|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:Didn't she technically come right up to the barrier and then fail to break it? Excellent metaphor imho
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 14:26 |
|
|
# ? May 28, 2024 11:55 |
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:Didn't she technically come right up to the barrier and then fail to break it? She broke the 227 year old barrier protecting the dignity of the POTUS office by allowing a clown to waltz in by accident.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 14:31 |
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:Didn't she technically come right up to the barrier and then fail to break it? Just did a status check, barrier still seems to be up.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 14:38 |
|
Pretty sure he's referring to "First Female Major Party Presidential Nominee" as the barrier. Which is just lmao.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 14:42 |
|
freckle posted:Pretty sure he's referring to "First Female Major Party Presidential Nominee" as the barrier.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 14:47 |
|
That's why I bolded Major.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 14:50 |
|
I'm just trying to ~heighten the contradictions~ also that's a prefect expressionquote:Known for Politics
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 14:50 |
|
She got her nose right up against the glass ceiling, was handed a hammer and then said "nah, if I don't use a hammer then neither will my opponent"
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 14:51 |
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:Do you think it would have been Clinton if she won? Sounds like she'll be Person of the Forty Years instead. https://twitter.com/CharlotteAlter/status/806480050942054402
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 14:59 |
|
The gently caress does "American Moses" mean? e: Oh lol. "Like an American Moses, she was an imperfect prophet, leading women to the edge of the Promised Land. Now it’s up to another woman to enter it."
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:00 |
|
freckle posted:The gently caress does "American Moses" mean? She divided America and released deadly, indiscriminating punishments on innocent people in foreign countries.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:01 |
|
freckle posted:"Like an American Moses, she was an imperfect prophet, leading women to the edge of the Promised Land. Now it’s up to another woman to enter it."
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:03 |
|
E: ^^^ Moses was clearly leading the people in circles to keep them occupied for 40 years. Just pick a direction and walk for a few months and you're going to find a river or ocean. Getting lost for forty years is deliberate sabotage. freckle posted:The gently caress does "American Moses" mean? How do people still think this 'woman solidarity' thing exists? Did this election not thoroughly show women still identify by a host of other factors over simple gender? Nix Panicus has issued a correction as of 15:08 on Dec 7, 2016 |
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:04 |
freckle posted:The gently caress does "American Moses" mean?
|
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:07 |
|
Joementum posted:Sounds like she'll be Person of the Forty Years instead. Ah yes, Hillary Clinton, that American Moses, that Arkansian Gandhi, that modern Tubman, that white Chavez, that great champion of the Amersduigaiudfsvhasdfhuiot
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:07 |
|
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:09 |
|
Not a Step posted:Clinton making a strong statement against DAPL wouldn't have cost her hardly anything while juicing up her base, but she had visions of a blue sweep so better not irritate anyone at all! By the end though, pretty much everyone was opposed to the DAPL. Even among my trumpite Facebook contacts, there was a strong opposition to the DAPL. The only person on any of my lists who was pro DAPL was my father in law, who's a pipeline welder. The reason Hillary wasn't speaking like a revival preacher about Flint or DAPL is that Hillary Clinton doesn't really give a poo poo about poor people, regardless of their skin color. Why bother with that when we can just wrangle some twitter thoughtfluencers to talk about how great she is!
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:09 |
|
Trump just proves we are all children of Lavos. RIP Reptites.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:11 |
|
Gizmoduck_5000 posted:I thought that once, but it turns out that old right wing shitbags die and are replaced by younger right wing shitbags. A lot of people who voted for trump were gen-Xers. Reminder that said gen-Xers were predominantly white. It looks like the right and left wings are starting to polarize along race. (lol, "starting to" )
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:19 |
|
this but replace the lavos hell screech with the sound of a crowd chanting "LOCK HER UP"
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:22 |
|
Not a Step posted:All the polls told Hillary she was going to win in an historic landslide. She wanted to be not only the first woman president, but the biggest election landslide since Reagan. She thought the best way to do that was to avoid taking any stance on anything that could turn off voters. Coming out against DAPL would have turned off energy voters, being loudly pro-BLM (after the primary) would have turned off the white southerners she thought was going to hand her NC. She thought she had the anti-DAPL and pro-BLM people in the bag - what were they going to do, vote Trump? - so she took them for granted and focused on not pissing off the pro-DAPL/anti-BLM people. She constantly triangulates her positions and takes up whatever stance she thinks will play well to the room - the famous public and private faces. hillary did talk about flint a lot earlier on in the campaign, especially during the primary when she rooting out lead a central piece of her infrastructure plan, but yes, i think by the end her polling told her that the single biggest thing that moved voters was just telling people what a historically terrible president donald trump would make. that ended up being a huge mistake.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:22 |
|
Concerned Citizen posted:hillary did talk about flint a lot earlier on in the campaign, especially during the primary when she rooting out lead a central piece of her infrastructure plan, but yes, i think by the end her polling told her that the single biggest thing that moved voters was just telling people what a historically terrible president donald trump would make. that ended up being a huge mistake.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:24 |
|
Concerned Citizen posted:hillary did talk about flint a lot earlier on in the campaign, especially during the primary when she rooting out lead a central piece of her infrastructure plan, but yes, i think by the end her polling told her that the single biggest thing that moved voters was just telling people what a historically terrible president donald trump would make. that ended up being a huge mistake. also whatever she had to say about Flint and BLM is overshadowed by "superpredators"
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:26 |
|
Joementum posted:Sounds like she'll be Person of the Forty Years instead. she needs to go away and people need to stop talking abput her. the age of centrist shills is over. let the true left rise.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:27 |
|
Concerned Citizen posted:hillary did talk about flint a lot earlier on in the campaign, especially during the primary when she rooting out lead a central piece of her infrastructure plan, but yes, i think by the end her polling told her that the single biggest thing that moved voters was just telling people what a historically terrible president donald trump would make. that ended up being a huge mistake. Clinton stopped giving a poo poo the moment the primary was over, because Flint was only ever a thing to bludgeon Sanders with for her. Once she no longer had to deal with a threat from the left she stopped giving a poo poo about them because her models told her they were a captive voting base and she didn't care about them to begin with. There are going to be so many books written about how legendarily bad Hillary Clinton was this election. Her name is going to go down in history as a cautionary tale of overwhelming incompetence.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:28 |
|
Pollyanna posted:also whatever she had to say about Flint and BLM is overshadowed by "superpredators" i think the electoral results made it pretty clear that actual voters did not care about a 20 year old clinton speech
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:30 |
|
Joementum posted:Sounds like she'll be Person of the Forty Years instead. "I thought Hillary was going to win and wrote this in advance. Well, can't let that article go to waste..."
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:31 |
|
Quick, what was Hillary's PR stunt during the 2016 flooding in Louisiana? Because I have no loving idea
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:33 |
|
AceRimmer posted:Quick, what was Hillary's PR stunt during the 2016 flooding in Louisiana? Because I have no loving idea she dressed up as a levee and tried to hold the waters back
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:38 |
|
Gizmoduck_5000 posted:Yeah me too, if we even get to vote at all in the future. GOP will 100% spend the next 4-8 years trying to ratfuck the election process as much as possible, and the dems will just turn around and present their asses with a whimpered apology like they always do when a republican raises their voice, because they are a bunch of spineless, incompetent cowards. They ceded every inch of ground they had in order to make the oval office their alamo, and did nothing to stop a right wing coup of congress and state governments. Is it 2004 again?
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:40 |
|
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/22/politics/hillary-clinton-louisiana-floods-trip/
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:41 |
|
Not a Step posted:Clinton stopped giving a poo poo the moment the primary was over, because Flint was only ever a thing to bludgeon Sanders with for her. Once she no longer had to deal with a threat from the left she stopped giving a poo poo about them because her models told her they were a captive voting base and she didn't care about them to begin with. i wouldn't even really call her legendarily incompetent. i would say that if you ran the same campaign she ran with, say, joe biden as the nominee, he would have won easily. hillary as a candidate was bad enough that it lead to the weird results we saw. the campaign did all the right stuff from a technical point of view - it raised a ton of money, allocated its resources fairly well, invested deeply in data and analytics, and managed its staff well across multiple states with surprisingly little drama. as far as a presidential campaign goes, it was actually shockingly well run. but for reasons we don't totally know yet, there were flaws in the analytics models. they were giving the campaign bad strategic advice - the data told them PA, MI, and WI were locked up and OH was tied. here's where it gets sad: the campaign made the crucial decision early in the campaign to eschew persuasion - wherein field organizers/volunteers speak to people the data says are less likely to support clinton - in favor of a base turnout strategy. so they played big in milwaukee, but ignored waukesha county. their logic was that the general election calendar was too compressed to do both effectively, so they should focus on just one. this was a mistake because it did not allow them to validate their support models.. had their field data come back from the persuasion canvasses and revealed in aggregate that the analytics models were wrong, they could have been trained in that data and it would have shown that they were losing areas they needed to win big. and that would have lead to a wildly different strategy than the one they pursued. from a non-technical point of view outside the mechanics of running a modern presidential campaign, i think they essentially poll-tested the campaign into the ground. it was very slick, the ads had incredible production values (most ads are terrible in that regard), and every message was something that everyone can agree with. i think the issue is that voters at this point are so accustomed to seeing ads that everyone can agree with that they see right through them. the message is sterile and boring, which doesn't translate to any kind of enthusiasm. for the clinton campaign, they thought "boring is good" because they were ahead. that was a mistake.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:41 |
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i think the electoral results made it pretty clear that actual voters did not care about a 20 year old clinton speech lol you mean the black people that showed up in fewer numbers than for Obama? Black peoples' only value is in voting for the current Dem candidate, they def don't have any feelings or thoughts of their own.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:44 |
|
AceRimmer posted:Quick, what was Hillary's PR stunt during the 2016 flooding in Louisiana? Because I have no loving idea Uhhhh *vanishes into fortress of solitude for debate prep*
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:44 |
|
i know we're all nihilists here but she was right, the last thing louisiana needed was a presidential campaign. but of course trump got the W there because he didn't give a poo poo if the security for his event disrupted the actual process of rescuing people, but that's how it goes.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:45 |
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:lol you mean the black people that showed up in fewer numbers than for Obama? well it's not exactly shocking that black voters did not show up in the same numbers for the first black president vs. hillary clinton. i don't think anyone ever really expected that to be the case. but her vote share among black voters did not really ebb, especially in the primary.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:46 |
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i know we're all nihilists here but she was right, the last thing louisiana needed was a presidential campaign. but of course trump got the W there because he didn't give a poo poo if the security for his event disrupted the actual process of rescuing people, but that's how it goes. louisiana didn't need it but her campaign sure did
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:49 |
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i wouldn't even really call her legendarily incompetent. i would say that if you ran the same campaign she ran with, say, joe biden as the nominee, he would have won easily. hillary as a candidate was bad enough that it lead to the weird results we saw. the campaign did all the right stuff from a technical point of view - it raised a ton of money, allocated its resources fairly well, invested deeply in data and analytics, and managed its staff well across multiple states with surprisingly little drama. as far as a presidential campaign goes, it was actually shockingly well run. but for reasons we don't totally know yet, there were flaws in the analytics models. they were giving the campaign bad strategic advice - the data told them PA, MI, and WI were locked up and OH was tied. 'Generals always fight the last war' is all well and good but I don't think it absolves them from being called massively incompetent.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:50 |
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i wouldn't even really call her legendarily incompetent. This is honestly fair, with the caveat that she also refused to stand up for issues unless it was politically convenient. It's funny she loves Hamilton so much, as the protagnist tells Burr "If you stand for nothing, what will you fall for?" quote:i would say that if you ran the same campaign she ran with, say, joe biden as the nominee, he would have won easily. hillary as a candidate was bad enough that it lead to the weird results we saw. the campaign did all the right stuff from a technical point of view - it raised a ton of money, allocated its resources fairly well, invested deeply in data and analytics, and managed its staff well across multiple states with surprisingly little drama. as far as a presidential campaign goes, it was actually shockingly well run. but for reasons we don't totally know yet, there were flaws in the analytics models. they were giving the campaign bad strategic advice - the data told them PA, MI, and WI were locked up and OH was tied. This is like saying "The horses were let out of the barn directly into oncoming traffic and killed, but they were gorgeous." quote:here's where it gets sad: the campaign made the crucial decision early in the campaign to eschew persuasion - wherein field organizers/volunteers speak to people the data says are less likely to support clinton - in favor of a base turnout strategy. so they played big in milwaukee, but ignored waukesha county. their logic was that the general election calendar was too compressed to do both effectively, so they should focus on just one. this was a mistake because it did not allow them to validate their support models.. had their field data come back from the persuasion canvasses and revealed in aggregate that the analytics models were wrong, they could have been trained in that data and it would have shown that they were losing areas they needed to win big. and that would have lead to a wildly different strategy than the one they pursued. These are all really significant factors, you can't really say it was a well run campaign.
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:50 |
|
|
# ? May 28, 2024 11:55 |
|
Concerned Citizen posted:well it's not exactly shocking that black voters did not show up in the same numbers for the first black president vs. hillary clinton. i don't think anyone ever really expected that to be the case. but her vote share among black voters did not really ebb, especially in the primary. Well there where the white women at?
|
# ? Dec 7, 2016 15:53 |