Angelus Errare
Banned
Can't really use that against her when Killer Mike was routinely summoned like a pokemon.
Vox: Hillary Clinton "Unleashed" interview w/ Ezra Klein
- Thread starter nynt9
- Start date
Can't really use that against her when Killer Mike was routinely summoned like a pokemon.
JoeyJungle
Banned
How? Democratic primary seems completely reasonable aside from the fucked up caucuses, every candidate receives delegates directly proportional to the votes they receive.
chaos789
Banned
Killer Mike was summoned I believe because for some reason Sanders was polling badly with African Americans despite the fact he marched for Civil Rights in the 1960's and even got arrested one time for doing so. But Killer Mike is not on the level of celebrity that Jay Z and Beyonce are.
ChainedMaster
Banned
Superdelegates are awful.
jack_package_200
Banned
You guys still don't get it... Hillary worked hard to earn that support. She met with the Mothers of the Movement. She listened to minority issues. She didn't try to explain away racism as just economic anxiety.
Just because MLK once marched with the Great Bernie Sanders isn't going to amount to much since that was decades ago.
Since it's gone all "Hillary's blaming everyone but herself", worth posting a link to this:
Is Hillary Clinton Right About Why She Lost?
That last point is the reason why people should step back and self-examine. She blames herself pretty heavily, but the causes of her loss are many, and no small number were out of her (full) control.
Is Hillary Clinton Right About Why She Lost?
That last point is the reason why people should step back and self-examine. She blames herself pretty heavily, but the causes of her loss are many, and no small number were out of her (full) control.
elrechazado
Banned
So she "blames" herself by saying it's not her fault?
hydragonwarrior
Member
It'd be great if there was some semblance of mediation between Bernie and Hillary stans, but no one's wanting to step up to the plate as a mediator. The moment this thread gets locked (based on past threads that escalate purely into Bernie fans vs Hillary fans), both sides will retreat back into their safety bubbles until the next topic.
The fact that no one is trying to mediate between these two bubbles on a national level is irritating as fuck. Both sides here were completely in unison prior to start of the democratic primary, and that's where we want to be as the important elections are coming up!
The fact that no one is trying to mediate between these two bubbles on a national level is irritating as fuck. Both sides here were completely in unison prior to start of the democratic primary, and that's where we want to be as the important elections are coming up!
She blames herself for not being better, doing better, campaigning harder, pushing more progressive policies...
But if all you took away from what I said was "She's saying it's not her fault", there's no hope. Just as an example, is it her fault that Trump rode a wave of White Nationalism that included the KKK endorsing him? Because you can either accept that that was outside of her control, and something which she can point to as a reason why she lost, or you're blaming a candidate for the American people's racism.
And that's just unreal.
Edit:
There was something a few days ago in another thread... Along the lines of "Easier to blame Hillary/Bernie (depending upon the side you're on), than accept that racism played a massive role in the election. Because to accept that means accepting that friends, relatives, co-workers may all be racist. And people don't want to admit that." I think there's a lot of truth to that, and it makes people scared.
And_Gignac
Member
Not having more open primaries is what "fucked" Bernie. But those rules were settled when he decided to run so, yeah.
jack_package_200
Banned
I'd like that. People who supported Hillary admitted her faults and for the most part DO NOT HER TO RUN IN 2020.
It would be just nice to see the other side maybe admit to their own faults/issues as we move forward to face Trump and his nazi stooges. Is that too much?
Also this
Particle Physicist
between a quark and a baryon
Clinton won without superdelegates. It was Bernie trying to convince the superdelegates to go against voters.
doubling down on the blame game and self entitlement i see. absolutely embarrassing personally speaking. Annoying how Ezra didn't push her in regards to any of her claims, but i guess he would not have gotten access that way.
you can't say "i had flaws but that wasn't why i lost, it was because of all of these external factors"
you can't say "i had flaws but that wasn't why i lost, it was because of all of these external factors"
Or even just for the attacks on Hillary to stop. It's like, yes, we know she was a flawed candidate. she was also one of the most qualified candidates in pretty much US history. Everyone assumed the latter would outweight the former, at least to some degree.
It's not either/or. People have to realise that - more than any other election in US history - this had multiple factors that all played some part.
Another example: a month before the election Trump held a rally. This woman attended
Obviously it's Hillary's fault that this woman normalised sexual assault, right?
Right?
Or maybe, just like my racism comment above, people don't want to face-up to the fact that a good number of their friends, relatives, co-workers accept sexual assault as an "okay" thing.
(sorry for thread derail, btw)
Primethius
Banned
Pretty much all of this. She blames herself just as much as she needed too. There's no reason to pin yourself to the cross cause half the country is filled with racist, bigoted, sexist shits.
chaos789
Banned
What was Hilliary doing that time during the Civil Rights movement? I get it a majority of neogaf loves Hilliary but you have to acknowledge her faults as a candidate. And as much as I like Bernie and have been aware of him since the early 90's. I still know he is not right about every issue.
kitsunelaine
Banned
Bernie "Identity Politics" Sanders is not a good poster child for minority issues.
During her time in either college or grad school she went undercover investigating discrimination in segregated private schools in the south. She didn't ever bring it up personally but it was out there.
elrechazado
Banned
You can't simultaneously day she should have done better while positing that factors outside of her control completely determined the outcome. That's literally claiming she could not have done anything to change the outcome, and was therefore blameless. It's the "accepting responsibility" equivalent of the "I'm sorry if you were offended" apology
Not doing better put you in a position where those marginal factors were able to sway the outcome!
It's not either/or!
This election was death by a thousand cuts and all one thousand of them played into it.
The bolded is not something I said, only something you inferred. And it is literally this black-and-white thinking - she must take all responsibilty, nothing else factors in - that I'm trying to argue against.
the issue i have most with this book from what i've seen of her introspections, is that she still does not fundamentally understand why she is polling worse than trump. its the same reason why the democrats are polling so low despite the republicans being abominations.
and because she doesn't understand, it is a ripple effect across the establishment wing of the democratic party that supported her saying that they don't have to understand either.
People care about fundamental progressive policies, they care about a politician who is going to fight for them, they care about authenticity.
You can't tell people that even advocating for bold policies is wrong and that they should be ashamed of themselves for even doing so. this "pony" nonsense is basically equivalent to the right wing's "liberals only want free stuff" mantra. Which shows how far to the right the establishment has drifted to adopted these talking points.
You also can't tell people you actually care about their needs when you proclaim to support immigrants and DACA yet say in 2014 that all illegal children should be deported.
You can't tell people that single payer is some theoretical debate that will never happen when you attacked Obama for that same thing in 2008.
You can't attack people for staying in a primary race when you stayed until the convention in 08 yourself.
its apart of how people perceive a politician that determines their worth. and this is just on your own "side", forget the republicans
jack_package_200
Banned
Classy and mature
chaos789
Banned
Yeah marching for Civil Rights and advocating for minorities to get better pay and job opportunities and fair and equal treatment. As well as speaking out against the Privatized Prison Industry and the higher than normal incarceration rate for African Americans and the longer prison terms. The gerrymandering of districts that works against minority voting rights. Is not speaking on behalf of issues that minorities face.
She comes off as "inauthentic" because she's a bad liar who doesn't have the natural instincts to win over people.
This is why fundamentally she's a bad candidate and ran into issues in '08 and '16.
Here's the thing though - the worse of a candidate you think that Hillary was, the worse you should think the position of the GOP and Trump is heading into the next cycle. Because Trump only won by 70K votes.
Vermont is the second-whitest state in the nation and has the highest proportion of incarcerated black Americans in the country.
This was Bernie's fundamental problem - he never learned how to speak to areas of the country that weren't similar to Vermont and it killed him in the AA vote.
chaos789
Banned
Well said.
chaos789
Banned
Thank you for posting that. I am glad I know all of that now, but it does make Trump's ascendancy to president hurt even more
nephilimdj
Member
???
Bernie was being snubbed at random DNC debates early on, despite having poll numbers.
superdelegates never cared about voters
ChainedMaster
Banned
Okay? And superdelegates made Hilary look like she was far ahead of Bernie from the start rather than the small lead she had. You say it as if that changes the fact that superdelegates aren't awful. They are. Period.
i would take issue with your assertion that because vermont is a white state and has incarceration problems that that is somehow sanders fault when he is a congress person representing the state and hasnt been even been directly apart of state affairs in vermont since 89. the connection doesn't stick to sanders as some kind of "aversion to race" considering his actual life experience dealing with civil rights causes.
doubly so when its shown that he won the younger african american vote just like the other young demographics in the primaries. name recognition in the south for hillary clinton and lack of name recognition for sanders doomed his campaign as he had no entrenched roots in those communities from older 'reliable democrats', of which the democratic party has many african americans, hence her 'firewall'.
With all that in mind, Sanders still had the sense of mind to actually take lessons from netroots nation and the two women who interrupted him on stage, to make more prominent in his platform his clear policy positions on criminal justice reform which he still repeats to this day.
i mean, my main takeaway is that sanders has a lot of respect for the black community and understands many of the issues regarding systemic racism, hence his speech on jail incarceration and the so called "war on drugs" disproportionately hurting blacks just as one example.
at the very least, he's never said that BLM "is not interested in policy goals and just want to disrupt" like she has in her book. Which was echoed by Bill clinton when they dared to protest his presidential handling of things instead of talking with them.
No problem - some of it even I wasn't aware of til I googled and found that article.
Hillary in her book said:
My emphasis on 'other', to highlight it. And four paragraphs later
Hillary in her book said:
I mean, for her experience, she's being honest, and she not generalising in the way you imply it (whether you mean to or not).
Irrelevant to the point at hand - we're talking about Hillary and Bernie, not Bill.
Bernie Sanders has been in politics in Vermont nearly his entire adult life.
I am saying that because he has been in politics in Vermont and beholden only to their voters, that he turned out to be very, very bad at speaking to groups that did not resemble Vermont. (the combination of rural white people and college kids)
He can have all the respect he wants, but that doesn't mean he has a clue on how to talk to people in a way that convinces them that he understands where they are coming from. It specifcally came up over and over in regards to trying to synthesize "social" and "economic" issues, and he was never able to thread the needle. Things like condemning "identity politics" were him reverting to the lessons he had learned over his long history in Vermont because rural white people eat that shit up with a spoon and a lot of young people really still aren't aware of just how ugly the world actually is. By contrast, Elizabeth Warren has always been able to merge the two effortlessly in speeches, and had she run, I think she could have taken Hillary out where Bernie could not. (because although I think we can identify what Bernie could have done better to win, I do not think he is or was capable of adapting to play to win on a national level.
Sanders did not lose the primaries simply because Clinton voters were too stupid to recognize his saintly presence. If you're going to ask that Clinton accept blame for her part in the election outcome, you need to recognize that Sanders is partially to blame for how the primaries turned out as well. We knew he was DOA quite soon in the process, but he was DOA largely because he was never making the right inroads into the southern AA vote that he needed to (one that Barack Obama was able to heavily win over in '08!)
Monocle
Member
There's no excuse for messages like that when other posters have shown with well reasoned arguments why this clearly isn't the case. Stop typing and go buy a pinata if you have zero interest in a discussion tethered to reality.
No problem - some of it even I wasn't aware of til I googled and found that article.
My emphasis on 'other', to highlight it. And four paragraphs later
I mean, for her experience, she's being honest, and she not generalising in the way you imply it (whether you mean to or not).
Irrelevant to the point at hand - wee're talking about Hillary and Bernie, not Bill.
the problem is that the clinton family have endorsed and defended and supported each others policies to the death, that telling one from the other is very hard.
I mean bill is largely responsible for the deregulation of wall street bankin regulations, so when his wife comes out and says "Obama got paid by wall street and he never got corrupted!" as a deflection instead of recognizing the issue of money in politics that she embodies, that is one of the biggest problems out there.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJnwQFUXgAAjq1F.jpg:large
You dont ever respond to corruption in the political system through lobbying and money with "that's just how things are". because if your going down that route, then nobody has an obligation to trust what you say about anything relating to those policies with which you are espousing if you have a conflict of interest.
kitsunelaine
Banned
Yeah I guess that's why he's been resorting to right-wing dog whistling to suggest that democrats should not focus on minorities and more on the white moderates.
AmayaPapaya
Banned
Lol. There was not any hidden message in my argument. Someone says the primary is based on popular vote, I corrected them. That was it.
Particle Physicist
between a quark and a baryon
Yeah. Superdelegates are terrible if they go against the voters. They are basically unneeded, but I bet had Bernie convinced the superdelegates to go against the voters we wouldn't be hearing about them from the Bernie crowd. They essentially did nothing this primary cycle. They didn't determine anything.
What about caucuses. What do you guys think about them? Do you feel they represent the eligible voting public well?
So you've now moved the goalposts slightly, and are arguing that 1) Hillary is not (and by extension could never be) her own woman, forever tainted by her husband, and 2) it's impossible for her to not be affected by her bias towards her husband when it comes to policy.
ChainedMaster
Banned
They are terrible because they misrepresent the lead to the voters. They can easily sway voters by misrepresenting primary performance. That absolutely helps determine the end result when people see the established candidate as 300 delegates from the start of the Iowa caucus and people think "lol who's that nobody Bernie Sanders" as opposed to "whoa who's Bernie Sanders. He's neck to neck with Hilary. I should do more research on him". They are awful. Not sure why you'd defend them. I take it you defend the EC as well.
They did absolutely no such thing in '08. At the time, during that campaign, people were very aware that the SuperDelegates would only overturn the election in the case of extreme circumstances, because that's one of their two functions.
The only reason that they are brought up in '16 is because Sanders used them as one of many excuses for why he lost, and a generation of voters who hadn't lived through '16 ate it up hook line and sinker.
ChainedMaster
Banned
Like I said, they helped sway the election by appearing in media outlets as a completely lopsided primary. Not sure why you're so bent on defending an inherently undemocratic DNC function. And you keep bringing up Bernie Sanders. This has nothing to do with Bernie Sanders or the 08 election.
I don't know what articles you were reading during the Primary season, but everything I read specified Delegates and Super Delegates separately. For those articles that don't, you can either blame the media (for combining numbers to give a different narrative spin), or the voter for not being educated enough.
Edit: Interesting spin by Bernie fact-checked by the WaPo.
ChainedMaster
Banned
CNN, MSNBC, etc... generally grouped them together. Not when talking about a specific states' primary results but when talking about the overall progress. The votes of superdelegates, despite the fact that they don't vote until the convention, was always displayed.
Because it is deliberately undemocratic in order to allow for them to intervene in two scenarios:
a) You get a nightmare scenario where a candidate turns out to be the Zodiac Killer and needs to be kept out of the nomination (aka a Trump)
b) To tiebreak in the event that no candidate gets a majority
This is a party election, not a federal one. It does not have to be purely democratic and it's very hard to argue that the "pure" GOP method was a better one this cycle!