Why Hillary Lost....According to a Liberal, Minority Female

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: InTheLight

Interesting that Clinton's book still far outsold Trump's.

And it did better on release than any other non-fiction book in the last five years.

LOL ... so keep laughing ... like Clinton is ... all the way to the bank.

It is as if everyone wants to know 'what happened' too.

Yeah, I know what happened for free: Trump won.

But they 'why' did he win needs to be looked at and dissected.

He won four swing states by a total of 70K or so popular votes. That gave him one of the most narrow wins in the Electoral College in history, ranking 47th I believe.

I meant 'why' as in what prompted people to vote for him? I don't get it.

Well, many people voted for their chosen party, many saw Trump as anti-establishment, many liked his positions on some issues and some just want to watch the world burn.

In my opinion.

To me these are the best parts of the piece:

Hillary Clinton ran a bad campaign. No matter how many popular votes she received, it isn't the popular vote that determines the presidency. Those are the rules, and she knew the rules. To not campaign, or campaign poorly, in swing states where electoral college votes would determine the presidency, was a bad calculation on her part.

White women voted for Trump. This should have been a demographic that Clinton owned. She didn't. She claims these women didn't vote for her because their men told them not to, as if they can't think for themselves. How disrespectful. How misogynistic. This "what happened" book is an example of why she didn't get elected.

Truth.

For those still clinging to the "she won the popular vote" fallacy, let me explain how that fits into the U.S. election process using sports metaphors.

Baseball

• individual vote = hit
  
• Electoral vote = run
  

You win the game by scoring more runs than the opposition. Having more hits in the game does not necessarily mean you win. Having more runs scored matters more, and having more of those in the game will guarantee you win.

American Football

• individual vote = yard gained
  
• Electoral vote = points scored
  

You win the game by scoring more points than the opposition. Having more yards gained in the game does not necessarily mean you win. Having more points scored matters more, and having more of those in the game will guarantee you win.


Get it?

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: InTheLight

Interesting that Clinton's book still far outsold Trump's.

And it did better on release than any other non-fiction book in the last five years.

LOL ... so keep laughing ... like Clinton is ... all the way to the bank.

Sycophants looking for more reinforcement in their denial can give her all their money for all I care, as long as she's not in the White House.

LOL... don't you love the free market!

a reply to: Krakatoa

Sure, and to actually address the facts, you win the Electoral College with 270+ votes from the Electors.

Those Electors are assigned based on the popular vote totals in 48 States and by Congressional district popular vote total in two.

It's not that hard to understand really.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: InTheLight

Interesting that Clinton's book still far outsold Trump's.

And it did better on release than any other non-fiction book in the last five years.

LOL ... so keep laughing ... like Clinton is ... all the way to the bank.

Sycophants looking for more reinforcement in their denial can give her all their money for all I care, as long as she's not in the White House.

LOL... don't you love the free market!

I do. And I don't get jealous of people making more money than me. How rich she is is of zero concern to me.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Krakatoa

Sure, and to actually address the facts, you win the Electoral College with 270+ votes from the Electors.

Those Electors are assigned based on the popular vote totals in 48 States and by Congressional district popular vote total in two.

It's not that hard to understand really.

That's correct. So all that time she spent in California was a waste, when she could have spent that time in states where she needed to garner more votes to win the election. But them Californians were giving her a lot of money, so.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: InTheLight

Interesting that Clinton's book still far outsold Trump's.

And it did better on release than any other non-fiction book in the last five years.

LOL ... so keep laughing ... like Clinton is ... all the way to the bank.

Sycophants looking for more reinforcement in their denial can give her all their money for all I care, as long as she's not in the White House.

LOL... don't you love the free market!

I do. And I don't get jealous of people making more money than me. How rich she is is of zero concern to me.

I prefer a full life surrounded by loved ones to big bank accounts myself, although I'm not opposed to money or financial success.

a reply to: face23785

She has a Twitter account; you should tell her!

a reply to: Gryphon66

One of her lackeys probably has me blocked. She hates the average American.

originally posted by: TrueBrit

The reason she should of lost however, is that the solutions to the issues facing America do not come from the centre right position she occupies as a political entity, leave alone any further right than that.

I think people in general are moderate but the media goes after the squeaky wheel of alt right/left. The old "if it bleeds it reads" mentality is in play here, but on steroids 24/7. When we look at all eligible voters we see 44% of them did not vote, and this tells me that at least 44% does not play into all this far right/left propaganda.

Since Hillary only got 28% of the vote and Trump got 27% you could most likely break that down to the low teens in who is actually far right or left. Center right/left is healthy but people just do not want to see that.

a reply to: SuperDaveAPK

Hmmmm.

How to put this.

Hillary was not a great candidate. Romney could have beaten her. Rand Paul might have beaten her.

She was not personable and frankly made little effort to be personable or aggressively campaign as if it was a fight for her life, like she should have.

But Trump? He was an objectively WORSE candidate by almost every measure.

It was two bad candidates running, but one much worse than the other.

A conflation of factors tipped the Odds Trump's way in that match-up and those factors included Russian interference campaigns. They spent Millions and Putin and the FSB aint stupid.

Put another way, all of the following is are True.

If Hillary was a better candidate, she would have won.
If she had campaigned more aggressively as if her opponent had not admitted to groping women on national TV, she would have won.
If Russia had not spent Millions of dollars on a year long concerted propaganda campaign across social media, hacked DNC emails, fake news campaign etc. She would have won.

If a team plays a crappy game of football and is about to win by one point, but the other crappier team cheats and wins at the last minute?

Who is to blame for the loss? The original winning team would not have been in that position if they had played better, but they would have won if not for the cheating.

All that said? Game over. It's a pointless debate. On to the next match-ups in 2018 and 2020 and reviewing tapes to make sure the refs and officials are prepared for future cheating.

originally posted by: openyourmind1262
Thank God the popular vote doesn't vote them in.

I understand where you're coming from but I didn't like either one of them so I just drank that night.

A lot.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: TrueBrit

The reason she should of lost however, is that the solutions to the issues facing America do not come from the centre right position she occupies as a political entity, leave alone any further right than that.

I think people in general are moderate but the media goes after the squeaky wheel of alt right/left. The old "if it bleeds it reads" mentality is in play here, but on steroids 24/7.

Interesting sidenote, it's not just "the media".

the 30K FB ads that FB has identified as coming from Russian shell companies and Russian Gov?

Strangely they promoted Black Lives Matters as well as Ads/Fake News attacking those same promoted stories.

they did the same with general race stories and hot button issues.

Division was the aim. Straw boogie men for the US political consumer courtesy of Putin.

He was working to divide the moderate middle before pressing them Trumps way.

Kind of diabolical when you think of it.

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Gryphon66

One of her lackeys probably has me blocked. She hates the average American.

Hmmm ...

Contact Hillary Clinton

There's an Instagram, Facebook and snail-mailing address there.

originally posted by: CB328
James f'ng Comey. That's why she lost plain and simple. That and most Americans are stupid as dirt.

Well, at least she was able to convince ONE person with her delusions. Good job CB328! Keep up the bad work!

a reply to: Gryphon66

I was joking. Besides, it's not like if I send some truth through any of those methods that her staffer is gonna pass it along to her. They shield her from uncomfortable truths, that's why nobody told her to get her ass up to Wisconsin.

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Gryphon66

I was joking. Besides, it's not like if I send some truth through any of those methods that her staffer is gonna pass it along to her. They shield her from uncomfortable truths, that's why nobody told her to get her ass up to Wisconsin.

A cogent point.

originally posted by: RedDragon
Libertarians aren't smart rofl. I used to be one and used to think that. Libertarians are ideologues, like religious fundamentalists to the point that most of them want to repeal the Civil Rights Act.

They routinely circle fake information among each other. They circulate fake quotes falsely attributed to great men like Thomas Jefferson and famous philosophers so they can claim that smart people think like they do. They spread fake alternative news. They buy into conspiracy theories. This isn't the activity of smart people. It's the activity of religious fundamentalists.

Oh, you caught my dumb ass, buckaroo.

I don't believe in conspiracies, love the Bill of Rights, don't misattribute quotes, don't quote alt news and am not religious.

Any other buckets you want to try and cram me into?

originally posted by: soberbacchus

Division was the aim. Straw boogie men for the US political consumer courtesy of Putin.

Lots of people in play here... Old George Soros is supporting all of this but for different reasons. I don't know if the Russians are just fighting the NWO or if they really want to see America collapse. It is not like they will fill the void...If we go, so do they under China or Middle East.