|
Aesop Poprock posted:Not true. The fundraising was unprecedented, the ground game was excellent and the ad campaign was insanely well played outside of that dumbass abuela ad. It didn't end up mattering but it was excellently run based on everything we knew about campaigning The ad campaign was great but literally all of the ads I saw were "IM NOT TRUMP" and "I LIKE KIDS". Its absolutely on the candidate to sell themselves to the public. We had a referendum on incrementalism and voting for the lesser of two evils and they both lost miserably.
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:34 |
|
|
I wonder if Bolton will have trouble getting 50 votes in the senate. He's uniquely horrible... but then again so is every other Trump appointment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Gwen Ifill has died. Man, gently caress you, 2016.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Monaghan posted:clinton ran as one of the most disliked democratic party candidates in thirty years and barely lost to trump, yet somehow sanders wouldn't have done any better,. Well yeah he's only one of the most liked Democratic Party candidates in thirty years Business Gorillas posted:The ad campaign was great but literally all of the ads I saw were "IM NOT TRUMP" and "I LIKE KIDS". Its absolutely on the candidate to sell themselves to the public. Let's be fair, they did not lose miserably. It was very close, she won the popular vote, lost key states by only 1%. That's not a stunning indictment of anything. It was only a blowout compared to what she was expected to win by.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Majorian posted:This is true, and I have to say, I kind of feel like the people who shouted down any criticisms of Clinton at all, even from those who were planning on voting for her, need to own up to being part of the problem. I'm not going to name names, but I've noticed that a lot of them haven't posted since last Tuesday... Where did this happen that wasn't on the something awful dot com forums? I see this being discussed a lot, but this forum is not an important place that accurately represents the democratic party. Yeah a lot of clinton supporters on these forums dismissed a lot of criticism of her campaign, but where did that happen in the non internet world, where the campaign tones are actually set?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
Beelzebooty posted:Where did this happen that wasn't on the something awful dot com forums? I see this being discussed a lot, but this forum is not an important place that accurately represents the democratic party. Yeah a lot of clinton supporters on these forums dismissed a lot of criticism of her campaign, but where did that happen in the non internet world, where the campaign tones are actually set? non... internet world? like, some world without the internet? can you explain what you're ranting about, please
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Trump had strong name recognition too, ran on bullshit and fairy dust, and they decided Clinton wasn't the better candidate. I don't know if charisma is really a wild thing we can't control. I feel charisma is in part, playing to your strengths. What is a strength of the Democratic party? We like do things that improve people's quality of life. We can always point to something that directly benefits our constituents. No matter how clever Gop politicians are, they always have to go roundabout to imply that what they are doing will help folks because it doesn't actually help folks. We can throw more red meat out to our base than the GOP has in their whole drat Freezer!
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:Clinton was a flawed but incredibly qualified candidate who ran a great traditional campaign with fatal blind spots against an idiot with billions in free airtime to make empty promises that people were desperate to hear. How do you reconcile "Clinton was the most qualified and experienced candidate we ever had" and "Clinton went to the super bowl and lost to an orange pee-wee bumblefuck"? I mean drat dude even in your attempt in being snarky you imply that if we had Bernie we wouldve done demonstrably better than we did with  THE IRON ABUELA
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
Beelzebooty posted:Where did this happen that wasn't on the something awful dot com forums? I see this being discussed a lot, but this forum is not an important place that accurately represents the democratic party. Yeah a lot of clinton supporters on these forums dismissed a lot of criticism of her campaign, but where did that happen in the non internet world, where the campaign tones are actually set? lol if you think a majority of the electorate doesn't get its campaign tones from the internet
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:imo one of the biggest problems is that democrats try to avoid completely political dishonesty when making campaign promises, republicans largely do, and trump was just freewheeling across the landscape promising puppies and unicorns and pots of gold to anyone who would vote for him So you're saying it's helpful to maintain a public position and a private position on some issues
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
trash person posted:It would be an understatement to say that I do not understand the thought process held by Trump voters, but I cannot even begin to fathom how they thought voting for Trump, and also voting for the standard GOP down ballot candidates, would lead to the 'drain the swamp' rhetoric happening. The establishment on both sides hates Trump. Voters think this is because he knows something they are scared of. In reality, it is because he's a fuckwit and the top nobs all know him personally and know how much he is a fuckwit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:https://twitter.com/ryangrim/status/798249519628558336 Real weird when the Trump administration ends up indistinguishable from a Jeb Bush administration.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:I'm very curious as to what people who think Democrats are in it for the working man would think Hillary's platform would look like if Bernie didn't run and scare the poo poo out her in the Rust belt. The working man isn't just white.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Scent of Worf posted:Lena Dunham and her boyfriend were literally weeping in the streets when Hillary lost. https://twitter.com/bradanders79/status/797613013096419329
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
The majority of voters likely voted for trump due to being bombarded with fake news in Facebook and else, saying that the internet didn't matter is like saying that eating 10 kilos of sugar daily didn't matter when you got diabetes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
Seriously though, It seems like there should be no way for the GOP to beat Democrats when it comes to throwing red meat out on the table. We have so many irons on the fire its crazy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:lol if you think a majority of the electorate doesn't get its campaign tones from the internet Boy you sure do think that Something Awful is the entire internet, huh
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
Celexi posted:The majority of voters likely voted for trump due to being bombarded with fake news in Facebook and else, saying that the internet didn't matter is like saying that eating 10 kilos of sugar daily didn't matter when you got diabetes. Hey, according to Zuckerberg, fake news on Facebook had nothing to do with anything. He also held a meeting with political people to try and find out why America has become so partisan. That dude has trouble accepting his share of responsibility for our current mess.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:Real weird when the Trump administration ends up indistinguishable from a Jeb Bush administration. You wouldn't have Bannon in a Jeb White House.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:
ah yes the postindustrial rust belt states of colorado, washington, maine, and arizona
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Yeah that's not going to happen. It's gonna be rough but this is pure strain nuts, kind of along the lines of some of the rights fears about Obama coming to take their guns and white women. That's also with RBG on the court, and she's an 83 year old survivor of multiple cancers. How long do you think she'll be holding on? 87? 91? Being blunt, Trump is going to get to replace RBG during his term. Liberals have lost the court for at least a generation here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
thechosenone posted:Seriously though, It seems like there should be no way for the GOP to beat Democrats when it comes to throwing red meat out on the table. We have so many irons on the fire its crazy. This was a problem I had with Clinton's campaign actually. I liked that moment in the second debate where she started talking about the stuff she's done for Americans. She did not do nearly enough of that. She clearly has a solid record, everyone kept saying she had a solid record, but no one could be bothered to actually pull it out and slap the voters across the face with it. Hell, Bernie talking about his consistent record was a huge selling point for him in the primary. Why didn't they learn from that?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Haha Trump is going to be so openly corrupt and get away with it all it's going to make the New York Times editor's heads spin with how much responsible and polite politics has broken down in the span of a few years. I'm expecting literally admiring with a wink on 60 Minutes he's going to do "very well" from the latest infrastructure project and put big golden Ts on the top of everything built while maybe someone desperately tries to explain what's going on to people that just don't care.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:Only 538 dissented and said it was pretty close, which was true. And boy did they get poo poo on for this! I heard here that they were fudging the numbers to get ad clicks from the gullible. Shook Nate is now Smug Nate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Beelzebooty posted:Boy you sure do think that Something Awful is the entire internet, huh Boy you sure do underestimate the userbase of Facebook
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Scent of Worf posted:It's already pretty obvious that Dems aren't going to learn anything from this loss. Yeah, can't say I'm surprised it took less than a week to go back to calling everyone racist and refusing to discuss anything else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:That's also with RBG on the court, and she's an 83 year old survivor of breast cancer. How long do you think she'll be holding on? 87? 91? Well, the new standard is a Presidential term only gets 3 years to appoint a justice to the SCOTUS. If the Dems make gains in the Senate, they should not allow any appointments in the 4th year.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Spacebump posted:Well, the new standard is a Presidential term only gets 3 years to appoint a justice to the SCOTUS. If the Dems make gains in the Senate, they should not allow any appointments in the 4th year. I have serious doubts about whether they would have allowed Hillary to appoint a justice to the SCOTUS if she won the presidency and not the Senate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:That's also with RBG on the court, and she's an 83 year old survivor of multiple cancers. How long do you think she'll be holding on? 87? 91? Frankly control of the SC isn't all that important if you can actually secure control of Congress. It only really matters as a last resort against a unified conservative congress+president(uh oh) and as a tiebreaker in a divided congress+president. If Dems can win in 18 and 20 they should be fine And lol RBG will be on that bench until she drops dead
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
Spacebump posted:Well, the new standard is a Presidential term only gets 3 years to appoint a justice to the SCOTUS. If the Dems make gains in the Senate, they should not allow any appointments in the 4th year. 100% this. Of course the media won't loving shut up about how unfair and unprecedented that is to Trump. Cup Runneth Over posted:I have serious doubts about whether they would have allowed Hillary to appoint a justice to the SCOTUS if she won the presidency and not the Senate. They straight up said they wouldn't since it's not like they paid any price for it in the case they held the Senate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:You wouldn't have Bannon in a Jeb White House. In bizarro world, on Freep and Stormfront, Jeb Bush supporters and the alt-right morons furiously relitigate the primary and argue about how if they had only run Trump instead of Bush, they would've beaten Bernie. Cup Runneth Over posted:This was a problem I had with Clinton's campaign actually. I liked that moment in the second debate where she started talking about the stuff she's done for Americans. She did not do nearly enough of that. She clearly has a solid record, everyone kept saying she had a solid record, but no one could be bothered to actually pull it out and slap the voters across the face with it. Hell, Bernie talking about his consistent record was a huge selling point for him in the primary. Why didn't they learn from that? This was a big thing too. They had plenty of things to run on to give people a reason to vote for her. Their decision to run against Trump was a terrible misplay.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Spacebump posted:The working man isn't just white. When people talk about the working man, they're talking about white men. Just like when people talk about law-abiding citizens, they're talking about white people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:That's also with RBG on the court, and she's an 83 year old survivor of multiple cancers. How long do you think she'll be holding on? 87? 91? I mean, the Republicans stole the court for a generation. Let's not give the poo poo they pulled any legitimacy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
Spacebump posted:The working man isn't just white. Remember when Hillary's aides mocked BLM for being looney radicals? Her platform would be nominally pro-police reform at best
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
Huzanko posted:This argument is stupid. But, look at what site we're on. I posted this earlier, but Clinton's position wasn't "those jobs aren't coming back", it was "we're going to stop those jobs going away" with a dose of "we'll get back to making things in America". She just didn't communicate that as well as Trump did. If you all think the Democratic parties position was "those jobs aren't coming back", then you've got bigger problems than just trying to figure out why someone voted for Trump or didn't vote for Clinton. https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/manufacturing/
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
My Linux Rig posted:Same here. I didn't really realize why people were going to him in droves while trying their hardest to explain away why trumps racism or radicalism wasn't going to be that bad. They're gambling on what blowing up the status quo might do. Except that the status quo is just going to be reinforced- the only thing Trump will absolutely do is lower taxes for the wealthy. They got conned because as it turns out, paying attention to what a candidate's policies mean is pretty important. But pointing this out means I'm making GBS threads on white America.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Except that the status quo is just going to be reinforced- the only thing Trump will absolutely do is lower taxes for the wealthy. They got conned because as it turns out, paying attention to what a candidate's policies mean is pretty important. But pointing this out means I'm making GBS threads on white America. "White America" has no idea what's coming for it. Kicking them off the ACA is just the start. I'd like to think the GOP is where the DNC was four years ago where they thought they were untouchable gods because Obama was so popular. I think a lot of people in this country have zero allegiance to either political party and jump ship frequently as neither one has an actually plan to alleviate the issues facing the vast majority of the population. Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 21:06 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:How do you reconcile "Clinton was the most qualified and experienced candidate we ever had" and "Clinton went to the super bowl and lost to an orange pee-wee bumblefuck"? I dunno man look at her resume, that claim isn't some opinion. Being qualified and experienced fit the office isn't really related to a loss caused by the reasons I outlined above. The entire pundit and polling class had it wrong as well and going by traditional metrics of campaign efficacy she had no feedback telling her to course correct. She hosed up, but trying to lay the entirety of the blame of Trump's ascension on her candidacy is ignoring the complexity of sit we are still puzzling out and setting the party up for failure in the future.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
Covok posted:Though, to be fair, that's already burning him a bit. People are already going "how is the swamp drained?" or "you lied about the coal mines, con man." And, gently caress, he isn't even inaugurated. The only people really doing this in numbers are the people that didn't want Trump to be President.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:34 |
|
|
Radbot posted:Yeah, can't say I'm surprised it took less than a week to go back to calling everyone racist and refusing to discuss anything else. Its really hard not to as we watch Trump put loving Bannon in as strategist. I can't intentionally put my head in the sand on that one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:06
|
|
