It wasn't the emails...

[kpete]

:large

[tblue37]

1. K&R for visibility. nt

[MLAA]

2. Wow! So true. Thank you for sharing.

[dlk]

3. Even in the Age of Trump, So Many Americans Don't Want a Woman President--She Might Mess Things Up

[coolsandy]

24. Or she might be successful like that black guy.

[True_Blue]

30. She would have been

And they couldn't bear the thought of 16 yrs without a white male POTUS. Americans might actually get use to having diversity in the WH.

[Alice11111]

33. !!!

[IronLionZion]

46. It's a slippery slope towards something

If she was successful and led us to peace and prosperity, then it might lead to even more women in positions of power and leadership. We can't have that now can we? tsk tsk....

So instead we are stuck with a mentally ill piece of shit who allows US citizens to die preventable deaths after natural disasters, destroys every institution in America, and is itching to go to war someone, anyone will do.

[sheshe2]

4. K&R!

[Different Drummer]

5. K&R. Got that right! n/t

[NBachers]

6. I endorse this sign, and the concept it promotes.

[Madam Mossfern]

76. The sign includes Sanders

I do not endorse it at all.

[TexasBushwhacker]

85. Yeah, if it didn't include Sanders I think it would be great n/t

[Glorfindel]

7. K&R n/t

[bluepen]

8. Tina Fey nailed it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2017/04/01/tiny-fey-tells-college-educated-white-women-who-voted-for-trump-you-cant-look-away/?utm_term=.e2d12bcd03d1

[whathehell]

9. Wow..

Great stuff.

[progressoid]

10. Sanders?

[pangaia]

11. Yeah, my reaction too, but.. dare I say anything???

better not...

[Nitram]

86. You just did!

[pangaia]

95. Umm,, you're right...

Ah well....

back to my Mount Gay bourbon...

[KY_EnviroGuy]

12. How about Rupert Murdoch - for example?

10,000% more negative effect than Bernie.

[progressoid]

90. Right. And Hannity and Limbaugh and O'Reilly and Ailes etc.

Those are some serious assholes that deserve all sorts of condemnation.

[pnwmom]

14. The Russians used the Sanders campaign to divide Democrats.

And because Sanders continued to campaign all the way up to the convention, the party was not yet united and the door was open to Russia's timely interference.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/7/11/15952666/russia-dnc-hacks-timing

Russians timed and framed this well

Had the DNC emails come out earlier, they would, of course, have been an issue in the 2016 primary campaign. And while it’s conceivable that they would have helped Sanders win the nomination, it’s more likely that he still would have lost. Either way, they would have been part of the campaign, and the convention would have been an opportune moment to put the disagreement in the past.

By raising the issue after the primary was over but before the party had come together in a big show of unity, the emails were released at a perfect moment for making trouble.

And at the time they were released, WikiLeaks’ primary brand in the West was as a left-wing muckraking site — the kind of place to which Sanders supporters might turn for a critical glimpse at the political establishment. Russia’s state-owned English-language media simultaneously offered a steady diet of overheated takes about a rigged primary that were framed as left-wing attacks on Clinton.

Clinton’s campaign team, to their credit, had this plan nailed correctly at the time. They argued that the real story the media should be focused on was a coordinated Russian government effort to help Donald Trump win the election. Had the media seen it that way at the time, the revelations would of course have been covered differently. And, critically, had Sanders and his supporters seen it that way at the time, they likely would have reacted differently. But instead, the timing and framing were just right for Sanders backers to see the revelations as aligned with their own campaign against the political establishment.

SNIP

But it’s true that even as Trump performed historically badly with young voters, Clinton was hurt by relatively low turnout among under-30s and a relatively high level of defection to third-party candidates. To attribute all of her problems with mobilizing Trump-hating young people to the hack would, of course, be going too far. But it’s fair to say that she lost in large part due to a failure of the unity efforts with Sanders, efforts that were sabotaged by a very well-timed and very well-framed release of stolen DNC emails.

[Omaha Steve]

17. Then blame the DNC for not being neutral in the first place!!!

Last edited Fri Oct 13, 2017, 04:01 AM - Edit history (1)

And the emails would not exist!

Party is still split. Those that donated to Bernie (the DU had 2,108 donations totaling $77,149.00 plus former DUers took it over $100,000) will have a hard time trusting the DNC with $ in the future.

Remember Hillary kept running right through California?

OS

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-rfk-comment/

The remark in question was originally made to the editorial board of a newspaper in May 2008 in response to questions about why Clinton remained in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination seemingly past the point of having any real chance of winning it:

Hillary Clinton cited the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy during the 1968 presidential campaign to explain why she was remaining in the race despite long odds.

“We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California,” Clinton told the editorial board of a South Dakota newspaper. ” I don’t understand it,” Clinton added, alluding to the calls for her to quit.

Clinton made the statement after pointing out that her husband didn’t lock up the nomination until June of 1992, trying to point out that, by past history, it’s not late in the campaign.

But Barack Obama received Secret Service protection one year ago, the earliest ever in presidential history, after reports of threats.

Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said in a statement: “Sen. Clinton’s statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign.”

[pnwmom]

18. No. Why should the party have disavowed the woman who had been loyal to the party

for decades, in favor of an independent?

When the election was mathematically over in May, that's when the party should have unified. Hillary kept running in CA because Bernie kept running, even though the numbers of delegates already assigned made a win for him impossible.

[Omaha Steve]

20. I was obviously talking about Hillary running through CA in 08!!!

[pnwmom]

23. Not obviously, since the emails in question were related to her 2016 run. n/t

[Omaha Steve]

26. The video and article are BOTH 08

[pnwmom]

28. Your post was framed with your reference to the DNC emails

and Bernie's 2015 letter -- both related to the 2016 campaign. (In which Hillary WAS forced to campaign in June.)

I had no idea where you were going with the snopes thing and the video.

[emulatorloo]

29. Quit while you are ahead

I donated to Bernie, Edwards, Dean et cetera. Political contributions aren't refundable.

Bernie said he lost to Clinton fair and square. I personally don't want to hear any more Putin or Assange 'spin', lies and bullshit CT that contradicts what Bernie says.

Have a great night.

[radical noodle]

82. You know very well that she was

much closer to beating Obama in California in 2008 than Bernie was to her in 2016. This idea that Bernie was somehow cheated out of the nomination is silly. She was far ahead of him and didn't need a single superdelegate to beat him.

And why did you bring this up anyway? The original post didn't mention him.

[k8conant]

126. The OP certainly mentioned him nt

[LisaM]

96. Hillary dropped out in early June 2008. The convention was at the end of August.

That left two and a half FULL MONTHS for her to go out there and work for Obama, which she did.

The 2016 convention was on July 23rd. Sanders never officially withdrew, but he did not "endorse" Hillary, if you can call it that, until July 12th. 11 DAYS.

I don't see how people can compare these two things, and please don't accuse me of re-fighting the primary. I looked this up yesterday because I was curious about the timing of the two candidates dropping out in 2008 (not the 2016) primaries, and last year.

[Omaha Steve]

36. I said neutral

Where did I say favor or disavow?

[pnwmom]

37. I disagree. The party had good reason to believe that she was poised on the edge of winning

by the time those emails were written. It was time for them to start focusing on the general and that's what they did. Bernie was just a distraction by May, except to him and his devotees.

[pnwmom]

66. No, we don't. The emails in question were written in late April and May, after Hillary's

nomination was assured.

[Omaha Steve]

68. Ummm...number of debates compared to 08 etc?

You didn't answer the question. It is ok to break the DNC rules IF you are the right candidate by your standards?

OS

[pnwmom]

69. That just made sense. We had an insane number of debates in 2008. We had decided

long ago to cut that back.

And hearing Bernie repeat the same 1% critique for another dozen nationally televised debates wouldn't have made any difference.

[pnwmom]

83. Yeah, right.

[questionseverything]

100. deciding to cut back the number of debates is

a HUGE part of why we have what we have in the whitehouse


giving the freakin repubs a 3 month head start and hours of free tv time is a big part of why she lost

the average voter doesn't follow any of this as closely as most of us

they see presidential debate...figure this is who is running, this is who I have to pick from and start making choices,,,especially when trump sounded like a dem about half the time and there was a void of opposing ideas because the dnc "decided to cut back"


<<insert every cuss word you can think of>

do u still not get it?

debates= free airtime

[AtheistCrusader]

71. I like the delegate revisionist history.

I also like your leap from 'let's have a fair race' to 'Disavow'. Nice sleight of hand there.

[progressoid]

19. ...

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

34. I was truly shocked when Hillary made that remark about the assassination of Bobby Kennedy.

[mythology]

39. And yet a higher percentage of Sanders supporters in 2016

Voted for Clinton than Clinton supporters voted for Obama in 2008.

[fleabiscuit]

88. That was a race of a different color.

Whether we chose to see and acknowledge it is a separate matter.

[ClarendonDem]

102. Curious to know

How so?

[fleabiscuit]

105. Race and age.

A larger percentage of white voters in ’08 were more likely to vote for the white guy.

In 2016 the past 8-17 year olds, now 'new' voters, would be more accepting to vote for the white Dem woman, even though misogyny made the whole race rather icky. Mostly from 'mature adults.'

Again, whether we chose to see and acknowledge it is a separate matter.

[emulatorloo]

31. Yeah Sanders does not belong there.

[HughBeaumont]

42. It's really not fair to include him.

He did NOTHING wrong. We don't do coronations here. A strong primary helps the leading candidate.

[IronLionZion]

73. They didn't say which Sanders

[progressoid]

89. LoL. THAT makes more sense.

[onit2day]

98. Funny.Sanders is the only name up there that campaigned

in every state and every major city for Clinton to get her elected. Who ever made the poster just demeaned it by putting
sanders name up there, making it untrue. We have another Sanders illiterate. Resentment without justification. Why didn't they put wall street up there?

[Eliot Rosewater]

101. Sooooooooooo much damage done to her from all angles.

Sure the russians stole it, but just about everybody attacked her for years.

Just about everybody, well not democrats, but everybody else.

[Lil Missy]

120. too little, too late. n/t

[progressoid]

123. Yup. n/t

[FailureToCommunicate]

13. Remove "Sanders" and it'd be right on.

[HopeAgain]

15. So we hate white males now?

Stereotype much?

[HughBeaumont]

41. Well, no Democratic candidate has won the white vote since 1964, sooooooo . . . .

Truth hurts.

I mean, who do you blame - the bad politicians they vote for, or them for putting these bad politicians in?

[HopeAgain]

45. I thought race/gender bias was a Republican thing.

Let's adopt bigotry and bias too and see how that works. Brilliant.

[HughBeaumont]

50. Oh PLEASE, B. "Reverse Racism" is not a thing.

When you hold all the cards, you don't get any aces.

[HopeAgain]

52. so we want to win elections by attacking the largest demographic in the Country

Fucking brilliant...

By the way, reverse institutional racism may not be a thing, but anyone can be bigoted against anyone.

[fleabiscuit]

94. I don't think you read the content in that link. nt

[HopeAgain]

106. I don't think you understand what I am saying

If your saying hating people from a majority is okay, then have at it. I don't care what your demons are. But if you think attacking white males is the way to win elections then your going to be sorely disappointed.

[fleabiscuit]

110. Are you saying we should be good and lean to bigotry and racism?

[BainsBane]

115. You're claiming it's racist to point out election results

that white men voted for Trump in large margins and continue to represent his base of support?

That demographic votes Republican, always. No Republican would be in power without the votes of white men, just like no Democrat would be in power without the votes of women. It's no more racist to point that out than it is to say that African Americans vote Democratic.

And no, you aren't oppressed because people dare to comment on election results.

Plenty of white male Democrats read stuff like that and don't take it personally. They know how various demographics vote in this country, and they don't need the truth suppressed to make them feel okay.

[BainsBane]

114. Talking about supposed racism toward white people

Is a Republican and White Supremacist thing.

[kpete]

44. Hate?

I married one of the good ones

[HopeAgain]

47. Think about it...

If I just said "I just married one of the good (anything but white males)" how would people react?

[kpete]

49. mr pete

is pretty white and a VERY good man

i am brown and our children are tannish


not really sure what reaction you are talking about

?

[HopeAgain]

51. If I said...

"My neighbor is one of the good black people"

How would that not have bigoted overtones? But saying my husband is one of the good white men implies the same thing -- that most of them aren't. right or wrong, many of the conservative white males I speak to feel that they are under attack. Why not learn to talk to them rather than reinforcing their fears?

Is there white privilege? Absolutely. But are we going to expand our voting base by hating on white men?

[HughBeaumont]

57. How is asking them to take a hard look at themselves equal to "hating" and "attacking"?

How are you supposed to learn anything or go forward if you're not willing to acknowledge your demographic has done and continues to do a lot of bad things? What people have done in the past and present is not a slight on them; it just is. These people need to get over themselves. White people have done and continue to do bad things - there is no left, right, black or white about that - it just IS.

I'm a white male and I don't see it as one BIT of a insult to revisit sins. It's an exercise to better shape your worldview and be sensitive to the troubles and problems of those around you.

[HopeAgain]

60. That poster will not help turn one single white man into a liberal

and you know it. It's more of the blame game. Trying to marginalize people who already believe they are being marginalized won't help convince them they are not. That will continue to be a losing strategy.

[fleabiscuit]

111. You don't have to be a liberal to not be a bigot and racist. nt

[JoeStuckInOH]

93. Spot. On. nt

[BainsBane]

116. Those comments are offensive when directed against the marginalized

because they are marginalized, because of the history of slavery, Jim Crow, and other forms of racism. You apparently feel that is the same as the demographic that controls the vast majority of wealth and power on the planet. Obviously all white men are not wealthy and powerful, but they don't come from a historical legacy of slavery and racial oppression. That is why those comments are not typically deemed offensive.

It's astounding any of this has to be explained to you. It's not something people who have spent time around liberals or progressives would be unfamiliar with. I have trouble believing this is sincere.

[HopeAgain]

117. Don't want to win elections?

Maybe this is a reason the Democrats are doing so well. But thanks for the lecture on how I should feel.

[BainsBane]

118. 1964

That's the last election that Democrats won the white male vote. The Civil Rights and Voting Rights Act ended that. The Democrats have won lots of elections in the meantime, but they have not yet been told to revert to the pre-civil rights ways until recently. There is a full press effort to move the party firmly to the right under the pretense that reorienting the party toward the most affluent people in America and away from the poor and the marginalized is somehow progressive.


And white men are not the largest demographic in America. On the most basic level, there are more women than men, so you're point is clearly false. I think what you meant to say is the most important.

[UtahLib]

16. It's right on just the way it stands!

[lunamagica]

22. K&R! Nailed it!

[Snake Plissken]

25. Even though that sign is 100% accurate, lets not forget that Trump won the White female vote too

Hillary got railroad by White men for sure, but White females needs to shoulder some of the blame too, if Hillary carried the White female vote by even a single vote in each of the swing states, she would be in the White House right now.

[Willie Pep]

27. Yeah people forget that there are many conservative women out there.

And they aren't all "brainwashed" by their fathers and husbands. I don't know why some people seem to think it is impossible for women to be right-wing on their own just like men. Look at Margaret Thatcher, Sarah Palin and Nikki Haley just to name three that come to mind. Just as an anecdote, I heard plenty of vicious anti-Hillary stuff coming from women during the election.

But I do agree that Hillary has been the victim of smears for decades and the media, in their obsession with salacious gossip and making every election a horse race, went along with perpetuating many of these smears.

[IronLionZion]

48. Oh some of the white women's attacks were downright vicious

one of my favorites was how they can't respect any woman who would stay with a cheating husband. They would rather vote for a cheating, groping, abusive, orange toxic waste dump who had 5 kids with 3 different women than vote for Hillary.

But a good many of them like their white privilege and don't want to give up even one inch of it to advance women's rights. They had a clear choice between white power and woman power, and we know what they chose.

Older, married, or rural women probably care about different issues than younger, single, or urban women anyway.

[Tarheel_Dem]

35. Spot! On!

[jmg257]

40. Damn that Pence, oh and Sanders.

[berni_mccoy]

43. The inclusion of Sanders is why Hillary fans will never get anywhere with their arguments

about the fairness of the election.

[Ninsianna]

107. You mean the GE? Which we know was unfair?

How does including Sanders and excluding women, including the woman who won the city and the county they set the conference in, reference the General Election?

Can you please explain your meaning?

[BainsBane]

112. He's mad about the sign

in the OP. Apparently that's more important than Kremlin interference and the integrity of our electoral democracy.

[BainsBane]

108. You don't care that Russians interfered in the election?

Because you aren't a "Hillary fan"? 67 million Americans voted for Clinton. They and everyone else who cares at all about democracy and national security cares about that interference. As for "not getting anywhere," Mueller is dealing with that. I'm sorry to disappoint you, but they have Manafort dead to rights. I understand that some Trump voters don't like to come to terms with the fact they were played by the Russians, or simply don't care that our electoral system is no longer ours because the result was the White Supremacist they so badly wanted to hold office, but the rest of the country does care. Meanwhile, you keep focused on Bernie. That election that you think was perfectly "fair," has resulted in Trump taking action today that will ensure low income Americans no longer have access to healthcare and that many will die. DACA recipients are being thrown out of the country, and Trump is poised to start a nuclear war that will kill millions--all due to Russian annihilation. But what bothers you is that someone made a stupid sign with Bernie's name on it, which in your mind justifies or obviates the Kremlin attack on our electoral system. Millions of lives vs. Bernie's career, and your priority is the latter.

I don't suppose it has occurred to you that there is a disconnect between your priority on one's politician's political prospects and your disregard for the integrity of electoral democracy. How exactly do you suppose Bernie could become president without elections not subject to Kremlin interference? And just what do you think he would rule over if Trump succeeds in starting a nuclear war with a country with the capacity to launch nukes that reach US soil?

Meanwhile, the poor and marginalized are suffering, but none of that matters because they are mere "Hillary fans." The 67 million Americans who voted for Clinton along with the additional Republicans and independents who care about the integrity of electoral democracy, "will never get anywhere" with their concern for electoral democracy "will get no where" because you saw a sign that takes Sanders's name in vain.

So you go ahead and remain focused on your petty animosities toward Clinton voters. The rest of us are going to try to keep this country from descending into fascism and the word from facing nuclear Armageddon. You've got smaller things to focus on, and far be it from me to try to convince you that democracy or human lives matter.

For the record, I would not have included Bernie on such a sign. I would have dedicated it to the white males who voted for Trump and decided this election. And of course that includes the fascist collaborators who chose to inflict suffering and death on others to satisfy their own narcissistic egos.

[Weekend Warrior]

53. K&R Perfect.

Some will literally claim they cannot see Russian interference, gerrymandering, etc., because of the inclusion of one name on that sign. That is the epitome of white privilege.

[PDittie]

54. Why is 'Sanders' on there?

[StevieM]

55. I disagree. The election was all about Comey and the corrupted FBI. HRC kicked Trump's ass

from one end of the country to the other. That's why she was about to win a big victory, even after Comey had already rigged it for the GOP a couple of times. Then he rigged it beyond hope with 11 days to go.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

56. Dayum.

There it is.

[Yavin4]

58. Also, It was the White Females that didn't vote for her. n/t

[StevieM]

72. They would have had it not been for a totally corrupt FBI waging a war on our democracy.

Just like they would have had a big problem with Sanders or O'Malley, had they been the nominee, after the FBI got done with them.

[Yavin4]

74. That didn't stop African American, Latina, and Asian women from voting for her.

I think that it's easy to point the finger at Sanders, O'Malley, or Comey, but the big elephant in the room is why didn't a majority of White women vote for one of their own? This is a critical question that needs to be addressed instead of being glossed over.

[StevieM]

79. You misread my post. I didn't blame Sanders or O'Malley at all.

You should re-read what I wrote. I was saying that if Sanders or O'Malley had been the nominee then they would also have been targeted and destroyed by the corrupt FBI.

Minority voters are less susceptible to GOP swift boating and are more loyal to the Democratic Party. They were also more outraged--and scared--by Trump's blatant racism.

I don't think it is easy to blame Comey at all. Ever since the election the media has brutally shut down any attempt to suggest that the polling until 11 days before the election was right and that the election was turned on its head in the final 11 days by the Comey intervention. But the evidence is overwhelming that Comey's action had a dramatic effect on the race, just like it is incredibly clear how much damage he did with his July press conference.

Had there not been a corrupt FBI director like Comey HRC would have won by a wide margin. And if Sanders or O'Malley were our nominee we can be sure that they would have been swift boated. We don't know how successful the swift boating would have been.

People who use catch phrases like "take responsibility" or "it's too easy to point the finger" are simply using those sound bites to automatically shut down a conversation about what happened in 2016 that does not lambaste HRC as a candidate, either for her policy positions or her supposed level of competence.

HRC's critics are using the final election results to write the history books in a way that validates their pre-conceived notions. And also to affect the decisions made by future primary voters. If it's really true that no Democratic candidate can win unless they run on a Bernie Sanders-type agenda, then there is no choice but to vote for someone like that in the future.

It also seems like some Sanders supporters just want to keep piling it on. They want to remind us how absurd it was that Bernie was not the nominee and what a terrible mistake we made. In reality, we don't know whether Bernie would have won or not. And if Bernie was supposed to be the nominee of the Democratic Party, then he would have won the primary and been the nominee of the Democratic Party.

[liquid diamond]

59. This should be a t-shirt

[JHan]

125. I'd buy it :)

[niyad]

61. EXACTLY!!!!!!!

[NRaleighLiberal]

63. You missed the point...it is not all about you. If all white males did what you did, we'd be fine

but most did not. So - yes - it is a problem.

I am a 61 year old white male that has never voted for anyone who is not a Democrat. But I have friends (less than I used to these days) who did the opposite - and I completely agree that we have a significant issue as stated in the original post.

[BainsBane]

109. the problem is for some

It's always about them. That's why they didn't vote for Clinton. They can't bear a government and a culture that doesn't focus exclusively on them.

(Note: I didn't see the removed post so it's not a comment about that person in particular but a general observation).

[IronLionZion]

65. Welcome to DU!

You're already fed up in your first 10 minutes on this site?

[JHan]

64. some really predictable replies in his thread... anyway..

Here's your massive K&R

[usaf-vet]

67. And now Trump has announced that his administration and the WH

WILL NOT adhere to the federal records keeping law.

I thought they were outraged because Hillary wasn't using a government server so records were archived.

And then there is the whole Jared and Ivanka private email server issue.

As well as Cabinet members using private email accounts.

[Eliot Rosewater]

70. Pretty soon we are in a crisis that will only be resolved in ways that are not

the usual ways.

While trump and gop destroy the world, I would think everyone opposed to that would realize there is only one way and one party to deal with it.

I wish every non racist, non asshole would register to vote as a Democrat, we could then stop all of this, permanently.

[DesertRat]

75. k&r

[Arazi]

77. Sanders was not responsible for Hillary's loss

But you knew that. Way to keep fanning the divisive flames

[gademocrat7]

78. K&R!

[jrthin]

80. TRUTH!!!!!

[Gothmog]

87. Great Poster

[Lil Missy]

91. 100% correct.

[jimlup]

92. Not going to agree with the implication of Bernie

other than that I'm in with it.

[demigoddess]

97. yes!!!

It was the white males!! and women who think like them!

[Soph0571]

99. To the white anti feminist male.....

you know who you are....soooooo many
[link:|

[gopiscrap]

127. welcome to DU

[Soph0571]

128. thank you

i will do my best to be my progressive best here

[zentrum]

103. I'm a white female

...and I thank Goddess every day for some white males: Jerry Brown, Bernie Sanders, Eric Schneiderman among others.

True feminism shows up in both genders. And some females---Noonan, Thatcher, Palin, Trump's female helpers---are as bad for women, and all people, as any RW man.

[ClarendonDem]

104. There are many reasons HRC lost

Not just the white male vote. For instance, black voters made up a smaller percentage of the vote, and only 88% voted for HRC while 93% went for President Obama in 2012. HRC won 65% of the Latino vote, compared to 71% for President Obama. And HRC won 54% of the 18-29 vote, compared to 60% for President Obama. HRC won 37% of the white vote, compared to President Obama's 39%, but this was offset somewhat by the white vote making up a smaller percentage of voters, 70% v. 72% in 2012.

More here [link:http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/09/politics/clinton-votes-african-americans-latinos-women-white-voters/index.html|

[BainsBane]

113. Voter disenfrachisment

Orchestrated by white men--the GOP, the party of white men.

[ClarendonDem]

119. Agreed

That also is a reason she lost. I really don't think that we can say identify "the" reason though.

[BainsBane]

121. I don't know if there is any one reason

It was a confluence of factors.

[ClarendonDem]

122. Yep

That was the point I was trying to make, you just made it better.