|
I live in PA and I still have no idea what the gently caress happened in PA. All I know is right before the election I was in the small town poconos and basically every lawn had a Trump sign. Obama won some of those areas. I noticed a lot of what looked like recently closed down small businesses, even stuff like restaurants which is sad for a tourist area. I buy the economic anxiety angle to a degree. Also, if people assumed the "moderate" northeast republicans would be scared off by racism and sexism...you don't understand northeast republicans. j/k it's all russia. FuriousxGeorge fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Dec 14, 2016 |
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 02:11 |
|
|
Mister Fister posted:In the grand scheme of things, i think telling your surrogates not to campaign in Michigan because you want to fool Donald into campaigning in Iowa did 100 times more harm than anything sexism could. It also doesn't help that Hillary has the opposite charisma of her husband. Hell, she doesn't even need to be a slick salesman like her husband, just have enough passion like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren where people realize you actually care about people like them and you'll get your votes. I think that's true but sexism definitely was a factor. Like she could have won despite sexist assholes but instead ran a poo poo campaign. Like we are learning that Trump ran a garbage campaign he was basically intending to lose so he could start up his new alt-right news network and THAT was the good one in 2016. WTF. FuriousxGeorge posted:I live in PA and I still have no idea what the gently caress happened in PA. Yeah the Democrats sell to moderate Republicans has always been "we are going to do about 50-75% of what you want but without being racists or homophobes" and I'm like have they ever actually met a moderate Republican? At best they don't care about social issues so why should they settle for part of the platform when they could vote Republican and get it all? Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 16:12 on Dec 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:All I know is right before the election I was in the small town poconos and basically every lawn had a Trump sign. Obama won some of those areas. I noticed a lot of what looked like recently closed down small businesses, even stuff like restaurants which is sad for a tourist area. I buy the economic anxiety angle to a degree. I live in California and in the couple days running up to the election I noticed at least two "sign parties" on the side of roads or highways with people waving Trump signs and encouraging honks. These people showed day after day for about a week running up to voting day. I never saw a single such thing for Clinton. I want to reiterate, this was California. Near the coast. And not Orange County.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
Radish posted:I think that's true but sexism definitely was a factor. Like she could have won despite sexist assholes but instead ran a poo poo campaign. This election had nothing to do with the platform or any policy at all. It's Team red identity politics.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
Yeah, I think that "moderate Republicans" who are only with the GOP for financial reasons are basically a myth. Like, maybe there are some of them in exceptionally wealthy, highly-educated suburbs, but I doubt there are enough of them to tip an election. Most people who are "moderate Republicans" for the fiscal conservatism angle have also probably bought into the fever-swamp insanity about death panels or Muslim trojan horses or whatever the nonsense de jure is, at least to some extent. That's just my experience/theory anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:This election had nothing to do with the platform or any policy at all. It's Team red identity politics. Yeah and Democrats can't hope to sell to people that subscribe to team red identity politics but keep trying anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
The people who disagree with me are just so stupid and crazy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
No one (at least in this specific conversation) is saying Republicans are inherently stupid or crazy. However the Democratic party has been chasing the white whale of moderate cross over voters for decades and often at the expressed expense of their core constituents. When those voters identify with Republicans and their values (and as Bernie's meeting with Wisconsin Trump voters yesterday showed sometimes being contradictory to those values making it difficult to convince them) you aren't going to get enough of them to come over for the effort and sacrifices it takes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
Radish posted:Where the gently caress did $1.5 billion end up? What a waste of money.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
HannibalBarca posted:Yeah, I think that "moderate Republicans" who are only with the GOP for financial reasons are basically a myth. Like, maybe there are some of them in exceptionally wealthy, highly-educated suburbs, but I doubt there are enough of them to tip an election. Most people who are "moderate Republicans" for the fiscal conservatism angle have also probably bought into the fever-swamp insanity about death panels or Muslim trojan horses or whatever the nonsense de jure is, at least to some extent. This isn't really a theory, when you start looking at who really made up the Tea Party. I find it most amazing how these people, who were better off than most Americans and lived off of social security, managed to trick the media and their opposition into thinking they were a populist movement made up of poors.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
Radish posted:I think that's true but sexism definitely was a factor. Like she could have won despite sexist assholes but instead ran a poo poo campaign. It's a factor, but an overstated one. And did Trump run a poo poo campaign? I'd argue he accidentally ran a good one (in terms of winning the battleground states and factoring the political climate, not in terms of the popular vote). I still maintain Bernie would have beaten Trump because he could have gotten crossover voters from Trump, unlike Team Hillary's insane attempt to court moderate Republicans disgusted with Trump.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
coathat posted:The people who disagree with me are just so stupid and crazy. There are multiple groups of people who disagree with you. Figuring out the ones you can convince and how to do so is important work, and telling the rest to go gently caress a rake is self-indulgent entertainment that is harmless as long as you don't let it get in the way of actual work. And since no actual political work is getting done here anyway...
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:This isn't really a theory, when you start looking at who really made up the Tea Party. Can't wait to watch the moderate Dems
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
Re: sexism instead read this. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/michigan-hillary-clinton-trump-232547
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:Can't wait to watch the moderate Dems We can waste time trying argue that Trump ran a populist campaign (he didn't) and wanted to enact populist reforms (he won't), but I think it's time better spent on actually defending your loving policies. jtc I can probably count the amount of minutes Clinton spent defending the public option with my fingers. You don't even need a populist strategy to win the Oval Office. That strategy is better reserved for representatives closer to their communities. The absolute worst take away is to try and copy the kind of showmanship Trump is doing, because what he's doing is truly unprofessional.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:And since no actual political work is getting done here anyway...
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
What a bunch of wreckless incompetent fools who should never work in national politics again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:What a bunch of wreckless incompetent fools who should never work in national politics again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:Re: sexism It's both. And also Comey and also Russia and also racism and also a lot of other stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
yeah it's honestly lots of stuff and sexism is definitely a factor for real, but 99% of the changeable stuff is: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/michigan-hillary-clinton-trump-232547
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
HannibalBarca posted:What are the odds that somebody in Brooklyn HQ said "Post a map" at some point when somebody expressed concerns? You're speaking with the benefit of hindsight. I was one of the first to say "post a map", and given the information we had at the time I still stand by it. The folks I said this to were freaking out with no evidence to support their position and the polling and other reports widely showed otherwise. All this other information has come out after the fact. How in the gently caress would you expect me or any other reasonable person to react?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
I was one of the people really confident in a Clinton win even up to election day (although I was starting to feel doubt in the back of my head a month out which I tried to ignore). The people like us look like fools in the aftermath but we had no real agency or reason to disbelieve the information we were given. It sounds like the Clinton campaign was run by people that had similar beliefs but had the ability to actually investigate to see if it was based on solid information or listen to people trying to report dissent from the ground which it's becoming more clear that they did not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
It's one thing for some goon to say "post a map  ", it's another thing for Robby loving Mook to essentially be saying it despite all the alarm bells he was hearing to the tune of "hey maybe these polls aren't quite right."
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
Jesus, that article. It's somehow worse than the Romney ORCA-related post-mortems.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
HannibalBarca posted:It's one thing for some goon to say "post a map Yes, but you mocked the former.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
Radish posted:I was one of the people really confident in a Clinton win even up to election day (although I was starting to feel doubt in the back of my head a month out which I tried to ignore). The people like us look like fools in the aftermath but we had no real agency or reason to disbelieve the information we were given. It sounds like the Clinton campaign was run by people that had similar beliefs but had the ability to actually investigate to see if it was based on solid information or listen to people trying to report dissent from the ground which it's becoming more clear that they did not. As a non-clinton voter I kind of feel like all of our attitudes were, "Well, I'M not going to vote for her, but I assume everyone else will because Trump is a huge rear end in a top hat and the polls say she's doing fine...." Oops. I probably should have just voted for her, well at least she didn't lose PA by 1. FuriousxGeorge fucked around with this message at 16:54 on Dec 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
Radish posted:I was one of the people really confident in a Clinton win even up to election day (although I was starting to feel doubt in the back of my head a month out which I tried to ignore). The people like us look like fools in the aftermath but we had no real agency or reason to disbelieve the information we were given. It sounds like the Clinton campaign was run by people that had similar beliefs but had the ability to actually investigate to see if it was based on solid information or listen to people trying to report dissent from the ground which it's becoming more clear that they did not. I mean, there was SOME prior evidence. Hillary ran a bad campaign in 2008 (her team didn't understand how the delegate system worked, while Obama's team did).
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Yes, but you mocked the former. I was mocking both, which I think is eminently fair considering that taking Brooklyn's word on the polls looked sorta dumb already after the primaries.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
Mister Fister posted:I mean, there was SOME prior evidence. Hillary ran a bad campaign in 2008 (her team didn't understand how the delegate system worked, while Obama's team did). I figured she absolutely had to have learned her lesson about incompetent Yes-men since it's her defining trait as a campaigner that everyone pointed out after 2008 (including the dullards the Clintons have had hanging onto them since the 90's) but NOPE.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
Radish posted:I figured she absolutely had to have learned her lesson about incompetent Yes-men since it's her defining trait as a campaigner that everyone pointed out after 2008 (including the dullards the Clintons have had hanging onto them since the 90's) but NOPE.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Radish posted:I figured she absolutely had to have learned her lesson about incompetent Yes-men since it's her defining trait as a campaigner that everyone pointed out after 2008 (including the dullards the Clintons have had hanging onto them since the 90's) but NOPE. She was still much more of the problem than anyone working for her. Don't forget that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
That's the thing isn't, that some people want to act like no one could have seen this coming. When in fact you could have. Hell even look at her win over Bernie, that some people are still using to prove that he couldn't beat Trump. She gets less than a 10 point win, while being over of our most "talented and gifted" politicians against an unknown who openly called himself a Socialist and had campaign staff that was easily worse than hers AND had the DNC placing their thumb on the her side of the sale through out the primary and it was a tough win that saw some really low dramatic turn out by primary Voters. Hell New York her "home state" had the lowest turn out second only to Louisiana. The writing, the red flags, everything. It was all there for us to see but instead we listened to these Hiliary cultists thinking that maybe they were right and everything we've ever seen or known about her was wrong. We played ourselves KomradeX fucked around with this message at 17:13 on Dec 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
HannibalBarca posted:Close runner up: This article!!! quote:Nor did Brooklyn ask for help from some people who’d been expecting the call. Sanders threw himself into campaign appearances for Clinton throughout the fall, but familiar sources say the campaign never asked the Vermont senator’s campaign aides for help thinking through Michigan, Wisconsin or anywhere else where he had run strong. It was already November when the campaign finally reached out to the White House to get President Barack Obama into Michigan, a state that he’d worked hard and won by large margins in 2008 and 2012. On the Monday before Election Day, Obama added a stop in Ann Arbor, but that final weekend, the president had played golf on Saturday and made one stop in Orlando on Sunday, not having been asked to do anything else. Michigan senior adviser Steve Neuman had been asking for months to get Obama and the first lady on the ground there. People who asked for Vice President Joe Biden to come in were told that top Clinton aides weren’t clearing those trips. What the jesus. Put them all in the burning bin.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
This is very anecdotal - FYI, for people wondering what was up with turnout in NY state primary: it has some really lovely registration rules for being allowed to vote in the primary. The idea that you must be registered in with the Dem party in October for a primary vote in April is pretty absurd, since everything online says that you just had to be registered to vote by March to participate in the Primary (that info didn't specify that it only applied to first time registrants.) I know my sister missed out on her chance to vote in the Primary and she was really upset about that (she wanted to vote Bernie) when she found out why she was missing out. Max fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Dec 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
I wonder how much Obama regrets giving Hillary SoS
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Mister Fister posted:I wonder how much Obama regrets giving Hillary SoS Considering how he treated the Russian interference issue before the election he isn't blameless. Honestly I don't think those two are going to want to be in the same room for a long time. Max posted:This is very anecdotal - FYI, for people wondering what was up with turnout in NY state primary: it has some really lovely registration rules for being allowed to vote in the primary. The idea that you must be registered in with the Dem party in October for a primary vote in April is pretty absurd, and for a lot of first time voters that took them by surprise, since everything online says that you just had to be registered to vote by March to participate in the Primary. Kinda reminds me (although not as blatantly lovely) of the British labour party trying to screw over Corbyn voters with fees and timing restrictions. Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Dec 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Mister Fister posted:I wonder how much Obama regrets giving Hillary SoS I bet he regrets the Comey appointment more. Or not choosing someone who could've been used better politically than Merrick Garland.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
Radish posted:Considering how he treated the Russian interference issue before the election he isn't blameless. Honestly I don't think those two are going to want to be in the same room for a long time. Also, appointing J. Edgar Comey in a spirit of bipartisanship. To be honest the right weren't wrong when they screamed about Obama's naivete in 2008.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
I wonder. He's so committed to his bipartisanship I have to question if it isn't something he fundamentally believes in rather than something he begrudgingly does to get things accomplished. Garland was such a lame choice; a really exciting Justice could have gotten people angry at Republicans holding him or her up but no one gave a poo poo about that guy enough to get rightfully enraged.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 02:11 |
|
|
Radish posted:Honestly I don't think those two are going to want to be in the same room for a long time. Oh god, that reminds me of my favorite little Obama v Hillary tiff during the election that I think was indicative of some of Hil dawg's not so great strategy. Remember that time Clinton did a bit in April that involved the words "CP Time?" http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/de-blasio-jokes-cp-time-hillary-clinton-38327656 It may have been a bit that turned away from it at the end but I still think it wasn't the best joke to make, especially for her. I have no idea who on her staff thought it was a good idea to go through with it. Anyway, two weeks later, Obama opens with this wonderful joke during the Correspondents dinner. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8S3ouw3Lr_4
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:30
|
|