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!
Yeah, a lot of what we've seen over the last 8 years is what seems to be a natural tendency in the electorate to hold the party in the WH to a higher standard, which creates some gravity towards a split gov't. Same thing happened in various degrees during the Reagan, Clinton, and Bush years.
What Bill should have said that his wife ignored this voter segment to her demise.
There was a lot of discussion about Clinton before the general election - many (myself included) thought she was running an absolutely terrible campaign. Not everyone agreed. I think in the aftermath we can see it was horrifyingly poor judgment.
Russia and Turkey have started normalizing relations lately, but this may throw things back into a tizzy,
He knows enough to know holding rallies in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania would pay off. Which is more than you can say of some other candidate.
I wrote that I wanted the pointing out of hypocrisy to stop because we can take it for granted that both sides will be hypocritical.
Yeah. on one side you had a system that concentrated power with the party leadership and helped ensure the preferred, ethically challenged, insider won, on the other side you had a breakdown in party control that allowed a know-nothing, ethically void, demagogue to win the nomination and then the party voters held together to put him in office.Party leadership is responsible for this debacle.
I think this is a little excessive. She didn't run a very good campaign, and she made one huge strategic error in devoting resources to Arizona, Georgia and other longshot states instead of devoting those resources to the "firewall" states. But she did some good things too: she dominated the debates, she drew out Trump's worst instincts well on several occasions, etc.
Thanks.One thing you are good at is mental gymnastics!
I don't think that those of us saying she was running a terrible campaign nearly a year ago can be accused of "Monday morning quarterbacking" now.
Yes. By all accounts that I've read, Hillary's incompetence prevailed over Bill's objections. If her campaign people had listened to the guy who won two elections previously, she would be winning the EC today.
True but do you think she ever had a chance to win the "angry white man" vote? That well was poisoned long before Trump.
I can't tell what you're trying to ask there.
You were saying she was running a terrible general election campaign during the Iowa caucuses and NH primary?
I was posting that her entire campaign strategy was terrible around March. I wasn't the first to bring it up.
I think the point is that Dems need to figure out why policy and messaging missed with rural, white voters. Part of that is clearly an attitude by some in the party that they didn't matter electorally so there was no point spending campaign resources chasing them and I think that cost votes. I'm not as convinced it would have changed the outcome since she did campaign quite a bit in PA and was all over FL and still lost.
Reads like you were talking about her primary campaign and her likability there rather than her general election campaign strategy- and I obviously agree that her likability was a problem, as did most everyone else from the get-go. I thought we were just talking about general election strategy mistakes here, based on Grace Under Pressure's post.
To clarify I don't think campaigning alone would have made a difference in WI, MI, PA. The problem was inability to connect with those voters on how Dem policy was superior to Trump's protectionism. The first step should be admitting that it probably isn't much better for those voters. Trump is likely to hurt them int he long run with higher inflation and a less competitive U.S. globally, but the Dem platform currently doesn't have much to offer and we need to be honest about that.
I read somewhere that Bill was harping on this strategy, but Hillary's team dismissed almost all his campaign ideas.
If you just want to argue about this, I'm sure there are people who are more fun to just argue with.
If you can show me a link to Clinton or any high ranking Democrat referring to rural white voters as "deplorable" I will give you $1000.
Bingo.
Give me a break!
I think if she ran her campaign events on issues that rural voters care about it would have.
Tellyawhat, there was a neighbor of my in laws who had a sign up that said in big caps 'I am a deplorable' (and then in smaller lettering 'Donald Trump Supporter').
Jobs/support for workers who aren't benefiting from technology and globalization
So what you said was true, but you just don't want the $1000? Right.Give me a break!
You Anti-Trump guys make cracks all the time about rural white voters(rednecks as many here call them) and how they support Trump. Hillary was talking about Trump supporters when she called them deplorables and that includes rural white voters. Guess what...rural white voters took exception to being called deplorable.
Good Lord Tobias...that was one of your worst posts ever!
Farm subsidies, restricting future gun control measures to cities like the wild west used to do, fixing trade deals that appear to have hurt rural areas, and things like that.
