Shame on all Dems who wrongly say "Hillary didn't talk about jobs or opportunity etc etc when they

[bettyellen]

Never actually listened because she did and you missed it.
Plenty of people missed out on a great campaign and obviously did not participate because they totally missed the particulars of it. I keep reading she didn't X as if it was fact she did- so lots of people looked the other way and let this happen. Way to enable the sexist RE enabling media with your apathy- much thanks for nothing.

[boston bean]

1. Yep. They had closed minds and looked for anything to justify their

the view they held.

[BainsBane]

2. She absolutely did

and yes, many of the people making that criticism also said they wouldn't listen to her. They chose to remain low information voters.

[LisaM]

3. Have you seen that estimate about how much time the networks devoted to emails?

100 minutes on that, 32 minutes on all other campaign issues combined, and none on things like climate change.

She absolutely did discuss those things, but if people choose to put cotton in their ears, there's not much to do about it. She was a terrific candidate and more than that, she would have made a first rate president.

[bettyellen]

7. And also 8 or 9/10 they DID cover policy was what Trump or Sanders said about her policy....

Which was the opppsite of how they covered the other candidates. They took away her voice- and so some Dems who just skimmed the headlines claimed she never used it. They should be hopping mad about the implicit sexism. Or Bernies failure of a primary race. But she gets more votes than anyone and they rewrite history.
No.

[OKNancy]

8. yes because the handful of DUers who despised her are the most important people to listen to

No, just no. If a Dem stayed home or voted for Trump or third party then they are asshole whiny idiots.

It's pretty awful to say you despise someone especially someone as good as Hillary Clinton. THis country really lost out on a great leader and a wonderful human being.

[B Calm]

11. That's what happens when you silence a sizable part of the party

Calling them asshole whiny idiots is not uniting the party. I could easly say democrats who voted for Hillary in the primary, voted for a Trump victory. But we both know that like your comment, neither is helpful.

[Lil Missy]

16. Easy to answer- they ARE NOT part of the Democratic Party.

They ARE whiny, ego-driven idiots. No reason to "unite" with such turds.

[B Calm]

25. Then next election don't be surprised if they go with a new party. There

are many of these democrats who no longer feel their party represents them anymore and
want to start a new progressive party.

Your comments not calling them democrats only reassures what they believe. You must
know if the party splits, the republicans will stay in power for years.

[Lil Missy]

36. That's my point - they SHOULD form their own party.

They are not the majority of Democrats - they don't dictate the terms. There are more votes to gain in the center. Obviously courting the left isn't working - it got us bush the lessor and now trump. Time to try something different alright.

[B Calm]

38. If that happens and the democratic party stays out of power for the next 25 years

you are good with that because you want to dictate who is a democrat, got it.

[yallerdawg]

78. Bill Clinton figured out how Democrats could win after 12 years in the wilderness.

It wasn't moving to 'the left.'

It was moving to where the people are.

Hillary Clinton won the popular vote nationally. I guess she got it right, too.

[TwilightZone]

83. Jill Stein got 1% of the vote.

Where exactly do you think this huge mass of humanity that's going to take over American politics as a third party is going to come from?

There is exactly zero evidence that anyone is even looking for that - this election is rock-solid proof. If it didn't happen this time, don't hold your breath.

[Bobbie Jo]

50. Well this time

this contingent shot the hostage, and with it any credibility.

[George II]

63. There were many "democrats" who never really were until they saw an opportunity....

...to disrupt. And just about all of them went back to what they originally were even before the convention, including their so-called "standard bearer", who went back to being an Independent.

[Omaha Steve]

72. You mean representing his constituents as an I that voted for an I?

And yet the D party is giving him new power to attract voters. Bernie Sanders was just appointed to the Senate Democratic leadership team yesterday.

The "standard bearer" that worked to defeat Trump after the convention!

OS

[George II]

73. Please research the evolution of his political career vs. the Democrats in Vermont. It's sordid.

[Omaha Steve]

75. Your holding his arrest for civil rights activism against him?

This was the same time somebody was a Goldwater girl! How did that benefits D's? Candidates evolve over time. How much research did you do?


http://www.snopes.com/goldwater-girl/

Hillary Clinton supported Goldwater in the 1964 presidential election; Goldwater voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.






In 1963, controversial Chicago Public Schools Superintendent Benjamin C. Willis decided that placing aluminum trailers in black neighborhoods was the best way to ease overcrowding and keep school segregation intact. The modular units were put in vacant lots and on existing school grounds in neighborhoods such as Englewood, where the African-American school population was soaring in the early 1960s. Picketing, school boycotts and sit-ins ensued as the black community voiced outrage at the discrimination. (Chicago Tribune)

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-bernie-sanders-1963-chicago-arrest-20160219-story.html

Katherine Skiba Reporter
Chicago Tribune

A Chicago Tribune archival photo of a young man being arrested in 1963 at a South Side protest shows Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders, his campaign has confirmed, bolstering the candidate's narrative about his civil rights activism.

The black-and-white photo shows a 21-year-old Sanders, then a University of Chicago student, being taken by Chicago police toward a police wagon. An acetate negative of the photo was found in the Tribune's archives, said Marianne Mather, a Chicago Tribune photo editor.

More @ link.

[George II]

76. Who the fuck said that? I said his history vs. the Democrats in VERMONT, not something....

....that happened in Chicago a decade before he even moved to Vermont.

And why are you dragging in Hillary Clinton and things she said before she even was "of age"???

[Omaha Steve]

77. I pointed out they both evolved over time

Simple.

[George II]

79. When did Sanders begin to "evolve", when he was 65 or 70?

[Omaha Steve]

80. He voted consistent D in the House & Senate starting in 1991

You do the math.

[George II]

111. So he was at least 50 years old when he seemingly "evolved", but up in Vermont....

....he was still trashing Democrats.

When in the House he had basically two choices - vote with republicans or vote with Democrats.

Since you gave the Clinton "Goldwater Girl" analogy, she stopped being a "Goldwater Girl" and became a dedicated Democrat when she was still a teenager.

You do the math.

[Omaha Steve]

118. Hillary was still evolving on issues in the last several years

Nothing wrong with that. Just admit it.

But I don't want to rehash the primary. This is about the general election.

[DemonGoddess]

101. This!!!

Thank you!

[CajunBlazer]

128. Let them go with our blessing

After the primaries I am sick and tired of the ultra progressives. At least we wouldn't have to put up with their arrogant, self centered whining here on DU.

For everyone of them that we lose we could gain the votes of three centralist independents because we wouldn't have our left fringe doing their best to push our candidates as far left as possible.

They need to understand that if you are not in the majority in a party (and they aren't - see the results of the primary), you don't get to call the shots. If we move forward with a center left populist message which will attract of the young independents as Bernie did with his giveaways and bring back working people to our ranks, while remaining attractive to the fastest growing demographics, we won't need the ultra progressives. But they will need us.

Let them break away and form their own party. Then they will finally understand how few their numbers really are. They would become just another irrelevant third party with no future, ready to be cast into the garbage bin of history.

And who would lead them. Surely they don't expect leaders like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren to join them in exile. Anyone of any standing knows they can best work to work for their causes and to satisfy whatever ambitions they may have inside of the system. But I'm sure that their new party could persuade some totally unqualified token like Jill Stein to take up their banner.

On the other hand if the ultra progressives think rationally instead of emotionally (not one of their strong points) they will stay in the party and vote Democratic for a change. Maybe they can convince others that their way is the best way and work to elect candidates that reflect their views - in other words they would have to participate in the democratic (with a small d) process. However, to be effective they would have also so have to compromise and understand that good is not the enemy of perfect. Unfortunately compromising and admitting that a half loaf is better than no loaf at all, but again those not among their strong suits.

Unfortunately they are not going anywhere despite their threats. Looks like we are stuck with them for the duration whether we like it or not, and we have absolutely no hope they will change.

[boston bean]

51. You seem to be taking this so personally. I assume you 1) voted 3rd party 2) voted for Trump or

3) didn't vote.

Which one is it?

[B Calm]

54. Why does that concern you now?

[boston bean]

56. You certainly seem to be concerned about who voted for Hillary? Why can't you answer.

You know I voted for Hillary in primary and in GE.

So, be brave and principled announce it to the world what your vote was.

[boston bean]

58. Wonderful.... thanks for helping to undo the New Deal, and the Great Society you

so love.

[B Calm]

59. I can easily say the same to you too, but that's not accomplishing anything

is it!

[boston bean]

60. I voted for Hillary, you tossed your vote to Trump by writing in BS.

You can't make the comparison.

We weren't running against Trump in the primaries.

you allowed yourself to be so bitter that you dare risk it all and risk it all you did. You and millions more did the same... Kudos... I hope you feel real proud and principled as everything you believe in gets stripped away. You think it's coming back after it's gone? That there will be some saviour to undo that damage... You have way to much faith in the white working class.

[B Calm]

62. Everybody is entitled to an opinion.

[William769]

92. And you got DU'S opinion of you.

[boston bean]

124. Hey o William!!!!!!!

[bettyellen]

9. By that metric Sanders was a pathetic candidate- Dems in RL roundly rejected him

Countdown to you changing he standards by which to judge.

[B Calm]

13. Bernie won Michigan, Wisconsin and Indiana.

Michigan and Wisconsin wins for Hillary and she would be president elect.

[CajunBlazer]

20. If Stein voters had voted for Hillary she would have won Michighan and Wisconsin

I guess they were still pissed about Bernie losing because you know they voted for him in the primaries.

[B Calm]

28. Hell, just the voters who couldn't vote for her or Trump and

left the office of president blank might of been enough.

[Omaha Steve]

33. Bernie won Michigan

http://www.cnn.com/election/results/states/michigan

Stein got 1.1% there.

Seems her lack of ads there was at fault. Second link below.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/305916-hillary-clintons-missing-votes

Snip: Clinton lost states no Democratic presidential candidate had been defeated in since George H.W. Bush carried 40 states, including Michigan and Pennsylvania, in 1988.

Clinton leads the popular vote, but she received about 5 million fewer votes than President Obama did in 2012. At the same time, Trump won about as many votes as Mitt Romney did in 2012 and only a little more than Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) did in 2008.

Most critically, the votes Clinton lost stood out in states essential to both candidates’ paths to 270 electoral votes. In the 10 most competitive swing states, Clinton underperformed Obama’s 2012 tally by nearly 1.2 million votes. Besides Pennsylvania and Michigan, she became the first Democratic presidential candidate since 1984 to lose Wisconsin.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/12/the-advertising-decisions-that-helped-doom-hillary-clinton/

The advertising decisions that helped doom Hillary Clinton
By Jim Tankersley November 12

In the closing weeks of the presidential race, Hillary Clinton's campaign — and the outside groups that supported it — aired more television advertisements in Omaha than in the states of Michigan and Wisconsin combined. The Omaha ads were in pursuit of a single electoral vote in a Nebraska congressional district, which Clinton did not ultimately win, and also bled into households in Iowa, which also she did not win. Michigan and Wisconsin add up to 26 electoral votes; she appears not to have won them, either.

Clinton loses 32 IOWA counties to Trump won by Obama in 2012

[CajunBlazer]

55. So do you support those who voted for Stein instead of Hillary in Michigan?

[Omaha Steve]

67. Do you support those that voted for Johnson/Weld (LIB) instead of Trump?

There were a lot more of them. Johnson 3.6% 173,057

There is also a high number of voters that skipped voting for president altogether.

Put that in your Bernie people did this math.

Stein didn't get near the Michigan votes Nader did in 2,000. Nader: 84,165 2.0% Stein 50,700 1.1%


Or maybe Clinton's campaign should have spent more on Michigan & Wisconsin than she did Omaha?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/12/the-advertising-decisions-that-helped-doom-hillary-clinton/

The advertising decisions that helped doom Hillary Clinton
By Jim Tankersley November 12

In the closing weeks of the presidential race, Hillary Clinton's campaign — and the outside groups that supported it — aired more television advertisements in Omaha than in the states of Michigan and Wisconsin combined. The Omaha ads were in pursuit of a single electoral vote in a Nebraska congressional district, which Clinton did not ultimately win, and also bled into households in Iowa, which also she did not win. Michigan and Wisconsin add up to 26 electoral votes; she appears not to have won them, either.

Clinton loses 32 IOWA counties to Trump won by Obama in 2012

[CajunBlazer]

99. Nice deflection and I think we can figure out why you are deflecting

You intentionally ignored the fact that the Stein vote in both Michigan and Wisconsin exceeded by thousands of votes Trump's margin of victory over Hillary in both states. It is clear what that means.

And I appreciate you mentioning the ten of thousands of enthusiast Bernie supporters who sat out the election. When you combine the Stein vote in Pennsylvania with those in the state who selfishly didn't vote in that state, we are probably looking at one of the principle reasons that Trump took Pennsylvania.

Victories on those three states alone would have propelled into White House. That along with her 2.3 million vote victory in the popular vote, would have prevented us from ever having this conversation.

[Omaha Steve]

102. Maybe Hillary's campaign should have paid attention in MI & WI?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/12/the-advertising-decisions-that-helped-doom-hillary-clinton/

The advertising decisions that helped doom Hillary Clinton
By Jim Tankersley November 12

In the closing weeks of the presidential race, Hillary Clinton's campaign — and the outside groups that supported it — aired more television advertisements in Omaha than in the states of Michigan and Wisconsin combined. The Omaha ads were in pursuit of a single electoral vote in a Nebraska congressional district, which Clinton did not ultimately win, and also bled into households in Iowa, which also she did not win. Michigan and Wisconsin add up to 26 electoral votes; she appears not to have won them, either.

She became the first Democratic presidential candidate since 1984 to lose Wisconsin.

Clinton loses 32 IOWA counties to Trump won by Obama in 2012

[CajunBlazer]

109. Perhaps so, but the need was anything but obvious

The polls all had systematic errors - even the Trump campaign thought they had virtually no chance of winning in those two states. Any media campaigns they staged late in the election cycle were acknowledged Hail Mary passes that they believed they had no hope of completing.

Quit deflecting - it is abundantly clear to anyone with a brain knows that despite everything else, Hillary would have still won both Michigan and Wisconsin had all progressives had been united behind her. The selfishness and stupidity of Stein voters disgusts me. May they suffer through the next four years more than the poor, defenseless people they put in harm's way.

[Omaha Steve]

117. I repeat Johnson voters for Trump would beat every Stein vote for Hillary

Quit denying. IF you count Stein for Hillary, count Johnson for Trump! Same result as last Tuesday.

She spent so much $ on Omaha ONLY because Obama won it in 08. They wanted a 1 EC vote trophy like his. At great cost she lost Omaha and much more.

Why aren't you blaming white women instead of a few Stein voters?

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-exit-polls-how-donald-trump-won-the-us-presidency/

by Stanley Feldman and Melissa Herrmann

Many observers thought this presidential election would be decided by Donald Trump’s polarizing rhetoric, his history of behavior toward women and his questionable qualifications for the office.

Instead, CBS News exit polls suggest Trump’s win was in large part a repudiation of Hillary Clinton by a substantial number of white voters. While Clinton did win big majorities of minority voters, she did not get the level of support from those groups that she needed to overcome her deficit among white voters.

There are also indications that Clinton’s gender was a factor in the outcome. The gender gap was substantial. Trump beat Clinton by 53 percent to 41 percent among men while Clinton won among women by 54 percent to 42 percent. Four years ago, President Obama won 45 percent of men’s votes and Mitt Romney won 44 percent of women’s votes.

More telling is the gender breakdown among white voters: Trump beat Clinton among white women 53 percent to 43 percent. This was close to Romney’s margin in 2012. While Mr. Obama won 35 percent of white, male voters in 2012, Clinton lost to Trump among this group by 63 percent to 31 percent.

FULL story at link

[CajunBlazer]

120. Granted! So what! Why do you feel the need to defend Stein voters?

This is the DEMOCRATIC Underground, not the Green Party underground. It seems extremely odd that one of our own would go to such great lengths to defend those who voted for a rival candidates.

Yes, if Johnson's voter in Michigan and Wisconsin had gone to Hillary, she would have won those two states (though have no indication that more of them would have voted for Hillary than Trump had Johnson dropped out of the race.

Yes, had every white woman in Michigan and Wisconsin voted for Hillary she would have won those two states.

Yes, had every white man in Michigan and Wisconsin voted for Hillary she would have won those two states.

But, many of Johnson voters in Michigan and Wisconsin don't claim to be progressives.

Many of white women voters in Michigan and Wisconsin don't claim to be progressives.

Many of white men voters in Michigan and Wisconsin don't claim to be progressives.

But on the other hand, almost all of Stein voters see themselves as not only progressives, but ideologically pure progressives. And many former Bernie supporters also claim to be big progressives. It is well past ironic that all of these big progressive Bernie supporters and Stein voters were indirectly responsible for Trump's victory.

[Omaha Steve]

121. You keep blaming Stein

Stein's paltry 1% performance didn't elect Trump! I'm talking reality, not defending Stein.

No way Johnson Libs would vote Hillary before Trump! Libs are baby T party types. Ironic you can't put blame where it belongs is more like it.

Bernie supporters didn't cause this result. Move on.

All Hillary had to do was defend the swing states. Again ad $ there instead of Omaha would have been yuge.

[CajunBlazer]

123. Again why do you feel the need to defend Stein voters.

If I ranted and raved about Trump's voters, I can guarantee you wouldn't type a word to defend them.

If I accused Johnson's voters of throwing the election to Trump, you certainly would have spent all of your time defending them.

And yet when I attack the voters of yet another rival candidate from yet another rival political party, you appear to be willing to spend whatever time is necessary to adequately defend them. As a member the DEMOCRATIC Underground your behavior is extremely odd. Why don't you explain to everyone why your are acting that way.

[Omaha Steve]

129. I'm un-DU to defend Bernie from being lumped in with Stein?

Rave all you want. Get it out of your system. It is a postmortem.

Many DUers (in this OP and others) lumped Bernie and Stein together. I will always defend Bernie from that.

Just put the blame where it belongs has been my entire point. There are many reasons you don't seem to want to examine even though the DU is open to that purpose at this time.

[CajunBlazer]

131. Bernie esentially told people they would be stupid if they voted for Stein

But you have been defending them. Bernie is not not the issue here, Bernie got on board; he knew it would be terrible for the people who he has defended all his life if Trump won.

Yet those of Bernie's supporters who ended up voting for Stein selfishly and arrogantly defied him. Bernie is not the problem by any means, he is smart man who is to be honored for his integrity and his lifelong efforts to protect those who can't protect themselves.

On the other hand, those who voted for Stein and those who sat out the election because they were "too progressive" to vote for Clinton are SCUMBAGS in my opinion and totally unworthy to call themselves progressives.

Now go ahead and defend the SCUMBAGS again if you have a mind to.

[Omaha Steve]

132. You can lead a horse to water....

There is a lot of blame on Bernie from other DUers in this forum.

Over and over and over. Her 1% voters (many of them actual long time Green Party members) did not cost us the electron! Facts are not a defense! Sometimes the truth hurts.

The river in Egypt is da Nile. If you won't examine the real reasons for the loss in a civil tone, why bother to post in postmortem?

[CajunBlazer]

136. I'm not the one trying to defend the indefensible ones

Bernie was not to blame for Stein voters - they only have themselves to blame for their arrogant stupidity. I can't even blame the Stein voters themselves; they can't be anything other than themselves. Through their genetics and/or the life experiences that shaped their personalities, they among the "true believers", the human beings who are the least capable of change. you can't blame a spider for being a spider or a snake for being a snake. They are what they are.

What is truly repulsive to me is those people on DU who claim that they are loyal Democrats while spending much of their time trying to defend those who voted for a totally unqualified candidate of a rival party while claiming to be ultra pure progressives. You can't effectively defend the indefensible; why do you try?

[Omaha Steve]

137. So much for the DU not being a hate site!!!

"defend those who voted for a totally unqualified candidate"

I never defend a Trump vote!

It seems some DUers still don't get that Stein voters didn't change the outcome of this GE election. Broken record (IF you understand the term)

I would remind you of all the comments a year ago that Bernie DUer's outnumbered Hillary DUer's on the DU. See Act Blue DU results.

Some should go back to the alternative site run by DUers that does screen captures of D's at other places and cry fowl.

FOR THE LAST TIME I SAY PUT THE BLAME WHERE IT BELONGS! You can't fathom reality, so one of the few ignores I've had in over a dozen years is yours! CONGRATS!

OS

[CajunBlazer]

139. Simple question - Why do you find it necessay to defend Stein voters?

It has to be something going on - you have written 7 posts now doing your best to defend them against the charge that they helped cause Clinton's defeat.

I am almost certain that if I had accused Johnson voters of helping to cause Hillary's defeat you wouldn't have bothered to respond. So you aren't out to defend 3rd party voters in general, just Stein voters. It always amazes me when I see someone on a Democratic website spend any time, much less seven posts, defending those who voted for the candidate of a rival party who did her best to steal votes away from the Democratic Party candidate.

I pushed this much further than I normally would have to determine how far you would go to defend the Greens and the answer you provided in 7 posts is crystal clear - you will do whatever it takes.

You may say you are a Democrat, you may have held your nose and voted for Hillary to keep Trump out of office, but based on way you have posted your heart seems to be with the Green Party. I apologize if that isn't true, but I can only try to understand motives of people here on DU based on what they post, and that's what it seems like to me.

If it is true, let me point out you have picked a difficult road for yourself. In a parliamentary democracy, third parties can play an important role. Under just the right circumstances, even a small third party can be a key player in a ruling coalition, but not in our system of government. Rules embedded deep in the US Constitution makes ours a winner take all system when it come to electing President.

In our system of government the best that a third party can do is to be a spoiler. And when it rises to that level it hurts itself. In that situation a 3rd party attracts enough votes away from the major party with which is is most closely aligned ideologically and causes that party to lose to the major party with the opposing ideology. No one is happy with that result except those in the the opposing party. People swear to never let that happen again so just when a third party does its best. it causes people to resolve to shun it in the next election cycle. Hence the political saying, "Third Parties are like bees; when they sting, they die." The Greens and the Libertarians and all of the rest are doomed by our system to watch from the sidelines while the nation, for better or worse, moves on without them.

The best advice I can give to those with with preference for a third party is to determine which of the two political parties are most closely aligned with their ideology and work to ensure that it is successful. It may not be an idea solution, but it is the only one with any possibility of success.

[Omaha Steve]

66. If Johnson voters had voted for Trump he still would have won Michigan and Wisconsin

I guess they were still pissed about (pick which R candidate out of 17) losing because you know they voted against Trump in the primaries.

Johnson: Johnson 3.6% 173,057 (MI)

Stein: Stein 50,700 1.1% (MI)

[CajunBlazer]

104. Duhhhh.....

Since Trump won both Michigan and Wisconsin, of course he would have still won Michigan and Wisconsin if Johnson voters in those states had voted for him instead of Johnson.

[BlueProgressive]

31. Actually, she needed Michigan, Wisconsin AND Pennsylvania,

and that would have given her 278 electoral votes, assuming no changes in other states.

[B Calm]

32. I know that.

[Lil Missy]

37. Faulty logic. That doesn't mean Bernie would win those states in the General.

When Bernie won those states, it was the DEMOCRATIC Primary.

Do I really need to explain this????

[B Calm]

39. I know the difference between a primary and the election. I was pointing out

these were states where the democrats supported Bernie. She should have done more to win over these voters. She never campaigned once in Wisconsin or Indiana.

[Lil Missy]

42. Well then

thanks for your concern.

[George II]

65. Perhaps Bernie should have done more to win over those voters for her? After all, he....

...."promised". He didn't even get involved in the campaign until a week or so after Labor Day, after he finished closing on his new island home and moving in.

[Omaha Steve]

82. Bernie Sanders endorses Hillary Clinton (July 12, 2016 )

Bernie Sanders endorses Hillary Clinton: http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/11/politics/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders/

[George II]

85. Read the article, it was a strained and awkward "endorsement", and he didn't........

....make a formal campaign appearance until two months after that endorsement.

Not only that, but at most of his few appearances he spent more time talking about himself than he did about Clinton.

[Omaha Steve]

86. And knew there was no place for him in a Clinton Cabinet

It wasn't going to happen! Unlike an SS under Obama.

[George II]

87. So? What does that have to do with him "(not) doing everything he could to get her elected"?

You're conceding that he lied to his and Clinton's supporters?

Is that why hundreds of Democratic office holders campaigned for Clinton, to get a Cabinet post?

Barack Obama?
Michelle Obama?
Joe Biden?

and many more?

So, if what you said is true, Sanders' selfishness took over from his love of country. Truly sad.

[Omaha Steve]

94. Conceding NOTHING

Last edited Thu Nov 17, 2016, 02:15 PM - Edit history (1)

He felt as bad after his loss and you feel now. He endorsed. Finally campaigned and said "this is not the time for a protest vote."

I said Hillary had a reason to campaign for Obama. SS & knew she would run again.

You place so much blame on fellow D's with a difference of opinion. We are entitled to an opinion.

[George II]

96. His support of Clinton in the campaign was weak at best, nonexistent at worst.

[Omaha Steve]

97. First page of a goggle search

Let's play IF. IF Bernie won the nomination would you work for and vote for Bernie after everything you have said against him???

[George II]

98. I don't see any events in July or August, or too many events more than a couple of hours drive....

....from his new $600K lakefront home on Grand Isle in Lake Champlain.

I don't play "if" games.

[Omaha Steve]

100. You asked me to do research earlier

Made you should get past the loss and do some of your own? Let your fingers do the walking.

[George II]

112. Clinton's loss was only 9 days ago, Sanders' was four months ago, yet many Sanders supporters....

...still haven't gotten "past the loss".

[Omaha Steve]

119. I got past it

Life long D too!

[George II]

122. Then why does everyone keep bringing up Sanders, he wasn't even a candidate in the GE.

Should we keep rehashing the GE then?

[Omaha Steve]

130. Maybe because many DUers keep blaming Bernie for the loss?

[George II]

134. I was referring to all the Sanders supporters here who are claiming that he would have won.

[SMC22307]

140. No one's paying attention until after Labor Day...

you know that.

[George II]

147. What??? And just how do I "know that"?

[George II]

64. Pssst...there are 50 states in the Union!

[George II]

115. If Sanders was so popular, why is it that just about every candidate he endorsed lost?

[TrekLuver]

10. She was an excellent candidate and a horrible one both at the same time because of this unbridled

hate that emanated from both sides including independents. The years of right wing hit jobs worked...including days prior to the election the final hit from Comey....So that's an awful lot of hate to try to Trump....and we did do it in the popular and came damn close in the electoral.

I still cannot understand though voting for Bernie and having such hate for Hillary that it would
1) Make me vote Trump
2) Make me stay home
3) Make me vote 3rd party if I never did before...a "spite" vote

Even if I didn't like Hillary...the prospect of Trump should of motivated Bernie holdouts alone.
If Bernie would of won I would of thrown myself 110% behind him...
They are just so stuck on being right and righteous that it's clouding their vision.
They want to fracture the party....like that is going to help us!!! Why not just vote Republican than because you'll
be giving everything to them anyway.

[CajunBlazer]

21. This!!!!

[uponit7771]

142. Yeap, makes the vote for the reasons outlined irrational... so very true

[ucrdem]

5. I saw a Hillary ad about jobs and heard her speak last May 24 at UCR about jobs.

Here's a link to the TV ad which is called "How To":

https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/statuses/760847322922090496

Here's my account of her UCR speech and at the head of the list of topics she discussed is "jobs":

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512046962

So, yeah, she talked about jobs quite a lot.

[KittyWampus]

69. Never saw that tv ad ONCE. Do you know for a FACT it ran on tv? That it ran in Wisconsin?

The only ads I saw were about how bad Trump was with a few feel-good puffs thrown in.

[Omaha Steve]

84. Hillary spent more on TV for Omaha's lone EC vote than she did in Wisconsin and Michigan combined

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/12/the-advertising-decisions-that-helped-doom-hillary-clinton/

The advertising decisions that helped doom Hillary Clinton

By Jim Tankersley November 12

In the closing weeks of the presidential race, Hillary Clinton's campaign — and the outside groups that supported it — aired more television advertisements in Omaha than in the states of Michigan and Wisconsin combined. The Omaha ads were in pursuit of a single electoral vote in a Nebraska congressional district, which Clinton did not ultimately win, and also bled into households in Iowa, which also she did not win. Michigan and Wisconsin add up to 26 electoral votes; she appears not to have won them, either.

Clinton loses 32 IOWA counties to Trump won by Obama in 2012

[ucrdem]

135. Yes, I saw it on TV last summer on TV, on a regular cable channel.

Exactly where and when I don't recall, but I distinctly recall the ad as it's the only broadcast Hillary ad I saw the whole campaign. It might have been in a hotel in New Orleans or possibly at a gym but I seem to recall being with Mrs ucrdem at the time so I'll see if she remembers the circumstances.

[Thinkingabout]

6. K & R, yes she did, she has pushed forv a minimum wage increases to occur when Congress

Received raises. The deafness of those who had a closed mind. Hillary has been an advocate for women and children issues and so many more.

[Lucinda]

12. It is a sure indicator of who didn't bother watching speeches, or reading her website.

I'm finding those posts to be very enlightening.

[KittyWampus]

70. The issues isn't posters on DU. It's the large number of Americans

who are low information and not engaged in the political process.

Obama got them to the polls in large enough numbers and in the states/districts he needed to win.

[Starry Messenger]

14. k&r

This was all over my feeds today--"She didn't talk about the economy!" wtfever. The media finally broadcast one of her speeches live tonight--like where the fuck were you guys? Polishing our new Mayor McCheese's ballsack.

[ErikJ]

15. Tho Hartmann said he got lots of email campaign letters

asking for donations from HRC. Never a word of policy.
Misgynist? HA!
I woulda LOVED to see Eliz Waren rn. She got the magnetic sincerity and honest Progressivism I'm looking for.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

49. She's my favorite politician.

I wanted Elizabeth Warren too. I hope she'll seriously consider running in 2020.

I like Hillary too, but not as much. That's just how I feel. I still voted for Hillary and all Democrats in the election.

What worried me about Hillary, at least in my area, was:
(1) She's married to the guy who signed NAFTA. That was very unpopular in my area because people indeed lost jobs to Mexico (including me on two occasions), and NAFTA was blamed.. rightly or wrongly. I don't think people are concerned about trade deals with countries that are more affluent. They're worried about losing jobs to people with a much lower cost of living. Mexico could be predominantly Anglo-Saxon and the fear of being pitted against cheaper labor would remain.
(2) She seemed to cozy up to Wall Street too much for some people's tastes.
(3) Hearing too many people say "where there's smoke, there's fire" in regard to the MANY investigations of the Clintons over the years. Never mind that they were mostly Republican witch hunts and no guilt could be revealed.
(4) Being married to the man who told this country that he "did not have sexual relations" with that woman. Was that Hillary's fault? Of course not, but I've encountered many people who never want to see another Clinton in the White House because of it.

Despite those concerns, I still didn't imagine that Trump would win!

[Hekate]

90. So you saved your vote for Warren? She was not running. She heartily endorsed Clinton.

smh

[ErikJ]

113. Yes, I voted HRC. U think I'm a fool?

[mountain grammy]

17. I got a zillion emails asking for money

and warning me about Trump. I know the policies of both parties. I took the time to read them. They were out there for all to see. If we had even a tiny iota of real news out there, we never would have gotten to this place and we all know it.

[SunSeeker]

18. K & R

[Omaha Steve]

19. An oldie but...

[CajunBlazer]

22. Perfect!

[radical noodle]

30. And then Trump voters would be all

"you make fun of us and call us names so we decided to vote for a con man."

[andym]

35. wonderful cartoon. 1 NT.

[DFW]

41. Too bad that wasn't posted on every street corner

From the Delaware river to the Columbia River

[CBHagman]

23. She'd make a policy speech and it would be referenced on the last page of the paper.

Meanwhile, on the front page, above the fold, there'd be another story about Trump.

And then come November the media wrung its collective hands over the issues getting short shrift this election cycle.

[Hekate]

91. Plus 2 million for the close to 2 million more votes she got than Trump in spite of that

[Laura PourMeADrink]

24. Personally think the campaign blew it. some of us here said focus ONLY

on the blue states. light blue to dark blue. all money all resources - forget fl forget NC. She lost in the light blue !! and not by much. It is inexcusable to me because she had 272 - just needed to shore it up. On Oct 26th I posted that her light blues were trending down. All I got from DUers was "Oh...a Concerner..LOL" Bet those were trolls and I hope they don't come back ever.

And, you are right, she did talk about jobs and opportunity. But, what she was lacking, IMHO, was a whole bunch of savvy. Someway to get around Trump saying - Ha ! she's been around 30 yrs - she's done nothing. Someway to get to those rural folks who got hoodwinked. Someone said if Carville and Begala had been running things - they could have saved it all, for sure. Even think if Bill was still on his game, he would have figured it out.

In my final postmortem - think she lacked a big ticket item to talk about. I think she should have constantly talked about how good Obama did - cite stats - constantly and then stay the course and have a few big ideas to add. This would have offset all the right saying everything had gone to hell.

thanks...had to get that all off my chest. But I feel so incredibly sad for her. she looks so sad - can't even imagine how horrible she must feel - so close - thinking the polls were right - bill thinking he'd be back in the WH.

[MyNameIsKhan]

26. Me too, more than myself, I feel for HRC... I feel terrible that we did something less

I questioned myself, what more I could have done, did phone bank for hours, $$$ but nothing helped.

I now want build my energy so can campaign in 2018 and 2020...

I promised myself not to see orange man going into airforce-1 and going into whitehouse...

I hate this man from my core...

I am terribly ashamed...

[NCTraveler]

45. Wish this wasn't your final postmortem.

It's much different than a lot of what I have been reading. You make good points and completely stayed away from bs.

[LonePirate]

27. She spoke about jobs many times. The media simply refused to cover issues during this election.

[radical noodle]

29. It was all there on the website for anyone to read

We can't count on the media to talk about anything important.

[Ford_Prefect]

34. I cannot get over the navel gazing going on here.

There were strong reasons for the perception of Hillary as the War Hawk, and as the candidate of Wall Street jobs and opportunities. Her own history condemned her there. The objections to her had nothing whatever to do with email BS or allegations of secret servers to hide her tracks, and much to do with the perception that the Clintons are far more at home with the rich elite than everyday Americans.

Those are some strong negatives that were reported well before the primaries and they remained throughout the election. She never honestly addressed the public about her paid speeches for investment bankers. She and Bill were quite evasive about the Clinton foundation and its donors and still are. Both situations were handled badly and in ways that raised suspicions rather than addressed them. You can buy a lot of things on Wall street but public trust is not one of them. That you have to earn. Either she or her team dropped that ball very badly...And it meant there was at least a mixed message going out to the voters about what to expect from her.

Her intentions regarding Syria, Iran, and Russia were quite evident and remained a concern to those of us willing to vote for her in spite of them.

None of these doubts justified a Democrat voting FOR Trump and I have no respect for those who imagined that voting for any alternative was responsible. Far too much was at stake. Burning down the house to prove a point is the game of spoiled brats when the alternative is the Alt-Right racist wins.

But let us not forget that the GOP played every dirty trick they could. In spite of the claims of Russian hacking by NSA and FBI the real culprits there were a pack of scoundrels licensed by Republican Governors to eliminate hundreds of thousands of Black voters from the rolls of Arizona, Florida, Ohio and North Carolina. The GOP also eliminated voting locations, reduced early voting options, reduced staffing for election locations and limited access to ballot forms all in a successful effort to reduce the impact of minority and elderly voters, to say nothing of intimidating them. It worked in the key states where it mattered in that dubious count of electoral college votes, and Senate seats as well.

And then there was the FBI Director who should be up on charges of treason and malfeasance.

Yet all some of you can do is bitch and moan and blame the "other" wing of the democratic party. Shame on you all. You haven't got the guts to be honest about your candidate or the elections and you certainly aren't ready to fight the Tyrant and his minions. The party I have belonged to for 47 years, and which my parents gave every day of their working lives for is a richer, broader organization than the puny spiteful one you imagine it to be.

Grow up. She did not lose according to at least 2 million people we have heard of so far. The election was stolen from ALL of us just as it was in 2000 and in 2004. If you cannot understand that you have a lot to learn yet and you'd better get off your collective butts and do it.

The other side cheats to win and they are effective at it. They exploited weaknesses in the perception of Hillary as a candidate and the desire of working class people for change. They also bent the system to give themselves an edge. The lack of discussion by the press of actual policy issues during the primaries and the general election was another key factor. The elevation and respectful treatment of Trump as a candidate by the MSM was a national scandal, and I heard nearly every day from friends in Europe and Asia about it. I fear that Hillary also suffered from the historically absurd yet sadly pervasive idea that a woman should not yet be President, any more than a black man should be, at least among the women who voted for Trump.

A great many people from all parts of the party worked hard and gave a very great deal to support HRC and the other Democratic candidates. If you insist on blaming the left then you do not yet understand what happened. Read some of the thoughtful critiques that have been written about HRC's candidacy and the DNC organization. You may yet learn something to all of our benefit. We all have a very long road ahead of us, or a very short pier.

[Paladin]

43. Hillary didn't fail us. We failed Hillary.

I'm with you, Ford_Prefect. I'm sick of all the grave-dancing and finger-pointing around here, most of it being carried out by Bernie acolytes. A crooked FBI Director and an antiquated electoral college system played their parts, but the main factor in Hillary's defeat was a resurgent white nationalism movement in this country, which a responsible mainstream media would have exposed (in case everybody missed it, a responsible MSM didn't show up for this election). Could Hillary's campaign have done some things differently and better? Sure---but what political campaign isn't guilty of such shortcomings, with the enormous benefit of hindsight? Enough, already.

[Ford_Prefect]

46. Actually the White Nationalists were not the largest portion of Trump's support.

Last edited Thu Nov 17, 2016, 08:46 PM - Edit history (1)

Disaffected working class voters did not believe Hillary was going to help them and at least 29% of the Hispanic vote went Trump. The DNC badly miscalculated and Hillary was unconvincing. Those are quite serious flaws in a Democratic strategy and candidate. That they remained tone deaf to those problems throughout the campaigns was not a mere shortcoming, it was seriously flawed policy.

Blaming the Democratic Left or Bernie is denying the issues existed. The working class and former middle class voters are the ones who were not persuaded that status quo government was working for them. To a large degree they are correct even if many of them chose the last person on the planet that would ever help them to fix the problem. The press did a first class job obscuring Trump's background and amplifying his message rather than showing the yawning gap between his rhetoric and the reality of his insider status.

[Paladin]

47. You just lost me, F_P. (nt)

[Buckeye_Democrat]

81. 1

[NCTraveler]

44. They aren't dems.

They are liberal isolationists. Their goal to paint all trade as being bad is a part of their extreme conservative agenda. Liberal isolationists are by far the worst among us.

[ucrdem]

48. Speaking of jobs, the unemployment rate in Wisconsin is 4.1% and falling.

In Michigan it's currently 4.6%:


Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (Data extracted on: November 17, 2016, 8:21:50 AM)

Politicians demagoguing against trade deals weren't telling the whole truth, imagine that.

[mcar]

52. So many experts here

THEY know exactly what she should have done or said and ignore her actual campaign.

[wisteria]

53. Yes, if they were really paying attention they would know this.

[George II]

61. They were too busy sulking because the majority of Democrats (and Independents too!!) chose her.

[KittyWampus]

68. You Are WRONG There were no tv ads I saw where she mentioned JOBS.

You desperately want to make Clinton blameless and write off the loss to sexism.

You are WRONG and actually perpetuate sexism by not holding Clinton accountable.

Clinton's job was to reach the Rust Belt. She failed. Didn't even show up.

And pointing to campaign rallies and her website just makes those doing it look out of touch with how the majority of people get their information.

Furthermore, Clinton didn't even HAVE rallies in Wisconsin to get her message out.

[bigtree]

74. economic anxiety is the least of Trump voters' worries

...there's just something fundamentally wrong with someone who gave any heed to the nonsense Trump was selling. He made a xenophobic appeal that told white working-class voters he'd return them to a past era where they didn't need to concern themselves with the rest of the nation, especially the people Hillary was correctly highlighting who had done FAR worse in the Obama economy.

What the Trump voters want, what they believe Trump will give them is a share of the economy that THEY BELIEVE others, namely blacks and immigrants, are unfairly, undeservedly reaping. It's unmitigated bullshit, and you're representing their pique as some legitimate gripe. Worse, you're ignoring who they voted for.

I'm tired, and frankly appalled, at the handwringing going on by some Democrats over people who supported Trump and his bigoted, racist, xenophobic, demagogic rhetoric. You can try and pretend that they didn't hear what he was saying in the campaign, but most of us are clear on what he was selling, and I think Trump voters were, as well.

He was selling a shot at superiority. The white nationalism which seeped out of every pore of the Trump campaign was a seductive draw for rural whites who saw a chance to animate their resentment of the emerging, non-white population, and they were sold on Trump's deceptive promise to restore their sorry lives to a bygone state of preeminence whites had once enjoyed.

Wake up.

[still_one]

93. absolutely. It was about racism pure and simple. What is troubling is those that voted third party

who identified themselves as progressives, and those progressives who refused to vote for Hillary. They did make a difference between winning and losing.

Take Michigan. Hillary lost by .3%. Jill Stein received 1.1% of the vote. Similar figures occurred in Wisconsin, which incidentally Russ Feingold lost, even with Bernie out their campaigning for him. Why did Cypher Teachout lose? She was as closely aligned to Bernie's policies as anyone was.

I love this Monday morning quarterbacking.

We all know what happened:


11 days before the election, Comey went to the republicans in Congress with a vauge letter saying they were going to look at Weiner's computer, which they had for over a month, to see if there were "email issues". The republicans immediately grabbed that, and said the email investigation was being "reopened". It was a blatant LIE. MSNBC was the first cable/satellite network to headline their breaking new that "Hillary's email investigation reopened". MSNBC then proceeded to interview every right wing republican they could find, who continued to propagate the lie that the "investigation was being reopened". Soon, the other networks followed with the same LIE, that the "email investigation had been reopened". This went on for a few days, but the damage that was done was severe. A few days later as things begin to quiet down, Fox news bret baier reported from his sources in the FBI, an indictment was pending because of the "Clinton Foundation". That story was spewed all of Facebook and google news, (more on their part later). Two days later bret baier came out and said he was mistaken about a pending "indictment", and he apologized for the error. Good ole Rachel Maddow, was so taken by bret baier's apology, that on her show she jumped right to his defense saying what a terrific reporter he was for admitting a mistake. Of course that didn't stop fox news, or the trump campaign from continuing to spew the lie.

While all this was going on, the wonderful social networks such as Facebook, and search engine enterprises such as Google, were buy opening their flood gates to let the fake news right wing purveyors sell their bill of goods.

and that was what was happening in the last two weeks before the election, but the fake news, and distorted and shabby reporting by the MSM was going on long before that. WMDs anyone?

On top of that there were at least 10%, and by some estimates up to 50% of Sanders supporters who refused to vote for Hillary..

It was these ndependent forces, the media, the social network's "fake news" where up to 45% adults get their news from, the republicans, the FBI, the third party voters, and those progressives who refused to vote for Hillary that gave us trump on a silver platter.

Rocket science? I don't think so

[bettyellen]

116. I saw quite a few, can't say they played (or should have) in your market ...

And you can't say you watched all the stations at once, can you?

She had a great economic platform that did NOT include raising taxes which would have killed us. There was a virtual media blackout in terms of covering policy- its unprecedented. But just because it didn't get reported doesn't mean she didn't campaign on it.

[bigtree]

71. yep

Worrying Over Economic Winners
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512611990

[still_one]

88. absolutely. The media did their part looking the other way. "emails, emails, emails, pneumonia,

pneumonia, pneumonia, emails, emails, emails

[Hekate]

89. She did all that. The Party took on Bernie's platform and she embraced its language, added to her...

....own sterling record. She didn't "inspire"? They didn't bother to listen, or read what was on her website.

The election was rigged, all right -- against her, at every turn. By the media, the mouthbreathers, Comey, Putin -- and against all odds, she WON by what looks like close to TWO MILLION VOTES.

In the end, it was the Electoral College that brought her down, and is going to bring us all down.

And we are supposed to blame HILLARY and by extension OBAMA for this travesty? We're supposed to participate in the ritual flogging of her? We're supposed to say how sorry WE are to the pissants who stamped their little feet and said they'd show us?

Actually, Hillary Clinton WON the vote quite handily. Sadly, both Sanders and Trump are right about one thing: the system is rigged. And now we have a vulgar, ignorant, possibly insane, strongman about to enter the White House. After he LOST the vote.

[still_one]

95. Hell, Russ Feingold and Zypher Teachout lost. Besides the FBI, the MSM distortions, the social

media's fake news, and those self-identified progressives who refused to vote for Hillary, she still won the popular vote.

[mcar]

105. Funny how the experts forget that

when they opine about Hillary.

[DemonGoddess]

107. It's infuriating n/t

[mcar]

127. But not surprising

[still_one]

126. and Zypher Teachout was a ideological disciple of Bernies, and she lost by 10%

There were others factors that were involved, but those that voted for Trump, it wasn't for jobs, as they would like you to believe. It was about race and sexism. This demographic was concerned about the "browning of America"

[DemonGoddess]

106. This!!!

[oldtime dfl_er]

103. We give greater weight

to what we see on TV, instead of what we read from reputable sources. By "we" I don't mean the people here, who are by and large much more aware, educated and savvy about what's real and what isn't. I mean everybody else (LOL) .

[applegrove]

108. They did not cover her jobs platform on the news. It was up to her

to recognize it and flood the airways with her ideas on helping the middle and working class in ads.

[CajunBlazer]

110. K&R

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

114. How many times did she visit those rust belt

states that she lost after she secured the democratic nomination?

Hmmmm

[NurseJackie]

125. Their own irrational hatred filled their ears and blocked all other senses.

[yurbud]

133. Did she run any campaign ads on it or finagle the press to make a big deal about it?

[bettyellen]

138. How could she "finagle the press" exactly? She did run ads on it.

I saw a few here in NJ.

[jalan48]

141. Shame always works. For sure.

[bettyellen]

143. what- you want to let the untruths stand? why?

[jalan48]

144. "Untruths"? The Democratic Establishment needs to look in the mirror.

That's where the real problem is.

[bettyellen]

145. The OP was about specific untrue things- not you're vague laments.

If you want to influence others, it's best not to use a premise based on bullshit.

[jalan48]

146. Actually, it's the labeling of those you disagree with that's bullshit.

Calling people "deplorables" is a big time losing strategy. Oh, and keeping Donna Brazile on as DNC chair after she leaked a debate question to Hillary-that really impressed the voters!

[bettyellen]

148. I'm talking about disinformation being spread by Dems.... you're deflecting.