General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHillary Clinton is the greatest "candidate" who ever ran for the WH. or the most qualified
She and her husband do more for those in need in one day than any 200 average people do in their lifetimes combined.
Hillary and her husband do more for those in need IN ONE DAY than the entire trump extended family will do in ten lifetimes.
Turns out we dont deserve her as president, we deserve the piece of shit racist pile of human garbage who is now destroying the entire world.
We dont? Then how in the fuck did we let him get close enough to use the KGB to steal the election?
He rapes women, for christ sake.
(There were better candidates as to charisma, but she was the most qualified)
Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)BainsBane
(53,003 posts)but she is the most qualified.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,097 posts)That is what I meant to say and flubbed it.
Response to BainsBane (Reply #2)
karynnj This message was self-deleted by its author.
Voltaire2
(12,626 posts)She was very qualified. That she lost was an unmitigated disaster.
StevieM
(10,499 posts)That's why she had the election won, by a decisive margin, even after the FBI rigged the election back in July by deceiving the American people into believing that she had somehow broken the law and gotten away with it. Then they rigged it a second time with 11 days to go.
susanna
(5,231 posts)Because he should. He ended up losing his job, and I won't lie and say I was sad...he tried to play both sides against the middle and got called out. Had he truly played it straight, we would not be here.
Seriously: I'm an integrity/honor scold in my own life, and freely admit it, but I know when to say "wtf, this is bullshit and I'm out."
Comey either didn't understand that, or chose not to. I know where my thoughts lie.
So here we are, with this unfit and unqualified person deciding the life and death of others.
Yeah, I am sick beyond imagining.
Comey deserves all that he is reaping for himself. (And I hold no joy in that, for the record.)
But none of the rest of America deserves this constantly unfolding nightmare.
We, The People, voted correctly.
Exultant Democracy
(6,594 posts)Her staff managed to do her a major disservice both in 2008 and 2016. Leon Panetta was a great choice but she was too loyal to her people to let him clean house when he wanted to.
As for most qualified she is way up that list, top 5 no question. Ironically the most qualified person, based on previous experience, to run for the office was Hoover, ha.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)You can't just push the blame onto them.
Exultant Democracy
(6,594 posts)If she had cleaned house after 2008 and restaffed with Obama people I have no doubt she would have won. When you look at what got fucked it was always at the senior staff level with longtime aids she took on in the 90s for the most part. Even the damn emails werent her idea, that was Mills.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)I think her main issue was not allowing a clear and consistent management structure. There were supposedly lots of internal struggles for power amongst her closest aides, and issues with access to the candidate and so on.
It still bugs me the bit they described in Shattered where they absorbed that grassroots program and then basically pushed out the leaders who had dedicated so much time and energy to the cause. It felt like some of the campaign managers cared more about retaining the control they jealously guarded rather than working as a real team.
StevieM
(10,499 posts)campaign recognizes. They jump at every opportunity to find fault with HRC and often get their facts wrong.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Its worth remembering that they wrote most of that book expecting Hillary to win.
As for the content, it reads like basically any other political campaign account. Of course people are going to deny the stuff that makes them look bad, but they really werent particularly hard on Hillary all things considered. I actually came away afterwards feeling more sympathy and liking towards her than I have for a considerable amount of time.
The only person who could consider themselves seriously hit hard by the book is Robbie Mook.
StevieM
(10,499 posts)Nothing her staff did prevented her from winning in a landslide, which she would have without a completely corrupted FBI.
Exultant Democracy
(6,594 posts)Because when I looked at her staff, the inner circle was mostly the same fuck ups. She jettisoned a few terrible choices like mark Penn from 2008 and Leon Panetta was a great choice for 2016 (and he tried to clean house but HRC was too loyal to show anyone the door) but Robbie Mook fucked her almost as hard with his mismanagement as Mills did with the emails.
Every dem running for POTUS has know for a fact since 2000 that of the race is close enough that the republican would steal it. There is a reason the SEIU and Obamas team were screaming bloody murder about putting bodies into Iowa and the rest of the expanded map.
StevieM
(10,499 posts)the Comey intervention. In other words, you can argue that she failed to accept the damage that was done by the corrupt FBI rigging the race, for a second time. But that is not the same argument that you seem to be making.
Mook and Company couldn't have done too bad a job if she was about to win by a wide margin until the FBI intervened on behalf of the GOP--for the second time.
Hillary actually had more staffers in Wisconsin than Obama did in 2012. Meanwhile, Trump had a lot less than Romney did. More staffers isn't what she needed to win. What she needed was an FBI that was not launching an assault on democracy.
ProudLib72
(17,984 posts)His supporters tell us it is inevitable, so we must lay back and enjoy it.
slumcamper
(1,603 posts)Here we are--damned near a year since we LOST. Multi-MILLIONS of tweets and posts of lamentation do nothing but air the same old, tired grievance. I grieve too. But for fuck's sake, we gotta turn the page and focus our efforts on doing what we have to do to crush the illegitimate power that arose and is smothering out progress. Crying over Clinton and her loss--in spite of all she might have been--is wasted energy. Get with the program.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Now, it's about ideas, dialog, listening, seeking common ground among the progressive, positive majority.
slumcamper
(1,603 posts)We need to focus on each other and a progressive vision for our children, our country, our world; reaching out, building bridges--and actively challenging (not merely resisting) the forces that impede the course of social and economic progress.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)If that is a problem for you then don't read our posts. There is also the ignore button.
stonecutter357
(12,682 posts)StevieM
(10,499 posts)the name Neil Gorsuch on the next page.
Response to Eliot Rosewater (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)slumcamper
(1,603 posts)All of us share the struggle. You can do it; we must do it.
Overcome it for the sake of "Stronger Together."
You can. And "Yes we can."
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)I agree that it's sad that she wasn't elected president, but I don't know what you were going with that bit of punctuation.
George II
(67,782 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)to question the meaning and sincerity of the word.
It just struck me as an odd choice.
I agree that she was a fine candidate. That's why I campaigned for he in the fall.
Do we really need to get into a thing of HOW superior she is?
At this point, what pupose does that serves?
Skittles
(152,964 posts)pointing out that the most qualified person ever to run for president - a woman, was held to impossible standards, lost to the least qualified person ever to run, someone who was held to no standards at all
IT CANNOT BE STATED ENOUGH
susanna
(5,231 posts)Thank you, Skittles.
George II
(67,782 posts)Skittles
(152,964 posts)for a minute with my bad peepers I thought you were replying to ME
I was fixing to do a major ass kicking!!!
George II
(67,782 posts)Eliot Rosewater
(31,097 posts)Response to Ken Burch (Reply #14)
George II This message was self-deleted by its author.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)Just sayin'
shanny
(6,709 posts)HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)You know, two candidates that WON and made this country better.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)Even more so in his post-Presidential years.
HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)He didn't give an inch to the Ayatollah . . . while "The Great Communicator"s administration made him a partner in treason.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)Awsi Dooger
(14,565 posts)Issue to issue I would trust Hillary to out think and out talk any politician in recent decades, including her husband and Obama. Heck, she bested Obama in the hefty majority of their primary debates.
But like Rachel Maddow, Hillary is far superior on issues than political instincts and why people vote the way they do. That's one reason I'm not a fan of Maddow. A broadcaster needs to be equally balanced on the two aspects, since they'll never be able to put their issues in play. I'm more understanding and forgiving of a politician, who should have a competent is not superb staff to analyze and blend.
* Hillary during the 2008 primaries ignored the Par 3 states and caucuses. That was unforgivable and fatal
* Hillary in 2016 ignored the white male tempest and the states where it would be felt most. That was unforgivable and fatal
* Hillary beginning with the two weeks of Rio commercial onslaught failed to grasp that Trump could absorb virtually anything. He had described it himself with that 5th Avenue comment. I still have Rio events on tape and watch them occasionally. Every time another worthless negative Hillary commercial shows up I go absolutely nuts. Someone on that staff should have attended any PGA event during early to mid 2016 and walked the gallery ropes while listening to gallery members talk about Trump. I suspect the ad campaign would have been markedly different
* Deplorables was a stupid, stupid, stupid remark that does not receive enough attention. That one remark separated Hillary from Obama or her husband, each of whom would have known to avoid anything similar, while actually courting Trump voters instead of belittling them. Then when asked about deplorables, all Hillary had to do was emphasize that she was referring to hate groups, and how dangerous they are, and that the issue means so much to he she got carried away with the "half" nonsense. Instead, her rationalization was every bit as disjointed and weak as the email apologies
* Hillary dominated the debates on a question by question basis, but actually lost ground among voters who decided based on the debates, according to exit polling. I was not surprised in the least. Those debates were ineptly analyzed by the media as a block. Somehow, only the moronic CNN analyst Hugh Hewitt grasped the big picture every time. Hewitt pounced upon the fact that Trump would ramble about job loss in Ohio and other manufacturing states in multiple segments of every debate while Hillary ignored the matter in favor of some lengthy issue dissection. It might as well have been Al Gore with the Dingell Norwood Bill. I wanted to scream every time. Whenever Trump talked about job loss in Ohio it was like a "Cha Ching" toward not only Ohio but all the other states that recognized themselves in Trump's description. It is a good example of Gingrich's summary that Trump knows how to use simple words and themes toward his intended audience
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)But definitely is over the top qualified for the job itself.
She didn't pull it off though. Its over. We need to more forward.
delisen
(6,039 posts)are moving forward.
Those who fell for Russian propaganda, I expect to be slow to move forward but most will eventually catch up.
shanny
(6,709 posts)I read recently that a lot of Russian propaganda was anti-Bernie: the "he's a racist and sexist" crap.
Who was it who fell for that? And have they moved forward?
They dont move.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)If a legitimate Democrat is not on the ticket in 2020, we will not be voting.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)And then say you won't vote in 2020 unless it's a candidate you like. The irony here is overflowing..
LisaM
(27,762 posts)They would have all served faithfully, ethically, and honestly.
FakeNoose
(32,354 posts)Sad and disappointong that they lost. But the people they lost to are trying to destroy our country.
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)Clinton Family Givers (Them, them and more them)
samnsara
(17,570 posts)...and yet we chose the least experienced. what the hells wrong with us?
Scruffy1
(3,239 posts)Check out Buchanan's resume. But the plain fact is that 60 million voted for the dolt. I think it has more to do with emotion than logic. The powers that be were able to stir up strong emotions in the election cycle. It was classic demagoguery and we did a poor job of puncturing the hot air balloon. Of course he was pumped by the mainstream media and their taking of phony scandals seriously, but there is a lesson to be learned here. A truly bad candidate can defeat a good one if they know how to use the media. It's not the first time, just the latest example and by far the worst ever election to the highest office in US history. I'm not blaming her or anyone else. I don't watch television, but every place I was in that had one had Trump nonstop. He knew how to get his name thrown out constantly and received constant media attention. It was a marketing coup. They only conclusion I can make is that voters don't all vote rationally.
Mike Nelson
(9,903 posts)...difficult to win a "third" Democratic term, after Pres. Obama's two... all campaigns make mistakes. Hillary won the vote by millions, in a country where Democrats need to win big to win at all.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)She's a politician, and she lost twice. Get over it, find the next leader who might actually win for us.
ms liberty
(8,479 posts)She wasn't even the most qualified of my lifetime, or of the last 100 years. An accurate statement would be that she had excellent qualifications. We don't have to canonize her to believe it to be a travesty that she did not become President.
brooklynite
(93,873 posts)Was a strong supporter of hers and knew a lot of her campaign team. They made serious strategic errors; if they hadn't, the Russian influence might not have affected the outcome.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,097 posts)about her?
Were they supposed to anticipate an onslaught of progressives attacking her and PUTIN attacking her?
brooklynite
(93,873 posts)...in the early days of the campaign, they never made an effort to go door to door and confirm their base voters; instead, they spent a lot of time trying to "expand the map" into places like Georgia and Arizona.
They also wasted a lot of money on TV advertising that focused more on Trump's negatives than on her own message.
HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)There were a lot of problems with the way she campaigned. Doesn't mean she shouldn't have been president, because, come ON.
Frankly, a lot of America, whether through conditioning or not, simply did not like her.
That's not really her fault, it just IS.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,097 posts)blm
(112,920 posts)All three were prevented from the Oval Office because of a complicit media that worked tirelessly against them.
Irish_Dem
(45,640 posts)America has had a number of excellent candidates and leaders.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)HRC good, trump very bad.....and no one but HRC stood a chance against this POS that is potus today....
sheshe2
(83,347 posts)I am still with her.
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)There were, of course, many reasons for the tragic loss, so I'm sick of those who constantly bleat about what a "terrible" candidate she was. They delight in ignoring the Comey stunt, the Russian interference, the criminal inaction of Facebook, Twitter, et al, the media giving Dump unfettered advertising, the selfish, childish non-voters and 3rd party voters throwing tantrums, etc. etc.
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)NNadir
(33,368 posts)I supported her over Obama in 2008, but she'd have had her work cut out for her if she wished to match his Presidency, were this country a democracy, and had she been seated to the office which the overwhelming majority of Americans wanted.
I don't think Ms. Clinton was necessarily the equivalent of Abraham Lincoln or Franklin Roosevelt.
I note that one of the Presidents who had served as Secretary of State, Senator, and member of the House of Representatives, James Buchanan, is generally regarded as the worst President in US history. He was considered at the time of his election to be one of the most qualified men in history, but the country actually fell apart under his tenure.
This is not to imply that Ms. Clinton would have been a bad President; I believe she would have been outstanding, but the criteria does not in fact mean very much.
Trump is a nepotistic thug with a mind as small as his hands - hopefully we can find appropriate sized handcuffs for him when he goes to prison.