What Hillary Clinton should of done differently

[Da2017]

She was up against the most beatable candidate. I like many thought she was going to win. 
Some Ideas

Assume no vote is safe.  Just because you are a democrat does not mean they will automatically vote for you. You are not entitled to anyone's vote.

Pay more attention to the rust belt.

Listen to Bill. He is a political mastermind.

Sincerely Apologize for the Email server.

Promise some change from the Status Que.  Stronger Together and I'm with her are not messages. Gives Voter something to vote for not against. 

[uti2]

The Clinton team's objectives were to maximize the popular vote and to convert a sizable number of suburban republicans, objectives in which they succeeded.

Coincidentally, these were also the objectives of the Establishment GOP following the autopsy strategy. They aimed for the popular vote a la Bush 2004 and wanted to take on a number of suburban democrats.

This was the bipartisan political thinking of ~2013-2016.

[uti2]

In terms of what Hillary should've done in lieu of following the conventional wisdom, obviously she should've listened to Bill. Bill wanted Hillary to go hard after Obama in '08, she refused to early on, when she eventually heeded his advice, she was able to narrow the gap, but it was too late. Bill wanted Hillary to focus more on the WWC in 2016 as well.

[TML]

She should have spent more time pitching Democratic policy positions (most of which were popular with the general public) and less time going after Trump personally. In an election decided by a fraction of a percent across three states, this could have been enough to tilt these states the other way (and produced a completely different outcome).

She should have heeded the warnings of people like Michael Moore who indicated months in advance that Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania could be picked off by Trump with his anti-trade rhetoric toward working class voters in these states.

She should have realized that even though she had leads in the Midwestern states mentioned above, there were still many undecided voters who could break late in favor of her opponent and thus allow him to overtake her. If she had realized that, she would likely not have neglected Michigan & Wisconsin.

She also should have reached out to non-urban voters (especially white working class voters) more. For example, in Pennsylvania, she should have invested more in the Northeast (Scranton/Wilkes-Barre and surrounding areas), while in Florida, she should have invested more in the suburban/exurban counties surrounding I-4 (these two regions were decisive in flipping these two states to Trump in 2016).

[Mr. Smith]

Not hired the man who nearly delivered Virginia to Ken Cuccinelli

Not taken August off.

Put the same enthusiasm into the black vote as the Hispanic vote, would've made the difference in Michigan, North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida

Invested into Arizona much earlier (even if she still lost overall, the narrative would've been very different if Trump lost it in an upset despite the Rust Belt [or even if he won the state by only the same amount he won PA/WI/MI])

[Annatar]

In retrospect she should obviously have listened more to what Biden and Bill Clinton were saying, but I disagree with the consensus view which claims she ran a bad campaign if I was the head of her campaign I would have done exactly what her campaign did, if you look at the 3 big states which decided this election, Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, her campaign did everything right.

Ohio was going to be difficult to hold in any scenario and her campaign realized that, let's focus on the two states which really the Clinton campaign believed they were going to win, Florida and Pennsylvania.

In Florida, she got 267k more vote then Obama, an increase of 6.3%, a huge improvement, in Miami Dade, her margin was 5.6% better and 81,000 votes more, 290k vs 208k, in Orange County, her margin was 6.2% better and 50k more in raw votes. Her campaign did exactly what they wanted to in Florida, the fact that Trump got a monster increase of 460k votes or 11% over Romney was something her campaign was not responsible for.


The story in Pennsylvania is similar, out of Philly, its suburbs and the urban core of Pittsburgh which is Allegheny County, Obama's margin was 706k, Clinton not only matched that but exceeded it by 65k, getting a margin of 771k, exactly what her campaign wanted, again she did exactly what she wanted to in Pennsylvania.

In short, I think the Clinton campaign was well run at least in Florida and Pennsylvania, in both states she substantially outperformed what Obama was able to do, I do think her campaign does not get enough credit for this, even by the media, the reason she lost was because of deeper trends which her campaign cannot be held responsible for in my opinion.

In retrospect it is easy to criticize her decision making processes, but with the information that was available leading up to the election, her campaign behaved in the correct way, her campaign thought big margins out of Miami and Orange were what was needed, as well as matching or exceeding Obama's margins in the Democratic areas of Pennsylvania, they achieved both.

To put it bluntly she lost the election because Trump was able to energize the Republican base in a way Romney failed to, turnout in small town Pennsylvania was up 8% from 2012 to 2016 for example, Romney it should be noted was a disaster in regards to turnout, he somehow miraculously manged to get fewer votes in Ohio then John McCain for example and Trump was also able to get voters who had voted for Obama at the top of the ticket but were voting GOP down-ballot to vote for him, thus allowing him to flip a state like Pennsylvania. Just to illustrate the point, in 2012 in Pennsylvania, House Dems won the vote by 80k, Obama won by 310k.

[here2view]

I would have allocated some time she spent campaigning in Iowa, North Carolina, Arizona, and Ohio to Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. I still would have spent time at the former four but based upon early Fall 2016 polls Trump was favored to win these (I predicted he would.) I had her wining 302-236, although if she lost Florida it'd be much closer at 273-265. I think she spent too much time trying to "expand the map" (she never should have been campaigning in Arizona instead of Wisconsin.) But I would have made sure there was a rock solid path to put her around 250ish with all the other swing states left (PA, FL, NC, OH the main ones.)

From this, I would have done more to appeal to the WWC, especially because of Trump's stance on trade policies. In terms of policies, Clinton made the mistake of not emphasizing Democratic ones enough (which were popular.) Instead, a lot of people went to the voting booths with the sense that they should vote for her because she wasn't Trump and was the lesser of two evils.

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

Maybe she could have gone to Wisconsin at least once after the primaries, and try to hold down the states to win instead of focusing on expanding. These among gazillions of things.

[JG]

Maybe she could have gone to Wisconsin at least once after the primaries, and try to hold down the states to win instead of focusing on expanding. These among gazillions of things.

She campaigned a whole lot in Pennsylvania but still lost the state though.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

- Picked a better running mate (Tom Vilsack or Sherrod Brown would've been much better choices)
- Tried less to appeal to Republicans and more to bring out the D base
- Campaigned much less in the Sun Belt and much more in the Rust Belt
- She shouldn't have essentially taken August off
- Maybe making less cringy and more sincere appeals to millennials would've helped too.

[Da2017]

She campaigned a whole lot in Pennsylvania but still lost the state though.

She focused on Philadelphia. She should of focused more on Scranton,Allentown.

[Dr. MB]

-Picked a better VP that could appeal to Sanders supporters
-Campaigned heavily in the midwest

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

She campaigned a whole lot in Pennsylvania but still lost the state though.

She focused on Philadelphia. She focused more on Scranton,Allentown.

[OSR stands with Israel]

-Chosen Sherrod Brown as her VP

- Campaign in the Rust Belt instead of the Sunbelt(Especially Texas)

[Da2017]

Run more policy ads about what you will do. Focus less on Trump,s character. We get that Trump is a racist misogynist . A study last year found 25 percent of Clinton,s ad focused on policy, less than any other recent candidate. I was shocked. I thought that was Trump.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Stayed home. Would of helped the world dearly.

[History505]

Really payed attention to the folks in the Rust Belt.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Divorced Bill.

[Blair]

The problem is that it's very easy to write on the internet 'she should appeal to the WWC'' but the issue is that both the Democrats, and the Clintons in 2016 were always going to struggle. The problem was that I think Obama's performance in 2012 (in states like Ohio, Iowa etc) where seen as the norm, rather than the exception for Democrats.

I don't think it's as simple as sending Hillary to rally in Wisconsin; in fact her not campaigning in Wisconsin is very much a symptom of her campaign's defeat, rather than a cause   

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Besides not be Hillary Clinton? Well, she could have hidden her utter contempt for progressives better, actually visited Wisconsin, and visited Michigan multiple times.

[Beet]

She should have stayed Hillary Rodham and sought her own career in politics, rather than running off to that corrupt southern backwater known as Arkansas with the charming alleged rapist.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

She should have stayed Hillary Rodham and sought her own career in politics, rather than running off to that corrupt southern backwater known as Arkansas with the charming alleged rapist.

An old friend of hers warned Hillary that Bill was bad news, but she replied that he was going places. The 2016 election should dispel anyone of the notion that Hillary got nominated because she has amazing political skills.

[Blair]

Besides not be Hillary Clinton? Well, she could have hidden her utter contempt for progressives better, actually visited Wisconsin, and visited Michigan multiple times.

Turning up to a hall in Wisconsin to talk to 500 committed Democrats wouldn't have won her an election

[JG]

She should have stayed Hillary Rodham and sought her own career in politics, rather than running off to that corrupt southern backwater known as Arkansas with the charming alleged rapist.

An old friend of hers warned Hillary that Bill was bad news, but she replied that he was going places. The 2016 election should dispel anyone of the notion that Hillary got nominated because she has amazing political skills.

I mean, how was she wrong? He ended up president. How can you say he was not going places?

[All Along The Watchtower]

Seriously: If I were her campaign consultant I would have advised her to be herself - misogynistic double standards be damned. At the very least, she would have been genuine - thus, more people would have been less inclined to see her as dishonest or “crooked.”

Even if Hillary’s ship still went down, she would have been a more respectable er, “loser.”