't qualify for many social services that the Dems champion to the poor.
So what's left? The GOP tells the middle class that they will cut their taxes.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
You got that right. Obama was suddenly a "divider in chief", and you best believe folks social media got lit up. (gun control also played a huge part in the rural areas that swung Trump's way. I saw more anti-background check signs than anything else, and it wasn't even close)
badcrumble
Member
I'm pretty sure the left argument is that those people were already voting Republican in 2008 and 2012. It's the people who stayed home in 2016 who are worth analyzing more closely in the future. If you think America wasn't already racist as hell in 2008 and 2012 then maybe you only started paying attention to politics recently.
airmangataosenai
Member
American anti establishment sentiment is a view I usually see from people who arent very engaged and just say to deflect when question. Seems they really believed it though.
Sanders.
There was an interesting convo on twitter a few days ago that pointed out that cutting single (or noncustodial) people (which is a group that's majority male) out of the EITC in the final rounds of program cuts in the welfare reform package likely resulted in a lot of subsequent issues.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
In this thread people pretend Obama's popularity wasn't at an all time high when he left.
You don't get it.
Poor people see Donald Trump and think "He's one of us, if I was rich I would be like him!", they look at Hillary and think "She's a liberal elitist, she's rich because she's a politician, if I was rich I wouldn't be like her at all!".
They think they could be friend with Trump and can't imagine being so with Hillary.
So You're telling me this fucking guy:
Connects with the poor? He's gonna fight against the 1%?
I honestly can't even begin to understand what goes on in these people's heads. It's like trying to understand how cabbage thinks.
You don't get it.
Poor people see Donald Trump and think "He's one of us, if I was rich I would be like him!", they look at Hillary and think "She's a liberal elitist, she's rich because she's a politician, if I was rich I wouldn't be like her at all!".
They think they could be friend with Trump and can't imagine being so with Hillary.
The data we're seeing is telling us that we were getting both Obama->Trump voters AND Romney->Clinton voters. (Hence Clinton overperforming like crazy in wealthier suburban districts which still re-elected GOP reps.) But they were not in the same places in the country, and that hurt badly w/ the EC margins.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
The point is racial resentment was on an upswing, fueled by everything that was happening post-2012, which was a constant in the news/social media post-2012. This shit was so fucking obvious, especially if you lived in a rural white area. Trump might as well been their molotov cocktail, who also said just about everything they were feeling.
It's a gaming forum so something like a Jontron reference would be relevant here. Obama voter, twice. Now go take a look at how pathetic that dude is. He's not that much of an anomaly.
This is actually very worth remembering.
Georgia's margin in 2016 was 5%. In 2012 it was 7%.
Arizona's was 3%. In 2012 it was 9%.
Texas's was 9%. In 2012 it was 16%.
Hillary made big increases in a bunch of states that were traditionally Republican. They just weren't quite enough to win them. Trump made smaller increases in several states that were traditionally Democratic, but they were just enough to win those.
Run the exact same election in 2024 and Hillary probably wins 350 EV just on demographic change.
Of course, that's why Trump voters are so focused on targeting people of color, denying them services, and persecuting them with the legal system. To slow down or reverse demographic changes, and keep America a country for white people. It's not stupid at all. It's perfectly logical.
It's also true that while we on the whole may or may not be more or less racist than in the past, the way that racism and resentment manifests changes wildly based on the discourse of the time. For example, 20 years ago we might have had poorer attitudes towards eg Latinos, but we also weren't so petrified they were stealing our jobs that we'd bankrupt the country to install a useless wall; that's a very recent development. Similarly, we likely hated Muslims more right after 9/11, but we also did not consider banning refugees a primary foreign policy goal; this is also a very recent development. The way we talk about things, and how we deal with and demonstrate our attitudes change drastically, even if we get progressively more tolerant overall/over time.
Shadowhelper
Banned
I keep getting in trouble for saying every brexiter is either dim or racist.
But its true. The young brexiters that I know, only one really, they just have all this stupid russian propaganda stuck in their head, and are just brainwashed into thinking the choice that is going to make them poorer is the right one.
At least, Trump will eventually be gone, I don't believe he makes it beyond one term. Brexit is irreversible. This populist explosion that is fueled by economic despair, racism, Russia, and my theory is a new form of jealousy resentment fueled by the internet.
Especially in the UK, so much of the vote was against 'arrogant londoners' not brussels or the EU. The internet and social media allows the well off to lord over the less well off in a way that never really happened in history.
But of course in the UK, it's a bit different, even though indeed those forces are at play. One of the reasons the UK is so fucked up is Tony Blair. For a brief moment in time he brought hope and positivity to the country but revealed himself to be an insanely corrupt, religious conman, that destroyed the soul of the labour party. Clinton corporatized the democrats and he also did allow cash donations or favor dictate a lot of his policies, but Clinton, wasn't has brazen or anywhere near as corrupt. System of checks and balances, obviously, much stonger in America. Hence, why Trump hasn't done shit yet. Blair also got too full of himself and was a deeply psychologically flawed man obsessed with money. Clinton was this too, but never deluded enough to think there wasn't a line that was going too far.
And of course, our media, is much more toxic and dangerous. America's media has its problems as well, I mean outside of the obvious, like Fox News. But their most read and respected papers aren't Rupert Murdoch neo nazi lite newspapers.
But it's true. A lot of stupid people, one I know, voted for brexit because they legitmately thought it would improve our economy and because the EU is corrupt cartel. The idea that the EU is a corrupt cartel might have some truth, but EU less regulated UK would be ten times as bad. It's just so preposterous to criticize the EU about things we are worse about, like EU migrant treatments. People actually use that as justification for leaving the EU, when half the reason for leaving the EU is because we want less immigrants, and don't give a fuck about Syrian refugees.
DeaconKnowledge
Member
The United states is at a massive crossroads with its economy in where millions of people have been left behind financially and they need an answer. Barack Obama flat out said certain jobs are not coming back. That wasn't his fault of course, but his solutions were not sufficient enough to satiate many Americans.Simply put, a major paradigm shift has to take place, as manufacturing, retail, and other 20th century jobs will not be enough to allow Americans to make a living.
Hillary came along and based her entire campaign on being Obama 2.0. That wasn't good enough, and she paid for it.
Trump meanwhile based his entire campaign on how he was different, had different ideas, was able to use his business acumen to keep jobs here (and also keep jobs out of 'Foreigners' hands and with Americans) and it spoke to people. Obama 2.0 wasn't enough. They took the chance on Trump, despite all the red flags because Hillary Clinton wouldn't have changed anything as much as it NEEDS to be changed.
Did Trump sell Americans snake oil? Absolutely,but Americans decided to take the risk in him rather than Hillary, who's best was the status quo that clearly wasn't benefitting them to the degree needed.
America needs a candidate with a radical plan to change the economy and the American system from its roots. Unfortunately for them, in the general election anyway, the only candidate who made any claims approaching that at all was Donald Trump.
Hillary came along and based her entire campaign on being Obama 2.0. That wasn't good enough, and she paid for it.
Trump meanwhile based his entire campaign on how he was different, had different ideas, was able to use his business acumen to keep jobs here (and also keep jobs out of 'Foreigners' hands and with Americans) and it spoke to people. Obama 2.0 wasn't enough. They took the chance on Trump, despite all the red flags because Hillary Clinton wouldn't have changed anything as much as it NEEDS to be changed.
Did Trump sell Americans snake oil? Absolutely,but Americans decided to take the risk in him rather than Hillary, who's best was the status quo that clearly wasn't benefitting them to the degree needed.
America needs a candidate with a radical plan to change the economy and the American system from its roots. Unfortunately for them, in the general election anyway, the only candidate who made any claims approaching that at all was Donald Trump.
Don't elections typically flip for the encumbants because of this shit? I.e. if the economy isn't perfect for the poor they'll vote for the other guy?
Dems gotta fight this view that here for the 1%. Nothing more to say. They aren't. Fucking Hillary wasn't. Yes she's rich. Yes she knows lots of rich people. But they got fucking records and votes on the books to show them working to fight for the poor. They pushed through the fucking ACA, which, for all it's warts, is there to help the poor fight poverty and not die. They've got to message that shit and force more votes on it to move forward. For the life of me, I have no idea why the good controls the political conversation so much in this country. I guess countless lies just force people to respond.
Dems gotta fight this view that here for the 1%. Nothing more to say. They aren't. Fucking Hillary wasn't. Yes she's rich. Yes she knows lots of rich people. But they got fucking records and votes on the books to show them working to fight for the poor. They pushed through the fucking ACA, which, for all it's warts, is there to help the poor fight poverty and not die. They've got to message that shit and force more votes on it to move forward. For the life of me, I have no idea why the good controls the political conversation so much in this country. I guess countless lies just force people to respond.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
I don't want to downplay the role racism had in this election. It should horrify us that such a racist candidate was able to win 5% of the vote, let alone 46%. It's hard to grapple with this and it speaks to how deeply ingrained the roots of American white supremacy go that a candidate like Trump is possible. I also think it's important that we recognize that every Trump voter who did vote for white supremacy and that we need to be clear as Democrats or just decent people that white supremacy should be unacceptable in all cases and should campaign clearly on opposing it, even if it will cost them the election.
...but it's funny to see people who point at blatantly white supremacist Trump voters and go "welp this entire election was a referendum on race and no Trump voter was motivated by anything other than it" see some stats on people saying they either didn't vote or voted for Trump because of the Democrats stand for the one percent and go "actually this is about race"
...but it's funny to see people who point at blatantly white supremacist Trump voters and go "welp this entire election was a referendum on race and no Trump voter was motivated by anything other than it" see some stats on people saying they either didn't vote or voted for Trump because of the Democrats stand for the one percent and go "actually this is about race"
My point was she did not focus nearly as much effort on her policies as she could have and focused on all the wrong places to boot.
Ads are not very different to me, but yes, I am talking about that one. The media also did not help.
Pretty much said that.. People in Democrat party rallied to Hillary while the Republicans had no one else that could compete with Trump due to populist surge to me it was very foreseeable and Democrats resisted it, though I did not expect her to lose still.
EDIT: My main focus was how everyone seen the rise of populist, but only the Democrats resisted it while the Republicans went all in on Trump the anti-status quo in a time where people were annoyed of of the status quo.
Well, hopefully everything settles and we get a better picture of the midterms/next election. Democrats really need a candidate that can win.
shinra-bansho
Member
Well those who didn't vote think they'll be unaffected by Trump, because they're white and male and studying ecopottery on some loan they'll never pay back... so that is about race.
And those that flipped falsely believe that Trump will help "all people equally" read: people like them "equally"; read: no more special treatment, you guys talk too much about helping people with darker skin than me that took our jobs and superiority. So that is about race.
Or to conclude. All things in the US are about race.
SlickShoesRUCrazy
Member
Millions of people don't actually understand what ^ that means. remember that.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
Ah yes, Flint, Detroit, Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Youngstown are all very white cities filled with people with college degrees for ecopottery. It even references this in the article
What exactly are you saying here about white supremacy being great
Kidding!
I posted the data in the other thread in our ongoing cavalcade of Trump voter postmorteming that Obama-Trump voters typically had high levels of racial resentment.
So there's a selection problem here. Sure, they might care about the economy and not trust the Democrats, but the ones who went on to choose to pull the lever for Trump were actually racists too!
The presentation doesn't give a view of how these people differed from the average American in these survey questions. I think that's a pretty important baseline to have in interpreting these results.
I also think it's worth noting that the results are very different for the drop-off voters, who mostly report opinions and perspectives in line with Clinton voters (i.e., Trump is the devil). So don't conflate the two! The evidence here suggests what I assumed, which is that drop-off voters weren't big fans of Clinton but also assumed she'd just win without them. Oops! Those guys are pretty likely to vote Democratic in 2018 without any special effort (they already think the 2018 elections are extremely important).
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
Definitely, and I don't think we should sacrifice our commitment to racial equality and dismantling racist systems in order to chase these voters, I just think we should present an option that says the reason their lives suck is because they've been fucked over by the 1%, not because Latino immigrants took their job. Maybe that's impossible, but the fact that they don't perceive us as even trying to help them and instead are looking out for the wealthy and it seems to me like we aren't even trying to convince them otherwise. I definitely don't remember Hillary talking about how important it was to overturn the part of Taft-Hartley that makes right-to-work legal.
Sure, it seems like step one would be to nominate a candidate people like and that in the absence of someone they don't like as a figurehead leading the charge they might show up to vote again, and we should definitely be more concerned with the drop-off voters than the Trump voters, but I think it's worth looking at the commonalities between them and trying to offer both a positive vision of the future.
Adding to this is an additional point I think is worthwhile; one that is often overlooked. Those that are being left behind, those losing manufacturing jobs and the like, often fall into one demographic: Baby boomers and the next generation. Talking about re-training programs to 50-60 year olds will never, ever go over well.
Further, to an uneducated factory worker which of these two sounds more likely? That some new training program in some different field both accepts and pays for you followed by you actually getting hired months/years later by that new factory/field and it being located where you live OR that the recently closed factory down the road opens again?
The cold truth is that for most, neither option was ever going to happen - no matter the person in office.
shinra-bansho
Member
Hey, they're the ones telling me that renewable energy and college cost reduction are what would be the most beneficial policies. And that 2016 didn't matter to them.
Leading me to believe they're white, college attending or educated, greenies. And at least privileged enough that they couldn't be assed voting because it didn't matter to their safety and security.
The pottery is just based on the reality that most of the US student body are doing useless degrees.
El_Tiguere
Member
The results of this study should be common sense by now. The economy was #1 in voter's minds heading into the polls (wealth inequality across the globe is nearing civilization-collapsing extremes) and 2/3rds of Americans thought the country was headed in the wrong direction (how did GAF miss the anti-establishment sentiment sweeping across the globe?).
We get it GAF, you are way smarter than a Trump voter. You were researched enough to not get swindled by a sleazy car salesman (but 80% of America only has a high school diploma however).
Clinton was a well-known loyal puppet of that 1% that was being rejected in 2016. She and Bill Clinton Inc wore it on their foreheads as they and their buddies ravaged countries like Haiti and Honduras as the new 21st century white colonizers. To top it all, Clinton was well trained by her mentor Henry Kissinger to be a cunning warmonger full of hubris, as seen in major global debacles like Libya. She was set to lose in a race against a swindler that relatively had HER SAME negative and dishonesty ratings, but promised change and flashy business acumen (yes... which was bullshit, but has been flashy on TV for 30 years).
GAF seems too hellbent on pretending our Democrat shit don't stank. We have corporate cartels running oligopolies and monopolies over many of our basic necessities, and the prices of shelter, tuition, health care, child care, etc. have been ballooning along with corporate executive pay and shareholder wealth. Obama messed it up because he either pandered to the same conglomerates that bankrolled his party, or he was too much of a coward to rile up Americans in the way that a Bernie was doing against all those private interests who have objectively captured our government. Of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations. Democrats like Obama, Clinton, Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, etc. are all too cool with that too.
We can go down the list...
Education could get fixed with free public schools, but there is too much money to be made off of issuing student loans and funding for-profit colleges
Health insurance can be fixed, but the insurance and health care lobbies have the representatives of the people grabbed by the balls. Americans may continue to go bankrupt.
Racism in the criminal justice system could be fixed, but there is too much money to be made in the modern slavery mill of the prison system.
Wealth inequality can be fixed, but there is too much money against giving workers more negotiating power or baselines of support.
Unfairness in the economy against organized cartels can be fixed, but our politicians need hose fat pockets to run for re-election (and the cartels will only fund a politician in return for favors of course). Along came a Bernie Sanders decrying this bullshit (and all the bullshit affecting women, minorities, the young, the old, the poor), which is why the majority of Democrats under 45 actually wanted him to be the Democrat candidate. The DNC decided to fuck with democracy, and run a completely partial process in the primaries (against what the DNC stands for according to its charter).
Bernie should not run in 2020, but we do need a Bernie 2.0 who is another Bernie because he is GENUINE (unlike Hillary or Trump). The genuine enemy of the American people are the cartels who own our government (who use the executive, legislative, and even the judicial branch to hand themselves tax dollars, contracts, subsidies, guarantees, loans, grants, and mainly legislation that gives the cartel more power and wealth (like the laughable Dodd-Frank did for the top 4 banks... or how the ACA was a scam benefiting the health insurers and the health care lobby...
THANKS OBAMA. Trump and the discontent of America (and a lot of the instability still persistent in the world) ended up as his legacy.
We get it GAF, you are way smarter than a Trump voter. You were researched enough to not get swindled by a sleazy car salesman (but 80% of America only has a high school diploma however).
Clinton was a well-known loyal puppet of that 1% that was being rejected in 2016. She and Bill Clinton Inc wore it on their foreheads as they and their buddies ravaged countries like Haiti and Honduras as the new 21st century white colonizers. To top it all, Clinton was well trained by her mentor Henry Kissinger to be a cunning warmonger full of hubris, as seen in major global debacles like Libya. She was set to lose in a race against a swindler that relatively had HER SAME negative and dishonesty ratings, but promised change and flashy business acumen (yes... which was bullshit, but has been flashy on TV for 30 years).
GAF seems too hellbent on pretending our Democrat shit don't stank. We have corporate cartels running oligopolies and monopolies over many of our basic necessities, and the prices of shelter, tuition, health care, child care, etc. have been ballooning along with corporate executive pay and shareholder wealth. Obama messed it up because he either pandered to the same conglomerates that bankrolled his party, or he was too much of a coward to rile up Americans in the way that a Bernie was doing against all those private interests who have objectively captured our government. Of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations. Democrats like Obama, Clinton, Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, etc. are all too cool with that too.
We can go down the list...
Education could get fixed with free public schools, but there is too much money to be made off of issuing student loans and funding for-profit colleges
Health insurance can be fixed, but the insurance and health care lobbies have the representatives of the people grabbed by the balls. Americans may continue to go bankrupt.
Racism in the criminal justice system could be fixed, but there is too much money to be made in the modern slavery mill of the prison system.
Wealth inequality can be fixed, but there is too much money against giving workers more negotiating power or baselines of support.
Unfairness in the economy against organized cartels can be fixed, but our politicians need hose fat pockets to run for re-election (and the cartels will only fund a politician in return for favors of course). Along came a Bernie Sanders decrying this bullshit (and all the bullshit affecting women, minorities, the young, the old, the poor), which is why the majority of Democrats under 45 actually wanted him to be the Democrat candidate. The DNC decided to fuck with democracy, and run a completely partial process in the primaries (against what the DNC stands for according to its charter).
Bernie should not run in 2020, but we do need a Bernie 2.0 who is another Bernie because he is GENUINE (unlike Hillary or Trump). The genuine enemy of the American people are the cartels who own our government (who use the executive, legislative, and even the judicial branch to hand themselves tax dollars, contracts, subsidies, guarantees, loans, grants, and mainly legislation that gives the cartel more power and wealth (like the laughable Dodd-Frank did for the top 4 banks... or how the ACA was a scam benefiting the health insurers and the health care lobby...
THANKS OBAMA. Trump and the discontent of America (and a lot of the instability still persistent in the world) ended up as his legacy.
Escape Goat
Member
Low information voters are real
What about all those Trump voters that are now on Health Insurance thanks to Obama though? They aren't an insignificant number.
El_Tiguere
Member
They learned that their premiums (which were already sky-high for mediocre care) were set to spike by at least 17% a few weeks before the election. Some likely flipped at that point.
n00bsauce87
Member
I would wonder if they still feel the same after the first 100 days. Essentially surveying voters remorse based on the initial question asked
They don't have any remorse. They buy into the lies and misinformation being propagated by the administration.
While most of Trump's stuff was garbage, he did remember to mention the TPP, basically the turnover was simply discontent with the previous administration. It completely ignores how many policies with blocked or compromised.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
It basically just can be summed up as "DERP! CHANGE!"
They didn't care about anything other than his outsider status.
So that magically makes a billionaire the perfect person to restore balance to the force.
Trump cast himself as self made and relatable. He certainly talks at a low enough grade level. He was the molotov to throw at Washington if you were unhappy. Hillary didn't really cast herself as anything, and allowed the negative press to frame who she was as a candidate.
I wish the democrats (and I mean both politicians and base) would actually learn from this shit and change their platform and messaging, but judging from a lot of the responses in this thread it's just going to be met with "lol rednecks" and we'll all be fucked in 2018 and 2020 again.
water_wendi
Water is not wet!
If you take those below the poverty line to twice poverty its near half the nation. Iirc twice poverty line is just under $50k for 4 member family.
Rich Uncle Skeleton
Member
Getting turned off by Dems is one thing; voting for Donald Trump is another. I don't know how you can avoid calling some of these people stupid. To think that Donald Trump and other GOP politicians will stick up for the little guy more than Democrats is just... well, it's either mind-bogglingly stupid or it's to be interpreted as "stick up for the [white] little guy [against all these brown people]."
Vicetrailia
Banned
This has already happened for more than a few million people to be honest, and is not a new policy. In fact congress reduced funding for these kinds of effective programs under the DOL in 2011. Dems want this back plus it applying to a broader base of people. So what's really more likely?
We'll never get back to even 17 million people working in mfg regardless. Reshoring will never make up the jobs that offshoring lost. We aren't getting low tech mfg jobs back, and automation is soaking up the benefits of coming back to the U.S. anyway.
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
Anyone who tries to blame Trump's election on Obama can eat an electroplated dick and believe that no one takes them seriously
Autodidact
Banned
Acting as though Democrats dismiss the "lol rednecks" just smacks of historical ignorance. Before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Democrats had two wings: the northern liberals who favored civil rights and the southern conservatives whose ancestors had been opposed to Reconstruction and founded the KKK. (Ever wonder why Strom Thurmond was a Democrat for years and years?) In every election the Democratic establishment had to placate those two wings lest it provoke internecine conflicts. The New Deal, for example, brought liberal reforms that we still enjoy today, but many of its policies deliberately excluded black people. Why? The southern conservatives would have balked at any advancement of civil rights. This disappointing reality speaks to the nature of populist movements in general: they tend to favor white people (men) at the expense of minorities. Huey Long's "Every Man a King" never had black people in mind. I hope you'll understand also why minorities and women view Bernie Sanders with some skepticism. They know his kind of "movement" usually screws them over.
Anyway, after the Civil Rights Act, those Southern Democrats became Dixiecrats opposed to civil rights legislation. Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy capitalized upon their disaffection and bigotry, persuading them to vote Republican and keep blacks in check. (Why do you think Nixon repeated "law and order" through the entire '68 campaign? Dog whistlin' ain't new.) Reagan came along and swung those voters further-right, and they and their states have been Republican (or Democrats in Name Only) ever since.
Sorry to go on a historical tangent, but I just wanted to emphasize an important point: those voters to whom you refer perceive the Democrats as the party of the blacks, the gays, the Mexicans, the Muslims - all people they hate. They haven't voted Democratic in damn near fifty years. You cannot win them back. It's not because of "corporatist Democrats" or "neoliberal shills" or "both sides are the same" that we haven't had progressive reforms. It's because those "lol rednecks" reject progressive reforms when they realize minorities will benefit, too. Stop criticizing Democrats for refusing to change their platform to accommodate these bigots.
She did cut the margins in those states, but at the time it seemed like a bad strategy to put time, energy and resources into those states and that proved to be right when the battleground states were more important.
If she had won Arizona and Texas then she would have been in the midst of a landslide win, in which case who really cares? I would have rather focus on locking up 270 rather than going for 340 or so.
There was no reason to look at the polls and think Hillary was going to lose Wisconsin.
Campaigns are only as good as the available information, and it mostly said Hillary would easily win. Things changed rapidly at the very end.
Cow Mengde
Banned
B-b-but I was told James Comey and Wikileaks was to blame. Not Hillary having no plan of attack, not campaigning in Rust Belt, unable to clear her image.
GiantEnemyGoomba
Member
Those two things are to blame though. And so are her having no plan of attack and not campaigning in certain states.
Similar threads
- Locked