2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIn Hillary, "Democrats Are Making Suicidal Mistake"
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2016/05/the-democrats-are-making-a-suicidal-mistakeAs a report undermines her statements about the email server, and polls show Trump drawing even, the Clinton campaign is quickly becoming a disaster.
by NATHAN J. ROBINSON
Somewhat predictably, Hillary Clintons campaign has become a sinking ship. All of the lessons that should have been learned after her 2008 run failed so badly (that voters trust in her diminishes with each word she speaks, that her campaigns are woefully poorly run, that Bill is a liability) have been ignored, as the Democrats press forward with what looks like a doomed strategy.
Things were already looking bad when new polling showed that Trump had drawn even with Clinton, or was actually beating her (something Democrats have insisted is impossible). Now, the Inspector General for the State Department has released a report that contradicts large parts of Clintons story about her email server, which was already a highly troublesome and persistent issue.
The report hands the Trump campaign a powerful issue to deploy against Clinton. As the New York Times reported, it has numerous damning portions:
The inspector general found that Mrs. Clinton had an obligation to discuss using her personal email account to conduct official business with department officials but that, contrary to her claims that the department allowed the arrangement, there was no evidence she had requested or received approval for it Department officials told the inspector generals office that Secretary Clinton never demonstrated to them that her private server or mobile device met minimum information security requirements, the report said. The report also criticized Mrs. Clinton for not adhering to the departments rules for handling records under the Federal Records Act once she stepped down in January 2013 The rules governing emails under previous secretaries were, the report said, very fluid. By the time Mrs. Clinton came to office, however, they were considerably more detailed and sophisticated, spelling out the obligation to use department systems in most circumstances and identifying the risks of not doing so.
The Clinton campaign quickly released a statement arguing that the report had in fact exonerated her of wrongdoing. But even the Times, whose Clinton coverage is generally extremely sympathetic (they are the paper, after all, that went back and re-edited a news piece about Bernie Sanders to avoid making it seem too complimentary), seemed unable to stomach this attempt to twist the reports findings. The Times makes clear that the Clinton campaigns response to the report ranges from distortion and omission to at least one outright lie. Clintons statement insists that As this report makes clear, Hillary Clintons use of personal email was not unique. But as the Times replies, the report actually indicates that Mrs. Clintons use of a private email and server stored in her home was, in fact, unique. Thus the Clinton campaign has responded to the report by simply pretending it says something other than what it actually says.
This is a useful exemplification of a disturbing recurrent Clinton trait: responding to criticisms that she has lied by telling even more lies, thus causing the whole thing to degenerate further down into disaster.
840high
(17,196 posts)laserhaas
(7,805 posts)Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)MisterP
(23,730 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)But it's not the Democrats.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)My personal guess is that Sanders would beat Trump but Kasich would beat Clinton.
What can be expected if, instead, the general election matchup pairs the two candidates with the highest unfavorables? The electoral map still favors the Democrats, so I'd predict a Clinton win, but even if that happens it won't prove that she was the strongest candidate.
Tarc
(10,476 posts)Sooner or later, you'll really have to get over these sour grapes.
mac56
(17,567 posts)Hillary?
Yeah, no, I don't think so.
Tarc
(10,476 posts)Bernie doesn't get a pass to the finals if he can't even make it out of the first round, if you'd like a sports analogy.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)On your view, Trump is "by definition" the strongest candidate the GOP could put up? Oh, I soooo don't think so. Heck, I don't even think Romney was the strongest last time. Huntsman would've had a better chance of beating Obama.
In each major party, the candidate who "wins the primary" is more precisely described as the one who emerged with the most delegates from a combination of primaries, caucuses, appealing to the automatic delegates (superdelegates in the Democratic Party, RNC members and state chairs among the Republicans), and appealing to the delegates of candidates who've since dropped out. Because of closed and semi-closed primaries and caucuses, they don't fully test one important aspect of each contender's November strength, namely the ability to appeal to independents and crossover voters. Even as to party members, there are millions who aren't political junkies and don't turn out to vote until November.
Then there's the effect of the post-convention campaign. We heard plenty of Clinton people saying in plenty of posts that Clinton has already weathered many years' worth of attacks from the VRWC and is still standing, plus she has the money to fend off the Kochs' onslaught; but that, by contrast, Sanders would be massacred over the "socialist" tag and the USSR honeymoon and the CO status and wouldn't have the money to defend himself. If Sanders had done somewhat better, so as to have a majority of the pledged delegates at the convention, that wouldn't disprove the Clinton camp's arguments about what would happen after the convention. None of you would have said that Sanders was "by definition" the strongest candidate for the general election.
Well, what's sauce for the gander is sauce for the goose. Clinton had a huge lead in endorsements from prominent Democrats. Those did her more good in the race for the nomination (which is largely confined to the party faithful) than they will in the general election. The criticisms of her over things like the emails and the Clinton Foundation were largely dismissed by the party faithful as "right-wing attacks" (a thought expressed on DU as well), but will find a more receptive audience among the general-election voters. None of this proves that Trump will beat her. I said that I don't think he will. The lesson from these arguments is the same as the lesson from the Clintonite fear-mongering about Sanders and that dreaded S-word -- namely, that the factors determining success in the nomination contest aren't the same as those determining success in the general election.
Tarc
(10,476 posts)Isn't there a brewing kerfuffle on talk:Jimbo that you need to go attend to, Jim?
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Your argument is circular. You assume that the one who secures the nomination is the strongest candidate, and then "prove" that Clinton is the strongest candidate because she secured the nomination. The Trump supporters could say the same thing. I think most DUers agree with me that the Republicans are not nominating their strongest candidate, even if by your circular logic they are.
Instead of addressing any of my specific points, you merely seize the occasion to vent your spleen about Wikipedia. Go ahead, make another small-minded in-joke. I probably won't bother answering you.
Tarc
(10,476 posts)I'm the one here supporting the actual Democratic presidential candidate, while you still continue to push the also-ran. You still have precisely 14 days to get this out of your system though, til the admins drop the hammer on the attacking of Democratic candidates.
BlindTiresias
(1,563 posts)Sorry but they did indeed get to the source of your argument: it is circular.
Tarc
(10,476 posts)The suggestion that the "strongest candidate didn't win" is so blatantly contradictory, I'm not surprised the Sandersfans are unable to grasp it.
BlindTiresias
(1,563 posts)I am part of the population (observers of the argument) that are the most important, and you got rekt son.
Tarc
(10,476 posts)Having lost the primary, is is the weaker candidate.
By all means keep trying though, I have plenty of time.
MillennialDem
(2,367 posts)have been a better general election candidate than Romney.
Tarc
(10,476 posts)My goodness, this is like shooting fish in a barrel tonight.
MillennialDem
(2,367 posts)primary vs primary.
If it was why even bother having the general? Just count up the primary/caucus votes on both sides... and you have your winner. Of course would it be Hillary (most primary votes for an individual) or the republican front runner (republican party had more primary votes in total)?
Tarc
(10,476 posts)You can spin your way out of that however you like, but no one really cares.
MillennialDem
(2,367 posts)Tarc
(10,476 posts)That's all we need, and your candidate have no means of overcoming that.
You can engage in endless pedantry, or you can win. I know which road I took.
MillennialDem
(2,367 posts)election?
You would fail logic 101 if you said because A beat B, A would be more likely to be C than B.
The conclusion does not follow from the premise.
Tarc
(10,476 posts)It will be Hillary vs. Trump in the fall. You can do Pedant Olympics all you like while I and most others engage in the reality of the election.
Consider this the "last word".
MillennialDem
(2,367 posts)some crazy circumstances.
You trying to "rub dirt" or something (neener neener Hillary won?). I don't get it...
But this has NOTHING to do with whether Bernie or Hillary are better general election candidates. Can't we have a rational discussion on such matters?
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)beachbumbob
(9,263 posts)His past would obliterate him with middle America....the voters who elect the presidents....
msongs
(67,405 posts)Duval
(4,280 posts)brush
(53,778 posts)cloudythescribbler
(2,586 posts)Shadowflash
(1,536 posts)Her Majesty is invincible. She doesn't need us.
mac56
(17,567 posts)have no place in the palace.
nt
floppyboo
(2,461 posts)RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)We can always blame Bernie for Hillary's problems.
How convenient.
We've got Trump to convince us to hold our noses and vote for her.
And Bernie to blame if she still loses.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)I will vote down ballot and otherwise will simply be a spectator, tailgating the GE in my lawn chair with popcorn and margaritas.
imagine2015
(2,054 posts)If she can't handle Bernie with all of her resources how can she hope to beat Trump.
Most people just don't fricken like her and trust her.
And some think she can beat Trump?
puffy socks
(1,473 posts)truedelphi
(32,324 posts)And she is only barely beating Bernie, and much of that is due to less than honest means.
The fact that she and her team are in California to try and eke out a win in Tuesday's Primary (and probably have some top notch people discuss tactics with the totally corrupt Registrar of voting people) tells me everything I need to know.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)It'll be an out-of-touch Camp Weathervane outpost...a pointless echo-chamber with absolutely no influence on the election. The real discussion (actual discussion...) will be happening elsewhere.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
democrattotheend
(11,605 posts)I have said many times that I don't hate Hillary. In fact, there are many things I like about her. But she is just not a good candidate, and has pretty much said so herself. It's a shame, because I think in many ways she would make a very good president. I felt the same way about Kerry in 2004 after I got over the sting of the primaries.
I really don't think she compromised national security. But I think she has handled the controversy poorly, and let it feed into the narrative that she is not trustworthy.
trudyco
(1,258 posts)Although I think the reason she lies about the lies is because she has some massive things to hide.
lmbradford
(517 posts)Because I will not vote for her, I am not responsible for the outcome vs Trump. That is her supporters' responsibility, not mine.
I am proud of my candidate, I have no doubt that Dems will vote for him because he is a good guy, he has principles, he works for the people, and he will represent all Dems in a way that has integrity. If he doesn't win against Trump, then that is on me. I support who I believe will win and who represents me.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Just so you get a sense of who/what is beyond this website and article.
Raster
(20,998 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)He just seems like a goofball and the source doesn't seem to be a particularly serious one.
merrily
(45,251 posts)If she is the nominee, whether the Republican base will heed them or stick with Trump remains to be seen.
I do not believe sane indies will vote for Trump. Some will vote Democratic. Some will stay home or vote only down ticket, though.
What the percentages are, I have no idea.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)truedelphi
(32,324 posts)they cannot vote in the California primary.
And even if they did make that switch, they probably got sent a Rep ballot. This means they will need to bring that ballot in with them to the polling place, have it spoiled and then insist on being given a Democratic ballot. (If offered a provisional then they probably cannot rely on that getting counted.
Tarc
(10,476 posts)Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)jamese777
(546 posts)Since Barack Obama beat John McCain by 7 points, I'd be ok with Hillary Clinton beating Trump by 9.
New Reuters/Ipsos Poll Has Clinton Expanding Her Lead Over Trump To Nine Points
By Sean Colarossi on Thu, Jun 2nd, 2016
Since last week, when Clinton led in the same poll by just five points, the former Secretary of State has nearly doubled her lead over Trump.
As Donald Trumps polling bounce continues to recede, a new Reuters/Ipsos poll shows likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton extending her lead to nine points 43 percent to 34 percent over the spray-tanned billionaire.
Since last week, when Clinton led in the same poll by just five points, the former Secretary of State has nearly doubled her lead over Trump.
The head-to-head general election numbers arent the only promising findings in the survey for the Democratic candidate.
On favorability, Donald Trumps numbers are twice as bad as Clintons with a whopping 60 percent of respondents saying they have a negative view of the Republican candidate. Just 40 percent say they like Trump. While the former Secretary of State doesnt have stellar likeability numbers, she has consistently performed better than the Trump on that measure.
As the Democratic primary race comes to a close, the survey also shows Clinton leading Bernie Sanders by eight points 51 percent to 43 percent with less than a week to go before she will likely clinch the nomination with a win in the New Jersey Democratic primary.
[Exceprt]
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/06/02/reutersipsos-poll-clinton-expanding-lead-trump-points.html
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)Sharp person, might have quite a career.
http://sociology.fas.harvard.edu/people/nathan-robinson
Research Interests: Criminal justice, prisons, sociology of law, architecture and urban planning
Nathan Robinson is a PhD student in Sociology & Social Policy. Nathan is interested in criminal justice policy, particularly in Louisiana. His research focuses on adult education in U.S. prisons and on the politics of indigent legal defense. At Yale Law School, he co-directed the Green Haven Prison Project and worked for the New Orleans public defender and the ACLU's National Prison Project. He is also the author of The Man Who Accidentally Wore His Cravat to a Gymnasium, a children's book about fashion and conformity.
Previous degrees:
BA (African American Studies, Politics), MA (Politics), Brandeis University
JD, Yale Law School
yurbud
(39,405 posts)The rich lose faith in Hillary, which they seem unlikely to do.