Typo posted:

yeah yeah sure explain that to working class people in OH/MI

Typo posted:

instead of 100%?

Fullhouse posted:

and the entire neoliberal media
remember when this poo poo happened http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-new-york-times-sandbagged-bernie-sanders-20160315

quote:

Democratic clustering didn’t start in 2016, but it lost Hillary Clinton the Electoral College because she thought it would energize her base if she put half the country in a “basket of deplorables.”

“You cannot write off half the country,” Dayen wrote, “much less spend an election cycle deriding it, and expect success.”

What Clinton needed — and failed to offer — was a cogent platform and a “change”-based slogan. Trump won the presidency with only the latter.

In short, it’s hard to read a room you’re not even in.

Clinton twice took Michigan for granted — in the primaries and the general — and twice lost in what were later called upsets. Had she even bothered to visit Wisconsin during the general, she might not have been so dead sure the state was a lock.

Even in Democratic-heavy cities like Detroit and Milwaukee, she trailed President Obama’s 2012 numbers by 50,000 and 27,000, respectively.

Beyond the Obama coalition, Clinton — whose tangential relation to NAFTA and flip-flopping on TPP Trump reiterated in near-daily rallies across the country — made no attempt to reconcile with labor union members. And, according to exit polling, paid for it.

Hillary Clinton ultimately lost because she didn’t market herself where it mattered. What she called a platform was a steaming pile of pathos that played well on the Pacific and Atlantic coasts but drowned in the Great Lakes.

Deimus posted:

Their wages were cut in half

Deimus posted:

Cars are like the most saturated market on the planet. Obama had a choice of what to do with the company with taxpayer money and decided to give it back to the same people making the same poo poo at the expense of everyone else.

Sheng-ji Yang posted:

Typo posted:

all you are really telling me is that he bribed the right sector of the electorate and they gave him credit for it

The Kingfish posted:

Thanks for the article.

Fun story, and presumably one related to media shenanigans. I was chatting with a Hillary voter in class today, and she told me that Bernie was so far left that he was practically on the right. If I had to guess it was that vox article that imprinted on her but it could have just been one of the hundreds of tacky click bait huffpost dorks.

Grondoth posted:

Somehow the article is even dumber than the goddamn headline

quote:

Since the 1970s, American political parties have been weakened by reforms that democratized the nomination process and significantly reduced the control of traditional party elites. Among major democracies, only the United States allows rank-and-file voters to choose party nominees through primaries. Under normal circumstances, party elites have continued to influence the process informally by their mastery of campaign resources and money. But in a system structured around primaries, angry voters can override the judgment of party elites and execute a hostile takeover of the party at any time, which is exactly what happened with populist voters and the GOP during this past U.S. presidential election. Though they fell short in their attempt to nominate Bernie Sanders on the Democratic side, the next presidential election could look a lot different.

We have entered a new and dangerous age of populism. Populists succeed when they appeal to the passions of voters, rousing them through fear and anger to reject the messy compromises that are intrinsic to a politics of moderation, and to look for scapegoat targets upon which they can vent their frustrations. Populists of the rights have embraced nativism and populists of the left have targeted Wall Street and kindled class war. For more than a decade, populism has undermined Congress as an institution, leading to increased partisan polarization and representatives who find it difficult to seek compromises for fear of being challenged in primaries by partisan hardliners. Now, a populist outsider has captured the pinnacle of power in the American system: the presidency. Trump’s success will encourage other populists on the left and the right to find a path to power.

The Founding Fathers created the constitutional system as an alternative to “pure” or populist democracy, a form of government that would “admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction” (Federalist No. 10). Returning to this wisdom begins with finding ways to strengthen parties as institutions and conceding that the radical democratization of the U.S. political system will not provide remedies for the ills voters face.

LastInLine posted:

And all of the secondary companies like parts suppliers and logistics companies would have collapsed. In 2009 2 million jobs were connected to the US auto industry. Not just the factories, but the dealers, parts suppliers, logistics, R&D, and financing companies. Allowing the US auto industry to disappear would've cost two million jobs.

Condiv posted:

HannibalBarca posted:

Warren is no spring chicken herself. Bernie Sanders, Liz Warren, and others like them should be doing everything they can to recruit and empower people like them who are 20, 30, and 40 years younger to rebuild the Democratic party.

LastInLine posted:

And all of the secondary companies like parts suppliers and logistics companies would have collapsed. In 2009 2 million jobs were connected to the US auto industry. Not just the factories, but the dealers, parts suppliers, logistics, R&D, and financing companies. Allowing the US auto industry to disappear would've cost two million jobs.

HannibalBarca posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Bro_Pair/status/796858505852502017

HannibalBarca posted:

Sitting at a wings place, table next to me is talking about currency manipulation and how we need to talk about "CHINA" and not "y GAGA". This is suburban Atlanta, by the way. Sort of an indictment of the Clinton campaign.

Deimus posted:

I'm not advocating that letting it fail would have been a better choice.

Lawman 0 posted:

so which city takes the crown for most "shaken but not stirred liberals" at this point.

Karl Barks posted:

dc or new york media crowd

Atrios posted:

Primary Colors

I never had any opinion about whether Clinton or Sanders would be a better general election candidate. I think people are entitled to have opinions about that, of course, but a big warning bell for me was always people who had *strong* opinions about that. It's unknowable and there are arguments on both sides. Sanders lost. Some of his supporters were and are convinced that he would have won. I think that's silly. Maybe he would have! Who knows?

But Sanders lost the primary. Clinton won. Many of her supporters - and the people working for her - were strongly convinced of the same about their own candidate. That belief - right or wrong - had relevance during the primary. It really had no relevance for the general election. That battle was won, there was no need to keep fighting it. It did not matter whether Clinton was the better candidate, what mattered was making her win. She was the candidate. Continuing to be invested in the idea that she was the best candidate blinded people to ways in which she wasn't a perfect candidate (even if you believed that overall she was the best one). Maybe it was a hangover from 2008. They couldn't stop fighting the primary.

Some of the reasons she might not have been were unfair. Like, you know, sexism. Lots of Clinton supporters in 2008 told me privately (and some people here expressed it in the comments if I remember correctly) Obama couldn't win the general election because he was black. If true, also unfair! It could have been true, though it turns out it wasn't. Racism and sexism are horrible. We live in a horribly unjust and unfair society. Other largely unfair reasons Clinton had problems as a candidate included 25 years of "scandals" that mostly weren't and media treatment of the Clintons generally. Unfair!

But you can't wish unfair away, and you can't make it go away by screaming "unfair!" at it. If Sanders had been the candidate there would have been a lot of unfair things he would have had to deal with, as Obama, Kerry, and Gore did (that racism and misogyny are things which have to be dealt with makes Obama's and Clinton's situations more obscene and depressing, and, yes, more unfair, but no less real). Hell I concede even Mittens dealt with some unfair things. Yes, yes, they would have tried to make Sanders seem like commie-loving Stalinist. Unfair! The man just likes Scandinavia. Still he would have had to deal with that and everybody knew it.

A lot of us thought she would win. Including me! If you think the polls are bullshit you'd better have a good reason to think so, not just a gut feeling. It turns out the polls were bullshit in this election in a way they haven't been before. I'm not sure anyone will ever really know why, or if polls will ever be anything other than bullshit again.

Anyway, you go to an election with the candidate and electorate and the horrible unfairness of everything that you have. The key is to have a strategy for dealing with it. You get no extra points to compensate for the unfairness.

So many of the arguments for why voting patterns in the primary demonstrated that Clinton was the better candidate were transparent bullshit. They were transparent bullshit in part because the exact opposite arguments were made in 2008. I don't fault them for making those arguments to win the primary, I fault (some of them) for apparently actually believing those arguments. Performance in a partisan primary says almost nothing about how you will do in a general election. Bernie Sanders, Susan Sarandon, and the Berniebro army didn't lose the election, any more than voters who stayed home or Latinx voters who voted for Trump did. Clinton, the Clinton campaign, and the broader professional Clintonworld did. It was their job to win. They took on that responsibility. That might be horribly unfair, but that's the way it is.

The Kingfish posted:

Thanks for the article.

Fun story, and presumably one related to media shenanigans. I was chatting with a Hillary voter in class today, and she told me that Bernie was so far left that he was practically on the right. If I had to guess it was that vox article that imprinted on her but it could have just been one of the hundreds of tacky click bait huffpost dorks.

Sir Tonk posted:

She'd better loving run in 2020,

VirtualStranger posted:

horseshoe theory is dumb garbage for idiots

DaveWoo posted:

I dunno, my progressive friends apparently hate Warren now because she didn't endorse Bernie in the primary.

FuriousxGeorge posted:

http://www.eschatonblog.com/2016/11/primary-colors.html

Souai posted:

This was the hot take I sent to my Rep (Ellison) regarding me thoughts on losing the rust belt based on working at a Wisconsin manufacturing plant for a few years:

DaveWoo posted:

I dunno, my progressive friends apparently hate Warren now because she didn't endorse Bernie in the primary.

Condiv posted:

Here's a fun little article: Hillary Clinton’s strategies cost Hillary Clinton the election


one interesting perspective this article made me think of:

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?ref_src=tw

if you supported hillary as the safe candidate over bernie sanders you literally are responsible for trump. it was hillary's bright idea to make trump her opponent and she couldn't pull a win off him. if people had gone all in on bernie, it might've been JEB! vs bernie instead of idiot vs trump and we would almost certainly be in a better position today.

sportsgenius86 posted:

http://www.rollcall.com/news/opinion/im-a-coastal-elite-from-the-midwest-the-real-bubble-is-rural-america#sthash.hQsGH2Zt.rws7PPMx.gbpl

quote:

P.S. This piece started as a tweetstorm on Twitter. I got a message from a high school classmate who now lives in Arizona. He had this to say, “I can’t believe what you tweeted was true. I never thought of that before.”

When you are in the white bubble, you just don’t know it.

DaveWoo posted:

I dunno, my progressive friends apparently hate Warren now because she didn't endorse Bernie in the primary.

Thoguh posted:

Thats recoverable for her.

Mister Fister posted:

The hillaristas in this forum and outside of it were too busy patting themelves on the back over their 401k's and their jobs in finance/silicon valley to really be scared of a Trump victory. Ironically, white privilege from the left did us in.

Typo posted:

abuela tried to double down on gender id.pol this cycle and failed so so so so horribly



lol@feminist hero losing white women by 10 points