Hillary Clinton is not a good candidate (based on ability to win)

[Erich Maria Remarque]

When are we going to come to grips with the fact that Trump is actually a pretty good candidate?

He connects with millions of Americans in a way that no candidate before ever has.

LOL!

He's right. He has exploited bigotry towards Whites like few others, and in the process validated it in many people's minds. Trump is the Southern Strategy on steroids.

Fixed for you

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

When are we going to come to grips with the fact that Trump is actually a pretty good candidate?

He connects with millions of Americans in a way that no candidate before ever has.

LOL!

He's right. He has exploited bigotry towards Whites like few others, and in the process validated it in many people's minds. Trump is the Southern Strategy on steroids.

Fixed for you

Show me, who is calling whites rapists? I'm curious to see...

[Erich Maria Remarque]

When are we going to come to grips with the fact that Trump is actually a pretty good candidate?

He connects with millions of Americans in a way that no candidate before ever has.

LOL!

He's right. He has exploited bigotry towards Whites like few others, and in the process validated it in many people's minds. Trump is the Southern Strategy on steroids.

Fixed for you

Show me, who is calling whites rapists? I'm curious to see...

Deplorables...

[elcorazon]

When are we going to come to grips with the fact that Trump is actually a pretty good candidate?

He connects with millions of Americans in a way that no candidate before ever has.

LOL!

He's right. He has exploited bigotry towards Whites like few others, and in the process validated it in many people's minds. Trump is the Southern Strategy on steroids.

Fixed for you

Show me, who is calling whites rapists? I'm curious to see...

Deplorables...

It is now racist against whites to call being racist, sexist or xenophobic deplorable? got it.

[Buffalo Bill]

When are we going to come to grips with the fact that Trump is actually a pretty good candidate?

He connects with millions of Americans in a way that no candidate before ever has.

LOL!

He's right. He has exploited bigotry towards Whites like few others, and in the process validated it in many people's minds. Trump is the Southern Strategy on steroids.

Fixed for you

Show me, who is calling whites rapists? I'm curious to see...

Deplorables...

It is now racist against whites to call being racist, sexist or xenophobic deplorable? got it.

only whites can be racist?

[Comrade Funk]

She isn't likable. Simple as that. People hate politicians who have been in power for 25 years.

[Hermit For Peace]

Great insight....

This:

I've felt this way for a LONG time. People vote for President based on feel. I won't say a woman doesn't have a chance. I mean, Hillary may even win. I just feel they are treated differently BY THE VOTERS. People view the candidates thru their own lens and they don't envision women as "Presidential". That's a lot to overcome. And traits that are seen as strong in men, are often viewed negatively in women. It CAN be overcome, but it's hard. Harder for a woman than an African American (and yes, I felt this way BEFORE Obama).

Issues of appearance, voice, etc. are harder for women. Yes Gore had some of the same issues as Hillary so it's not ALL about gender, but I honestly believe her gender is one of her biggest obstacles to victory.

And this:

Yeeep. This is the issue exactly. It's why there's a focus on her health when she's just as healthy as anyone else her age. It's why people see her as untrustworthy. Women are "supposed" to act a certain way, and women who do not act that way are seen as untrustworthy or "bit**es." Hillary has never been the "typical" woman, and so she has a lot of public dislike built up simply because she has never been how many people think she should be. It's ridiculous.

I would say Hillary is more healthy than most people her age. Probably Trump as well. These people keep a schedule that would kill a younger person. Both of them live in a fish bowl as well, with little privacy or freedom. Unhealthy people just cannot do this and be as active as these two are.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

this country is not ready to elect a female President

Give me a break. How delusional, as typical of the average smug Clinton supporter.

I bet we weren't ready to elect a black president either?

You seriously cannot accept that gender partly structures the way people—from voters to the press—respond to Hillary Clinton? I guess I've forgotten how good wilful ignorance feels, eh?  

Seriously, you should definitely consider to change your nick to The Woman Card. It is the only argument you come with

Accusing someone of playing the woman card is just another way that benefactors of the status quo allow themselves to feel good about gender inequality, sexism, and enabling society's current patriarchal order. You are small-minded to the extreme.

I asked a simple question. You refused to answer it, perhaps because it makes you feel uncomfortable to recognize your loud-mouthed privilege.

Lol, yes.
I don't deny that there is sexism and racism. But it highly, highly overrated by such as you.
It probably costed Obama 1%, and it probably will cost Clinton 0.2%. According to you it is like 25%.

It is not one of top-10 reasons why Hillary is doing so badly. Period.

No. It is something unquantifiable that we should be aware of. It's impossible to say how much of an effect it has had numerically, but Hillary Clinton has always been the First Lady who overstepped her bounds. It has conditioned almost every political reaction to her in some way.

And we talk of "untrustworthiness" or "likability." An untrustworthy woman is received much differently than an untrustworthy man. Case in point: When Donald Trump tells lies, he is "unpredictable," which some spin as an asset.

Let's put it another way. Independent fact-checkers consistently show that Clinton has made fewer false or partly false statements than any major-party nominee since before even the 2008 race. Donald Trump's "falsehoods" are at an unprecedented high. Why does the media always talk about how "untrustworthy" Hillary is perceived to be when the data/reality says otherwise, and actually gives us more reason to trust her than virtually any other politician? This emphasis from the media only reinforces and strengthens the perception they're high-lighting... even though they're actually pretty baseless, at least given the context she's in. The media never talks about Donald Trump's considerable problems with the truth in the same way.

What about likability? All we hear, day after day, is that Hillary is unlikable. She's asked about it on the trail, she has to justify it, she's made to jump through hoops... and voters are always, always reminded that she's not "likable." Mitt Romney was not "likable," but the news media didn't hammer him on it 24/7 and put him on the defensive such that he had to basically justify his personality. Hillary has had to defend her unlikability for literally decades. She has to do it almost every day even still. Maybe she should smile more.

And when it's constantly thrown in your face that you simply "are" unlikable, it's no wonder she has more trouble opening up or being transparent, because she's put in a position where she literally has to be on the defensive 24/7. I mean, f-ck! The woman gets pneumonia, knows it would be spun as another personal strike against her, so she keeps quiet. Instead of facing the jeers over being sick, she's now facing them over being "secretive." She is constantly put in positions where she just can't win, and yeah: It's a woman thing. Men on the trail do not receive the same treatment.

Couple the press's built-in tendency to hold HRC to a higher (perhaps unrealistic) standard with the fact that voters also perceive women differently (consciously or not), and it becomes clear that a female candidate is made to face a slew of unquantifiable obstacles that a man simply would not face.

Disagree with me if you want, but it makes you an ignoramus. Sadly, people seem to wear that quality as a badge of pride these days.

[Hermit For Peace]

After this election is over, it will be easier for other females to run for President. Hillary has been running offense for all the rest of us, and that is quite a task and I commend her for it.

She has taken heat like no other in politics. And how is she handling it? I'd say damn well!

And about transparency, think about it....she has disclosed tax returns for 30 or so years, has disclosed medical history, we know every little teeny tiny thing about her and yet, we think we are owed even more.

If I were Hillary I'd be more like Trump and just flat out say, this is what you get. I'm not going to release my tax information, I'm not going to smile more, I'm not going to play these stupid games anymore. Listen to me, to my policies and what I'd like to do for the country.

Judge me on my fitness to be President, but lay off the stupid stuff. I'm through with that.

[elcorazon]

this country is not ready to elect a female President

Give me a break. How delusional, as typical of the average smug Clinton supporter.

I bet we weren't ready to elect a black president either?

You seriously cannot accept that gender partly structures the way people—from voters to the press—respond to Hillary Clinton? I guess I've forgotten how good wilful ignorance feels, eh?  

Seriously, you should definitely consider to change your nick to The Woman Card. It is the only argument you come with

Accusing someone of playing the woman card is just another way that benefactors of the status quo allow themselves to feel good about gender inequality, sexism, and enabling society's current patriarchal order. You are small-minded to the extreme.

I asked a simple question. You refused to answer it, perhaps because it makes you feel uncomfortable to recognize your loud-mouthed privilege.

Lol, yes.
I don't deny that there is sexism and racism. But it highly, highly overrated by such as you.
It probably costed Obama 1%, and it probably will cost Clinton 0.2%. According to you it is like 25%.

It is not one of top-10 reasons why Hillary is doing so badly. Period.

No. It is something unquantifiable that we should be aware of. It's impossible to say how much of an effect it has had numerically, but Hillary Clinton has always been the First Lady who overstepped her bounds. It has conditioned almost every political reaction to her in some way.

And we talk of "untrustworthiness" or "likability." An untrustworthy woman is received much differently than an untrustworthy man. Case in point: When Donald Trump tells lies, he is "unpredictable," which some spin as an asset.

Let's put it another way. Independent fact-checkers consistently show that Clinton has made fewer false or partly false statements than any major-party nominee since before even the 2008 race. Donald Trump's "falsehoods" are at an unprecedented high. Why does the media always talk about how "untrustworthy" Hillary is perceived to be when the data/reality says otherwise, and actually gives us more reason to trust her than virtually any other politician? This emphasis from the media only reinforces and strengthens the perception they're high-lighting... even though they're actually pretty baseless, at least given the context she's in. The media never talks about Donald Trump's considerable problems with the truth in the same way.

What about likability? All we hear, day after day, is that Hillary is unlikable. She's asked about it on the trail, she has to justify it, she's made to jump through hoops... and voters are always, always reminded that she's not "likable." Mitt Romney was not "likable," but the news media didn't hammer him on it 24/7 and put him on the defensive such that he had to basically justify his personality. Hillary has had to defend her unlikability for literally decades. She has to do it almost every day even still. Maybe she should smile more.

And when it's constantly thrown in your face that you simply "are" unlikable, it's no wonder she has more trouble opening up or being transparent, because she's put in a position where she literally has to be on the defensive 24/7. I mean, f-ck! The woman gets pneumonia, knows it would be spun as another personal strike against her, so she keeps quiet. Instead of facing the jeers over being sick, she's now facing them over being "secretive." She is constantly put in positions where she just can't win, and yeah: It's a woman thing. Men on the trail do not receive the same treatment.

Couple the press's built-in tendency to hold HRC to a higher (perhaps unrealistic) standard with the fact that voters also perceive women differently (consciously or not), and it becomes clear that a female candidate is made to face a slew of unquantifiable obstacles that a man simply would not face.

Disagree with me if you want, but it makes you an ignoramus. Sadly, people seem to wear that quality as a badge of pride these days.

great post

[Hermit For Peace]

And to add to my post, a woman just can't say that kind of stuff, however. She would be skewered and disemboweled and thrown out of the ring.

Double standard much?

[tonyreyes89]

I think she's the only reason this race is even competitive. Any male Democrat and this race would probably be over.

fixed

lol nah, Warren would be up big time on Trump.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

No. It is something unquantifiable that we should be aware of. It's impossible to say how much of an effect it has had numerically, but Hillary Clinton has always been the First Lady who overstepped her bounds. It has conditioned almost every political reaction to her in some way.

Le Pen in France has never used this The Woman Card bullsh**t. She is the one who worked hard in years, despite getting much more sh**t... for her Trump'ish opinion. Not because she's a women, for God's sake...

And we talk of "untrustworthiness" or "likability." An untrustworthy woman is received much differently than an untrustworthy man. Case in point: When Donald Trump tells lies, he is "unpredictable," which some spin as an asset.

Bullsh**t. I never heard of this analysis outside Atlas.

Let's put it another way. Independent fact-checkers consistently show that Clinton has made fewer false or partly false statements than any major-party nominee since before even the 2008 race. Donald Trump's "falsehoods" are at an unprecedented high. Why does the media always talk about how "untrustworthy" Hillary is perceived to be when the data/reality says otherwise, and actually gives us more reason to trust her than virtually any other politician? This emphasis from the media only reinforces and strengthens the perception they're high-lighting... even though they're actually pretty baseless, at least given the context she's in. The media never talks about Donald Trump's considerable problems with the truth in the same way.

It is more about semantic. When Trump says "they bring rapists... but some a good people" I (and I assume many many other) immediately understand what he means. When he says "Islam hates us" I understand whet he means. On emotional level. But technically it is a complete lie. But it is not the point in his statement.

What about likability? All we hear, day after day, is that Hillary is unlikable. She's asked about it on the trail, she has to justify it, she's made to jump through hoops... and voters are always, always reminded that she's not "likable." Mitt Romney was not "likable," but the news media didn't hammer him on it 24/7 and put him on the defensive such that he had to basically justify his personality. Hillary has had to defend her unlikability for literally decades. She has to do it almost every day even still. Maybe she should smile more.

You are f**king kidding me. From day one what we hear is that Trump is clown and that everybody hates him. Even when media talk about Clinton, they add second unlikeable after Trump. Always. But right now, when he is probably for the first time is less unlikeable, media don't talk about it...

And when it's constantly thrown in your face that you simply "are" unlikable, it's no wonder she has more trouble opening up or being transparent, because she's put in a position where she literally has to be on the defensive 24/7. I mean, f-ck! The woman gets pneumonia, knows it would be spun as another personal strike against her, so she keeps quiet. Instead of facing the jeers over being sick, she's now facing them over being "secretive." She is constantly put in positions where she just can't win, and yeah: It's a woman thing. Men on the trail do not receive the same treatment.

Lol, so the fact that she is not standing for women's right >>> The woman gets pneumonia, knows it would be spun as another personal strike against her, so she keeps quiet. is a good thing according to you...
Yeah, patriarchal society caused that, right?..

Couple the press's built-in tendency to hold HRC to a higher (perhaps unrealistic) standard with the fact that voters also perceive women differently (consciously or not), and it becomes clear that a female candidate is made to face a slew of unquantifiable obstacles that a man simply would not face.

Disagree with me if you want, but it makes you an ignoramus. Sadly, people seem to wear that quality as a badge of pride these days.

Lol, yeah. Media is biased towards Trump. Period.

His policies (border/muslims/deportation/law enforcement) is not racist. If you agree with him on this issues, does not make you deplorable.

But yeah, it is a meaningless discussion

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Where does idiocy come from, I wonder?

[Buffalo Bill]

Again she's not a good candidate and would be losing to anyone else.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

Hillary's strong suit is in debate and I'd assume that's what her campaign is really leaning on to get her the win in November. We haven't seen how her and Trump handle a debate stage together, but if she allows him walk all over her, then I'd agree with you.

The debate will be pretty high stakes. 

How Trump communicates to his weaker supporters and undecided will, of course, be crucial.  He's underrated as a communicator.  I remember a piece earlier this year by Byron York who neatly explained Trump's communication genius.  He seems to be rambling, but he is able to (A) touch on the bullet points his crowd comes for, and (B) dish out a helping of celebrity gossip, which crowds of all kinds eat up these days.  That worked well in the nomination process.  The debates are another animal, but who's to say Trump couldn't have his "There you go again!" moment. 

For all the folks who want to blame "sexism" for Hillary's unpopularity, let me suggest that she's the Democratic model of a cross between Richard Nixon and Mitt Romney.  Ruthless and tone-deaf and unattractive when these qualities come to the surface.  Both of these folks were smart, but Nixon was secretive and ruthless and Romney is a tone-deaf elitist.  Hillary combines these two qualities and wonders why she's unpopular.  She's as genuine as when Mitt Romney, on a Southern swing, spoke about his love for "cheesy grits".  (Again, out of the wellsprings of the heart . . .)

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Where does idiocy come from, I wonder?

People like you who thought it would be wonderful to put a unpopular hubris candidate nominated against a clown.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Where does idiocy come from, I wonder?

Er.......

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Where does idiocy come from, I wonder?

Er.......

Indeed, as we now have our answer: the Rust Belt.

[White Trash]

Where does idiocy come from, I wonder?

Er.......

Indeed, as we now have our answer: the Rust Belt.

Give it a break

[Lincoln Republican]

Where does idiocy come from, I wonder?

Er.......

Indeed, as we now have our answer: the Rust Belt.

With a Democrat attitude like that, it is no wonder the Democrats lost the Rust Belt and thereby the election.

No doubt Rust Belt voters find your denunciation of them ill conceived, objectionable, and offensive.

You deserved to lose the Rust Belt and the votes of the fine, upstanding, honest, hard working, wonderful people who live there.    

Republicans love the great people of the Rust Belt, whereas, evidently, Democrats distain them.   

[ApatheticAustrian]

hillary wouldn't somehow have become a great candidate (while i really enjoy her actual work and skills), if comey didn't send that letter and a few thousand more rust belt democrats voted for her.

[Shadows]

People like Hagrid need to leave the Dem to save the party. You can't people demonize Rust belt voters when you have a candidate who handled Classified material in her server at her basement as Sos, sold access for donations to Clinton foundation, has lied & flip-flopped on most issues & is inauthentic.

You have a candidate with scandal after scandal & then you have Clinton supporters attacking & denigrating rust belt voters.

I think Clinton supporters want to run the Dem party to the ground - Make it Obsolete like the Whigs!

@ Topic Starter - Kudos to you - You were 100% right!

[Meclazine for Israel]

Hillary is not that bad.

She won the popular vote and did fight a hard campaign.

The pain comes from the narrow defeat.

PV + MI +WI difference was miniscule.

But there can be only one President.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It was obvious that she wasn't a good candidate in the primaries, but the party decided that nominating a 3rd wayer over a progressive was more important to it than winning the election.