Do Dems have a losing platform or was Hillary just a bad Candidate? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 28, 2024, 12:11:27 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2020 U.S. Presidential Election (Moderators: Likely Voter, YE)
  Do Dems have a losing platform or was Hillary just a bad Candidate? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Do Dems have a losing platform or was Hillary just a bad Candidate?  (Read 2914 times)
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,884
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW
« on: November 12, 2016, 11:15:07 AM »
« edited: November 12, 2016, 11:21:05 AM by Virginia »

She was a bad candidate. Period:

1. No charisma
2. Not very likeable
3. Comes off as an opportunist
4. Seen as a huge liar. For whatever reason Trump seemed to get a pass (or more of a pass) on this despite lying far more than her, and far more shamelessly. But, you know, it is what it is.
5. Seen as corrupt
6. For so many people, seemed to embody almost everything they hated about politics, a problem which was magnified in an election built around populist anger / a repudiation of business as usual.


And (drum roll please)  last but not least:

7. She had 54819290056 problems/scandals/whatever! Whether or not you consider these "scandals" real or just blown out of proportion, people thought they were important and it contributed immensely to her character problems. She spent almost the entire election defending herself against one scandal after another!


-

Please, let's not be so foolish as to think this election was an indictment of Democratic policies, or really, even Republican policies? This was an election where people chose who they hated less, and it turns out that in critical states, Hillary is hated or not trusted more.

And I must say, one of the biggest changes in the party going forward should be to ensure that the DNC never again rolls out the red carpet for a candidate as vulnerable and plagued with problems as Clinton, or really anyone for that matter.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,884
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2016, 02:57:24 PM »
« Edited: November 12, 2016, 03:00:16 PM by Virginia »

While an argument can me made about a sexist perception (a "woman liar" being perceived more harshly than a "male liar"), I think it's not just that.

What many of us, myself including, don't like about Trump might have been his biggest asset on this particular question. His "I don't give a f**k" attitude may cause outrage, but seems genuine. Clinton long struggled to be perceived as... I don't know how to put this? Authentic?

I'm not sure why I forgot that one ("authentic"). That was another one of her biggest liabilities. This was a big deal in an election where people were tired of politicians just saying whatever they thought people wanted to hear. They craved authenticity, and this applies to both sides. Ironically they chose Trump, whose 'telling it like it is' behavior was just 'telling them what they want to hear, on steroids.' Exactly what they didn't want.

Amazing how the DNC no doubt understood many of Hillary's issues and yet still cleared the way for her. Their ranks need to be thoroughly cleansed of anyone who still thinks picking favorites and doing all they can to dissuade challengers is acceptable behavior even after this election.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.023 seconds with 11 queries.