My Last Rant on the 2016 Presidential Election (until my next one)

[AthenaAwakened]

The Russians didn't do it
Comey didn't do it.
Hackers didn't do it.
The sun didn't get in anyone's eyes
The dog didn't eat it.
And nothing was called on account of the weather.

The Democrats lost this presidential election because of the Democrats involved and the choices they made. Period.

Donald Trump should have had a dozen votes plus his immediate family. And had he run against anyone not Hillary Clinton, that is probably what he would have gotten. But he ran against a candidate that from the beginning of the generally election had no shot at almost half the voting public as she was the second most hated candidate to run in a presidential election since they started keeping track of such things.

Add to that a campaign with multiple slogans and thus a muddled message, use of a favored tactic within the party of bullying its own members to make them tow the party line, surrogates that annoyed and enraged voters more often than inspired them, a campaign strategy that took for granted the blue wall of the rust belt (after all, they got no place else to go), campaigning too much through fundraisers and not enough with mass rallies, a candidate who, partly through her own shortcomings and partly because she was sandwiched between Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, exuded all the charisma and excitement of a substitute on line accounting instructor with a head cold and a skin condition teaching at Trump University; and you wind up with a candidate with credentials up the yin yang, a war chest larger than the GDP of some countries, the support of a popular sitting president, and three million more popular votes than her nearest competitor STILL LOSING the election to a blowhard braggart second rate star of a third rate reality show with no experience, no new ideas, and a knowledge of world affairs not quite equal to a turkey in the process of drowning in the rain.

Until certain media outlets, the Clinton campaign, the Democratic Party, and HRC herself are willing to admit that they are ultimately responsible for president elect Trump, the losing of elections has only just begun.

 

[Trausti]

Didn't vote for Clinton, but didn't think she'd lose either. Looks like the key difference was that Trump surrounded himself with smart advisers while Clinton had a circle of idiots.

SEIU — which had wanted to go to Michigan from the beginning, but been ordered not to — dialed Clinton’s top campaign aides to tell them about the new plan. According to several people familiar with the call, Brooklyn was furious.

Turn that bus around, the Clinton team ordered SEIU. Those volunteers needed to stay in Iowa to fool Donald Trump into competing there, not drive to Michigan, where the Democrat’s models projected a 5-point win through the morning of Election Day.

Blame the Mook.

Trump really fell for that Iowa ploy. LOL

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So we aren't blaming liberals who didn't bother to vote? Clinton lost Wisconsin... a state where Trump underperformed Mitt Romney.

But a huge thumbs up to Trump voters. Man, didn't matter if he was grabbing women by the pussy if you were an evangelical... they were going to vote for Trump regardless.

Odd... stick to your principles and lose.

 

[Ford]

Donald Trump should have had a dozen votes plus his immediate family. And had he run against anyone not Hillary Clinton, that is probably what he would have gotten.

But he didn't just run against Hillary Clinton. He ran against (and defeated) the best and brightest* that the GOP had to offer. One by one he picked off Jeb!, Little Marco, Christy Bridgely, Lyin' Ted, Senator Frothy, Sleepy, Dopey, Bitchy, and the other dwarfs of the Republican Party.

The media, the DNC, Clinton, and frankly the American people seriously underestimated Trump. In 20/20 hindsight, I don't know that even a Sanders/Warren ticket would have defeated him, because at the end of the day Trump won because he lied bigger and better than anyone else. "Build the Wall," and "Drain the Swamp" and "Lock Her Up" and "Make America Great Again" are all bullshit. You know it. I know it. I think even Trump supporters know it (and if they don't they're learning), but they just didn't care. They wanted to be told that manufacturing jobs were coming back. That we were going to get rid of all the Mexicans and Muslims. That we were going to "win" again, and win bigly.

It reminds me of a debate I went to once with a bunch of people from the Atheist Meetup. It was between a local pastor and the local American Atheists head, and it was about the usual evolution/creation and attendant issues. The AA rep had his facts. He was well organized. He refuted the pastor point by point with careful, reasoned answers.


And he got his ass handed to him. Why? Because he was up against a guy who just had more experience in front of a crowd. Was everything the preacher said bullshit? Yep, but he's been delivering that bullshit to people every weekend for years with two shows on Sunday! He knew how to work the crowd, had that preacher charisma thing going, and spoke passionately. He didn't sway the atheists in the audience of course, but we were in the minority. He delivered his phony baloney message much better, and so he won.

Trump told people what they wanted to hear. Classic bait and switch? Sure, but Trump is a good salesman. He's been doing this for a long time. Clinton was doing politics. Trump was making a sale. Congratulations America, you bought the special paint coating, the deluxe package, and the extended warranty on this one. The salesman is laughing at you as you drive away from the dealership, and will pocket a nice profit for his efforts.

 

[Elixir]

Donald Trump should have had a dozen votes plus his immediate family. And had he run against anyone not Hillary Clinton, that is probably what he would have gotten.

But he didn't just run against Hillary Clinton. He ran against (and defeated) the best and brightest* that the GOP had to offer. One by one he picked off Jeb!, Little Marco, Christy Bridgely, Lyin' Ted, Senator Frothy, Sleepy, Dopey, Bitchy, and the other dwarfs of the Republican Party.

The media, the DNC, Clinton, and frankly the American people seriously underestimated Trump. In 20/20 hindsight, I don't know that even a Sanders/Warren ticket would have defeated him, because at the end of the day Trump won because he lied bigger and better than anyone else. "Build the Wall," and "Drain the Swamp" and "Lock Her Up" and "Make America Great Again" are all bullshit. You know it. I know it. I think even Trump supporters know it (and if they don't they're learning), but they just didn't care. They wanted to be told that manufacturing jobs were coming back. That we were going to get rid of all the Mexicans and Muslims. That we were going to "win" again, and win bigly.

It reminds me of a debate I went to once with a bunch of people from the Atheist Meetup. It was between a local pastor and the local American Atheists head, and it was about the usual evolution/creation and attendant issues. The AA rep had his facts. He was well organized. He refuted the pastor point by point with careful, reasoned answers.


And he got his ass handed to him. Why? Because he was up against a guy who just had more experience in front of a crowd. Was everything the preacher said bullshit? Yep, but he's been delivering that bullshit to people every weekend for years with two shows on Sunday! He knew how to work the crowd, had that preacher charisma thing going, and spoke passionately. He didn't sway the atheists in the audience of course, but we were in the minority. He delivered his phony baloney message much better, and so he won.

Trump told people what they wanted to hear. Classic bait and switch? Sure, but Trump is a good salesman. He's been doing this for a long time. Clinton was doing politics. Trump was making a sale. Congratulations America, you bought the special paint coating, the deluxe package, and the extended warranty on this one. The salesman is laughing at you as you drive away from the dealership, and will pocket a nice profit for his efforts.

Extended warranty my ass.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Extended warranty my ass.

Ya, there's no warranty on this one. Your country breaks, you're fucking stuck with it.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

A woman with a resume as long as I-40 lost to the village idiot. No "Outside elements" should have mattered because Clinton should have been leading Trump (I mean REALLY leading) in the all the polls all the time 99 to 1. It was analogous to a race between Usain Bolt and a rock, with Bolt (HRC) starting two inches from the finish line in Central Park, NYC and the rock (the Donald) starting in Hawaii and I am being generous to the rock. Inside the bubble thinking, narrow vision, and hubris will lose you an election far more quickly and completely than Boris and Natasha and Fearless Leader ever will.

 

[Elixir]

A woman with a resume as long as I-40 lost to the village idiot. No "Outside elements" should have mattered because Clinton should have been leading Trump (I mean REALLY leading) in the all the polls all the time 99 to 1. It was analogous to a race between Usain Bolt and a rock, with Bolt (HRC) starting two inches from the finish line in Central Park, NYC and the rock (the Donald) starting in Hawaii and I am being generous to the rock. Inside the bubble thinking, narrow vision, and hubris will lose you an election far more quickly and completely than Boris and Natasha and Fearless Leader ever will.

How dare you impugn the accomplishments of Boris and Natasha - heresy!
Painting them as unworthy is just another right wing conspiracy theory aimed at diminishing the status of Rocky and Bullwinkle.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

A woman with a resume as long as I-40 lost to the village idiot. No "Outside elements" should have mattered because Clinton should have been leading Trump (I mean REALLY leading) in the all the polls all the time 99 to 1. It was analogous to a race between Usain Bolt and a rock, with Bolt (HRC) starting two inches from the finish line in Central Park, NYC and the rock (the Donald) starting in Hawaii and I am being generous to the rock. Inside the bubble thinking, narrow vision, and hubris will lose you an election far more quickly and completely than Boris and Natasha and Fearless Leader ever will.

The polls, I believe overstated how many liberals would vote. Also, they understated how many "conservatives" would swallow their "pride" and vote for Trump.

 

[Harry Bosch]

The Russians didn't do it
Comey didn't do it.
Hackers didn't do it.
The sun didn't get in anyone's eyes
The dog didn't eat it.
And nothing was called on account of the weather.

The Democrats lost this presidential election because of the Democrats involved and the choices they made. Period.

Donald Trump should have had a dozen votes plus his immediate family. And had he run against anyone not Hillary Clinton, that is probably what he would have gotten. But he ran against a candidate that from the beginning of the generally election had no shot at almost half the voting public as she was the second most hated candidate to run in a presidential election since they started keeping track of such things.

Add to that a campaign with multiple slogans and thus a muddled message, use of a favored tactic within the party of bullying its own members to make them tow the party line, surrogates that annoyed and enraged voters more often than inspired them, a campaign strategy that took for granted the blue wall of the rust belt (after all, they got no place else to go), campaigning too much through fundraisers and not enough with mass rallies, a candidate who, partly through her own shortcomings and partly because she was sandwiched between Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, exuded all the charisma and excitement of a substitute on line accounting instructor with a head cold and a skin condition teaching at Trump University; and you wind up with a candidate with credentials up the yin yang, a war chest larger than the GDP of some countries, the support of a popular sitting president, and three million more popular votes than her nearest competitor STILL LOSING the election to a blowhard braggart second rate star of a third rate reality show with no experience, no new ideas, and a knowledge of world affairs not quite equal to a turkey in the process of drowning in the rain.

Until certain media outlets, the Clinton campaign, the Democratic Party, and HRC herself are willing to admit that they are ultimately responsible for president elect Trump, the losing of elections has only just begun.

So a foreign government hacking and then altering (no matter how small) our election doesn't bother you at all? I'll bet if the same had happened to Sanders you would have been outraged.

 

[Deepak]

So a foreign government hacking and then altering (no matter how small) our election doesn't bother you at all? I'll bet if the same had happened to Sanders you would have been outraged.

The question of whether it's bothersome and what the deciding factor in the election was can be considered separately.

If the Dems didn't completely mismanage the election strategy they could have won regardless of the hacked emails. And let's not excuse the fact that a Gmail phishing message (which the Clinton IT guy thought was real) was the attack vector.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

The Russians didn't do it
Comey didn't do it.
Hackers didn't do it.
The sun didn't get in anyone's eyes
The dog didn't eat it.
And nothing was called on account of the weather.

The Democrats lost this presidential election because of the Democrats involved and the choices they made. Period.

Donald Trump should have had a dozen votes plus his immediate family. And had he run against anyone not Hillary Clinton, that is probably what he would have gotten. But he ran against a candidate that from the beginning of the generally election had no shot at almost half the voting public as she was the second most hated candidate to run in a presidential election since they started keeping track of such things.

Add to that a campaign with multiple slogans and thus a muddled message, use of a favored tactic within the party of bullying its own members to make them tow the party line, surrogates that annoyed and enraged voters more often than inspired them, a campaign strategy that took for granted the blue wall of the rust belt (after all, they got no place else to go), campaigning too much through fundraisers and not enough with mass rallies, a candidate who, partly through her own shortcomings and partly because she was sandwiched between Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, exuded all the charisma and excitement of a substitute on line accounting instructor with a head cold and a skin condition teaching at Trump University; and you wind up with a candidate with credentials up the yin yang, a war chest larger than the GDP of some countries, the support of a popular sitting president, and three million more popular votes than her nearest competitor STILL LOSING the election to a blowhard braggart second rate star of a third rate reality show with no experience, no new ideas, and a knowledge of world affairs not quite equal to a turkey in the process of drowning in the rain.

Until certain media outlets, the Clinton campaign, the Democratic Party, and HRC herself are willing to admit that they are ultimately responsible for president elect Trump, the losing of elections has only just begun.

So a foreign government hacking and then altering (no matter how small) our election doesn't bother you at all? I'll bet if the same had happened to Sanders you would have been outraged.

Let's say Boris, Natasha, and Fearless Leader were hacking away all the live long day

If Clinton had been crushing Trump throughout the election as she should have been, had the news media been covering the issues and not Trump's empty podium, if so many Clinton surrogates has not been senior citizens and professional talking heads with all the endearing qualities of pit of cobras and serious media over exposure problems, and had the DNC ran a campaign to delegitimize the empty rhetoric of the Trump campaign instead of trying to stage a coronation of Clinton, would the Russian govt have given a 4% fool like Trump the time of day?

 

[Harry Bosch]

So a foreign government hacking and then altering (no matter how small) our election doesn't bother you at all? I'll bet if the same had happened to Sanders you would have been outraged.

Let's say Boris, Natasha, and Fearless Leader were hacking away all the live long day

If Clinton had been crushing Trump throughout the election as she should have been, had the news media been covering the issues and not Trump's empty podium, if so many Clinton surrogates has not been senior citizens and professional talking heads with all the endearing qualities of pit of cobras and serious media over exposure problems, and had the DNC ran a campaign to delegitimize the empty rhetoric of the Trump campaign instead of trying to stage a coronation of Clinton, would the Russian govt have given a 4% fool like Trump the time of day?

I totally agree with you that HRC lost the election. The setup of her server was her fault. Period. She ran a crappy campaign. She probably ran a little too left, didn't go after middle class white voters enough. Whatever. But here's the thing, the republicans ran a shitty campaign also! Trump made mistake after mistake. He received 3 million less votes than HRC! And yet, because his side had better geography (EC), fewer internal enemies (Comey), less pressure from third parties, and a foreign government on his side, he received a slightly greater amount of votes in a couple key states, and he gets elected! How fair is that? In a razor thin margin, Trump and all his crazies take over. And razor thin margin may have been mostly due to a foreign government. Sorry, but I think that is a very serious situation.

- - - Updated - - -

So a foreign government hacking and then altering (no matter how small) our election doesn't bother you at all? I'll bet if the same had happened to Sanders you would have been outraged.

The question of whether it's bothersome and what the deciding factor in the election was can be considered separately.

If the Dems didn't completely mismanage the election strategy they could have won regardless of the hacked emails. And let's not excuse the fact that a Gmail phishing message (which the Clinton IT guy thought was real) was the attack vector.

So are you okay with the dems having a higher margin to win due to a foreign government (among other issues)? You okay with the republicans only needing 47% of the vote because of outside factors.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So a foreign government hacking and then altering (no matter how small) our election doesn't bother you at all? I'll bet if the same had happened to Sanders you would have been outraged.

Let's say Boris, Natasha, and Fearless Leader were hacking away all the live long day

If Clinton had been crushing Trump throughout the election as she should have been, had the news media been covering the issues and not Trump's empty podium, if so many Clinton surrogates has not been senior citizens and professional talking heads with all the endearing qualities of pit of cobras and serious media over exposure problems, and had the DNC ran a campaign to delegitimize the empty rhetoric of the Trump campaign instead of trying to stage a coronation of Clinton, would the Russian govt have given a 4% fool like Trump the time of day?

I think the hacking was to hamper a Clinton Presidency. That Trump won was just a bonus.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So a foreign government hacking and then altering (no matter how small) our election doesn't bother you at all? I'll bet if the same had happened to Sanders you would have been outraged.

The question of whether it's bothersome and what the deciding factor in the election was can be considered separately.

If the Dems didn't completely mismanage the election strategy they could have won regardless of the hacked emails. And let's not excuse the fact that a Gmail phishing message (which the Clinton IT guy thought was real) was the attack vector.

Did they mismanage the election? Lets remember something, almost no candidate without any incumbency did what Trump did. The "grab them by the pussy line" the "bleeding from wherever" would have (has) buried any other candidate (Allen, Akins, Angle, O'Donnell). I think Clinton ran the right campaign that would have won almost any other election, but there was a significant movement from the right-wing to push for a candidate like Trump. She trounced Trump in the debates, but it didn't matter. Trump said deplorable things, like inciting violence at a rally... it didn't matter. How do you beat a candidate that can't go too negative?

She made two mistakes in hindsight. First, she went for the landslide and polls were pointing there, but it turned out Republicans weren't telling the truth when they said they wouldn't vote for Trump. She should have stayed local and protected the Midwest. Secondly, she picked the wrong VP candidate. Oddly her only gamble the entire election, going for the landslide hurt her. Her VP choice was way too conservative, and she should have gone Latino. That would have likely won her Wisconsin, Michigan, Florida, and possibly PA and NC.

 

[Rhea]

So a foreign government hacking and then altering (no matter how small) our election doesn't bother you at all? I'll bet if the same had happened to Sanders you would have been outraged.

Let's say Boris, Natasha, and Fearless Leader were hacking away all the live long day

If Clinton had been crushing Trump throughout the election as she should have been, had the news media been covering the issues and not Trump's empty podium, if so many Clinton surrogates has not been senior citizens and professional talking heads with all the endearing qualities of pit of cobras and serious media over exposure problems, and had the DNC ran a campaign to delegitimize the empty rhetoric of the Trump campaign instead of trying to stage a coronation of Clinton, would the Russian govt have given a 4% fool like Trump the time of day?

I disagree with you completely on this. I think you overestimate how Sanders or any other Dem could have performed against Trump's lies and the people who wanted to hear them.

I think you overestimate (as Clinton did) the intelligence of the Dem voters.

My opinion is that it's easy to hang onto a dream ideal about Sanders woulda and coulda and shoulda and never apply to him the dirt and smear that Trump threw at everyone he encountered, not just Clinton. Dirt and bullying he's been throwing for decades without consequence. Dirt and bullying that was ripe for use from the fertile ground the GOP has been grooming for decades.

It's easy to assume without evidence that moderate people would have flocked to Sanders to replace the voters who clearly did not love him in the primaries.

My opinion is that there is no real evidence to support this claim that Clinton did everything wrong. I personally hate the way it sounds. That it buys into all the lies that have been told about her for decades. That it cuts off noses to spite faces and perpetuates the ideology of letting the perfect be the death of the good. That it gives permission and cover to all those who fell for the lies about Clinton and are now unhappy that Trump won. That it sends the message it's okay to be lukewarm support or even passively damaging to the side you prefer and then complain about the bad dude winning.

It sounds to me like a perfect set-up to have it happen again, to the detriment of the vulnerable.

Nader preached far and wide how awful the Dems were, and that by voting Green you could "send a message" and "the chaos will result in cleansing." And that brought us fucking Iraq. Sanders and Stein preached the same and see what we got. And they expect the Dem party to move _toward_ that kind of failing naysayer undermining message?

I just don't think you'll get what you said you wanted. My opinion is that continuing to throw poo on a group of people who have worked and volunteered and organized and compromised with each other to gain a coalition will get you nothing that you want and drive it further than your lifetime away.

If the extreme left can't even get themselves organized for long enough or think far enough ahead to elect a fucking state senator, then all they'll accomplish is keeping the ugliest of the GOP in power.

I get so sick of the whines that Clinton "didn't do it right," and never would or could and the DNC is therefore bad and evil and should be shunned. I am an extreme leftist and I want _actual_ action not self-defeating ideology. And Clinton has brought more leftward movement through building teams than Sanders ever did trying to tell everyone he was more pure than they.

If they really think all this finger-pointing and calling her supporters losers is going to make turnout for them bigger than it was for her, they're exhibiting the same kind ofcalculus that made them accept Trump as a winner.

Just an opinion. I'm not into scorched-earth hail-mary passes. I don't think they'll win, and it's sad to see their scorched earth deciding to burn others.


Also,

would the Russian govt have given a 4% fool like Trump the time of day?

The Russian goal was more likely to be destabilizing the USA. It didn't matter if it was Trump.

...


I'm all about debriefing and saying how things can change and what can be done better, but I'm not at all about whining and gossip based on things that were lies in the first place that amount to, "if only it hadn't been her."

2¢

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

So we aren't blaming liberals who didn't bother to vote? Clinton lost Wisconsin... a state where Trump underperformed Mitt Romney.

But a huge thumbs up to Trump voters. Man, didn't matter if he was grabbing women by the pussy if you were an evangelical... they were going to vote for Trump regardless.

Odd... stick to your principles and lose.

Except of course that he WASN'T grabbing women by the pussy. Nor was he saying all latino people are rapists. Nor was he Hitler. The media's twisting of everything he said (and he said enough that they didn't have to twist anything to make him look bad) was definitely part of this.

 

[Elixir]

Except of course that he WASN'T grabbing women by the pussy.

Right (maybe). Most likely he was just trying to bolster his own fragile ego by bragging/lying about grabbing pussy. Most of the women who allege that he assaulted them say he grabbed.... elsewhere. Much better.

 

[Rhea]

So we aren't blaming liberals who didn't bother to vote? Clinton lost Wisconsin... a state where Trump underperformed Mitt Romney.

But a huge thumbs up to Trump voters. Man, didn't matter if he was grabbing women by the pussy if you were an evangelical... they were going to vote for Trump regardless.

Odd... stick to your principles and lose.

Except of course that he WASN'T grabbing women by the pussy. Nor was he saying all latino people are rapists. Nor was he Hitler. The media's twisting of everything he said (and he said enough that they didn't have to twist anything to make him look bad) was definitely part of this.

This is the kind of weird bizarro-world acceptance of lies that people think Sanders would have overcome that Clinton couldn't.

Holy shit, yes, he fucking was! Women came forward and said exactly that. Some say he "just" stuck his disgusting tongue in their mouths without permission, but some say he stuck his disgusting hand up their dresses and grabbed them.

And the fact that people _still_ claim this stupid delusional bullshit that, "it was just words," when there are actual lawsuits against him for this very thing! is not something that Clinton "did wrong."

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYup8DzLpUk

Karen Straughan nailed this pretty much dead on.