A mistake I think the Clinton campaign is making

[RHTFT]

I live in a swing state (Iowa). I was watching TV last night, and a pro-Clinton advertisement came up that showed clips of  "mean" things Trump has said in the past (the time where he mocked a disabled reporter, making fun of women/minorities, etc.) Almost every Clinton Ad I've seen involves her attacking Trump for being too anti-PC.

I think this is a huge mistake. Clinton needs to start attacking Trump on his various scandals and his distastorous policies. Clinton shouldn't be attacking Trump for being too "anti-PC." Attacking Trump for making a disabled reporter and making fun of women/minorities is massively helping him. It makes him seem like an anti-PC macho-man who tells it like it is. It boosts his appeal with males who are obsessed with masculinity. This is why Trump is ahead in states like Iowa, Ohio, and Nevada.

I often hear people say things like "Clinton is a crooked criminal who should be in jail. Trump says mean things. Yet the media thinks saying mean things is worse than breaking the law."

I think this is because Clinton hasn't been attacking Trump enough on his scandals and disastrous policies. She's too focused on the "mean" things Trump has said in the past.

 I know many people who are completely unaware of Trump's various scandals or his disastrous policies.

Clinton needs to start attacking him for possibly raping a minor and for breaking labor laws instead of attacking him for calling a woman "fat" 20 years ago.

I recently came across this picture:


A lot of people I know feel this way.

[BlueSwan]

I totally agree. The Clinton campaign has failed in telling the positive story of Clinton and they have failed in attacking Trump where he is truly dangerous. Attacking Trump for being anti-PC is counter productive at this point.

[Ljube]

I totally agree. The Clinton campaign has failed in telling the positive story of Clinton and they have failed in attacking Trump where he is truly dangerous. Attacking Trump for being anti-PC is counter productive at this point.

At any point.

The only reason I like Trump is because he is anti-PC. I disagree with most of his positions (immigration, trade, some of his fake social positions...)

[Bacon King]

The target audience of those advertisements are the groups he is insulting. It's not about "mean things" it's about helping people realize that if (god forbid) Trump became President, he absolutely would not have any concern for your best interest. It's also about temperment to a degree, not about being "mean" but about being entirely unpresidential.

You can only convey so much in a 30-second ad and it's very much more effective to make an emotional appeal rather than assuming ad viewers are attentively following the logic of a claim you are making.

Also that meme is ridiculous and a lot of people you know have bad opinions

[jaichind]

I totally agree. The Clinton campaign has failed in telling the positive story of Clinton and they have failed in attacking Trump where he is truly dangerous. Attacking Trump for being anti-PC is counter productive at this point.

At any point.

The only reason I like Trump is because he is anti-PC. I disagree with most of his positions (immigration, trade, some of his fake social positions...)

Very similar to me.  I actually dislike Trump as a person and all things equal prefer Clinton policies overall when compared to Trump but will vote for him for being anti-PC.  Also I want to vote for White consolidation.

[politicallefty]

I don't agree, and perhaps that is why Iowa looks pretty good for Trump right now. Campaigns that try multiple attack points tend not to work. The Clinton campaign focus on Trump "saying mean things" isn't so simplistic as that. It ultimately goes back to her main theme that Trump is temperamentally unfit and unqualified to be President of the United States.

This kind of debate reminds me of 2012 in terms of how the Obama campaign was debating how to attack Romney. You'll notice how the Clinton campaign hasn't attacked Trump for both being a flip-flopper (other than the Iraq War) and being a virtual fascist. They are largely incompatible attacks that voters can rationalize. Her focus on temperament and qualifications is largely unprecedented apart from 1964, but Trump is an unprecedented candidate. However, her attacks have been focused to serve a larger driving narrative that reinforces a certain perception.

As for not establishing a larger pro-Clinton narrative, I would agree that that is where this campaign has been lacking. Hillary Clinton is an extraordinary woman who has served this country greatly and worked hard for its benefit. No one that has ever met her in person shares the views of her haters. She is very personable and works great with other people, including those with which she shares strong disagreements. If they portrayed the incredible person that she really is, this election would be a historic landslide. Unfortunately, most of America does not know the real Hillary Clinton and the great person she really is.

[RHTFT]

The target audience of those advertisements are the groups he is insulting. It's not about "mean things" it's about helping people realize that if (god forbid) Trump became President, he absolutely would not have any concern for your best interest. It's also about temperment to a degree, not about being "mean" but about being entirely unpresidential.

You can only convey so much in a 30-second ad and it's very much more effective to make an emotional appeal rather than assuming ad viewers are attentively following the logic of a claim you are making.

Also that meme is ridiculous and a lot of people you know have bad opinions

I agree that what Donald Trump said in the past is absolutely disgusting.

I think it's just stupid how she's airing these ads in IOWA. Iowa is a heavily white state, so airing ads attacking Trump for making fun of minorities isn't a smart move.

I also think that Clinton isn't attacking Trump enough for his various scandals and disastrous policies. She needs to start attacking Trump for breaking labor laws, etc. Actions speak louder than words. Clinton should attack Trump for his actions, not his words.

[Cashew]

I totally agree. The Clinton campaign has failed in telling the positive story of Clinton and they have failed in attacking Trump where he is truly dangerous. Attacking Trump for being anti-PC is counter productive at this point.

At any point.

The only reason I like Trump is because he is anti-PC. I disagree with most of his positions (immigration, trade, some of his fake social positions...)

Anti pc? Oh you mean like that time he said "literally founded Isis" and his supporters kept telling us he was just being sarcastic, he doesn't mean what he says?

[Kalimantan]

I totally agree. The Clinton campaign has failed in telling the positive story of Clinton and they have failed in attacking Trump where he is truly dangerous. Attacking Trump for being anti-PC is counter productive at this point.

At any point.

The only reason I like Trump is because he is anti-PC. I disagree with most of his positions (immigration, trade, some of his fake social positions...)

Hang on. You disagree with his policies, but you'll vote for him because he calls women fat. Thats an .... interesting position

[Kalimantan]

You might be right with the premise, you might not, its all a bit late anyway. But that poster is a disingenous, inaccurate, completely false piece of crap hitjob, and if you're the kind of person who goes to sites that publish that you're lost to the dems (and reasonable society) in any case.

[Rand]

I disagree. Trump's biggest vulnerability is his character. I agree with him on several issues and once supported him, but he is a dumb lunatic with no self control who I would never trust as the commander of my military and that's largely because of what he has said and how he conducts himself.

[elcorazon]

I totally agree. The Clinton campaign has failed in telling the positive story of Clinton and they have failed in attacking Trump where he is truly dangerous. Attacking Trump for being anti-PC is counter productive at this point.

At any point.

The only reason I like Trump is because he is anti-PC. I disagree with most of his positions (immigration, trade, some of his fake social positions...)

Very similar to me.  I actually dislike Trump as a person and all things equal prefer Clinton policies overall when compared to Trump but will vote for him for being anti-PC.  Also I want to vote for White consolidation.

Wow. Did you really say that out loud? Are you 7 years old? I can't explain your attitude at all, outside of your last line, which is scary and sad.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

White men feel that mocking the disabled is telling it like it is? Hope that's not accurate.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

I suspect that Hillary's campaign doesn't use this material because they know it to be either (A) false, or (B) unprovable, and if they use it, Trump would, indeed, have a viable civil suit against the Clintons and all responsible for slander and libel.  Slander and liable exceptions go only so far, even for political candidates, and it would be easy for Trump to prove malicious intent at this point.

If these things were true, and the verification was solid, we'd be hearing this 24/7.

If these things are true, and can be verified, and Hillary isn't using them, why isn't she?  Is it because these things would have been damning enough to force Trump off the ticket, in which case a substitute (Pence?) would have been named that would have proven to be more formidable?  Hillary's not beyond putting America at that risk, rationalizing that, in the end, she'll prevail, and all will be well with the World. 

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

I totally agree. The Clinton campaign has failed in telling the positive story of Clinton and they have failed in attacking Trump where he is truly dangerous. Attacking Trump for being anti-PC is counter productive at this point.

At any point.

The only reason I like Trump is because he is anti-PC. I disagree with most of his positions (immigration, trade, some of his fake social positions...)

Hang on. You disagree with his policies, but you'll vote for him because he calls women fat. Thats an .... interesting position

ljube has always been, er, special

[Devout Centrist]

The anti-PC crowd is a mixture of f**king morons and assholes. She wasn't going to win them unless Trump was exposed as a literal cuckold.

[Mr. Smith]

Yeah her campaign shoulda' done more to promote her.

Classic Democratic folly these days is forget self-promotion in favor of sheer attacks, out of fear that the public won't believe anyway or will see it as self-servingly fact twisting, and it'll likely have the exact same result as it did in 2014.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

"Anti-PC?" Don't you idiots realize that what you call "political correctness" is what actual decent people call "being considerate?" You're going to go shout "Merry Christmas" in the faces of a bunch of Sikhs just to be sh-t-stains? That's "standing up for your rights?"

I can only imagine how insecure you must be if you actually find "political correctness" threatening. My goodness.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Beet, is that you?

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

I totally agree. The Clinton campaign has failed in telling the positive story of Clinton and they have failed in attacking Trump where he is truly dangerous. Attacking Trump for being anti-PC is counter productive at this point.

At any point.

The only reason I like Trump is because he is anti-PC. I disagree with most of his positions (immigration, trade, some of his fake social positions...)

Very similar to me.  I actually dislike Trump as a person and all things equal prefer Clinton policies overall when compared to Trump but will vote for him for being anti-PC.  Also I want to vote for White consolidation.

It's stuff like this that makes me sometimes wish humanity would just be destroyed by a meteor. The universe would probably be better off.

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

I totally agree. The Clinton campaign has failed in telling the positive story of Clinton and they have failed in attacking Trump where he is truly dangerous. Attacking Trump for being anti-PC is counter productive at this point.

At any point.

The only reason I like Trump is because he is anti-PC. I disagree with most of his positions (immigration, trade, some of his fake social positions...)

Hang on. You disagree with his policies, but you'll vote for him because he calls women fat. Thats an .... interesting position

Deplorable, even.

[Xing]

I hate that's Trump's comments are reduced to being described as "saying mean things" or being "anti-PC". Yeah, sure, bullies who push teenagers to the brink of suicide were just "saying mean things". Duterte is just "anti-PC". This idea that being an anti-PC tough guy who "tells it like it is" (lol) is a good thing needs to die a painful, violent death. Trump's words have had a real impact on our country, and that impact will continue even if he loses.

I do agree that Clinton should have focused more on how unqualified and unprepared he is, but Trump's lack of filter is not something we should just brush aside.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I totally agree. The Clinton campaign has failed in telling the positive story of Clinton and they have failed in attacking Trump where he is truly dangerous. Attacking Trump for being anti-PC is counter productive at this point.

At any point.

The only reason I like Trump is because he is anti-PC. I disagree with most of his positions (immigration, trade, some of his fake social positions...)

Hang on. You disagree with his policies, but you'll vote for him because he calls women fat. Thats an .... interesting position

Or:

"I think his racism's great, but his hair are unpresidential" - otherwise reasonable KKK member.

[Devout Centrist]

I totally agree. The Clinton campaign has failed in telling the positive story of Clinton and they have failed in attacking Trump where he is truly dangerous. Attacking Trump for being anti-PC is counter productive at this point.

At any point.

The only reason I like Trump is because he is anti-PC. I disagree with most of his positions (immigration, trade, some of his fake social positions...)

Very similar to me.  I actually dislike Trump as a person and all things equal prefer Clinton policies overall when compared to Trump but will vote for him for being anti-PC.  Also I want to vote for White consolidation.

This is a great example of what not to do with your vote.

[Lyin' Steve]

I wish Clinton would make an ad calling out any number of disastrous Trump policies:
 * How banning muslims from the United States would be a Christmas gift to ISIS
 * How sending oil companies into the middle of a war zone to steal oil from sovereign nations is stupid
 * How ridiculously dangerous it would be to let any more countries have nuclear weapons
 * The massive contradiction between "Saudi Arabia is responsible for 9/11" and "the Saudis should have nukes"
 * What NATO actually does and has done and the effect of breaking it up
 * What's going on in Ukraine and how Trump propagandizes for Russia by claiming it's not happening, removing pro-Ukraine planks from the GOP platform, Paul Manafort.
 * How he has no idea what Obamacare even is and just repeats "get rid of the lines around the states" over and over and over
 * "I don't think General MacArthur would tell ISIS where we're going to attack, our generals are so stupid, stupid stupid stupid generals" god damn I'm so angry even thinking about this one.
 * Just dropping out of the Iran nuclear deal, because some right-wing talk show hosts made up a bunch of fake stories about how oh so bad it is, boy what a great way to show the world that America keeps its promises.
 * I could go on all day.  I know this man's policy positions pretty damn well and can explain in excruciating detail just how idiotic they are and what the consequences would be for some of the more disastrous ones.

But I realize that she can't.  Mostly because people are really really really dumb and not only believe all the fake things Trump makes up (like that we're getting crushed by ISIS and shouldn't have attacked Mosul) but like his very simple, brute-force policy solutions to fix them.  They honestly think these stupidly obvious solutions, that they all come up with at Bingo night, are what would work and the only reason politicians haven't tried them is that they're too stupid to come up with them, or Washington politicians don't have main street common sense (about how to fight ISIS).  This is the American ego.  We are smarter than our politicians, because we said "I would just bomb the sh*t out of ISIS" and our stupid politicians can't figure that out.  We spend all this money on all these weapons and we don't even use them to bomb ISIS, how stupid are we?!?!?!  Never mind that the U.S. has actually conducted tens of thousands of aerial strikes against ISIS, that's not reality because it's what the mainstream media's reporting.

So she can't talk about policy because Trump wins.  Therefore, she must talk about character, where she has a clear advantage eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeemails