Support NeoGAF

[Unknown Soldier]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/hillary-clinton-campaign-donors-post-mortem-232715

The call for a deep and detailed accounting of how Clinton lost a race that she and her donors were absolutely certain she’d win didn’t begin immediately after the election — there was too much shock over her defeat by Donald Trump, and overwhelming grief. Her initial conference call with top backers, which came just days after the outcome, focused primarily on FBI Director Jim Comey’s late campaign-season intervention.

But in the weeks since, the wealthy Democrats who helped pump over $1 billion into Clinton’s losing effort have been urging their local finance staffers, state party officials, and campaign aides to provide a more thorough explanation of what went wrong. With no dispassionate, centralized analysis of how Clinton failed so spectacularly, they insist, how can they be expected to keep contributing to the party?

Or, in the words of a Midwestern fundraiser who’s kept in touch with fellow donors, “A lot of people are saying, ‘I’m not putting another fucking dime in until someone tells me what just happened.’”

But without a framework for holding anyone accountable, increasingly annoyed party money men and women have been left to chatter among themselves about the underlying causes of the party’s defeat and about how to move forward. Some have gone as far as to ignore calls from former Clinton finance officials seeking to thank them, while others muse about leaving politics altogether. A handful of the party’s top donors have even turned to considering direct involvement: Illinois’ J.B. Pritzker and Florida’s John Morgan are considering gubernatorial runs of their own, as is California’s Tom Steyer, who’s been keeping his name in the news by cranking out a steady stream of furious news releases about Trump’s Cabinet nominations.

Still, five weeks after Democrats’ shock, donors are still slow to agree to fund any one organization or blaze any one path ahead.

“Most people are keeping their powder dry. It’s a bad strategy. It is classic Democrat to go into a fight, but pull back or say they’re never going to do politics again,” added another frustrated top-tier fundraiser, noting the lack of attention paid to this month’s Louisiana Senate runoff.

"All the Republican donors I know are organizing campaigns and groups and setting stuff up."

How fucked are the Democrats when even the donor class are wondering what the hell they're supposed to do with this party? Let's see if anyone attempts a realistic, introspective, thoughtful post-mortem of the disastrous Clinton campaign or not. If not, the steady and constant trickle of moderately unpleasant post-mortems from disgruntled insiders will undoubtedly continue. Even after the election, the Clinton penchance for extreme secrecy and paranoia are still preventing the party from an honest accounting of it's own failures.

The complete lack of any visible effort to support the Democratic candidate in that Louisiana runoff election should be just another blaring warning horn to add to what is already a defeaning cacophony of screaming sirens about the future of the Democratic Party, such as it is. Maybe the modern Democratic Party will suffer the same fate as the Whig Party in the mid-1800's.

 

[BUNTING1243]

tried to run the score up instead of focus on states needed to win, lack of economic message to middle class whites, also was a women and this country sucks

 

[The Technomancer]

tried to run the score up instead of focus on states needed to win, lack of economic message to middle class whites, also was a women and this country sucks

Basically

 

[legacyzero]

The donors are the most blind. Even more than a lot of her supporters. Those donors and big money are what killed her chances. She's crooked and untrustworthy. This will be followed by comments of "nuh-uh! Stronger together, I'm with her! Break down the barriers! YADDA YADDA!" The Democratic Party is fucked if it doesn't evolve. Get ready for 8 years of Conservative rule if you don't. They were all warned.

tried to run the score up instead of focus on states needed to win, lack of economic message to middle class whites, also was a women and this country sucks

Come on now. I'll keep saying it: if we put a Black Man in the office, we're more than ready for a white woman. She just wasn't the right woman.

 

[Yoda]

It's not rocket science, the electorate wanted change (in whatever form it was present on the ballot). HRC is as establishment as it gets, Trump wasn't. If they want to hire a bunch of consultants to tell them what they wanna hear: "It was the Comey letter", "It was the Russians!", "The message just wasn't communicated correctly!" they might as well burn the money.

 

[excelsiorlef]

The donors are the most blind. Even more than a lot of her supporters. Those donors and big money are what killed her chances. She's crooked and untrustworthy. This will be followed by comments of "nuh-uh! Stronger together, I'm with her! Break down the barriers! YADDA YADDA!" The Democratic Party is fucked if it doesn't evolve. Get ready for 8 years of Conservative rule if you don't. They were all warned.

I will say nuh-uh to you saying so factually that she's crooked. That's horseshit

 

[The Technomancer]

Forget the popular vote and just look at the margins that lost her PA, MI and WI

Its like 70,000 votes

Any explanation that attempts to answer such a narrow margin of failure is going to be complex

Come on now. I'll keep saying it: if we put a Black Man in the office, we're more than ready for a white woman. She just wasn't the right woman.

Lol this country just spend 8 solid years vocally screaming about how it wasn't ready for a black man

 

[legacyzero]

It's not rocket science, the electorate wanted change (in whatever form it was present on the ballot). HRC is as establishment as it gets, Trump wasn't. If they want to hire a bunch of consultants to tell them what they wanna hear: "It was the Comey letter", "It was the Russians!", "The message just wasn't communicated correctly!" they might as well burn the money.

Yep. And they'll never look inward. They're STILL deflecting and all of it it bullshit. "Sexism! Bernie! Comey! Deplorables!"

But they'll never say " Hillary was a shit choice."

I will say nuh-uh to you saying so factually that she's crooked. That's horseshit

LOl case in point

 

[royalan]

Come on now. I'll keep saying it: if we put a Black Man in the office, we're more than ready for a white woman. She just wasn't the right woman.

Or it can be the fact that BECAUSE we put a Black Man in office, we're seeing what we're seeing now.

I know it's easy to blame Hillary, but we cannot give a pass to the man following Obama. An overt racist surrounded by white supremacists. That means something.

----


Anyway, post-mortems for losing campaigns aren't a new thing.

 

[Laevateinn]

America wasn't going to vote for a woman who so brazenly and viciously slaughtered Benjamin Ghazi on live television.

 

[Dash_Riprock]

I would love some honest, BRUTAL self-reflection on the DNC's part, but I know they'll just take the guilt-free route and blame Russia.

 

[Adaren]

Come on now. I'll keep saying it: if we put a Black Man in the office, we're more than ready for a white woman. She just wasn't the right woman.

It's definitely possible for a woman to be elected President, but that doesn't mean they doesn't mean their gender doesn't make it harder for them.

 

[USC-fan]

seeing how much they raised for recount. Donors not going any where.

Look how much we raised for the green party in a week.

 

[Dierce]

This is what I'm afraid of. The Democratic party needs Wall street and wealthy donors to be in any way viable politically. Many whom just donated to the party they expected would win.

These people will just flock to republicans who promise them tax cuts and financial deregulations leaving the Democratic party extremely weak to mount a challenge nationally.

Even Hollywood might become more conservative to appeal to republicans in power and with the decimation of net neutrality the ISP/media conglomerates will do everything they can to stop dissent of Republican policies that benefit them.

 

[legacyzero]

Or it can be the fact that BECAUSE we put a Black Man in office, we're seeing what we're seeing now.

I know it's easy to blame Hillary, but we cannot give a pass to the man following Obama. An overt racist surrounded by white supremacists. That means something.

----


Anyway, post-mortems for losing campaigns aren't a new thing.

This isn't about Trump though. I think she would have struggled against any candidate the GOP put up. Decades of smear mixed with a lot of truths.

But ask the struggling people in the rust belt if Trump gets a pass, after Hillary's support of trade deals left them in poverty.

I would love some honest, BRUTAL self-reflection on the DNC's part, but I know they'll just take the guilt-free route and blame Russia.

You won't get that with the usual suspects at the helm any more than you'll get it from most Hillary supporters.

 

[The Technomancer]

This isn't about Trump though. I think she would have struggled against any candidate the GOP put up. Decades of smear mixed with a lot of truths.

Which parts of the smears were truthful? Please don't say "she was in the pocket of Goldman Sachs", we have literally just seen what that actually means

EDIT: And this matters because "Hillary was just a shitty candidate, just run someone better" is a conclusion before analysis. It might be true, but if you just assume that you might get your ass kicked in four years

 

[chaosblade]

The message being off was a big problem. Too much "this is why he's bad" and not enough "this is why I'm better." Mudslinging is standard procedure in elections and not difficult for the average voter to tune out, especially if they are otherwise inclined to prefer a candidate.

It didn't help that the people wanted a populist and Hillary wasn't that. Which is why I think Bernie might have been able to hold the key states Hillary lost if he had been the candidate, but who really knows.

 

[The Technomancer]

The message being off was a big problem. Too much "this is why he's bad" and not enough "this is why I'm better." Mudslinging is standard procedure in elections and not difficult for the average voter to tune out, especially if they are otherwise inclined to prefer a candidate.

It didn't help that the people wanted a populist and Hillary wasn't that. Which is why I think Bernie might have been able to hold the key states Hillary lost if he had been the candidate, but who really knows.

"The people want a populist" may be true, but if it is and its the strategy that we need to run on, then I despair. Populism always turns south. Someone has to be the scapegoat.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Yep. And they'll never look inward. They're STILL deflecting and all of it it bullshit. "Sexism! Bernie! Comey! Deplorables!"

But they'll never say " Hillary was a shit choice."


LOl case in point

Lol case in point what?

You don't just get to say she's crooked as if that's just reality and then claim anyone who disagrees is just a Clinton fangirl/boy.

 

[Odrion]

This isn't about Trump though. I think she would have struggled against any candidate the GOP put up. Decades of smear mixed with a lot of truths.

But ask the struggling people in the rust belt if Trump gets a pass, after Hillary's support of trade deals left them in poverty.

You won't get that with the usual suspects at the helm any more than you'll get it from most Hillary supporters.

actually i think it's the opposite and that trump put hillary in this really weird establishment/conspiracy spot. I think she would've done better against someone like rubio.

 

[royalan]

This isn't about Trump though. I think she would have struggled against any candidate the GOP put up. Decades of smear mixed with a lot of truths.

But ask the struggle people in the rust belt if Trump gets a pass, after Hillary's support of trade deals left them in poverty.

Hillary's support of trade deals means nothing. She had no power when NAFTA was signed.

And I have a hard to buying that trade deals mattered much when these voters flocked to a man who built his fortune on the backs of those trade deals.

And Trump has everything to do with this. He's the president-elect. And you can't draft an honest post-mortem without taking into account Trump's appeal. I mean, unless all you want is "Hillary was SHIT."

 

[guek]

I hope they make one and it's public

 

[legacyzero]

"The people want a populist" may be true, but if it is and its the strategy that we need to run on, then I despair. Populism always turns south. Someone has to be the scapegoat.

Bernie isn't just a populist. He's a populist with a loooong history of doing and fighting for good things. But people put blinders on to him because of superficial reasons, identity politics, blind support, etc etc. I was baffled during the entire election season because people would literally hear none of it.

I kept saying it- people wanted non-establishment. They were going to get it. And Hill is as establishment as they come.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Bernie isn't just a populist. He's a populist with a loooong history of doing and fighting for good things. But people put blinders on to him because of superficial reasons, identity politics, blind support, etc etc. I was baffled during the entire election season because people would literally hear none of it.

Ahh yess identity politics was the issue

What?

 

[Odrion]

actually i think it's the opposite and that trump put hillary in this really weird establishment/conspiracy spot. I think she would've done better against someone like rubio.

but then again her campaign at minimum wanted Trump to win so lmao. yes i quoted myself

 

[jack_package_200]

Bernie isn't just a populist. He's a populist with a loooong history of doing and fighting for good things. But people put blinders on to him because of superficial reasons, identity politics, blind support, etc etc. I was baffled during the entire election season because people would literally hear none of it.

I kept saying it- people wanted non-establishment. They were going to get it. And Hill is as establishment as they come.

You mean civil rights?

 

[The Technomancer]

but then again her campaign at minimum wanted Trump to win so lmao

Her campaign counted on the American electorate having any moral standards

Lesson number 1: enough of the electorate is now so thoroughly lacking in moral standards that Donald Trump can be president

 

[royalan]

Bernie isn't just a populist. He's a populist with a loooong history of doing and fighting for good things. But people put blinders on to him because of superficial reasons, identity politics, blind support, etc etc. I was baffled during the entire election season because people would literally hear none of it.

"Identity politics" (read: minority issues) are not superficial reasons. They're the valid concerns of marginalized people living in this country.

I want many things to come from this post-mortem. One thing that better not come out of it is the thinking that Democrats should do less speaking to the concerns of people who they have traditionally counted on to vote for them.

 

[Blastoise]

I would like a return on my investment

 

[Cagey]

You mean civil rights?

Mayor Eric M. Garcetti of Los Angeles said Democrats had not explained to many voters how tolerant social values translated into government action.

“Of course we are for a tolerant, diverse, inclusive, cooperative future,” he said. “It isn’t enough.”

Mr. Garcetti likened the party’s message to the gestures of conciliation proposed by civic leaders in Los Angeles after the Rodney King riots in the 1990s — well intentioned but insufficient.

“If the starting point is: ‘Hey, we are a party and we are a country that stands for blacks and Koreans and people of all stripes liking each other,’ that’s not an agenda,” said Mr. Garcetti, who has not ruled out a run for statewide office. “These values aren’t just about social inclusion. They’re about getting things done.”

Democrats at Crossroads: Win Back Working-Class Whites, or Let Them Go? - The New York Times
https://apple.news/AACOAwoKQTkq_XdE1QQKDbQ

 

[Kayhan]

Well, the donors are the problem.

Their concerns are the concerns of the 1%.

Being rich should buy you exactly zero influence in a well-functioning democracy.

 

[shintoki]

tried to run the score up instead of focus on states needed to win, lack of economic message to middle class whites, also was a women and this country sucks

I always feel like this comment is bullshit meant to pass on blame. She was down in every demographic to Obama. It wasn't just white, but also Young, Black, Hispanic, etc. Didn't she only have a point increase from Obama with Women in general?

She was simply a trash candidate with no clear message to anyone.

 

[epmode]

Could someone specify what people are talking about when they complain about "identity politics"?

 

[The Technomancer]

Democrats at Crossroads: Win Back Working-Class Whites, or Let Them Go? - The New York Times
https://apple.news/AACOAwoKQTkq_XdE1QQKDbQ

Man it's a shame one candidate didn't just run on a detailed platform of various action plans to improve the lives of various marginalized groups

 

[theignoramus]

I dont see it as an inherently bad thing that the donor class are sitting on the sidelines, these people oppose and fight grassroots, progressive movements and promote centre left neo-liberalism.

 

[geomon]

I can't believe some people are still using the "Crooked Hillary" excuse. Please, please point me to the smoking gun already on this because 30 years of investigations and outright fucking smear campaigns run through every form of media available hasn't found it.

Trump on the other hand has actually been found guilty of fucking corruption on more than one occasion. He got a free pass though. Why? Sexism? It's kind of hard to doubt it.

 

[legacyzero]

Ahh yess identity politics was the issue

What?

Blinders again. This was the problem during the whole election season. People didn't hide it either until you called them out on it, and then they got offended like "how daaaaarrree you!" Come on. It's obvious a lot of people were voting based on gender and minority, while ignoring the rest. That's not what I have a problem with. Hell, I'd vote my own mother into office if I could. But it was the whole driver in this election. It's a powerful thing.

I voted for Obama specifically because he was Black, and I loved how he handled himself. Great with words. But I knew nothing about his policy and McCain and Romey are Fuckwits. But then I grew up and started paying more attention.

 

[The Technomancer]

Blinders again. This was the problem during the whole election season. People didn't hide it either until you called them out on it, and then they got offended like "how daaaaarrree you!" Come on. It's obvious a lot of people were voting based on gender and minority, while ignoring the rest. That's not what I have a problem with. Hell, I'd vote my own mother into office if I could. But it was the whole driver in this election. It's a powerful thing.

I voted for Obama specifically because he was Black, and I loved how he handled himself. Great with words. But I knew nothing about his policy and McCain and Romey are Fuckwits. But then I grew up and started paying more attention.

...I don't actually know what you're saying here

 

[royalan]

Could someone specify what people are talking about when they complain about "identity politics"?

It's a dogwhistle.

Basic translation: stop talking so much about issues facing minorities and women! Adopt a politics that establishes the white male as the standard!

 

[excelsiorlef]

Blinders again. This was the problem during the whole election season. People didn't hide it either until you called them out on it, and then they got offended like "how daaaaarrree you!" Come on. It's obvious a lot of people were voting based on gender and minority, while ignoring the rest. That's not what I have a problem with. Hell, I'd vote my own mother into office if I could. But it was the whole driver in this election. It's a powerful thing.

I voted for Obama specifically because he was Black, and I loved how he handled himself. Great with words. But I knew nothing about his policy and McCain and Romey are Fuckwits. But then I grew up and started paying more attention.

What....

This is word salad.

 

[jack_package_200]

What....

This is word salad.

Almost reads like Trump wrote it...its that incoherent.

 

[KO Traveling Hobo]

"Identity politics" (read: minority issues) are not superficial reasons. They're the valid concerns of marginalized people living in this country.

I want many things to come from this post-mortem. One thing that better not come out of it is the thinking that Democrats should do less speaking to the concerns of people who they have traditionally counted on to vote for them.

Hopefully this was a strong enough case study of what happens when you take entire swaths of people's votes for granted, and the DNC won't just turn around and do the same thing to another group of people next election.

 

[Odrion]

Her campaign counted on the American electorate having any moral standards

Lesson number 1: enough of the electorate is now so thoroughly lacking in moral standards that Donald Trump can be president

Honestly we were being pretty naive! Have you consumed what goes for right-wing targeted news for like... an hour? Now imagine that for 4 hours everyday for 25 years. We re-elected Bush, for fucks sake.

 

[ultratruman]

I never liked the term 'post-mortem' for these kinds of things. The phrase connotes a dispassionate scientific investigation, instead of the reality that people use defeats as a way to harden whatever criticisms they already hold.

The party needs a thoughtful but rigorous debate on where to go politically. Tearing Clinton apart may be a good first step, but the Democratic party, on the national and state level, is at their lowest ebb in a generation.

Re-casting the same politicians with the same rhetoric that is completely anathema to the rural, uneducated vote, is obviously not going to work anymore. That's why Pelosi's re-selection was with a much weakened majority. The party needs fresh ideas.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I would love some honest, BRUTAL self-reflection on the DNC's part, but I know they'll just take the guilt-free route and blame Russia.

Well first they tried to blame Comey and the FBI, and the media, and the Bernie supporters, and even the voters. So I guess Russia is the next in line for the blame game. Hilariously, it wasn't actually the Russians who released most of the leaked emails, it was a disgruntled DNC insider.

 

[The Technomancer]

Hopefully this was a strong enough case study of what happens when you take entire swaths of people's votes for granted, and the DNC won't just turn around and do the same thing to another group of people next election.

I've been aghast at the people saying the Dems should have run a different candidate who was more appealing to them "because minorities would have been highly motivated by fear to turn out for them anyway". I have, no joke, seen at least three people paraphrase that exact argument in the last two weeks alone

How clueless do you have to be to be so entitled that you have to be "enthusiastic" about a candidate but you assume black people will fall in line cause the GOP sucks

 

[legacyzero]

actually i think it's the opposite and that trump put hillary in this really weird establishment/conspiracy spot. I think she would've done better against someone like rubio.

That would have been hilarious. Even more funny- I would have loved to seen her go against Jeb, like everybody predicted before the Primary

Hillary's support of trade deals means nothing. She had no power when NAFTA was signed.

And I have a hard to buying that trade deals mattered much when these voters flocked to a man who built his fortune on the backs of those trade deals.

And Trump has everything to do with this. He's the president-elect. And you can't draft an honest post-mortem without taking into account Trump's appeal. I mean, unless all you want is "Hillary was SHIT."

Dude, she was First Lady wasn't she?

You mean civil rights?

Ah- civil rights. Something else she seemed to struggle with. Especially when she looked FUCKING horrible interacting with BLM. It was embarrassing. Yet Bernie was ignored for all the ACTUAL civil rights work he did. But her supporters did the most fantastic mental gymnastics to try and discredit it.

"Identity politics" (read: minority issues) are not superficial reasons. They're the valid concerns of marginalized people living in this country.

I want many things to come from this post-mortem. One thing that better not come out of it is the thinking that Democrats should do less speaking to the concerns of people who they have traditionally counted on to vote for them.

You're absolutely right. Where this is a problem though- is it is a single issue vote just like voting trade deals is. Trade and greed was her Achilles Heel and it was struck throughout the entire season.

 

[Odrion]

I don't really get the statement that since we thought she would win, we should excuse her for having the hubris to do some dumb fucking shit in hindsight. I am assuming that she is more educated in politics and had more analytical resources than us.

 

[royalan]

Ah- civil rights. Something else she seemed to struggle with. Especially when she looked FUCKING horrible interacting with BLM. It was embarrassing. Yet Bernie was ignored for all the ACTUAL civil rights work he did. But her supporters did the most fantastic mental gymnastics to try and discredit it.

...are you freaking kidding?

Hillary Clinton got minority support almost on par with the First Black President. Bernie Sanders responded to BLM by walking off his own stage. Twice.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Well first they tried to blame Comey and the FBI, and the media, and the Bernie supporters, and even the voters. So I guess Russia is the next in line for the blame game. Hilariously, it wasn't actually the Russians who released most of the leaked emails, it was a disgruntled DNC insider.

What?