It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If Hillary was inevitable then why/how did she lose?

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Clinton absolutely would have won had the Democrats not pissed off blue collar, middle income white male voters. Trump won by the slimmest of margins in key states that gave him the electoral college.




posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

Smug definitely fits the Hillary Clinton persona...

Trump is proud and egotistical but he is passionate about what he believes. Clinton is in-your-face pompous and desperately panders to any group she thinks will vote for her.

The "super predators... we must bring them to heel" comment of hers in the 90s probably didn't help, nor did Benghazi or the emails scandal.



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: TonyS

The Democratic party in Wisconsin was SCREAMING at Clinton's campaign team to pay attention to the state during the election because they saw how the voting demographics were shaping up in real time. The Clinton Campaign continued to ignore them and went to states like Arizona instead.



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: dothedew


I think the main reason is the population...... You can have all your ducks lined up in a row and have every political back door propped open, but when it comes to the minds of over 120 million people.... There's always a chance for the unexpected.


I'd like to believe that. And to a great extent I think you're right. People on all sides are just fed up with the nonsense and stupidity in DC. We may not agree on the "right" course of action, but we pretty much agree that the critters in DC are rotten to the core and need to go. That we need new leaders and new solutions.

I haven't supported Trump, but I have greatly appreciated how he's shaken things up.



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:25 AM
link   
Hillary's a sick old woman, she lost! The continuance of this obsession with her is astonishing. Is she even relevant anymore?



edit on 23-1-2018 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Boadicea

It doesn't really matter. Why look a gift horse in the mouth?


Because the devil's in the details...

And because I don't think Hillary is the one we need to fear the most. So while I can breathe a sigh of relief for her loss, she's not the only one to worry about.



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea


Well, for starters she was not on team Russia. She also should have been campaigning more. However, she was sick in Sept of 2016 with pneumonia, which is why at the Sept 11th memorial she almost collapsed. I think the pneumonia kicked her butt.


Also she did win the popular vote by millions. Also, there was no voter fraud, as trump would like you to think, the investigation ended last week.







posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Boadicea

The going theory is that she was overconfident and instead of shoring up her base in states like Wisconsin that she believed were guaranteed blue states she went for the throat and campaigned primarily in red states. This had a double effect of weakening her support in reliably blue states (that would become battleground states) as well as passing off the perception of making her look overconfident and entitled to the Presidency.


Good point. I think there's probably much truth there. I would also suspect that it combined with some backlash for the treatment Bernie received, and encouraged lots of folks to just stay home (or vote third party?). I doubt many of those voters would vote for Trump no matter how betrayed or resentful they felt towards the party/candidates. So it just meant fewer votes for the Dems -- not necessarily more votes for Trump.



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:36 AM
link   
At this point whay difference does it make?

Lol...

Hillary came across as the wicked witch of the West wing and people voted for the other guy.

Really it's that simple



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I saw that as well and had to wonder if an underlying problem with the HRC campaign was lack of funds. Weird really how she ignored local party pleas for help.



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: kurthall
a reply to: Boadicea


Well, for starters she was not on team Russia. She also should have been campaigning more. However, she was sick in Sept of 2016 with pneumonia, which is why at the Sept 11th memorial she almost collapsed. I think the pneumonia kicked her butt.


Also she did win the popular vote by millions. Also, there was no voter fraud, as trump would like you to think, the investigation ended last week.






Clarification... she won the popular vote in CA by millions...



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: acackohfcc
Here in the D...


The "D"? Would that be the "District" as in the District of Columbia? Or ???


...over 80% of the votes would have been ineligible for recount because of procedural errors.
If they had done a recount Trump's win would have been even greater


That wouldn't surprise me. But what did surprise me is the big hullabaloo from both sides at any recounts or examination of election integrity -- depending on who was calling for it of course!

Seems to me that both sides have a little sumpin to worry about if our election process was every examined under a microscope.



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea


Agreed. It's never ending. At least the flavor is different.....



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:39 AM
link   
If Hillary was inevitable then why/how did she lose?

Demexit.

When millions on the left saw the Democrats for what they were, and what they did to Sanders.



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: TonyS

It really shows the dangers of confirmation bias and echo chamber bubbles. She clearly setup her own echo chamber bubble if her arrogance prevented her and her team from acknowledging the issues that were arising.



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

Yeah, the Bernie issue didn't help matters much. Many Bernie supporters refused to support Clinton after the party maneuvered to put Clinton over him. That political posturing also went towards her loss. Clinton clearly didn't want a repeat of 2008, where some unknown Senator comes out of nowhere with a message that better resonates with the public and upends her lead in the polls, and the DNC establishment just figured that if they maneuver to kick Bernie out of the race then their base will just consolidate because the alternative is too much to vote for.
edit on 23-1-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated


Ultimately, I think many people voted for Trump as a F' you to the traditional establishment candidates.


I totally agree.

I also think that many folks came out of the woodwork so to speak to vote after many many years of not voting, just to give the critters that big fat middle finger. Just like many on the other side stayed home to give their own big fat middle finger to their own party!



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated



Popular vote, is the popular vote. Also, millions.








posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy



DC, both parties, were sure of it. They had all their plans, and programs in place. But "the rat" zigged instead of zagged when hit with the stimuli.


Do you think there was any one event over others that changed the trajectory? For example, did they underestimate the backlash from the Bernie Bros?

I tend to think they believe their own publicity (both sides) and got way too big for their britches and didn't realize their head games on the people were no longer working...



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: DBCowboy



DC, both parties, were sure of it. They had all their plans, and programs in place. But "the rat" zigged instead of zagged when hit with the stimuli.


Do you think there was any one event over others that changed the trajectory? For example, did they underestimate the backlash from the Bernie Bros?

I tend to think they believe their own publicity (both sides) and got way too big for their britches and didn't realize their head games on the people were no longer working...



They (The Hillary campaign) believed their own lies.




top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join