Bravo. Full disclosure, I voted for HRC. However, I've been saying this to my liberal friends for the entire election cycle. The message from of all of my liberal Facebook friends has been some derivative of:
"Hear me out. We know Hillary isn't the best candidate, but you have to vote for Trump. If you don't you're a racist misogynist. Also, if you vote for a third party candidate, you are basically voting for Donald Trump."
There are so many things wrong with that message, that I won't go into it, but the last bit about a third party vote == a vote for Trump is dismissive, condescending, wrong, and rude. The assumption is that the third party voters are reasonable people who would otherwise vote Democrat but for the fact that they have a few misgivings about HRC.
However that is a very poor assumption.
Not once did I hear any of those same people listen to anybody, Trump supporter, third party voter, no voter. They shouted over everyone else and smugly and overconfidently assumed everyone was listening to them.
I am as shocked as anyone Trump won, but I had been telling my liberal friends for months that people just don't like HRC. I have my reasons for why I think that's true and it has nothing to do with emails or Bill Clinton's past indiscretions. Her primary run against Obama in '08 is proof positive of this, and in many ways this general election is a near repeat of that process.
She and her supporters were overly confident, refused to believe that they weren't connecting with mainstream America, and then got blindsided when the votes were counted.
I truly hope that the democratic party learns something from this, but from what I've seen on my Facebook feed this morning it certainly doesn't feel like it's going in that direction.
I'm just curious how old you are because I lived through the Bill Clinton years and it was appalling how bad the Clintons were. Their legacy from Arkansas all the way up the Pay to Play Clinton Foundation has been completely consistent--to bend and break the law everywhere possible if it is to their benefit to do so and then engage in cover ups, blackmail, and possibly murder to get away with it. They are a modern day crime family. You probably dismiss all this as unproven "tinfoil hat" conspiracy stuff, right? But there is such a large body of circumstancial evidence when it comes to the Clintons that it is impossible to ignore. Then the leaks started dropping and we got a small window in a large world of corruption. Did none of this occur to you?
I'm 35 and I remember the Clinton years well. I'm curious what about my comment led you to believe that I would dismiss their well-documented "missteps" as "tinfoil hat conspiracy stuff." Sure, Bill Clinton was corrupt and a liar. He also happened to be the greatest politician that's ever run for President.
There's plenty of corruption beyond what you cited. Private speeches to Goldman Sachs which HRC refused to release. Debbie Wasserman Schultz' straight-up corruption during the democratic primaries and her subverted attempts to force HRC down democrats' throats. The alleged passing of debate questions to HRC's camp in advance. The list goes on and on. And yet, I firmly believe that those things in and of themselves have little to do with why she lost.
If you lived through the Bill Clinton years then you might remember that his favorability ratings were so high when he left office (after being impeached!) that it was widely believed he could have easily won a third term if he were allowed to run again.
The reality is that most voters don't care about the candidates private lives. Some voters actually held Clinton in higher regard after the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke. Voters are much more drawn to the candidate than the candidate's background or even the issues.
HRC has simply never been an effective politician. Sure, she won a senate race in New York on the heels of her husband's presidency, but beyond that she's had a problem connecting with constituents in both elections. This was exactly the reason she couldn't beat Obama in '08.
Then the leaks started dropping and we got a small window in a large world of corruption. Did none of this occur to you?
It seemed to me more like a very large window onto what turned out to be a pretty small world of corruption. I don't have an axe to grind but I've never seen a straight answer as to what her "crimes" supposedly are.
"Hear me out. We know Hillary isn't the best candidate, but you have to vote for Trump. If you don't you're a racist misogynist. Also, if you vote for a third party candidate, you are basically voting for Donald Trump."
There are so many things wrong with that message, that I won't go into it, but the last bit about a third party vote == a vote for Trump is dismissive, condescending, wrong, and rude. The assumption is that the third party voters are reasonable people who would otherwise vote Democrat but for the fact that they have a few misgivings about HRC.
However that is a very poor assumption.
Not once did I hear any of those same people listen to anybody, Trump supporter, third party voter, no voter. They shouted over everyone else and smugly and overconfidently assumed everyone was listening to them.
I am as shocked as anyone Trump won, but I had been telling my liberal friends for months that people just don't like HRC. I have my reasons for why I think that's true and it has nothing to do with emails or Bill Clinton's past indiscretions. Her primary run against Obama in '08 is proof positive of this, and in many ways this general election is a near repeat of that process.
She and her supporters were overly confident, refused to believe that they weren't connecting with mainstream America, and then got blindsided when the votes were counted.
I truly hope that the democratic party learns something from this, but from what I've seen on my Facebook feed this morning it certainly doesn't feel like it's going in that direction.