Clinton campaign didn't do tracking polls for the last month, ignored Michigan issues

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not really. The Clinton camp having issues doesn't necessarily change anything about the reality of the Trump camp. We have people there admitting to not knowing wtf they were doing. Are we forgetting they had a 12-year old running their campaign in one city?

Yeah, don't get me wrong, the Trump campaign was pretty ridiculous in many, many ways.

But how in god's name was Clinton's.....worse?

Like, HOW???
 
Stupid motherfuckers.

Perfect first post and poster.

Could Hilgaf tell me how this is someone else's fault or will I have to wait until February for them to see their shadows?

giphy.gif
 
Is there any checks and balances on these potential issues? Like the DNC or even Obama/OFA checking in and making sure things run smoothly, or is it all on Clinton's people to make sure things are running smoothly.
 
We heard for months how much money they had compared to Trump and how superior their ground game was, what the fuck happened? The rust belt and it's blue wall were supposed to be the foundation for the inevitable Democratic victory, how could they drop the ball so badly?

It seems like they got so carried away that they pissed money away on red states thinking they could humiliate the Republicans and neglected to shore up their core states in the EC. It wouldn't have taken that much to win those rust belt states, it really is shocking that they could be so arrogant.
 
Yeah, don't get me wrong, the Trump campaign was pretty ridiculous in many, many ways.

But how in god's name was Clinton's.....worse?

Like, HOW???

Her campaign wasn't ran worse than Trump's. It's just her image problems were vastly worse than his and she thought it was going to be easy due to him being a piece of shit.
 
I was wondering how her experienced team could lose to a defunded poorly managed team. Now I'm learning they were both poorly managed. Heck it might actually be the case that in spite of Trump's best efforts to steal from his own donors his decision to go after traditional blue states was inspired genius.

This news speaks poorly to how well a Clinton admin could've been ran. This is beyond sloppy, it's negligent.
 
It says they didn't do traditional tracking polls. Mistakes are going to be made in every campaign and I can't imagine any state team would claim they needed less money, it's always going to be an issue.
 
Doing fundraising shit that turned out not to have mattered instead of working on her image problem. ooops

My whole thing is that all the anger should go the Clinton campaign and their hubris.

Sure Trump emboldened bigots and they must be resisted, but if Clinton just ran a semi decent campaign, we would've been spared this from the orange idiot and his upcoming reign of terror.
 
Her campaign raised half a billion dollars.

Another half a billion for the party

Several hundred million in likeminded PACs

Effectively limitless resources and they couldn't bother polling?
 
I seriously thought that the reason they didn't worry about Michigan and Wisconsin was because they were 110% confident with NUMBERS. If all this is true that they were getting warning signs and completely ignoring they deserved to lose. Not campaiging in New York and California or the extremely liberal places that barely have a Republican presence to begin with is completely understandable. Michigan and Wisconsin though...

Like others have said, Clinton lost by so little there that any type of bone thrown could have made the difference. Truly the nightmare scenario and all because they just didn't really care.

And we all thought the Trump campaign was the mismanaged one.

Holy.

Shit.

I still cannot get over any of this.

To be fair, this was Trump's only route. And the Clinton camp just didn't take it seriously. Blunder of a century.
 
So....were did all the money raised for the Clinton campaign go ?

Down the toilet, sure but what did they spend it on.
 
My whole thing is that all the anger should go the Clinton campaign and their hubris.

Sure Trump emboldened bigots and they must be resisted, but if Clinton just ran a semi decent campaign, we would've been spared this from the orange idiot and his upcoming reign of terror.

No she ran a fairly decent campaign. It's just that she didn't take her image problem seriously. That's why turnout was so shitty. She never gave people a strong reason to vote for her besides not being Trump.
 
eh...why wouldn't they bring this up during the campaign? just sounds like the usual finger pointing when you're blind-sided and can't explain why yet

no one thought trump would win...not even trump and his team

Yes, but more data from WI, MI might have allowed them to notice something wrong earlier. Nate Silver saw troubling signs in his model, and accounted for systemic polling error and uncertainty. The $2 billion Clinton campaign didn't? Fucking joke.
 
Her campaign wasn't ran worse than Trump's. It's just her image problems were vastly worse than his and she thought it was going to be easy due to him being a piece of shit.

Trump had an image problem as well though and I really don't think it was that much better or worse than hers.

Going by the OP, her campaign clearly had major, major issues. Hubris is a real killer.
 
Please, PoliGAF--continue defending Mook.
 
I didn't follow the primaries very closely, but if they did get blindsided in the rust belt before.... I even chewed a couple people out a few days ago because I didn't see the issue with MI myself.

Not good.
 
No she ran a fairly decent campaign. It's just that she didn't take her image problem seriously. That's why turnout was so shitty. She never gave people a strong reason to vote for her besides not being Trump.

She never went to Wisconsin, was under FBI investigation, and had a huge streak of no press conferences - that alone is not a fairly decent campaign.
 
And yet all the while, we fell all over ourselves talking about how organized the Clinton camp was compared to Trump's disorganized mess of a ground campaign.

It's almost as if we make up these narratives out of thin air to suit the reality that we want to believe in.

Yeeeeah not me :( I'd been viewing Trump as a legitimate threat since he made it past Iowa, and I was never going to be comfortable as long as he was in it...but yes I realize this wasn't the general outlook.
 
Is that why Michigan multiple visits from Hillary, Obama, Kaine, and Sanders within the last few weeks? Trying to make up for lost time and data?
 
Not really. The Clinton camp having issues doesn't necessarily change anything about the reality of the Trump camp. We have people there admitting to not knowing wtf they were doing. Are we forgetting they had a 12-year old running their campaign in one city?

Oh you're totally right about the Trump campaign. I didn't mean to suggest that Trump was organized in any way, but every story, every discussion piece was of the ilk of "Look how much of a mess Trump's campaign is!" followed up by "And look at the brilliant campaign that master politico Clinton is orchestrating!"

I think we just kept repeating that matra, that Hillary was so organized and such an expert and was thinking of everything (because she's been in the game for so long), that we created a bubble against doubt, that got popped Tuesday night. And now we're waking up to the reality that she didn't campaign in Michigan in the final months of the campaign, and didn't visit Wisconsin for months (or ever?), two states that had she won we'd be singing a different tune today.
 
No she ran a fairly decent campaign. It's just that she didn't take her image problem seriously. That's why turnout was so shitty. She never gave people a strong reason to vote for her besides not being Trump.

She never visited Wisconsin.
 
GAF turning faster on Hillary than Hannity did on Romney 4 years ago!

Watching a party eat it's own is fascinating.

Its a vital part of politics. Dems need to be completely ruthless in coming up with a solid explanation. It could take months or years before a consensus that withstands time is reached.

It's been 24 years, and there's still not a consensus on what impact Perot had.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom