You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
35 points

Clinton beat trump in every debate, it’s all about voter turnout man

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Exactly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Actually it’s about the demented electoral college, can we string up any of the electors that refuse to vote the will of the people?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Didn’t Hilary win the popular vote?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The turnout in swing states wasn’t enough

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Yup, but because the Electoral College weighs some votes more than others, that doesn’t matter.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

She also beat him in votes, but our country doesn’t honor the will of the people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

My feeling is that Clinton’s big problem was that she had a low ceiling and low floor because of 20+ years of smears; even though she was definitely qualified, there was just too much generalized negative baggage. I knew many democrats that believed something big would come out because republican muckrakers had spent so many years seeding that field. When Comey decided to break all tradition over nothing it just reinforced that perception.

Harris doesn’t have that, she has a high ceiling for perception. More people have no idea who she is and the more she can be the one to define herself while Trump looks crazier and crazier the better she’ll do. And the debate feeds that unlike Clinton.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

I voted Clinton in 2016…but I didn’t exactly vote FOR her, moreso I voted against Trump. I feel like that’s why she lost - she repeatedly demonstrated that she’s an out-of-touch career politician. She had several How Do You Do, Fellow Kids? moments that turned off a lot of people. It also felt like they were putting way too much emphasis on her being a woman and that’s…just not a selling point. I don’t care what reproductive gear a candidate is equipped with.

I cringed a bit at those gaffs but there were two main reasons my vote was a reluctant one:

  1. I can’t stand politician dynasties. I don’t want political families running the country and I definitely don’t want it to be a Clinton (who I admittedly would have voted for in the 90s if I was eligible). Staying with Bill after the scandal was a political move in my opinion.

  2. The nomination didn’t feel deserved at all. Sanders got screwed in a time we needed him most and it felt like it did earlier this year when I intended on voting for Biden. Nobody likes thinking “this is not who I want to support but I have no choice.” She was/is a “generic politician” who doesn’t represent the people. 2016 was an awful time for the Democrats to hoist her up.

I don’t have the same reservations about Harris even though she wasn’t my first pick, for what it’s worth, so please don’t bring up misogyny. I was vocally against the ridiculousness of pizzagate and the “omg her emails,” too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

Yeah the DNC trying to be kingmakers and shoving her to be the candidate because it was “her turn” was so demoralizing at the time.

I think this year will be different. A lot of people stayed home in 2016 because they hated Hilary but thought she had it in the bag. I don’t think people are making the same mistake again. Especially after Roe v Wade.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 18K

    Posts

  • 466K

    Comments