4 ms·
I think its more a question of discovering how they lost ohio and michigan, which are reliably blue states. What strategic nd tactical choices did they make tha
by c0nfused 10y ago
I think its more a question of discovering how they lost ohio and michigan, which are reliably blue states. What strategic nd tactical choices did they make that cause them to lose in so many states that they thought they had won. Clinton was rated 80%+ to win by everyone at the start of the night.
Is it an over reliance on polling? Likely to vote stat seems like a viable arguement
A poorer ground game? In the city I live in Trump came, sold out the colliseum, and Clinton sent Kaine who who sold out a middle school gym. This is in a blue city in a blue state.
Did they just get played by Trump and spend the entire campaign making it about him instead of about Clinton?
I don't know, but at this point they have plenty of time to try to figure it out and they really ought to. After all, it doesn't look like the greens or the libertarians are going to be a viable opposition party in 2 years
- imron 10y ago> I think its more a question of discovering how they lost ohio and michigan, which are reliably blue states Michigan I'll grant, but in the last 10 elections, Ohio has been blue 5 times and red 5 times, with a fairly even spread.
- lagadu 10y agoTo further drive your point: Ohio is the one state that has always voted for the winner, not a single miss. That's as even spread as it gets.