The Ohio Senate result show that it's always a mistake...

[Ken Burch]

...for the party establishment to push hard for the nomination of the least-progressive candidate possible.

The heavy hitters should have just stayed out of it, rather than insisting that it HAD to Strickland.

[hrmjustin]

1. To be fair I don't think Portman was ever going to lose.

[Ken Burch]

2. Perhaps, but a passionate candidate could have raised turnout

And that might have made a difference for the presidential ticket.

[hrmjustin]

3. Turnout really wasn't down. More people voted in this election than any other.

Portman was able to get several union endorsements so he was never going to lose.

[Zen Democrat]

13. Right. Turnout was up, but too many Democrats voted Republican this year.

Those same voters won the states of Michigan and Indiana for Sanders in the primary. So many others he would have won if closed primaries had been opened.

The Democratic Establishment rigged the primaries against Sanders (see Debbie Wasserman Schultz), and Hillary did her part in that, as well. Imagine what this election would have been with the Millennials, Unions and Progressives supercharged, upbeat and excited. Hillary delivered none of that.

I voted for her on the first day of early voting, and hoped for the best to beat The Fascist, but this wasn't her year and it was obvious since last summer. She was always the "inevitable nominee," which fails to inspire.

Too bad she didn't run against Bush in 2004 --- that WAS her year. Timing is everything. The timing this cycle was for Bernie Sanders and then Donald Trump. Never Hillary, sorry to say.

[bettyellen]

19. This turnout stuff- just another wild guess of yours.

Interesting!

[Ken Burch]

23. I'm not your enemy. And I worked hard for Hillary all fall.

n/t.

[OKNancy]

4. like Feingold? oh yeah, he lost

so did Teachout. No, the party did just fine. Lack of enough Democrats voting is/was the problem. Also those who want to throw out the good for the perfect.

[Ken Burch]

5. Feingold lost due to the negative ads.

And it's on the party to inspire turnout. We can't just demand it. Demanding it doesn't work. Look, I agree that everybody should vote, but if this result shows anything, we have to learn new ways to get the turnout to happen.

[Zen Democrat]

14. I don't know Ken. But he's entitled to post without taunting, isn't he?

[bettyellen]

20. And Feingold and Teachout didn't inspire people- so we should go less radical...

Just trying to follow along.

[hrmjustin]

22. Hillary got more votes than Feingold.

That surprised me but it is true.

[Zen Democrat]

7. Democrats voted in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin --- but they voted for Trump.

Face facts, Democrats didn't have a message for the working poor, the people who have slipped from the middle class. They went to Trump overwhelmingly.

We should have sloughed off the "middle way" and gone for the "middle class" in a very progressive way! Hillary had one message for them -- she had spent the last 30 years in politics. It was a dud message in a change year.

Bernie would have won.

[OKNancy]

10. no he wouldn't

look, I and many others have written about this but this election was not about income inequality or the other stuff Sanders preached.
Sanders was never smeared by the Republicans or the others who wanted Trump. They had tons of stuff ready to use on him

I'm sick of tired of this "Bernie would have won"

[Zen Democrat]

15. ".. this election was not about income inequality ..." Oh yes it was. That's why Hillary lost.

Why do you think historical Democrats who fell out of the middle class voted for Republicans this year? It's because the Democrats did not pick up the Progressive mantle and talk to them about how we were going to help them. Too late, now.

Hillary was a terrible campaigner, in both 2008 and 2016. In both elections, the 2008 primary, and the 2016 primary, she was the most conservative candidate. She pulled off the nomination by cheating, i.e., DWS, and then she was a lamb to the slaughter against a lying old Fascist who had a message for the struggling Democrats.

[bettyellen]

21. You must have missed 9/10 of her speeches because this is not true.

What happened- didn't like "the sound of her voice"? Because you missed some great speeches.

[LisaM]

8. I don't know how you could GET a better candidate than Feingold.

And he did worse than Hillary in Wisconsin.

[OKNancy]

11. exactly

[Zen Democrat]

16. There's this thing called "you can't go home again." Losing candidates don't regain their seat.

[LisaM]

18. That is not true. Look at Bill Clinton.

Lost as Governor of Arkansas, and came roaring back. And he's hardly the only example.

[cigsandcoffee]

24. Nixon, for instance.

[NurseJackie]

9. Thank you! It's disgusting to watch people try to rewrite history. That's what the GOP does...

... why would anyone want to lower themselves to their level?

I'm asking rhetorically ... don't answer ... I already know the answer. (It's pretty sick, isn't it?)

[Zen Democrat]

17. It's also disgusting to watch people who never knew the history in the first place.

A lot of Democrats do that too.

[NurseJackie]

6. Oh good God! GMAFB!

Total bullshit.