Support NeoGAF

[Carpe Libertatem]

LOL nobody cares about the platform, it's what candidates actually say and do. If you actually think Hillary would have followed that platform 100% I have multiple bridges to sell you.

The person I quoted was talking about the "megawealthy" and how much influence they should have over the platform.

But, actually, Hillary would have been a very progressive president, just like she was as Senator. She obviously wouldn't have followed the platform 100% - no one does. But the platform is a good benchmark to look at for where the party is going in the future and which constituents it cares about. It's a shame liberals have fallen for the "corrupt and untrustworthy" label that the GOP has put on her for the past 20 years.

 

[RedHill]

Trumps campaign still aired the "under FBI investigation" ad even after the case was closed. They are snakes.

 

[billeh]

They are a small piece of a larger narrative that framed Clinton as corrupt and illegitimate based on exactly no evidence, so I wouldn't say they are blame free, but then I also think their overall impact on the election in the end wasn't particularly large either

Besides losing educated white women to a man that bragged about grabbing pussies.

But no, rehash the Bernie or Bust bullshit. What percentage of fault were the Obama Bros?

 

[Parshias7]

So it seems a lot of people in this thread are OK with the FBI Director overtly influencing an election, and apparently bringing it up at all is whining? OK.

It is just so much sore loserdom, because the FBI director doing what he did obviously wouldn't be a big deal if Hillary had won.

Spoiler

Oh wait it still would have been a big fucking deal.

 

[QuantumBro]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/02/les-moonves-trump-cbs-220001


Enough to make your skin crawl

A quote from one executive at one media company said 8-9 months before the general election is not enough to blame the media for the election outcome.

 

[Xe4]

Back to Comey? Really? People have been saying since FOREVER that nobody likes Hillary.

Against a man like DONALD TRUMP, this election should have been a layup. Trump disqualified himself on a daily basis and the fact that this election was even close says more about how much people were willing to cut their noses off to spite their faces just to vote against Hillary.

I mean, look at this shit! Look at how many Trump voters were voting against Hillary this election:

And you don't think a significant number of those negative votes could have been due to Comey's actions in the final week? It's been known Hillary was unpopular among republicans for a while. What the underestimated is how they'd be willing to elect a populist demagogue to stop her.

 

[Chumly]

Comeys letter absolutely cost Clinton the election. I don't think there is any dispute in that. With last minute voters, "bringing republicans home", and democrats staying home it easily cost Clinton the 100k votes she needed accross Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Before people get too worked up... multiple reasons "cost" Clinton the election but the difference was so small that even fixing one of these things could have won her the election (such as the comey letter not happening).

 

[Earthstrike]

Can you expand? Hopefully something beyond it's their fault for reporting on the email server?

the republicans actually voted against releasing e-mails during Hilary's 12 hour benghazi hearing where as the democrats voted to release them. Of course the democrats lost the vote as there were more republicans in the room. Either the media wasn't watching the benghazi hearing (they were) or they didn't want to use the most obvious pieces of information available that this entire e-mail server issue was entirely grounded in bullshit. They didn't mad at Powell for doing the same thing, they didn't even get mad at Petraeus when he leaked state secrets to a woman so she could publish a book.

None of these points were ever made in the mainstream.

 

[Stinkles]

Can you expand? Hopefully something beyond it's their fault for reporting on the email server?

Continuing to report on a story they know is a non-story is MAKING news, not reporting it. Not like they were alone in this. But they implicitly supported it because ratings.

 

[Nafai1123]

Can you expand? Hopefully something beyond it's their fault for reporting on the email server?

Giving him more airtime than anyone else (and admitting it was a mistake).

Reporting controversies as if they were equal. (Eg. Trump Foundation found to be illegally accepting donations and paying off lawsuits....but the Clinton Foundation maybe did something....or not? Who knows!)

Reporting statements as if they were equal (Eg. Trump called Mexican's rapists, but Hillary called neo-nazi's deplorable!)

CNN hired a bunch of clowns to "represent" the other side, when in reality putting them next to people who wanted actual discourse just dirtied the waters for everyone and often ended up in yelling matches in which both sides looked bad.

And yes, spending more time on Hillary's emails than her actual policies.

There were many, many problems with the media coverage of this election. Much of it was due to the media legitimately not knowing how to deal with Trump.....and failing miserably.

 

[Cipherr]

A quote from one executive at one media company said 8-9 months before the general election is not enough to blame the media for the election outcome.

I agree, I didn't make that initial claim another poster did. I do however take it as proof that at least some of them value ratings over having the more qualified and stable President elect for sure.

Huge ass post

Yep. I mean all of that certainly isn't enough proof to blame 100% of the election on the media, thats crazy. But it definitely does show that many of them value ratings over in some cases whats best for the country in general.

And as they focus less and less on policy, people stop feeling that policy matters. We saw it on the left for sure in the Primaries where people were shocked at how close Bernie and Hillarys policies were. They had to have it spelled out to them with direct citations from Bernie and Hillarys webpages because they couldnt fathom that they were so similar. The media wouldnt report on those things hardly at all.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

Besides losing educated white women to a man that bragged about grabbing pussies.

But no, rehash the Bernie or Bust bullshit. What percentage of fault were the Obama Bros?

Hillary won college educated white women, 51-45.

As far as I remember, that's one of the only white subgroups - besides probably white LGBT and white milennial women - that voted for Hillary.

 

[Broank]

When I went to do early voting the library had the line going right through all the papers with big front page pictures of Clinton and the FBI. It was perfectly timed and led to all the extremely misleading headlines.

 

[MIMIC]

Probably, but the people in the margins in several swing states decided extremely late, and those margins were puny.

I was wondering how late-deciding voters voted in 2012, so I checked using NBC's exit polling for the 2012 Presidential Election. And of those who made their decision "just today or in the last few days" (in key states that Hillary lost):

Michigan
Obama: 45%
Romney: 53%

Ohio
Obama: 42%
Romney: 53%

Wisconsin
Obama: 44%
Romney: 53%

Florida
Obama: 57%
Romney: 43%

North Carolina
Obama: 49%
Romney: 49%

Pennsylvania
Obama: 39%
Romney: 57%

As you can see, the ones who decided late went Republican a majority of the time. So there is no indication that it was specifically Comey that influenced this late decision, when late deciders seem to go Republican anyway.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

So it seems a lot of people in this thread are OK with the FBI Director overtly influencing an election, and apparently bringing it up at all is whining? OK.

Until their fave gets hosed. Or after their fave gets hosed. We shouldn't be okay with the FBI weighing in so close to an election.

I was wondering how late-deciding voters voted in 2012, so I checked using NBC's exit polling for the 2012 Presidential Election. And of those who made their decision "just today or in the last few days" (in key states that Hillary lost):

Michigan
Obama: 45%
Romney: 53%

Ohio
Obama: 42%
Romney: 53%

Wisconsin
Obama: 44%
Romney: 53%

Florida
Obama: 57%
Romney: 43%

North Carolina
Obama: 49%
Romney: 49%

Pennsylvania
Obama: 39%
Romney: 57%

As you can see, the ones who decided late went Republican a majority of the time. So there is no indication that it was specifically Comey that influenced this late decision, when late deciders seem to go Republican anyway.

Except NC and FL and WI.

 

[Gentleman Jack]

I was wondering how late-deciding voters voted in 2012, so I checked using NBC's exit polling for the 2012 Presidential Election. And of those who made their decision "just today or in the last few days" (in key states that Hillary lost):

Michigan
Obama: 45%
Romney: 53%

Ohio
Obama: 42%
Romney: 53%

Wisconsin
Obama: 44%
Romney: 53%

Florida
Obama: 57%
Romney: 43%

North Carolina
Obama: 49%
Romney: 49%

Pennsylvania
Obama: 39%
Romney: 57%

As you can see, the ones who decided late went Republican a majority of the time. So there is no indication that it was specifically Comey that influenced this late decision, when late deciders seem to go Republican anyway.

Obama's 2012 margins in the 3 swing states referenced by silver's tweet

MI	449313
PA	309840
WI	213019

A case can be made that the swing in voters that were lost to democrats in PA between 2012 and 2016 were a normal fluctuation after two terms of a democratic president if we take for granted that the reduced number of total voters is consistent across both tickets (something I haven't spent time figuring out). I don't know if we have the numbers for late voters from 2008 to compare what obama picked up versus bush's first election, but it's plausible that this is just normal drift.

However, a significantly higher % of undecided voters broke in WI/MI from the democratic ticket in 2016 than in 2012.

2012
Wisconsin
Obama: 44%
Romney: 53%

2016
Clinton: 30%
Trump: 59%

2012
Michigan
Obama: 45%
Romney: 53%

2016
Michigan
Clinton: 39%
Trump: 50%

Something really, really hurt Clinton's chances in those last ten days. I think Comey's influence as a factor considering the order of magnitude difference in trump's margins vs obama's is a convincing argument.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Clinton was a bad candidate simply because the 20+ year Republican hate campaign seeded the notion of a corrupt politician in much of the country. Whether or not the accusations were true doesn't matter after such an effort.

But yeah, she would have won the election if it wasn't for Comey's letter. The margins were too close to think otherwise.

She sucked in 08 against Obama, and had a hard primary against Sanders. She lost to fucking Donald Trump. She was an awful candidate.

Maybe she should have been campaigning in the rust belt states hard instead of kissing donor ass.

I'm sure the Dems blaming everyone but themselves is going to work great.

 

[VendettaRed07]

So much went wrong with Hillary's campaign pointing it down to Comey alone would be like saying "yup it was the Muslim ban that did Trump in" had he lost.