Why Hillary Lost- Entitlement, hubris but most of all, triangulation
I hate Politico. Most of their stuff is just establishment propaganda, but sometimes like the proverbial blind squirrel, they find a nut. How Clinton lost Michigan- and blew the election by Edward-Isaac Dovere finally gives us a much clearer picture of the inner workings of the Clinton campaign. There have been reports of the disconnect between Clinton's Brooklyn HQ and the rest of the country, but this really puts it all in perspective. I highly recommend you read the entire piece, as it clearly details how the Clinton campaign had triangulated itself straight into a corner, and when confronted with opposing data and research, it was thoroughly ignored at best...
Not to mention it finally begins to highlight the massive waste of resources in the targeting of swing states, where things like "literature" were deemed unnecessary, because "everyone knew Hillary". Hubris and entitlement defined. Personally, when people asked me what Hillary stood for, I did the exact thing the campaign and Hillary Clinton did: "Go to HillaryClinton.com where you will find....", puke. Holy bad candidate Batman! That's why no one knew what she stood for, she buried the platform on her website and expected the voters to go educate themselves... Oh Hillary, of all people, you really should know better, and probably did. (hint: she's not a progressive....)
The triangulation... omfg. It was suspected since her last name is Clinton, but wow, just wow. Following a corporate model right off a frigging cliff... a great metaphor for her self-imploded impending Presidency as well. I'm sure she would have gotten straight onto that progressive agenda, getting things done... Anyways more of a comment diary then a breakdown, but for any wonk, this is a must read.
Peace
Updated to add:
- This is what happens when you diary at work... you leave out your whole premise. I answered below, so here it is on triangulation, thanks for pointing it out:
The triangulation is found in the Clinton's campaign use of what the article called "the corporate model". Their utter reliance on it, like it was a mana from the Gods, was determined using algorythms and data-points that I explained in another comment. It became dogma and bred hubris. It is exactly why people like Schumer said for every vote we lose on the left, we will gain 2 on the center-right., that model predicted such an outcome... it is why we lost Michigan, when the model was saying +5... in other words, the "model" was dead wrong the whole way, that model was based on triangulation, and it is because triangulation once again failed spectacularly. (Edited a wee bit)
Comments
What is Triangulation?
What is Triangulation? Near as I can tell, it's the art of positioning a candidate so that they are hated by both the Right and the Left. But don't ask me why.
"We've done the impossible, and that makes us mighty."
Being hated by the Left and Right
is the result of triangulation. Some call it centrism. I call it neoliberalism.
The act of triangulation is crunching every data-point you can find to determine both policy and strategy, whether it be Left or Right. What you end-up with is Clintonism 101.
Progressive to the bone.
Okay, now I understand more your use of "triangulation"
as an over reliance on crunching data to determine what your strategy should be. I wasn't getting that on my initial read.
I associate triangulation more with determining policy positions, i.e. left is too left, right is too right, let's pick the point in the center which satisfies no one but looks like you've addressed an issue in an incremental, pragmatic compromise. Sometimes stasis is progress if your goal is to protect the entrenched.
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
Phoebe's definition is what I've been
going around thinking is the meaning of triangulation.
Actually, can't it be argued that the application of triangulation methods to data would invariably lead to Phoebe's definition as a real world result? I'm not a mathematician, so I hope someone with better experience can bridge that gap for us.
Although you could also "triangulate"
by saying that "left" is too right, far left is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay out there, and find your "centerpoint" from that POV...lots of ways to do it.
Nice diagram, but it leaves out the "walking"
After the first triangulation, everything to the left is cut off and the triangle becomes a right triangle. Then it's recalibrated so that the new midpoint is halfway between the old midpoint and the farthest right point, and so on in an Achilles-and-the-tortoise series, until the "difference" between the "triangulated" position and the right point is negligible. (I think we hit that point on this round.)
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Triangles
For the win.
Progressive to the bone.
For future reference. Always campaign like you're in Missouri.
You can talk all you want about how great you are.
But in the end, you're gonna have to SHOW ME.
Hillary showed her character so much that if we actually prosecuted politicians in this country she'd be up on indecent exposure charges.
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
eww.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
Thanks for providing that link!
I'm seeing the hubris and the entitlement but I'm not seeing triangulation as much, at least in that story, although we know that was an underpinning of some of their strategy per Schumer.
But the bunker mentality described in the article is amazing, mostly because they were so deluded they didn't even realize they were in a bunker and that they were simply recirculating their own oxygen without any fresh air intake. That's probably the best piece I've ever read coming out of Politico.
Brooklyn, Election Day 2016: I can just imagine the victory chortling dying down, the screens looking at DC apartments on Craigslist being closed, the ice in the cocktail glasses clinking forlornly, as the rock solid we've got this! lead slips away in all the states they ignored. I can picture the eyeballs darting around the room, trying to figure out who the scapegoats would be and hoping to not be among them. Wherever Hillary was ensconced, assuming she wasn't watching it slip away in person, I wonder who got the job of telling her, Bill or Chelsea or Huma or Robby Mook or John Podesta.
After reading that article, it's frigging amazing that Hillary's team has the guts to blame Comey or hackers or Russians or the Electoral College or Fake News or any other factor other than themselves.
Their local operations could have told them Russian tanks were mowing down Clinton rallies (if there had been any) and they still probably wouldn't have paid attention.
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
The triangulation
is found in their use of what they called "the corporate model". Their utter reliance on it, like it was a mana from the Gods, was determined using algorythms and data-points that I explained above. It became dogma and bred hubris. It is exactly why people like Schumer said for every vote we lose on the left, we will gain 2 on the center-right., that model predicted such an outcome... it is why we lost Michigan, when the model was saying +5... in other words, the "model" was dead wrong the whole way, and it is because triangulation once again failed.
Progressive to the bone.
I would also add
it created inflexibility.
Progressive to the bone.
Jazzenterprise, I don't want to get caught up in semantics
she says, before she gets caught up in semantics -
I understand that you see their "model" as being the means to achieve the triangulation that was their ultimate goal, or in other words, triangulation was the strategy and "the model" was the tactic to achieve it. Okay, I get it. No argument.
Reliance on the model reveals another general character flaw shared by her campaign and that is "elitism"- their reliance on computer modeling over the info being sent back by the human boots on the ground. That same elitism is displayed in the order by the campaign that the local troops were not to communicate with the DNC under any circumstances, in other words telling the little people they were little and occupied the bottom of the pecking order and could only talk to the people ignoring them while the election went to shit. There have to be some historical parallels here, but I can't think of any off hand.
At any rate the fall from grace is like a Greek tragedy or Shakespearean drama because of the genesis of the fall is the character flaws enshrined right from the beginning by both the candidate and those she surrounded herself with: hubris, entitlement, elitism, secrecy, certitude, defensiveness, and distrust of others among other things.
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
Technocracy is a more precise word for this
Now ya done made me pull my Saul off of the shelf...and I had to dig a bit for it...
I think a good parallel for that would be Rome.
Take a look at the insulation of the Senators from the everyday people, and how they thought that if they just forked over a pittance in bread and circuses, everything would be just fine.
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
Well, the Bread and Circuses era
would technically be during the Empire (since the phrase originates from Juvenal, I believe) although there were certainly aspects of that even during the Republic.
...which is why the elite class was so thrown off when Tiberius Gracchus did his thing by appealing to the people and became tribune of the pleabians...I mean, very very few people in Rome came from a more esteemed family than the Gracchi, one of the original "traitors to his own class."
I've always wanted to write a play about Tiberius Gracchus.
Brava
You should develop that into a movie. I generally hate real events movies (why do I need to watch a movie about sully? I know what happened. There's no drama (classical) in that story). But THIS i would devour.
Love this...
...and I'm sure they kept drinking long into that good night, until Hillary finally punched Bill and the party was officially over.
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
I'm waiting breathlessly for the tell-all insider book. nt.
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
It will put "Game Change" to shame. n/t
Hillary's campaign
I think the Clinton campaign was so out of it that they thought bombarding the public with photos of Hillary grinning would be enough to put her over the top.
One of my neighbors:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10210931702631610&set=a.10200349...
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
Many of us are still holding out
from joining Facebook. A summary would be nice :).
You'd have to see it to believe it
I hit the link. It appears to be full of the artist's work which includes many paintings of Hillary Clinton. Person is a serious HRC supporter.
Yes, visual is the only way.
She painted her car as a Hillary art car in 2008, updated a couple of times since. I will say that, even though she is a huge fan, she has a truly good heart. Her motivation is to see a woman President...we ran into her all the time during the Primaries, while we were doing some Bernie promotion or another, and she always smiled and waved, and we waved back. She organizes painting murals on The Wall, which is only a few miles from us, beautifying the Mexican side of it...gets the local kids involved down there, and gives them paint and a brush. My partner, also a painter, has participated with her a few times. And, she participated with us in disrupting a Jan Brewer/ Jeff Sessions press conference right before the election. We remain on good terms. But...wow.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
Boy, now Clintonistas want the CIA to vet presidential
candidates.
I've pretty much felt that was the point of the JFK assassination. And it was a lot of work to oversee Watergate to get rid of Nixon, or the October Surprise (which included parking oil tankers in the Caribbean to artificially jack up prices). Much easier to get it right from the start.
It appears that Clinton was the chosen one for the neocons to lead us into war with Russia, and they'd like to get another bite at the apple. Or maybe dragging the cold corpse of the Clinton campaign around is just part of the negotiating strategy with Trump to ensure he's compliant enough with his betters.
In any case, most of the Clintonistas online are still wailing and gnashing their teeth and tearing their shirts, unable to understand why it was wrong for Hilz to take money from Big Oil and Trump can get away with appointing Exxon to run State. Really, I heard that yesterday. That's a lot of education ahead for progressives to provide them, but so far the Hillary wing is unwilling to take their eyes off the stinking pile that is left of the Dem Party and ask themselves why.
Another big glaring hint that was ignored
From the article:
Management at these and other unions endorsed Hillary despite the majority of its members wanting to support Bernie. It wasn't management that wasn't doing its GOTV work, it was the workers who did not volunteer to campaign for Hillary. It's not like management can issue an edict - people have to be willing and enthusiastic. They weren't.
That should have been a major clue to the Hill campaign that union members needed to be wooed.
I think Hubris was the biggest factor in her loss.
Surely cajoled, greased, intimidated union heads. Disgraceful.
This is both why people begin to lose their faith in unions, because they're inevitably run by people for their own self-interest who sell out the workers all the time, and why people distrust the voting process, because Money In Politics ensures there will be no democracy for the people.
John Iadarola of TYT nailed the whole union endorsement farce in Jan of this year. All the union rank and file were for Bernie, overwhelmingly. While the heads were in the pocket of the Clintons. Proving yet again that "endorsements," that phony game of peacocking that the media salivates over and tries to convince their viewers it means something, when in reality they don't mean a goddamn thing to voters. TOP was full of this garbage, filling to the brim with hubris and over-confidence the Hillary Cheerleader Squad.
"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC"
- Kurt Vonnegut
The oligarchy bought her a senate seat
and a primary, with a big shove by the DNC, and she thought she actually had achieved something. She thought she knew how to do this, yet her numbers always go down during a campaign.
For the life of me, I have no idea why a person who had just been blindsided in Michigan would be so trusting of the polls just months later.
Because she paid good money for those polls!
Clearly it's the fault of the people who answered the questions that their opinions had to be properly unspun.
Next time, we just won't have any polls at all, because clearly they're inaccurate.
/snark
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
It's not always voluntary
My brother was forced to attend her (heh) javitz center rally in the spring. It was not voluntary, but it was paid.
I taught surveying technique one summer.
I always thought political triangularization was a rather obvious term to describe the process by which certain politicians work out their positions, metaphorically. The term is "back sighting": Literally sighting on several distant reference points to determine your location.
I navigated KC-135s by taking shots of the sun...
with a sextant, or at night, three star shots, hopefully close to 120 degrees apart. Works pretty well, even at 500 mph. (Dad and sister are surveyors)
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
That sounds like fun . . .
When we traveled throughout the West, my daughter (from 3 years up) often played navigator. When she was at Southern Oregon State University she went flying several times as a passenger. The pilot was a bit surprised that she knew how to properly hold a map and quickly locate their position. She didn't even need to "line up" the map!
mmmm juicy recriminations
cautionary tales of arrogance and hubris, and snapshots of premature celebration... That was well worth the read. I guess the obvious conclusion is that Putin controlled their campaign database, via Google, naturally. The system was named Ada, and will be recalled as one of the first major milestones for Artificial Stupidity.
Ada
Ada is a programming language. C and its kin are far better ones, at least IMHO.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Thanks for..
"Artificial Stupidity".
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
Both the programming language
and the Clinton campaign software are named after Ada Lovelace
Triangulation may make sense if you have...
...2 equally powerful but opposing and static views of some issue. Unfortunately when it comes to most issues nowadays; climate change, international trade agreements, prison reform, health care, global interventionism, minimum wage, etc., one side has all the money the other has just activists who care. Once you start triangulating, the money side can buy you out.
Triangulation killed the Dem party.
How the Democrats Can Fix Themselves (The days of triangulation are toast)
The political revolution continues
THX for posting the link --
Joe Stiglitz is one of the "real" economists who always talks sense -- and I always enjoy reading his work.
Krugs, OTOH, long ago went over to the dark side (about the time when he went fully in the tank for The $Hill), and hasn't been worth the time of day since then.
When Cicero had finished speaking, the people said “How well he spoke”.
When Demosthenes had finished speaking, the people said “Let us march”.
Krugs
Krugs "progressive" mask was ripped off this election. I used to read him--but no more.
Its been wholesale unmasking this election:
the breadth of corruption reached nearly every corner. My holy shit moment was when it was revealed who sat on the Congressional Black Caucus PAC: opiate, tobacco and alcohol lobbyists. It was like a cartoon villain takeover.
Yes
one of the positives to come out of this election is this extensive unmasking. And I credit Sanders for it. His momentum forced them- in their venal defense of hillary- to expose themselves. For me, the lowest was Barbara Boxer adopting the smears that there was violence at the NV convention and that she was personally threatened. Good riddance, Babs.
Lawd have mercy
DUH...
And there were reports like this from other swing states.
Much as I hate that Trump won, Clinton sure deserved to lose with operations like that...(I remembered that last visit to Detroit a couple of days before the election and wondered why she wasn't going to Macomb right after that)
Clintons drip in the sludge of their corporate hubris.
I agree, I can't stand those sites either, driven by Beltway gossip, Entertainment Tonight-style political coverage. But can't wait to read that article, if only for the schnadenfreude.
Every single thing about the Clintons and their lemmings revolts me. The kind of people so driven by status, entitlement, capitalistic greed, overblown self-importance. The kind that believe they earned it, that have no problem jettisoning their conscience, who are impressed to enter places with bouncers with ear pieces guarding the velvet rope, always "networking" while looking at people as stepping stones or lower species.
Jimmy Dore had been doing consistently good and necessary work lately. He's really thrown himself in, solidified his dedication to being a genuine truth seeker challenging the status quo of media mendacity and brainwashing propaganda.
This piece featuring Rachel Maddow's embarrassing insider 'splainin' shows how beyond lame, completely disconnected and arrogant the MSM has become.
Also at TYT Cenk had a pretty good piece on the willful ignorance and self-deception of the pathetic Democratic Party too.
"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC"
- Kurt Vonnegut
Maddow
has turned herself into a truly dishonest broker and a clown at the same time.
I mean, I feel as if I just read a chapter
out of John Ralston Saul's Voltaire's Bastards...Mr. Saul should probably issue a new edition of the book based on technocratic BS like this...
...as someone pointed out in the comment section of that Politico article, reports from the people that are actually on the ground doing the door-knocking is data...data that was rejected because it didn't fit into their manufactured models...
WTF! Clinton wasn't winning Iowa under any circumstances, IMO; they were never that into her there; who would believe that shit.
EDIT: The Politico article also makes mention of Virgie Rollins; a name which rang a bell so I went and looked it up and found a profile of her in Michigan's African American newspaper, the Michigan Chronicle
http://michronicleonline.com/2016/06/22/virgie-rollins-how-a-true-michig...
When someone like Virgie Rollins speaks and says she needs help, you fucking LISTEN! She knows the lay of the land in Detroit (and elsewhere) better than any of those bozos in Brooklyn
Good Jacobin piece on this; see link below
(I've posted this link a few times because I think the piece has merit.)
Garbage In, Garbage Out: Turns out Clinton's ground game sucked
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/11/clinton-campaign-gotv-unions-voters-r...
Excerpts:
[emphasis added]
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." --Jiddu Krishnamurti
I typically refuse to click on any Politico link....
...but this one today got my interest. I read it earlier before seeing this post. I only did so to see if it continues to confirm my suspicions that Clinton ran a terrible campaign that cost 1.2 BILLION dollars???
I canvassed for Sanders in the primaries and we were hitting up many undeclared or independent households according to voter registration. We encountered more than a few Trump supporters. I was left with the impression that Trump could actually pose a threat to Clinton in our part of southern CA. Especially, since I had caught snippets of some of his speeches in the primary election and saw him campaigning to Clinton's left on economic issues. If he continued with that, in my thoughts, it didn't bode well for Clinton and Trump stood a chance to win.
Fast forward to the general campaign and no Clinton ground people ever knocked on our door. Even if we weren't home we never saw a door flyer. We only received stuff in the mail about 'OMG Trump'. It appears she just didn't make the effort with expectations that she would turn enough people off Trump and toward her. The trouble is 'OMG Trump' was never a good campaign strategy. You have to offer something for people to vote FOR and her candidacy just appeared to be more of the same in the minds of some Trump supporters. They same shit they been dealt for 30 years. Thanks, Democratic Party!!!
Edit to amend:
As for this -->
I heard this a good bit during the campaign but I always thought how many of those people just can't afford a computer, let alone a smartphone or internet service to access her dot com address?
I think the split in the Deep State over more or less immediate
war with Russia was the primary cause of Clinton's defeat. The power elite looked deceptively united against Trump, but the few who openly stuck with the Republican nominee meant business. What's surprising is how the fight still continues, even at the risk of civil war.
Taibbi wrote a few times about the Sane Rich and the Insane Rich. His distinction was between those who wanted to eat all the poor people right away and those that wanted to keep them alive for later use. In 2016, that difference remains but war with Russia is the overriding issue now.
I guess heads weren't the only things exploding that night
Wes Clark Jr of TYT at HRC "Victory" party, explains why.
The hubris, arrogance and elitism was on full brash display. Special tiered-seating, total tightly-controlled corporatized environment and no one willing to speak to him as a reporter. Lavish bullshit, with the implication that you could be part of all this too, if you just jettison your idealistic fantasies and embrace the incrementalism that is your ticket to big jobs through the Revolving Door of DC when you get "graduate."
He pulled no punches in describing the epiphany he had while boarding a plane home the next morning:
"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC"
- Kurt Vonnegut
They have'nt been annihilated and destroyed.
They'll still hang with their social crowd and make money, the Democratic party establishment is intact and standing around with it's hand in it's pockets.
it's us, we're screwed.
Is there a link to a site
that maybe has a transcript? Because I don't do FooPuke (and never will). F**k you, Zuckerberg --
When Cicero had finished speaking, the people said “How well he spoke”.
When Demosthenes had finished speaking, the people said “Let us march”.
It's all a function of her being a lousy politician.
What good politician - not in the policy sense, but in the seat of the pants political instincts - hides from the public. Good politicians thrive off of that; you know damn well bill wouldn't have gone awol for 6 weeks. He'd have been going around the union halls, coffee shops, churches, etc meeting & greeting voters.
But Hillary doesn't thrive off of that, and only wanted to be surrounded by her adoring courtiers.
An aside: I caught mrs. Greenspan at lunch. She had madeleine Albright or someone like that on, and after they talked about x, mrs. Greenspan asked her how Hillary was holding up. And her guest was "I had dinner with her, just the 2 of us, and it's hard on her. Blah blah blah, the names she was called, etc"
Grow up. 1) every presidential election someone wins & someone loses. If you can't deal with losing, don't run. I don't remember the media being all concerned about how Mondale or Dukakis or gore or Kerry or Romney felt about losing. 2) "names"? Really, "names"? Presidential candidates have a long history of being called terrible things. For example, Andrew Jackson blamed his wife's death on the things said about her. Put your big girl panties on, Hillary, or don't run.
Hmmmmm...
What good politician - not in the policy sense, but in the seat of the pants political instincts - hides from the public.
There was a part of me that always wondered whether or not that was, indeed, the right thing for Clinton to do and whether more exposure would lead to her becoming less popular...but if that's the case, then maybe you should not be in electoral politics on that scale
I would add just these points w/George Clooney
When Hillary left State she began her yet undeclared campaign by personally enriching herself while seeking out future rich and connected donors using her speeches. I looked as best as I could if during these two years if she gave speeches or made appearances free of charge to unions, grass roots activist groups, local democrats, significant democratic party organizers, etc. I did not find any.
In other words, she cultivated ties only those with money leading up to the official announcement of her campaign.
She was running a totally top down campaign from the very start aimed first and foremost at money personally for her and for her campaign (Bernie and Trump both ran bottom up campaigns.)
The Politico article states that the campaign absolutely ignored the unions in Michigan. Given the article, it looks like the ground game in the midwest states was at best pathetic to nonexistent--and this was the fault of the HQ. Brooklyn HQ adopted the same view and attitude as Clinton toward the foot soldiers of the democratic party--they did not matter. This is why certain endorsements during the primaries were rather prophetic--the leaderhshp of many unions went for Hillary, but the base for Sanders.
So putting this all in context the video of her screeching, hectoring and lecturing union members as if they were servants who didn't immediately obey her every whim and order.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrO7KDMfx_0
Yes, it was hubris, arrogance, and I would say a world view that is very much elitist in that only the MONEYED elites matter and it is they who should rule. Obama has this very same view.
If George Clooney is reading this, You are one of the causes of the Clinton loss. You see George, Clinton saw as her base the very same base Bush did--that is people like you with money and influence among people who have money. George babe, Clinton spent more time with you than the union workers in Michigan. And all the money you raised for her didn't matter jack shit. Hey, nice time you have tea with her again.
Walking around money
There used to be a complete machine for getting union leadership and religeous leaders walking around money for them to bring in their constituency.
I haven't heard the term in a while, but wonder how much really goes on.
Is that why leadership went Clinton and rank and file went Sanders?
What Hillary Stood For
changed day to day, depending on how successful Bernie was at squeezing her, and since she couldn't keep straight from day to day what she indeed stood for, she put it on her webpage. "What do I stand for? Today you mean? Just go to my webpage."
Politico right. Was hubris and entitlement that bit her in the ass. Was all over her smug face, and all over TOP, too. One would have thought Jesus H. Christ his self was running the way TOP ooohed and ahhhed over Her Highness. We've GOT this! It's in the Bag! We're going to win BIG! Shut up about Bernie! Just shut up! He's irrelevant. Can't win. We said shut up!
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
Yup, Hillary ran a contentless campaign
Something like 75% of her TV ads were attacks on Trump. About 9% on the economy, trade, and jobs. A number of people noted that it was hard to define what Hillary stood for, while the opposite was true of Trump. Trump has a few things that those both opposed and who supported him understood--he was for wall; he wanted mass deportations; trade agreements are shit.
Hillary's message was vote for my gender, and because Trump is bad. She ran pretty much contentless campaign against Bernie also in that the main tactic was to attack him and his supporters.
But you got it. Clinton supporters thought they were the masters of the universe when it came to winning elections. Bernie supporters had no clue on how to win elections which is why they reject this idea that Sanders could have beaten Trump even though the polls said oitherwise. Bernie would be president now.
One thing TOP said was that Bernie was not "vetted" and Hillary was completely "vetted" and immune to gop attacks after 30 years--and Bernie wasn't with the assumption that there was something utterly nefarious in Bernie's past and the gop would discover it. Oh man, karma is a mother.
yes, they thought that had it in the bag
in fact, if you search through comments here, we had a visitor from the other place on the morning of the election, who lectured us about how bad we were and how, since we hadn't been in Hillary's corner, we wouldn't have a say in anything that she did as President.
I believe that visitor was sent packing.
Contentless, but full of baggage
Good luck with redefining. Better luck needed for the ethics and conscience implantation. Once removed, it is often, a difficult, risky surgery for re-introduction, as foreign transplants run the risk of rejection.
If you define a future without corruption, what human challenges are beyond effort? It is unfortunate that so many bought into the paradigm of being needy. Recognize that your suffering or that of those in your proximity may not enjoy your freedoms, condition, nor options: They are not your enemy either, but they might not want your help, but would rather they not suffer alone. Being needy for too long leads to low expectations, diminished political standards, and bouts of magical thinking.
Fighting for democratic principles,... well, since forever
Does she know what she stands for?
Does she have to have a pre-order menu briefing before breakfast (blueberry muffins have a 10% edge on strawberry waffles this morning MS. C, +or- 2 pt MoE)?
21st Century America: The distracted, superficail perception of a virtual reality.
Hubris Indeed
I thought about penning an essay, way back when Clinton was nominated, that would tell about her downfall (that's what I predicted anyway). It was going to be titled "Hubris: Thy Name is Democrats". A lot of other writers, including you, have talked about the various facets of third-way, neoliberal, arrogant, triangulating Democrats and their campaigns. Not much more to say ha
Another thing while I'm here
You know, when you start to dive into it, it truly is just pathetic how she lost. Utterly pathetic.
The super smart, super experienced, battle-tested, had-the-scars-to-prove-it candidate lost to Donald Trump.
The candidate who raised what...1.2 billion for the campaign, had the establishment of BOTH parties on her side, the banks, wall street, silicon valley, had the media collude with her every step of the way, the popular sitting President Obama, Michelle, Biden, Sanders, celebrities from all over, and yet.... and yet, she still could not be dragged across the finish line. All of them, and probably a few more I'm missing, oh yes, like colluding with Super Pacs as well and also funneling money to skirt campaign finance laws, all of this and they still couldn't drag the two-ton brick known as Hillary Clinton across the finish line.
It's really quite simple, duh
When you piss on your base, they won't turn out for you. Duh, duh, duh.
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Got home at 2 am from work
to see this front-paged! Thank-you. A bigger thank-you to everyone for a wonderful discussion, and my apologies for not being able to personally respond.
Peace.
Progressive to the bone.
Said it before....
and I'll say it again. You don't cram a horrible, elitist, out-of-touch, war-mongering, DINO with 52% unfavorables (before the first vote was cast!) down peoples' throats (especially with Bernie as contrast, when we could see how truly horrible she was) and expect to win.
That being said, it was breathtaking to me that during the last debate, when she had one final chance to articulate why a laid-off mother (or father) of three from Wisconsin, say, should vote for her-- but instead THREE TIMES SHE BROUGHT UP ESCALATING THE WAR IN SYRIA. So let's at least be thankful we dodged that particular bullet.
I am appalled that Trump won, and revolted by his appointees thus far-- but I am sure glad HER lost. Still and always. She and her husband have been a curse on the Democratic Party, hijacking the New Deal and making the world safe for for-profit prisons, welfare 'reform,' endless war, bank deregulation, corporate consolidation, media consolidation, economic inequality, and on and on. At least with the rethugs one knows where one stands and what to expect (garbage); but these two have been traitors to not only the party but the country. She was rejected in 2008; but the lust for power and personal aggrandizement brought her back 20 years after their 'sell-by' date had expired. I believe it was Daniel Moynihan who said of them they were "a fine pair of rogues." One might have to be Irish to fully understand the scathing quality of that remark. Every sling and arrow of outrageous fortune we endure from Trump is due to them and their lust for power, as well as those DINOS too blind to see (Hillbots), and the whole stinking and enabling chickenshit DNC establishment and media establishment. Away with them, I say-- but now we all must pay the price for these two people's killing ambition.
Semper ubi sub ubi
Everybody sees it but the Clintons
Did the model formulated in the skyscrapers of Brooklyn even consider the values of the farmers in North Dakota or school teachers in Michigan who believe integrity is non-negotiable in a politician?
Have any of the multiple surveys we have all received from various Dem sources even asked what we thought about Hillary's character, or have they asked only about the logistics of her campaign?
How many of us have abhorred the ethically challenged Clintons since Bill's first term in the White House, and NO amount of advertising dollars or campaign groundwork would cause us to vote for that again?
Hillary's integrity is the elephant in the room this election....
A much more interesting study would be to correlate the beliefs of voters along the electoral college divide, and whether that is a more predictive model for the election outcome than any other variable?