• 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.

NYT: ‘Shattered’ Charts Hillary Clinton’s Course Into the Iceberg

Status
Not open for further replies.
Right, which is why Hillary got 3 million more votes.

It's hilarious all of these books examining the disaster of a race when a few key counties swinging the other direction wins her the election and every single book is suddenly about the death of the Republican party.

Let's not go nuts over-analyzing this. She got poor turnout compared to what she should have gotten vs an opponent like this because she's not a great candidate. But she was ahead in the polls and she got more votes on election day. The oddities of the electoral college and the confluence of a whole bunch of other things nudged Trump over the edge. But on election night, Trump's people absolutely thought he had lost.

You can talk about how close the race turned out to be and how a slight change in a few results could have tipped it the other way, but she should never have been in that position to begin with.

Going into the campaign she had almost every advantage, including spending several times over what the Trump campaign did, in a country where up till now money had almost consistently decided elections.

Add in the lukewarm official republican support, especially early on and the fact that the Democratic campaign should have been much more disciplined than Trumps (having much greater political experience) and the real question is how they ended up so close together at all.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
It didn't before? Obama is black, and he was voted for twice. People don't always vote based on social issues, in my experience, people mostly vote for the set of policies that they think will make them and their family better off financially.

We've had like four different studies by now, racial resentment is the strongest indicator for likelyhood to flip Obama to Trump. Its no surprise that a lot of people started to dislike him after Travyon Martin and he was forced to make even a milquetoast statement about race relations in America not being hunky dory
 
It didn't before? Obama is black, and he was voted for twice. People don't always vote based on social issues.

A candidate had never run as explicitly on racial issues as Hillary ran. Imagine the Black Lives Matter movement arising in 2008 or 2012. Do you think we'd have had President Obama if he had publicly mourned the young men and denounced racial inequities in an election year? Hillary showed a lot of courage in tackling those issues openly, but she felt white voters' wrath for it.
 

Black_Sun

Member
No, Hillary voters didn't give up on shit. Those voters defected and will never return. To them the Democratic Party now represents the "other" - the blacks, the gays, the Muslims, the Mexicans, etc. Why do you think they left in the first place? You can preach economics all you want, but they'll still reject you the moment they realize your policies will also help black people. Hillary voters - and the Dems. in general - haven't excommunicated or chosen to ignore anyone. They have, however, indicated they won't compromise on social justice to appease some bigots who probably still wouldn't vote for them.

But you can keep your narrative.

You literally want to set up the Dem party for another loss in 2020.

Many of the same voters voted for Obama. Is their a core of racists that support Trump? Of course. But there's a large section of people that voted for Trump only because they were against Hillary. Look over the reports and you realize that the people who voted for Trump didn't actually actually support but were very much against Hillary. That's what we call a weak candidate.
 

Zyae

Member
Which is what I've been arguing for continually in political threads, but with seeming constant pushback of "we don't need those kinds of voters, they're racist" platitudes. Angry Hillary supporters are doubling down on an obviously flawed strategy, especially in context of the electoral college demographics.

Lots of Clinton fans refuse to admit that her and her campaign fucked up
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
You can talk about how close the race turned out to be and how a slight change in a few results could have tipped it the other way, but she should never have been in that position to begin with.

Going into the campaign she had almost every advantage, including spending several times over what the Trump campaign did, in a country where up till now money had almost consistently decided elections.

Add in the lukewarm official republican support, especially early on and the fact that the Democratic campaign should have been much more disciplined than Trumps (having much greater political experience) and the real question is how they ended up so close together at all.

Biggest likely contributor:
TABLE-2.jpg


Lots of Clinton fans refuse to admit that her and her campaign fucked up

You also going to provide examples, or just post more bullshit like the other poster last page?
 
I still don't understand things like this. The people VOTED FOR HER to be the candidate. Nobody "ran her", we all collectively decided she was the best Democratic candidate.

No, we didn't. We really, really didn't.

Maybe one day you will understand. I doubt it though at this point.
 
The flaw in the campaign I always found most glaring was their attempt to capture the millennial, progressive, leftist etc voters. Those voters just weren't going to buy that message from her, and in retrospect a stronger push should have been made to draw in upper-middle class whites (like those in GA-6) who largely didn't want to be associated with Trump's vulgarity but didn't necessarily relate to much of Hillary's messaging, which sounded a lot like Bernie following the dem convention but always lacked his economic populism.
 

goodfella

Member
He was "One of the Good Ones".

Until he wasn't. (Trayvon Martin.)

That's kind of what I mean. Many of these ambivalent, undecided white voters may be racist to varying degrees, but policies that improve conditions for black people, or 'others', aren't a turn off. In the same way, these people may be racist to varying degrees, but a black president isn't a turn off.
 
Because the DNC controls cable news now? k.

When Hillary was thought to be the long time favorite to win primary and general, yes, they are going to follow the lead that the Clinton machine gives to them. Hedging their bets.

It also just might be a case of Her team being so much better/experienced at it. It also didn't help that Sander did shitty in the south, allowing the media to say it was over.
 

Trey

Member
Lots of Clinton fans refuse to admit that her and her campaign fucked up

We can admit the Hillary fucked up while also acknowledging the virulent undercurrent of racism and misinformation that contextualizes this entire election and the makeup of our voting population.

It's not an "either, or" scenario.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
The flaw in the campaign I always found most glaring was their attempt to capture the millennial, progressive, leftist etc voters. Those voters just weren't going to buy that message from her, and in retrospect a stronger push should have been made to draw in upper-middle class whites (like those in GA-6) who largely didn't want to be associated with Trump's vulgarity but didn't necessarily relate to much of Hillary's messaging, which sounded a lot like Bernie following the dem convention but always lacked his economic populism.

Also we don't turn out in general, which is why I think attempting to capture the youth vote isn't a super hot strategy. The youth don't turn out, not unless you've got an Obama and absolutely no-one in the Dem stable right now is another Obama.

Frankly if my generation wants to be listened to, we need to turn out and vote so that claiming that we'll withhold our votes actually has weight to it, and not just empty threats from people who don't vote anyway
 
That's kind of what I mean. Many of these ambivalent, undecided white voters may be racist to varying degrees, but policies that improve conditions for black people, or 'others', aren't a turn off. In the same way, these people may be racist to varying degrees, but a black president isn't a turn off.

The black president wasn't a turnoff for white people as long as they thought he was trying to help them and only them. When he explicitly addressed black issues, and his own blackness, they thought he'd ceased to "take their side." Chalk it up to white people not wanting to own their racism and embracing this fake-ass "colorblindness" to avoid confronting racial issues.
 

Trojita

Rapid Response Threadmaker
As described in “Shattered,” Clinton’s campaign manager, Robby Mook — who centered the Clinton operation on data analytics (information about voters, given to him by number crunchers) as opposed to more old-fashioned methods of polling, knocking on doors and trying to persuade undecideds — made one strategic mistake after another, but was kept on by Clinton, despite her own misgivings.

These problems were not corrected in the race against Trump. Allen and Parnes report that Donna Brazile, the Democratic National Committee chairwoman, was worried in early October about the lack of ground forces in major swing states, and that Mook had “declined to use pollsters to track voter preferences in the final three weeks of the campaign,” despite pleas from advisers in crucial states.

This was one of the most important parts. You couldn't even get a fucking sign to post in your front yard. The Clinton campaign lost major mindshare and herd mentality. Driving through three connected swing vote states I saw a flood of Trump signs.

Clinton's campaign runners thought all other ways of campaigning were "old school" and TV ads were all that were needed.
 
I mean, this is sort of a weird attitude on that issue specifically. The numbers didn't even place the swing states in danger. When you're a month out and you're up like +8 in Wisconsin or whatever its not immediately obvious to me that your reaction should be "oh shit we're in trouble in Wisconsin, divert resources ASAP"

She made a lot of mistakes, but this election was also shocking to pretty much everyone, not just her team

People on the ground in WI and MI tried desperately to warn Brooklyn that what they were seeing didn't match the data that Mook et al. were using to drive their decisions, and they were roundly ignored. Hell, the Michigan primary alone should have shown them which states and demographics shouldn't be taken for granted, and yet that lesson went completely unheeded, even though the campaign had eight whole months to learn from it.
 

Cipherr

Member
Can you seriously say that the DNC had no preference in the outcome? I think the party's involvement played a role in the outcome of the primary.

The DNC which is made of individuals will always have a preference. If that's the part that bothers you, then don't bother to tune in ever.

Unknown Soldier said:
No, we didn't. We really, really didn't.

Maybe one day you will understand. I doubt it though at this point.

Yes, yes we fucking did. Millions of us, all across the country voted for her to be the candidate. And we did it on purpose. Maybe one day you will get OVER that, but I also doubt it at this point.
 

goodfella

Member
We've had like four different studies by now, racial resentment is the strongest indicator for likelyhood to flip Obama to Trump. Its no surprise that a lot of people started to dislike him after Travyon Martin and he was forced to make even a milquetoast statement about race relations in America not being hunky dory

The black president wasn't a turnoff for white people as long as they thought he was trying to help them and only them. When he explicitly addressed black issues, and his own blackness, they thought he'd ceased to "take their side." Chalk it up to white people not wanting to own their racism and embracing this fake-ass "colorblindness" to avoid confronting racial issues.

Hmm okay, there is definitely more to it than I thought. I still think economic issues are the biggest factor, but I definitely underestimated racism.
 
When Hillary was thought to be the long time favorite to win primary and general, yes, they are going to follow the lead that the Clinton machine gives to them. Hedging their bets.

It also just might be a case of Her team being so much better/experienced at it. It also didn't help that Sander did shitty in the south, allowing the media to say it was over.

Sure but that's a media thing, not a DNC thing
 
The flaw in the campaign I always found most glaring was their attempt to capture the millennial, progressive, leftist etc voters. Those voters just weren't going to buy that message from her, and in retrospect a stronger push should have been made to draw in upper-middle class whites (like those in GA-6) who largely didn't want to be associated with Trump's vulgarity but didn't necessarily relate to much of Hillary's messaging, which sounded a lot like Bernie following the dem convention but always lacked his economic populism.

Agreed. That and there was a big problem with the minority get out the vote in multiple swing states. We had a bunch of media reports on how sophisticated the campaign was but there were glaring ommissions.

Hmm okay, there is definitely more to it than I thought. I still think economic issues are the biggest factor, but I definitely underestimated racism.

There is very little evidence to suggest this. Also to someone above, there was nothing diet about Trump's brand of racism.
 
The flaw in the campaign I always found most glaring was their attempt to capture the millennial, progressive, leftist etc voters. Those voters just weren't going to buy that message from her, and in retrospect a stronger push should have been made to draw in upper-middle class whites (like those in GA-6) who largely didn't want to be associated with Trump's vulgarity but didn't necessarily relate to much of Hillary's messaging, which sounded a lot like Bernie following the dem convention but always lacked his economic populism.

...but she did get those voters, by and large. There was a massive Democratic swing in that demographic this cycle. There just simply aren't enough Dem-receptive rich white people to outweigh major losses from the Obama coalition.
 

Black_Sun

Member
The black president wasn't a turnoff for white people as long as they thought he was trying to help them and only them. When he explicitly addressed black issues, and his own blackness, they thought he'd ceased to "take their side." Chalk it up to white people not wanting to own their racism and embracing this fake-ass "colorblindness" to avoid confronting racial issues.

They still voted for him which means they're open to a Dem taking their votes and that's all that matters
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
People on the ground in WI and MI tried desperately to warn Brooklyn that what they were seeing didn't match the data that Mook et al. were using to drive their decisions, and they were roundly ignored. Hell, the Michigan primary alone should have shown them which states and demographics shouldn't be taken for granted, and yet that lesson went completely unheeded, even though the campaign had eight whole months to learn from it.

This. Mook ignored reality and focused on numbers. It didn't match, and they (well, America in general) paid for it.
 

Arkage

Banned
When Hillary was thought to be the long time favorite to win primary and general, yes, they are going to follow the lead that the Clinton machine gives to them. Hedging their bets.

It also just might be a case of Her team being so much better/experienced at it. It also didn't help that Sander did shitty in the south, allowing the media to say it was over.

Sanders also polled really badly with minorities despite having a better economic message for them. The Clinton name baggage likely helped her in that sense. Sadly ironic that the minority vote ended up solidifying Clinton over Sanders as the nominee, but then wasn't big enough (Obama big) to actually carry Clinton over Trump.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
They still voted for him which means they're open to a Dem taking their votes and that's all that matters

Not one who embraces diversity in big signposted ways (not even getting into policy here, just symbolism) to the extent that Clinton did this election, and that's not exactly an advancement in the Democratic party that I'm eager to walk back
 

Black_Sun

Member
Sanders also polled really badly with minorities despite having a better economic message for them. The Clinton name baggage likely helped her in that sense. Sadly ironic that the minority vote ended up solidifying Clinton over Sanders as the nominee, but then wasn't big enough (Obama big) to actually carry Clinton over Trump.

No, he didn't. He polled badly with older voters.

He was winning 18-29 year old minorities.
 
Sanders also polled really badly with minorities despite having a better economic message for them. The Clinton name baggage likely helped her in that sense. Sadly ironic that the minority vote ended up solidifying Clinton over Sanders as the nominee, but then wasn't big enough (Obama big) to actually carry Clinton over Trump.

It's almost like people don't vote solely on economics or something.

It's almost like people all have their own unique pet causes they care about.

It's almost like

the Democratic party

is a coalition instead of an ideology.
 

guek

Banned
The black president wasn't a turnoff for white people as long as they thought he was trying to help them and only them. When he explicitly addressed black issues, and his own blackness, they thought he'd ceased to "take their side." Chalk it up to white people not wanting to own their racism and embracing this fake-ass "colorblindness" to avoid confronting racial issues.

Do you think race relations improved under Obama?

Do you think it's inherently impossible for them to have improved because of white racists?
 
...but she did get those voters, by and large. There was a massive Democratic swing in that demographic this cycle. There just simply aren't enough Dem-receptive rich white people to outweigh major losses from the Obama coalition.

Right, which in my opinion is evidence that there should have actually been an effort to attract them because if they turned out for her the way they did without really being courted by her campaign, it suggests that there are probably a decent amount of those voters who abstained from voting or went 3rd party that also could have been drawn in with a bit more effort. Going forward, I think it's important to recognize that the fastest growing rifts between the two parties is education level. Look for traditionally R areas with well-educated people regardless of income or ethnicity and I think you'll find a pool of voters who can be swung toward the Dems in the future as the Republican Party continues to reject science, data, etc.
 

KingV

Member
When the "public vs private position" line happened, I knew that he could win, despite the access hollywood tape.

That line was really bad and plays to the policy position discussion everyone is dismissing. Her written policies may have been popular, but then you have this quote that sort of confirms many people's worst fears about her, I.e. "She doesn't really mean what she says".

I get that there's a lot more nuance and context to that quote, but it's not really important for how the sentiment develops among the general public.

I would also say that she sort of reinforxed this in the primary, where she would one day claim to be a moderate and denounce Bernie's policy as sort of a pie-in-the-sky fantasy, and then tack left with a policy that was imitative, but slightly more centrist, but, also, equally as unlikely to ever be passed through both houses of Congress.

You'd see that pattern with College tuition and social security (she supported the grand bargain as recently as 2013). It's not the sole reason she lost of course, but it didn't help.
 

megalowho

Member
You also going to provide examples, or just post more bullshit like the other poster last page?
The thread is about a book that painstakingly details said examples you're asking for. It's interesting that so much of the conversation has already steered towards how every other post-election thread has gone regardless.

Here's a few more excerpts:

The Hill: Clinton Campaign Plagued by Bickering
Her aides took the browbeating — one of several she delivered in person and on the phone that day — in silence. They had a lot of their own thoughts on what went wrong, some of which echoed Hillary’s assessment: her message was off for Michigan, and she had refused to go hard against trade; Mook had pinched pennies and failed to put organizers on the ground; the polling and analytics were a touch too rosy, meaning the campaign didn’t know Bernie was ahead; she had set up an ambiguous decisionmaking structure on the campaign; and she’d focused too heavily on black and brown voters at the expense of competing for the whites who had formed her base in 2008. The list went on and on.

The underlying truth — the one that many didn’t want to admit to themselves — was the person ultimately responsible for these decisions, the one whose name was on the ticket, hadn’t corrected these problems, all of which had been brought to her attention before primary day. She’d stuck with the plan, and it had cost her.

In her ear the whole time, spurring her on to cast blame on others and never admit to anything, was her husband. Neither Clinton could accept the simple fact that Hillary had hamstrung her own campaign and dealt the most serious blow to her own presidential aspirations.

That state of denial would become more obvious than ever to her top aides and consultants during one conference call in the thick of the public discussion of her server. Joel Benenson, Mandy Grunwald, Jim Margolis, John Anzalone, John Podesta, Mook, Huma Abedin and Dan Schwerin were among the small coterie who huddled in Abedin’s mostly bare corner office overlooking the East River at the campaign’s Brooklyn headquarters. Hillary and Bill, who rarely visited, joined them by phone.

Hillary’s severe, controlled voice crackled through the line first. It carried the sound of a disappointed teacher or mother delivering a lecture before a whipping. That back end was left to Bill, who lashed out with abandon. Eyes cast downward, stomachs turning — both from the scare tactics and from their own revulsion at being chastised for Hillary’s failures — Hillary’s talented and accomplished team of professionals and loyalists simply took it. There was no arguing with Bill Clinton.

You haven’t buried this thing, the ruddy-cheeked former president rasped. You haven’t figured out how to get Hillary’s core message to the voters. This has been dragging on for months, he thundered, and nothing you’ve done has made a damn bit of difference. Voters want to hear about Hillary’s plans for the economy, and you’re not making that happen. Now, do your damn jobs.

“We got an ass-chewing,” one of the participants recalled months later.
 

BajiBoxer

Banned
Don't know if I have the stomach for reading the book, but yeah, there were a lot of unforced errors that could have made the Russian interference and collaboration, voter supression, and wackadoodle cable news networks irrelevant.

1. A more professionaly run DNC could have lessened the impact of the Russian hack.

2. Being more proactive on the server issue could have prevented it from lingering as long as it did. Hell, Bush era hindsight should have informed everyone that it was a bad idea in the first place.

3. Implementing a 50 state strategy that had been successful in the past could have helped.

4. Don't give highly paid speeches to bankers, wallstreet, etc. It's just an awful look after 2008 even if the content is benign.

5. Some things are better off not being said at all anywhere it will be recorded, regardless of how true it might be. Like the deplorable comment, the two face commentary, and the coal miners being put out of business quote.

There were a lot of controllable screw ups.
 
This. Mook ignored reality and focused on numbers. It didn't match, and they (well, America in general) paid for it.

One campaign was all about numbers and data and hard facts.

One campaign was all about platitudes and feelings and emotions.

You would think after the success of Obama's hope and change message the DNC would have learned how important getting people to drink the Kool aid is in an election.

I actually laughed at the "go to my website" in the debates. Such a bad idea. Someone was pushing that as a hip appeal to millennials I bet.
 

Black_Sun

Member
Not one who embraces civersity in big signposted ways (not even getting into policy here, just symbolism) to the extent that Clinton did this election, and that's not exactly an advancement in the Democratic party that I'm eager to walk back

What if it's between that and another term of Trump?

You could even walk it back half a step(to where it's not meaningful) and go full on left economically which would be a boon to all of society in the US.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
That line was really bad and plays to the policy position discussion everyone is dismissing. Her written policies may have been popular, but then you have this quote that sort of confirms many people's worst fears about her, I.e. "She doesn't really mean what she says".

Every politician has a public and private view on things. Bernie-bros sure loved to jump on that, when I guarantee Sanders has differing personal and professional views, probably about social issues since he seems to hate Identity Politics so much and retreated to the whitest state in the union.
 
What if it's between that and another term of Trump?

You could even walk it back half a step(to where it's not meaningful) and go full on left economically which would be a boon to all of society in the US.

Honestly I'd rather lose again than give up the fight for civil rights. Sorry.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
The thread is about a book that painstakingly details said examples you're asking for. It's interesting that so much of the conversation has already steered towards how every other post-election thread has gone regardless.

Here's a few more excerpts:

The Hill: Clinton Campaign Plagued by Bickering

Odd, I had no idea there was a book on Neogaf user political views.
If you are not talking about neogaf users, who the fuck are you talking too?
 
That line was really bad and plays to the policy position discussion everyone is dismissing. Her written policies may have been popular, but then you have this quote that sort of confirms many people's worst fears about her, I.e. "She doesn't really mean what she says".

I get that there's a lot more nuance and context to that quote, but it's not really important for how the sentiment develops among the general public.

I would also say that she sort of reinforxed this in the primary, where she would one day claim to be a moderate and denounce Bernie's policy as sort of a pie-in-the-sky fantasy, and then tack left with a policy that was imitative, but slightly more centrist, but, also, equally as unlikely to ever be passed through both houses of Congress.

You'd see that pattern with College tuition and social security (she supported the grand bargain as recently as 2013). It's not the sole reason she lost of course, but it didn't help.

And to be fair, when I jumped ship from Bernie to Hillary after the NY primary, there was a fair amount of that among her supports as well.

It'd be "oh she's an incredibly progressive candidate, just as progressive as Bernie" one sentence and then "universal healthcare is never going to happen in the US, get over it" the next.
 

kirblar

Member
Mook had pinched pennies and failed to put organizers on the ground;
We were hearing this about the general as well.

The ground game/GOTV operation was supposed to be THE failsafe. Ignoring it was insanity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom