Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
- Status
Grace Under Pressure
Footballguy
The great thing about the EC is that the people in every state need convincing, and they matter.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
- There's going to be a lot of this going on.
There is some brilliance about the system. One thing I like about it is that thousands of dead people voting in Chicago do not impact results in my state. And plus, it would be a nightmare if we had to do a recount of the entire nation on a close election.
avoiding injuries
Footballguy
tommyboy
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I think some revisiting needs to be done of the choices of the celebrity surrogates Hillary's campaign went with. Considering the key difference making states and counties who was being driven to the polls here?
Don Quixote
Footballguy
The electoral college was not that noble. It was mostly created because a direct election would have resulted in slaveholding states not being able to count their slaves, but the electoral college allowed them to get votes in the electoral college equivalent to 3/5ths of them.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
tommyboy
Footballguy
Arsenal of Doom
Footballguy
It's going to be a tough analysis because she was ahead in the polls throughout and was touching double-digits nationally before the Comey letter.
I wonder if they shouldn't have just dumped all of Podesta's emails on their own, since that was a slow drip that became a multi-month story as opposed to something that was processed and out of the picture like Trump's genital grabbing tape and once it became obvious he just wasn't going to release his taxes.
It also seems clear now that they didn't do enough to make her case as opposed to just not Trump, but again just about everyone, including Republicans, assumed that was working.
timschochet
Footballguy
You know what? Not again.
After 2008, a lot of people blamed Mark Penn. I was one of them; I was suckered into that by some books I read (mainly Game Change).
The biggest problem with Hillary, unfortunately, is Hillary. For all of her attributes (and I will go to my deathbed believing she had tons, and would have been, IMO, a marvelous President), her hubris and shadiness are her own fault. Add to that the fact that she personifies the "establishment" that so many Americans are weary of (not me but I'm obviously an anomaly).
Shes done now, (unless Trump and/or the Republicans have the stupidity to try and prosecute her, which will keep her in the spotlight and make her a martyr). She joins the annals of Daniel Webster, Henry Clay, William Jennings Bryan, and Adlai Stevenson. I think in years to come public opinion of her will rise. But that will take a long time. In the meantime, if I could give advice to her it would be to stay quiet. That includes 2020. Don't campaign for the candidate, whoever it is, don't show up at the convention, don't make yourself the center of any more attention. Others will carry on the fight. Go away quietly and with dignity.
Loan Sharks
Not a Wolf
It reminds me of this guy in my dynasty league kept proclaiming himself the "regular season champion" after 4 years of having the best record only to get hammered in the playoffs.
I hear you, but...
For all of Clinton's faults - she should have won the election. She was more popular than Trump (less unpopular?). She lost states that Democrats are not supposed to lose - and she lost those states because she did not campaign in some of them, and she did not have a message for large portions of those voters.
I think the campaign took those states, and blue-collar union workers for granted in the rust belt. Clinton never had enough numbers relying on the Obama coalition. That was crystal clear during the primary when she was soundly beaten among younger voters - a key group for Obama. At that point, the campaign should have re-set its message. They opted to go after moderate republicans - and that was a mistake. Given the struggles Clinton had in Michigan in the primary - that was a huge red flag, and easily fixable. She needed to really campaign hard on trade issues, on working to make life better for middle class working families.
Instead, I think the campaign spent too much time on identity politics - going after minority voters, women voters, etc. And, I think that kept a lot of potential democrat voters away, and she got very few of the moderate republicans. In the end those folks stayed in the GOP fold.
Arsenal of Doom
Footballguy
Except for the fact that the person who wins the election then has to represent all the people of the nation over the next four years, as opposed to just celebrating a one time victory. I think the size of that gap between the electoral vote and the popular starts to become important. I can't imagine how outraged the right would be if the shoe was on the other foot...Loan Sharks said:
Oh wait, actually I can.
https://twitter.com/azon1ps/status/796536180808491008
It's fine though. I'm solidly in the camp that elections have consequences and the Dems need to wear this one. Trump is now on the hook to deliver what he promised so let's see how it goes. As an armchair economist I'm interested to see how his protectionist policies actually work out for the voters he promising will be helped. Republicans are also now finally going to have to deliver a plan to replace Obamacare and still keep protections in place for the 20 million + people who have coverage now and can't be denied based on pre-existing conditions. I'm curious to see if Republicans in congress like Paul Ryan will still be pushing steep cuts to balance the budget, while also pushing tax cuts for the rich. It's not what Trump ran on really. He promised fairly large increases in domestic and military spending. I'm sure lots of voters in WI, PA, OH took him at his word that he'll protect Social Security and Medicare. It's on him and Republicans now to deliver.
Sammy3469
Footballguy
It's going to be very interesting on what he actually does. I know most of his voters were just voting for this amorphous "change", but Trump's change is in a lot ways what Congressional Republicans opposed for the past 8 years and voted for again in this election. They'll agree on Dodd-Frank, immigration, Obamacare, the tax code, and military spending, but getting all that done without exploding the deficit is kind of, sort of hard. Then you layer in Trump's protectionism and you come to realize that anyone that says they know what's going to happen is full of it. From a purely intellectual point of view, it's kind of, sort of interesting though I wish it wasn't happening.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
So this basically just had to be proved to you? Why so many hoops to jump through? This has been the proposition from the beginning.timschochet said:
Arsenal of Doom
Footballguy
I've landed in more or less the same place. I'm a big believer that the right/best ideas win out over time, even if sometimes they take a step backwards. For example, we all know that the ACA was a half-measure and was destined to be replaced at some point. The inadequacies of the old system have taken a back seat as the focus has been squarely on ACA's shortcomings and less on the positive. The microscope now is going to go right back to all the people falling through the cracks of the system, and my guess is it's going to go so poorly that next time we get a full head of steam for single-payer universal care or at least a universal basic coverage plan that works within the existing system.
I'm skeptical for a variety of reasons that tax cuts for the rich and protectionist trade policies are going to be a good recipe for the American middle-class. The economy has probably needed fiscal stimulus for a while, but that was more true 3+ years ago. So there will probably be a little lift from tax cuts, but the Fed is also about to start bringing up interest rates. This was announced before the election but I'd bet we're going to hear some loud whining from Republicans that it's being done to undermine Trump.
Trade policy is the hardest to predict. In part because the job loses from trade are intertwined with jobs created by trade and jobs lost to technology. I think we can say definitively that putting in place protectionist policies is going to raise prices in some sectors. How much and how jobs are actually affected are big wildcards. The worst case scenario is that we see little job growth and inflation. Obviously this would be a disaster so I hope it doesn't play out that way, but I'm not optimistic about it either. The reality is that just about every low-skill position you can name is in a place where it can be automated, and it's not just traditionally low-skill positions either. That trend isn't going to stop and is accelerating.
Of course, as you said, a big unknown is what Trump is actually going to do. It seems a lot of his voters are simply writing off many of his policy proposals. If he actually carries though on things like mass deportations it's going to be explosive. If he doesn't, the most vocal part of his base is going to feel betrayed and lash out.
Like you said, fascinating stuff but really disappointed we have to play this out.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
You are being way too kind. No way does she belong in that conversation. You can't say 'the problem is Hillary' and then say 'oh she belongs in the hall of populist/liberal/progressive greats.' No she does not.timschochet said:
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
It's not a conclusion that I was eager to reach. There's much about Hillary that I admired and still do, so I tried to overlook her faults in my own mind. I was not deliberately dishonest in my posts here.
Thunderlips
Footballguy
I don't know what's worse..... the liberals trying to organize this EC "surprise" or the Conservatives arguing that it can't be done and is unconstitutional. Both sides seem kind of butt hurt by it.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Hillary lost the "presidency" once. They don't hand out HOF jackets for failing to make the team once.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
The fact that Timschochet is now making this argument is infuriating.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I just wanted to break this down more:
- Yes - 38 (4% of this number went to HC, 94% went to DT)
- No - 60 (75% of this number went to HC, 18% went to DT)
- Yes - 52 (86% of this number went to HC, 9% went to DT)
- No - 47 (5% of this number went to HC, 90% went to DT)
- Yes - 36 - (94% of this number went to HC, 4% went to DT)
- No - 61 - (20% of this number went to HC, 73% went to DT)
- Yes - 33 - (5% of this number went to HC, 94% went to DT)
- No - 63 - (71% of this number went to HC, 21% went to DT)
- NEITHER - 29 - (40% of this number went to HC, 45% went to DT)
- 47% of people thought Hillary was unqualified - which is a lot in its own right - but people who thought so were 1/3 less likely to vote for her than people who thought that about Trump. Basically almost everyone who thought Hillary was unqualified ruled her out. No so with Trump.
- Neither candidate was viewed as any more trustworthy or honest than the other and neither really did any better on that basis. But IMO this is obviously one place that another Dem could have won.
- Almost a third of Americans thought neither of their candidates were honest. That is really terrible. Goven the near even breakdown in the vote both sides (like loyal party Reps and Dems) baked it into their votes.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
If you disregard facts put in front of you because of your own personal preference of how you want things to be, that my friend is......
I hope you don't do this IRL.
Arsenal of Doom
Footballguy
Generally speaking I think the story of this election is going to end up being that Republicans/leans ended up holding ranks around Trump and Democrats/leans who voted for Obama didn't for Hillary.
The Commish
Footballguy
Which is which? Sadly, it's tough to tell the difference between these two groups of low lifes. It's no wonder our major party options were Hillary or Trump.
The Commish
Footballguy
You can't triple stamp a double stamp!!!!!!!!!! LA LA LA LA LA LA LA......I'm not listening to you.....LA LA LA LA LA!!!!!
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Well looking at the NBC polling, it looks like Hillary and Trump did roughly the same with their own parties. But I think greater defection was expected from Trump. Whoever was talking about Goppers coming home earlier in here was ultimately right.
Also Trump won independent men 51-37, and while Hillary did win Indy women 47-43 that was not as big a margin to make it up.
Arsenal of Doom
Footballguy
Yeah but that also only accounts for people who voted, not the ones who didn't. It looks like Trump is going to finish with roughly the same number of votes as Romney and McCain, but Hillary is going to be down 4-8 million from Obama '12 and '08. Some of that went to Johnson and Stein who got around 3x the votes they had in '12 and good number of the Obama coalition chose to just sit it out.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
In the end I don't think this was a great slogan.
- It marginalized men, which I don't understand.
- And it wasn't about any actual 'thing' or concept. It was just about her. Which it was, right up until the end.
bagger
Footballguy
If only someone would have told him as early as the primaries, when she was having a horrendous time holding off an independent in the democratic primary, and had to cheat to help get it accomplished.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Loan Sharks
Not a Wolf
Sorry but arguing against the electoral collage is a very stale argument. The whole point of the electoral college is to prevent heavy pockets of the population from dictating the entire nations policy. If it were not for the electoral college, no candidate would ever have a reason to go to 46 states. Simply campaign in the 4 largest cities. I guess you are ok with people in states having no representation, most are not.
Loan Sharks
Not a Wolf
bagger
Footballguy
I find it an odd thing that having voted for her, I take a fair amount of joy in seeing her lose, and lose to one of the worst presidential candidates ever. It's not like she can say hey I just ran into Michael Jordan and the Bulls. That has to really sting that all of her cheating and manipulation finally caught up with her. I hope we as a country don't pay too big of a price but honestly she can go #### herself.
Tim is right about one thing, she should just go away and crawl into a hole.
Tim is right about one thing, she should just go away and crawl into a hole.
Willie Neslon
Footballguy
Arsenal of Doom
Footballguy
The most impressive of any of the candidates I saw in this cycle was William Weld. If Libertarians can do a better job of articulating how to deal with social safety nets I could give them another look. Someone needs to really pick up the BIG, seems like it would fit well ideologically with them since it's a minimally invasive, low gov't overhead way to handle it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Loan Sharks
Not a Wolf
You know, at the very beginning I said Trump would win because he had a better slogan. People laughed at me. There are reasons companies, products and campaigns have slogans. They reinforce a message and tell the consumer what they are getting. Make America Great Again was clear and concise. There were about 6 slogans that Hillary went with and all were confusing and terrible.
Loan Sharks
Not a Wolf
I don't think we can understate how damning the naked guy dancing at their convention was. Anyone curious about the Libertarian party was treated to a horrible eye burning that will never let us consider them again.
timschochet
Footballguy
What argument? I acknowledged her weaknesses months ago, in this thread. I wrote more than once that I didn't like her shadiness or her hubris, but I supported her over Bernie because as a centrist I preferred her positions. I defended her against most of the specific attacks on the emails and the Foundation because I thought most of the charges were hogwash. None of that has changed.
Where I was wrong is that I thought she would overcome her weaknesses and win pretty easily because her opponent was much more flawed than she was. It didn't turn out that way. I wish it had.
- Status
Similar threads
