Nobody owes it, but repuplicans win elections because no matter what they vote for their party. It sucks but that is what happened at least when it comes to states like Florida.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Hillary Clinton publishing book about 2016 election in Sept titled "What Happened"
- Thread starter johnsmith
- Start date
Nobody owes it, but repuplicans win elections because no matter what they vote for their party. It sucks but that is what happened at least when it comes to states like Florida.
And your attitude will be the reason we get Trump for 2 fucking terms.
Seriously, all introspective thought went out the window a week after we took this loss.
THANK YOU. Christ that narrative is stale and it degrades Hillary. She is a highly intelligent and capable politician who should have known better, not some amateur or wilting flower, and she owns her mistakes.
TurnipFritters
Member
It's a little weird to see that, because there was this other guy who ran a godawful campaign, one that was so bad it lost to Clinton, and people frequently point out how he's the most popular politician in America right now.
Well it's been explained to you a half dozen times in this thread...
Skellig Gra
Member
I don't "hate" her. I am heavily criticizing her because she failed to prevent someone who I DO hate from becoming president and ruining my sons future.
Trump is the most popular politician right now? What sane person believes that?
Maiden Voyage
Gold™ Member
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/clinton-trust-sexism/500489/
A Google search will give you several more articles on why she is disliked so much.
Exactly. The Bill Buckner comment earlier in the thread is apt. Throughout the entire cycle most thought Hillary would win easily. The election results were a shock to us. If she had seemed unlikely to win throughout the whole process then it would have been less of a shock/disappointment and there would be less blame at this point. When something goes disastrously wrong unexpectedly people tend to look for reasons why.
I don't see a ton of hate in this thread, tbh. I see people upset at her choices and disappointed that she ran a shitty campaign which contributed to Trump. People in this thread wish she were President. That's not hate.
Sectorseven
Member
Can't wait for the Trump rally book burnings.
Honestly I don't understand why people can't do both? How does reading her book at all effect how anyone deals with Trump's shit in America?
She should put out this book when she wants to, it's her right.
Those two things aren't mutually exclusive. Clinton has an overwhelmingly fulfilling resume to do the duties of the office of president.
Running a campaign is a different skillset, as that's based not in policy, negotiating, but a popularity contest. Especially this election in particular. She doesn't have the charisma to get public adoration ala Obama, but in terms of manuevering tasks within the inner workings of government, that's where her competence lies.
And arguing with you is like arguing with a child because I've named a ton of things and you've just come back with "He's just worse."
How is he worse. Spell it out. Show me he's worse right now. I'm not arguing that Trump isn't bad. I'm not arguing that Trump could end up being worse. I'm arguing that on the merits of what actually happened there's a gulf of fucking difference in the bad Bush did and what Trump has done up until now and arguing against that, especially without any shred of actual evidence, is insanity.
add the fact that he fought with and alienated most of the politicians in his own party constantly, hired and fired his obviously terrible campaign staff like it was a game of musical chairs, and admitted to sexual assault on tape.
Resident_UA
Member
And I explained that I don't agree that it's the same thing. What was the point of your reply? Just keep going in circles?
racism and sexism clearly happen
this was the biggest mistake
everyone knows moderate republicans are a myth, she wasn't supposed to actually listen to the people hyping up the Moderate Darlings, they're just set dressing
TurnipFritters
Member
Clinton should have double downed to appeal to the left instead of courting moderates, Clinton shouldnt have alienated moderates by pointing out that maybe the literal neo nazis supporting Trump are bad, actually.
Ventilaator
Banned
Yeah. Got ignored when I asked this earlier in the thread, but how does Clinton's bad campaign make it okay to vote for a drooling hate-goblin? And are people really claiming that a better campaign would have changed the mind of Trump voters, who have shown that facts and logic and decency and not being shit don't matter to them in the least?
Coriolanus
Banned
Theonik's not american and that's not what he did.
Father_Brain
Banned
The volume and intensity of apologia for Clinton and her failed campaign is vastly greater than that for any losing presidential candidate from either party anytime in the last few decades. I don't know how anyone can dispute that.
FunkyMunkey
Banned
yeah me blaming actual voters and trumps hateful campaign for attracting them, more than hillary, is such a poisonous attitude /s
do you blame the firefighter for not being agile enough to catch the guy jumping off a bridge, or the guy actually jumping off the bridge?
i blame the harbinger of hate and intolerance much more than the person who failed to protect us from it
this "not good enough" bullshit from the left is why we are where we are today
TurnipFritters
Member
Bernie, not Trump. Trump had the campaign that famously won against Clinton's.
CopperPuppy
Member
Resident_UA
Member
Oh yeah. Like that whole Russia story. That thing just won't die! LOL
I don't hate Hillary, I think she would have been a competent, if very middle of the road President. I voted for her.
I also think she made most of her own problems during the campaign, whether it was running her own email server or taking money for speeches to Wall Street. She seemed blindsided to the fact that both of those things would play poorly in the election.
I also blame her for taking positive actions to prop up Trump in the Republican primary because she thought he would be an easier opponent. Instead of joining in with never trumpers about how Trump was unfit for office, she took the more dangerous approach of party over countryy supporting a dangerous candidate because she thought it would benefit her, instead of saying "hey, it's more important that we stop the mad man than it is that I win". I would hate a President Rubio, but would vastly prefer him to Trump.
And then, after all that, she ran a campaign where she did like 2/3 as many campaign events as her opponent, ignored the advice of her husband and Obama, two great campaigners, and ran a polling operation so poor that she didn't realize she was in trouble in key states until literally like a week before the election. Key states, by the way, she hadn't stepped foot in since the primary. Reports are also that she ignored ground teams, including ground teams from her primary opponent, including in states he won. Didn't provide signs, or pamphlets, or buttons and had the brilliant idea of buying TV spots in red states two weeks before voting day.
She deserves some ire, because a lot of her loss was built in to the way she ran her own campaign.
Shit I forgot to list that part (that's why I put that Bush had the entire GOP behind him), but you are absolutely right. Trump had only part of the Republicans behind him, and still won.
As terrible as all of Trump's shit is, it still doesn't compare to re-electing the dumb fuck who's admin lied to the country, got us into a war, and tanked the economy. People better hope Trump doesn't reach that level of terrible.
freeofgreed
Member
How about you turn on the news? If you can't comprehend why someone could find Trump worse than Bush that's on you. I've lived through both. Also if you think arguing with me is like arguing with a child then...don't do it? You're the one who addressed me initially.
EDIT: Also you're comparing 8 years of Bush to 8 months of Trump. Trump at the very least has 3.5 years left. I'm saying he's worse with the knowledge that he'll continue to go fuck up even worse in before his term is done.
American or not, there's only one group of people/sources that uses the term in that manner that you could be picking up on that language from. (and it's not the far left or liberals)
The title is hilarious, like a title for a comedic book.
Reading the blurb, I'm actually looking forward to this. It seems Hillary knows her public career is over and she's taking off the gloves and speaking her mind. I hope that is the case. As she herself recognizes, she's been guarded her entire public life. I rarely ever felt like I was hearing her authentic voice when she spoke. I hope she is truly willing to speak her mind without worrying too much about public perception in this book.
Reading the blurb, I'm actually looking forward to this. It seems Hillary knows her public career is over and she's taking off the gloves and speaking her mind. I hope that is the case. As she herself recognizes, she's been guarded her entire public life. I rarely ever felt like I was hearing her authentic voice when she spoke. I hope she is truly willing to speak her mind without worrying too much about public perception in this book.
Maiden Voyage
Gold™ Member
LOL, stop being purposefully obtuse.And I explained that I don't agree that it's the same thing. What was the point of your reply? Just keep going in circles?
Father_Brain
Banned
It's hilariously pathetic that I still see people using the Access Hollywood tape as proof that Trump was somehow invincible. they're retroactively revising history because they can't admit that their narrative of Clinton as the perfect candidate was BS.
Resident_UA
Member
Those things are literally nothing when compared to what Trump did in the past and still won.
minor effort
Banned
Certainly, George W. Bush looks like a fantastically qualified candidate on paper today compared to Trump, but that's largely benefiting from hindsight. Back in 2000, 2004, 2008, and 2012 our perception of George W. Bush wasn't that of "he was a pretty good candidate, smart and polished". We still had the image of Bush as the naive, stumbling dope who could barely give proper speeches, and who won the first presidential election on a technicality.
And of the bolded, that one was at least a prevailing perception of Bush in a pre-Trump lens.
EDIT: I'll put it this way. If Hillary announces a 2020 presidential run, I'll join others in saying "please just go away". But until then I'll stop short of doing so every time she walks out her front door.
Trojita
Rapid Response Threadmaker
But the idea of stating how qualified, experienced, and intelligent she is contrasts with handwaving that she had the inability to control her campaign at all. The buck stops with her for the campaign. I also blame the DNC for their fucking awful state support. The problem is that all of the major fuckups in her campaign didn't come out until after the election was over. They weren't even hindsight issues. One major important thing was constantly stressed by Bill and Obama, but they were ignored.
If the firefighter's incompetence led to the guy's death and it could have been prevented, yes, I would blame the firefighter. I blame incompetent police officers when someone dies an unnecessary death as well.
TimeEffect
Member
What if she has some juicy trump stories
Resident_UA
Member
Campaigning is like marketing. Sometimes being stupid helps. That's why Trump is a good salesman no matter how dumb he is.
dragonchild
Banned
Other answers were snarkier and more amusing, but it's pretty much this.
Those things are literally nothing when compared to what Trump did in the past and still won.
i mean... the republican and democrat voting bases are obviously different groups with different priorities so i don't see what your point is
she lost because of the obama voters who either stayed home, voted third party, or switched to trump (note that the first group is far far larger than the other two). the low turnout from 2012 and 2008 can easily be attributed to her flaws and mistakes.
Father_Brain
Banned
It's a legitimate issue, but it is very clearly being exploited (if not just desperately seized upon) by people who want to exonerate Clinton and the Dems more generally. It's a lot easier to believe that Trump is solely the product of the malign manipulations of a foreign power than to conclude he's the symptom of a decades-long systemic failure of our political and economic system.
Yes she has. Did you know she was the first candidate to ever say "I'm sorry" in a presidential election concession speech? She literally apologized to all of her supporters for not winning the election.
I think this is part of why she isn't a very good retail politician. He guardedness makes her seem shifty, even when she is not being shifty.
O this day I still don't understand why she didn't release the speeches. IMO, the fallout from not releasing was far worse and lasted far longer than fallout from whatever non controversial statements within would have.
Trojita
Rapid Response Threadmaker
They thought only tv and internet ads were necessary. The campaign and the DNC literally had no signs to give out in most of the country outside of outliers like Philadelphia. Clinton listened to her dumb campaign adviser that believed this.
SolidSnakex
Member
Well, she certainly could explain why she thought it was a good idea to not campaign in Wisconsin. I think many of us want to know why she did that.
You're actually comparing years of Bush to months of Trump by saying he's worse. Jesus Christ...
You didn't say "He could end up being worse than Bush." You didn't say "His first few months are worse than Bush's." You said:
He's not. Full stop.
Steve Youngblood
Member
*bangs head on desk*
Similar threads
- Locked