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, 04:22:26 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 2917 times)
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,667
United States


« on: November 12, 2016, 10:58:18 AM »

Fuzzy, I don't think your "if the electoral college wasn't in place, Trump still would have won because he would have shifted his campaign strategy to win the popular vote" makes any sense, because Trump had a totally nonsensical campaign strategy where he was pissing away time in Washington DC, etc.

Didn't he campaign in Oklahoma?
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,667
United States


« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2016, 02:06:38 PM »

Guys, Trump gets a pass for "lying" because he doesn't lie; nor does he tell the truth. Words just come out of his mouth that have no relation to truth or falsity, if taken literally. The real intention of the communication is meant to be picked up by the listener. Somehow, Trump either realized or stumbled upon his mode of communication which millions of Americans picked up, but which most liberals, the mainstream media, and Democratic politicians didn't... for an entire year. He found like this gold mine or secret tunnel to communicate with people that just bypassed all of them and left them fundamentally misinterpreting what he was saying. As a result they never took his seriously and never understood why he wasn't losing in a landslide. It's just phenomenal.

All of these smart people just didn't get it; and even when confronted with evidence that they weren't getting it,all of these smart people couldn't adapt at all.

He is more art than actual communication.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,667
United States


« Reply #2 on: November 13, 2016, 08:52:38 AM »

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!


You could say the same thing about Trump, except perhaps the first one.  Smiley

I would however add these two things:

8.  Moved too far to the left.  She was basically running against Bernie Sanders, still.  She need to pivot and never did.

9.  This might come into the charisma aspect, but Trump seemed human, and a bit spontaneous.  Flawed, but human. Clinton seemed  rehearsed, at times robotic. 

10.  Clinton looked incompetent.  Looking at her email situation, she was either lying or incompetent.  She chose incompetent.  Look at the state of foreign relations, she looked incompetent.  Clinton was a known quantity, but in looking at her record, it frankly was not a successful one as Secretary of State.  The seeds of her defeat were planted in the Arab Spring. 
It looked really good at first. Who wants a world with totalitarian state sponsors of terror? I think the situation had a lot to do with luck rather than competence. Even when people thought things were going well. The problem is that totalitarian states ot there are like alcohol, weed, and soon Trump. They are the cause and solution to all of your problems.

About the "too far to the left" thing. It seems she took a logical and solid position on health and child care but she wanted to tack the minimum wage to about 80% of median worker income instead of 30% now. What was popular everywhere, about 50-60% of median worked in the referendums. That's about as highvas you can go I think without many issues. There were also issues about "free college" when there are already good repayment options available. The two things I would have pushed is tax relief for people getting thier public loans forgiven (so they dont have to declare bankruptcy when they are saving for retirement) and allowing bankruptcy for private loans.
And in 2020, I would run on reinstating Obama's overtime rules if Trump deregulates it.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,667
United States


« Reply #3 on: November 13, 2016, 09:22:57 AM »

Once again, the people are vastly overestimate "the platform."

Let's not kid ourselves. Most of the people who voted, whather Republican or Democrat, did not pay a close attention to it. It's hard to understand for us, political junkies, but it's true. 

A lot of ordinary people go on about them, though. Some of them might sound like conspiracy thoerists but a lot of them are inspired by the platform.
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 0.033 seconds with 14 queries.