Support NeoGAF

[A Link to the Past]

The VP doesn't change the election.

Especially not a VP that disagrees with the top ticket on a ton of stuff that's important to WWC voters.

If Bernie being out there campaigning with her didn't change their minds, why would being VP do that? The VP has no actual governing power.

The far left states generally had the same or higher turnout than in 2012. CA's vote total is insane this year.

But couldn't you just as easily point out how much people overestimate the VP's power, and in turn could have found it more appealing that Bernie be her right-hand man of sorts rather than just someone pushing for her? You could look at it in the same way that the right rallied behind Trump picking someone like Pence, someone who is more conservative.

As far as turnout goes, I was more thinking in super close states. I don't think Bernie would have hurt turnout in Michigan, Wisconsin, or Pennsylvania.

 

[TheOfficeMut]

Do you think voting should be open for one full week beginning on Tuesday and ending on Monday?

What are the pros and cons of this?

 

[VendettaRed07]

I guess I do not really see why they didn't choose Bernie to run as VP. I guess they underestimated how many people were put off by Clinton (and to a lesser extent Kaine, though kind of unfairly). Keeping Bernie closely involved and having him engaging younger voters consistently as part of the campaign could have had the potential to keep them involved.

It's going to be interesting to see how the ramp-up for 2020 goes.

Putting Bernie on the ticket wouldn't have elevated Clinton as much as it would have discredited Bernie.

I hate to say it but her trustworthiness was simply too low. She couldn't take any position because people simply did not believe her or that she was just lying to win elections. Not a single person believed she was actually against TPP.. Not even me. And, Bernie being on the ticket, I don't think would have helped at all.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Like Hillary had every single Dem and celebrity hype man she could have possibly ever asked for against the most disliked candidate in history. If she couldn't beat Trump with the way things went then no VP would have made a difference.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Also, I forgot to ask, but how difficult would it be to implement "second choice voting" (ie, vote for a third-party and a major party; if the third-party wins they win, if they lose your vote isn't wasted)?

 

[VendettaRed07]

Do you think voting should be open for one full week beginning on Tuesday and ending on Monday?

What are the pros and cons of this?

Pros- People get to vote

Cons- It's unfair to republicans that people can actually vote

 

[Gotchaye]

Also, I forgot to ask, but how difficult would it be to implement "second choice voting" (ie, vote for a third-party and a major party; if the third-party wins they win, if they lose your vote isn't wasted)?

As far as I know a state could just decide to do this.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Also, I forgot to ask, but how difficult would it be to implement "second choice voting" (ie, vote for a third-party and a major party; if the third-party wins they win, if they lose your vote isn't wasted)?

Here? nearly impossible.

States could likely implement it if they wanted but the only states that would go for it would be ones that were safe dem anyway.

No chance this ever happens at a federal level.

 

[johnny956]

Pros- People get to vote

Cons- It's unfair to republicans that people can actually vote

Yes they say if voting is too easy then it's an insult to MLK Jr.

 

[Plinko]

The VP doesn't change the election.

Especially not a VP that disagrees with the top ticket on a ton of stuff that's important to WWC voters.

If Bernie being out there campaigning with her didn't change their minds, why would being VP do that? The VP has no actual governing power.



The far left states generally had the same or higher turnout than in 2012. CA's vote total is insane this year.

48% of whites between the ages of 18-29 voted for Trump. There were Bernie voters in that group. Lots and lots of Bernie voters, not to mention the ones who stayed home.

You're speaking in past precedent here. This election was crazy. Nothing old makes sense any more. Him as VP absolutely could have turned the tide. His followers were fanatical about him.

 

[johnny956]

Here? nearly impossible.

States could likely implement it if they wanted but the only states that would go for it would be ones that were safe dem anyway.

No chance this ever happens at a federal level.

Didn't Maine vote on this during the election? Not sure if it passed or not but it was just for state positions if I remember correctly

 

[kirblar]

Bernie as VP wouldn't have magically made Hillary more appealing to WWC voters. The VP doesn't really do anything to sway the election unless they're a disaster, like Palin.

Literally any progressive stalwart like Warren or Bernie would have helped. Bernie clearly would have been a nightmare in the position, but Warren would have been a fine pick.

As far as I know a state could just decide to do this.

It's Ranked Choice voting and Maine just implemented it.

 

[dramatis]

Also, I forgot to ask, but how difficult would it be to implement "second choice voting" (ie, vote for a third-party and a major party; if the third-party wins they win, if they lose your vote isn't wasted)?

Have to be from ground up (state level), you can't expect it from federal side.

Maine got ranked choice passed just this past election, because they got really pissed about their governor.

Ranked-choice voting (RCV) is also known as instant-runoff voting. Question 5 provided that ranked-choice voting be used to elect U.S. senators, U.S. representatives, the governor, state senators, and state representatives.

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

Hillary didn't pick Bernie because they didn't agree or get along well enough to be a team, the end.

 

[Veritigo_X]

Didn't Maine vote on this during the election? Not sure if it passed or not but it was just for state positions if I remember correctly

They did, but it's just state level. Essentially so another LePage situation doesn't happen again.

 

[kirblar]

Hillary did not need Kaine to get Virginia.

 

[Plinko]

Hillary did not need Kaine to get Virginia.

Hillary didn't need Kaine for anything. It was a bad pick.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Also, I forgot to ask, but how difficult would it be to implement "second choice voting" (ie, vote for a third-party and a major party; if the third-party wins they win, if they lose your vote isn't wasted)?

I doubt any state that matters will do this. I don't even think it would help the Democrats that much - iirc, the Libertarian vote would split more in favour of Trump than it did in favour of Clinton.

 

[Shao Kahn on the Lawn]

Hillary didn't pick Bernie because they didn't agree or get along well enough to be a team, the end.

Obama and Biden weren't exactly best friends either. That isn't why you pick a VP.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Literally any progressive stalwart like Warren or Bernie would have helped. Bernie clearly would have been a nightmare in the position, but Warren would have been a fine pick.

Both Bernie and Warren were on the trail with Hillary. Bernie was actually out more than Kaine was. And it didn't change anything.

And it ran the risk of tainting Warren or Bernie as establishment shills who wanted to work in a corrupt, unpopular administration.

 

[Sirpopopop]

Hillary didn't need Kaine for anything. It was a bad pick.

What did the Clinton campaign do that you actually liked?

 

[Box of Kittens]

I generally agree with the sentiment that the next nominee needs to appeal to the working class. I don't like the way people tend to fetishize the white working class vote, but in general Clinton seemed to have trouble connecting with working class voters regardless of race (though obviously the issue was far more pronounced among the WWC). The working class represents a large bloc of persuadable voters, and given the signs pointing to massive Republican overreach, I think they'll be more open to considering Democrats in 2018/2020 than is generally assumed right now.

I don't think Sanders is the solution at all, although this is unlikely to matter anyway as I don't think he's going to run. He has a lot of baggage that wasn't really given much attention this time around because Clinton and Trump were both courting his voters and therefore had strong incentive to praise him. Also, you're really trading one problem for another, as he has similar issues connecting to minority voters as Clinton did in connecting to working class voters (which is not to say that he doesn't care about minority voters or that she doesn't care about working class voters and their issues, just that neither has credibility among those respective groups for whatever reason). If the lesson of 2016, or at least one of them, is that you can't neglect part of your coalition, then Sanders is not the right choice.

To make a long story short, the closest I think we have to an ideal 2020 candidate right now is Sherrod Brown.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

What did the Clinton campaign do that you actually liked?

I liked the shade of blue in the #I'mWithHer logo. It was aesthetically pleasing.

 

[metalslimer]

I generally agree with the sentiment that the next nominee needs to appeal to the working class. I don't like the way people tend to fetishize the white working class vote, but in general Clinton seemed to have trouble connecting with working class voters regardless of race (though obviously the issue was far more pronounced among the WWC). The working class represents a large bloc of persuadable voters, and given the signs pointing to massive Republican overreach, I think they'll be more open to considering Democrats in 2018/2020 than is generally assumed right now.

I don't think Sanders is the solution at all, although this is unlikely to matter anyway as I don't think he's going to run. He has a lot of baggage that wasn't really given much attention this time around because Clinton and Trump were both courting his voters and therefore had strong incentive to praise him. Also, you're really trading one problem for another, as he has similar issues connecting to minority voters as Clinton did in connecting to working class voters (which is not to say that he doesn't care about minority voters or that she doesn't care about working class voters and their issues, just that neither has credibility among those respective groups for whatever reason). If the lesson of 2016, or at least one of them, is that you can't neglect part of your coalition, then Sanders is not the right choice.

To make a long story short, the closest I think we have to an ideal 2020 candidate right now is Sherrod Brown.

If he wins reelection I would really hate to lose that Senate seat though because we probably aren't getting it back

 

[PBY]

Hillary didn't need Kaine for anything. It was a bad pick.

Yeah, I have to agree. I understand that Veeps historically don't move the needle... but this was an election that bucked history in so many ways.

In hindsight, Warren or Bernie could have been huge.

 

[kirblar]

Both Bernie and Warren were on the trail with Hillary. Bernie was actually out more than Kaine was. And it didn't change anything.

And it ran the risk of tainting Warren or Bernie as establishment shills who wanted to work in a corrupt, unpopular administration.

There's a huge, huge symbolic difference between having them campaign for you and actually picking them as the VP. Warren would have been a pain in the ass too, but for much, much better reasons than Bernie.

 

[Box of Kittens]

What did the Clinton campaign do that you actually liked?

It's amazing how every losing campaign couldn't do anything right. You saw the same thing with John Kerry after the 2004 election, when the truth is he ran a perfectly competent (though unspectacular) campaign. Don't get me wrong, the Clinton campaign made a lot of mistakes but they also did a number of things well. She did win the popular vote despite FBI interference, and just a small shift in votes completely changes the conversation about this campaign, as Nate Silver pointed out.

 

[PBY]

It's amazing how every losing campaign couldn't do anything right. You saw the same thing with John Kerry after the 2004 election, when the truth is he ran a perfectly competent (though unspectacular) campaign. Don't get me wrong, the Clinton campaign made a lot of mistakes but they also did a number of things well. She did win the popular vote despite FBI interference, and just a small shift in votes completely changes the conversation about this campaign, as Nate Silver pointed out.

Totally agree. Very important to separate process from result.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

If he wins reelection I would really hate to lose that Senate seat though because we probably aren't getting it back

Agreed, very much. Losing that incumbency bonus would be just awful, it's the only good shot at keeping hold of a rapidly reddening state. I don't think it's going to be Brown.

 

[neurosisxeno]

If she wants good graces with the left, she needs to renounce a lot of the garbage shit she's said over the years.

Some of the old Fox personalities have turned it around. Apparently Glenn Beck of all people is really moderate now. Says he had a mental illness that he's now managing and has apologized time and time again for how he talked about Obama, and even claimed Obama made him a better man. He's got a lot of work to do to be a darling to the left, but he's racking up the points.

I don't see why Megyn Kelly couldn't do the same. If anything her NeverTrump status this election has already endeared her to portions of the left. She's undeniably a smart woman, and a great television personality. I could see her becoming one of the "Republican" commentators on another network--like an MSNBC-friendly Republican.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Hillary didn't need Kaine for anything. It was a bad pick.

She honestly may have not won Virginia without him. She lost Pennsylvania ffs. I think if a VP can get you a state like that then they did their job.

The bad pick was Hillary herself.

 

[RastaMentality]

Some of the old Fox personalities have turned it around. Apparently Glenn Beck of all people is really moderate now. Says he had a mental illness that he's now managing and has apologized time and time again for how he talked about Obama, and even claimed Obama made him a better man. He's got a lot of work to do to be a darling to the left, but he's racking up the points.

I don't see why Megyn Kelly couldn't do the same. If anything her NeverTrump status this election has already endeared her to portions of the left. She's undeniably a smart woman, and a great television personality. I could see her becoming one of the "Republican" commentators on another network--like an MSNBC-friendly Republican.

Glenn Beck can't say shit while he has Tomi Lahren on his network actively making white people hate black protestors.

 

[Crocodile]

Quoting myself from last night since it seems relevant again:

It will probably have to wait until people cool off a bit before we can have a better conversation but there are somethings I think everyone should understand:

-Even if you lose, that doesn't mean everything you did was a mistake
-Even if you win, that doesn't mean everything you did was correct
-Even if you run a campaign well, you can still lose
-Even if you run a good campaign, that doesn't mean you didn't make mistakes (even fatal ones)

Postmortem analyses shouldn't be black and white

 

[B-Dubs]

Some of the old Fox personalities have turned it around. Apparently Glenn Beck of all people is really moderate now. Says he had a mental illness that he's now managing and has apologized time and time again for how he talked about Obama, and even claimed Obama made him a better man. He's got a lot of work to do to be a darling to the left, but he's racking up the points.

I don't see why Megyn Kelly couldn't do the same. If anything her NeverTrump status this election has already endeared her to portions of the left. She's undeniably a smart woman, and a great television personality. I could see her becoming one of the "Republican" commentators on another network--like an MSNBC-friendly Republican.

I'm not entirely shocked that Glen Beck had a mental illness for a while, dude was acting straight up insane for a number of years. Like that makes perfect sense.

 

[Box of Kittens]

If he wins reelection I would really hate to lose that Senate seat though because we probably aren't getting it back

This is a concern given the direction the Ohio electorate is heading, but I think he'll hold on to his seat for a variety of reason. He has strong approvals, good appeal to the working class, will benefit from 2018 likely being a strong cycle for Democrats (I know this is hard to believe right now but the president's party almost always fares poorly in midterms), and shifts in partisan allegiance tend to take some time to filter down from the presidential level.

 

[Nerokis]

Rewatching the Real Time panel with Michael Moore and Dan Savage is a revelation. Moore drops the bomb that he believes Trump is going to win, gives some compelling (in retrospect, prophetic) reasoning as to why, and the conversation very quickly moves on to (basically) what a bad joke Trump is. It should have sparked a conversation, a deep sense of urgency, but we very much compartmentalized that possibility away. That's the discussion we were missing throughout this cycle.

Just one reason among a good handful why we lost.

 

[Toxi]

Totally agree. Very important to separate process from result.

Also, important to distinguish failures of the campaign from successes of the other campaign.

Florida was a success for the Clinton campaign despite losing the state when you look at raw numbers. The Republicans just did even better.

Michigan was a failure.

 

[nature boy]

Rewatching the Real Time panel with Michael Moore and Dan Savage is a revelation. Moore drops the bomb that he believes Trump is going to win, gives some compelling (in retrospect, prophetic) reasoning as to why, and the conversation very quickly moves on to (basically) what a bad joke Trump is. It should have sparked a conversation, a deep sense of urgency, but we very much compartmentalized that possibility away. That's the discussion we were missing throughout this cycle.

Just one reason among a good handful why we lost.

But, but he said the same thing in 2012!

 

[Blader]

Did Beck actually say he is/was struggling with a mental disorder? I thought it was just that he had a slight come to Jesus moment once Trump started campaigning.

 

[kirblar]

Rewatching the Real Time panel with Michael Moore and Dan Savage is a revelation. Moore drops the bomb that he believes Trump is going to win, gives some compelling (in retrospect, prophetic) reasoning as to why, and the conversation very quickly moves on to (basically) what a bad joke Trump is. It should have sparked a conversation, a deep sense of urgency, but we very much compartmentalized that possibility away. That's the discussion we were missing throughout this cycle.

Just one reason among a good handful why we lost.

And prior to Comey's email, we probably had it won.

We just didn't know the margins were that slim in those states, and that can be put at the feet of the campaign for sure.

 

[mo60]

Jill stein has now broken 1% in the PV vote even though Gary is still crushing her in terms of actual votes while mcmullin has around 480k votes right now.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Did Beck actually say he is/was struggling with a mental disorder? I thought it was just that he had a slight come to Jesus moment once Trump started campaigning.

Regardless of the real reasons or what actually happened. He should get the benefit of the doubt, because he's saying all the right things and we need more people like him to come out and do the same.

 

[The Lamonster]

Missoura fucking failed the country. Imagine this guy heading to senate.

hey I voted for him. In the primary too.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Also, I forgot to ask, but how difficult would it be to implement "second choice voting" (ie, vote for a third-party and a major party; if the third-party wins they win, if they lose your vote isn't wasted)?

Maine actually passed ranked choice with a ballot initiative this year, I think it only applies to state elections though.

 

[Ether_Snake]

Election was stolen through voter suppression. That's what the Dems and everyone who doesn't support Trump should keep hammering loudly, plus Hillary got the popular vote and was ahead in all the polls, so it's much more believable than some bullshit surprise.

Edit: Beck was always a secret Democrat, always thought so. It was a character.

 

[Mackenzie 92]

I was curious if anyone knows if there is window for a recess appointment for the SC during the change of congress?

 

[RustyNails]

How Bannon flattered and coaxed Trump on policies key to alt-right

 

[Chase17]

Didn't Maine vote on this during the election? Not sure if it passed or not but it was just for state positions if I remember correctly

Yep, it passed in Maine. And yeah, doesn't change how the presidential voting is done. Still a step towards a better direction though.

 

[jtb]

Clinton really prioritizes loyalty above everything else. Kaine was on her side for a very long time, and consequently his place was assured. Mind you, I don't think Sanders wanted it, but it's why she didn't pick any of the other numerous choices that were better than Tim "No Show" Kaine.

Really? I don't think this is the right reading. I think he was safe, definitely, but from what I read, I don't think they had interacted with each other much prior to this election.

Kaine was one of the first people to endorse Obama in 2007, too, and was one of the front-runners for the VP job. I think he was pre-vetted and safe, and a Dem loyalist -- but not a Clinton loyalist.

It was the risk adverse move.

 

[IggyChooChoo]

Really? I don't think this is the right reading. I think he was safe, definitely, but from what I read, I don't think they had interacted with each other much prior to this election.

Kaine was one of the first people to endorse Obama in 2007, too, and was one of the front-runners for the VP job. I think he was pre-vetted and safe, and a Dem loyalist -- but not a Clinton loyalist.

It was the risk adverse move.

In Kaine's interview with David Axelrod, the subtext is that both were surprised/impressed she picked him as VP given he was an early Obama guy. I thought he did a solid job on the campaign and is a solid model for winning over purple states. I hate to see him get blamed for the loss.