3 ms·

> 1) 2m voters were disenfranchised. 200k in Milwaukee alone. Disenfranchised by Clinton when she never even bothered to visit them > 2) Racism How did that

by rdtsc 9y ago

> 1) 2m voters were disenfranchised. 200k in Milwaukee alone. Disenfranchised by Clinton when she never even bothered to visit them > 2) Racism How did that work? I've seen that mentioned before, but how did racism exactly help Trump win. He is a white supremacist and so other KKK member sleeper agents joined and brought him to power? > 3) Electoral college But how many US presidents won by referendum? Are we saying that Clinton didn't know about the Electoral College. As in she went for the popular vote and then only after the votes were cast, they surprised her with "Oops, we'll be using an electoral college this time". > 4) $3b free earned media for Trump campaign. Wasn't Hillary the one who was supported by most media conglomerates. Anything from getting debate question passed on to her by Brazile ahead of time, to Chris Cuomo on CNN telling people not to read emails because they are "illegal" and to come CNN for interpretation. It wasn't just the traditional media but stuff like Eric Schmidt going around wearing a "staff" logo on Clinton campaign events and designing "winning" strategies for the campaign: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/37262 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/37262 > these contests close enough for the GOP to snatch victory out of the jaws of defeat. 74 electoral college votes is not quite "close enough". Not a landslide like it was claimed but not a small amount either. > PS- HRC won the popular vote. Yes she seemed to have been confused about how US elections are won. What does popular vote officially get her? Maybe there should be a consolation prize like being the head of the Dept of Labor.

autokad 9y ago
> "Yes she seemed to have been confused about how US elections are won." I read an article by someone from inside her campaign: she believed it was impossible to loose the electoral college but there was a possibility she could loose the popular vote. she didn't want that to dog her after she took the presidency, so she diverted resources to the population centers to jazz up the popular vote
- specialist 9y ago
  I'm sure you're correct about juicing the popular vote. (I haven't finished "What Happened" yet, for HRC's own account. I'd appreciate a link for that insider account, if you still have it.) But there's also a coat tails factor. Many left wing voters are "1:4", only voting one out of every four general elections (for president). So its expected of the presidential campaign, as the nominal head of the party, to juice turnout to help down ballot races.
  - autokad 9y ago
    I think this is the one: https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/michigan-hillary-clinton-trump-232547 https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/michigan-hillary-clin...
specialist 9y ago
"... but how did racism exactly help Trump win." What measure of proof do you require? The most recent round up I've read: The past year of research has made it very clear: Trump won because of racial resentment https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/12/15/16781222/trump-racism-economic-anxiety-study https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/12/15/16781222/trump-rac... Not that I needed sociologists to confirm what I knew about my friends and family who voted for Trump, but there's plenty more confirmation, if you're curious: https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+racism+won+the+election https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+racism+won+the+electio...
- rdtsc 9y ago
  Maybe also would be good to have a a better definition of what "helping win means. Is it that he is racist and his voters were racist. Did they become more racist or have always been so and were just waiting for someone like Trump to emerge. And then what did they exactly hope Trump would do for their cause. I haven't seen that explained well in the studies. Maybe I missed it by accident. > Not that I needed sociologists to confirm what I knew about my friends and family who voted for Trump, But what is their logic there. They saw the racism in Trump and identified with it? Why not vote for Clinton, her "superpredator" remark is pretty racist and maybe association by proxy with her husband's "tough on crime" policy would make more sense. That policy was more hurtful to the black community than what Trump ever did. I looked at the first study. Thanks for the link. One thing that jumps out is that they only picked millennials. Doesn't that exclude say auto-workers from Michigan, steel mill workers, and other pre-millennial blue collar workers from key states which Hillary should have kept blue like the Democrats did in the past? Did they become racist in the last 4 years? Besides most millennials voted for Hillary in general. So the premise that they are making an effort to really understand why people voted for Trump is a bit suspect. Going by what I know about Republicans so far, I can believe that there are more racist people voting Republican candidates in. But I don't think that is the primary reason they voted for him. Also whether we think the president has any effect on the economy or not, he seems to claim to bring black unemployment to a 17 year low. For being elected to advance a racist agenda he is not doing that good of a job delivering results.
specialist 9y ago
Just reread your reply. "Disenfranchised by Clinton when she never even bothered to visit them" Please define "disenfranchisement".
- rdtsc 9y ago
  It was a silly attempt at a joke. She certainly didn't preclude anyone from voting. But the serious point was that she ignored the state, even after losing the primary there. Then went on to have rallies in California. I think Powell's quote applies here and in general to the whole campaign: "Everything HRC touches she kind of screws up with hubris."

by rdtsc 9y ago

autokad 9y ago

> "Yes she seemed to have been confused about how US elections are won." I read an article by someone from inside her campaign: she believed it was impossible to loose the electoral college but there was a possibility she could loose the popular vote. she didn't want that to dog her after she took the presidency, so she diverted resources to the population centers to jazz up the popular vote

specialist 9y ago
I'm sure you're correct about juicing the popular vote. (I haven't finished "What Happened" yet, for HRC's own account. I'd appreciate a link for that insider account, if you still have it.) But there's also a coat tails factor. Many left wing voters are "1:4", only voting one out of every four general elections (for president). So its expected of the presidential campaign, as the nominal head of the party, to juice turnout to help down ballot races.
- autokad 9y ago
  I think this is the one: https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/michigan-hillary-clinton-trump-232547 https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/michigan-hillary-clin...

specialist 9y ago

"... but how did racism exactly help Trump win." What measure of proof do you require? The most recent round up I've read: The past year of research has made it very clear: Trump won because of racial resentment https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/12/15/16781222/trump-racism-economic-anxiety-study https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/12/15/16781222/trump-rac... Not that I needed sociologists to confirm what I knew about my friends and family who voted for Trump, but there's plenty more confirmation, if you're curious: https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+racism+won+the+election https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+racism+won+the+electio...

rdtsc 9y ago
Maybe also would be good to have a a better definition of what "helping win means. Is it that he is racist and his voters were racist. Did they become more racist or have always been so and were just waiting for someone like Trump to emerge. And then what did they exactly hope Trump would do for their cause. I haven't seen that explained well in the studies. Maybe I missed it by accident. > Not that I needed sociologists to confirm what I knew about my friends and family who voted for Trump, But what is their logic there. They saw the racism in Trump and identified with it? Why not vote for Clinton, her "superpredator" remark is pretty racist and maybe association by proxy with her husband's "tough on crime" policy would make more sense. That policy was more hurtful to the black community than what Trump ever did. I looked at the first study. Thanks for the link. One thing that jumps out is that they only picked millennials. Doesn't that exclude say auto-workers from Michigan, steel mill workers, and other pre-millennial blue collar workers from key states which Hillary should have kept blue like the Democrats did in the past? Did they become racist in the last 4 years? Besides most millennials voted for Hillary in general. So the premise that they are making an effort to really understand why people voted for Trump is a bit suspect. Going by what I know about Republicans so far, I can believe that there are more racist people voting Republican candidates in. But I don't think that is the primary reason they voted for him. Also whether we think the president has any effect on the economy or not, he seems to claim to bring black unemployment to a 17 year low. For being elected to advance a racist agenda he is not doing that good of a job delivering results.

specialist 9y ago

Just reread your reply. "Disenfranchised by Clinton when she never even bothered to visit them" Please define "disenfranchisement".

rdtsc 9y ago
It was a silly attempt at a joke. She certainly didn't preclude anyone from voting. But the serious point was that she ignored the state, even after losing the primary there. Then went on to have rallies in California. I think Powell's quote applies here and in general to the whole campaign: "Everything HRC touches she kind of screws up with hubris."