3 ms·

>at worst you are also creating a much wider audience of sympathetic ears, mostly drawn from a public who doesn't like to be told what to think. I very firmly

>at worst you are also creating a much wider audience of sympathetic ears, mostly drawn from a public who doesn't like to be told what to think. I very firmly believe that if it we're for the chorus of media outlets and public voices pushing the idea that anybody who didn't like Hillary, or who did like Trump, were all racist, sexist, deplorable... That Trump probably wouldn't have been elected.

rsj_hn 8y ago
I think that was part of it -- the "deplorables" line really hurt her. Hillary didn't have anywhere near the political talent that Bill had, where by "political talent" I mean being able to connect with people and bring you over to their side. I was stunned when she was nominated, because I couldn't imagine her winning a national election. I think Al Gore had similar issues vis-a-vis Bush. He was just robotic, condescending in his stump speeches and debates. He was the exact wrong person to nominate to run against Bush, just in terms of his public persona. The TV age really changed politics, and treating people with respect and not talking down to them matters. I think this rules out a lot of people who would otherwise make capable administrators, but that's how it is. And all of these people may be great one on one, but stick them in front of a camera, and man, they are cringe-worthy. While I'm at it, Elizabeth Warren has the same problem. She comes off as a schoolmarm, constantly talking down to people. Please don't nominate her, Democrats, don't keep doing this. It would be nice to bring two party rule back to this country, so get someone who can win -- someone in the Bill Clinton, Barack Obama mold, who is able to be passionate about something while at the same time doesn't sound like they are scolding you for having the wrong views.
- AmericanChopper 8y ago
  Well said. >I was stunned when she was nominated, because I couldn't imagine her winning a national election. I think the way she got herself nominated didn’t do her any favors either. It was quite transparently corrupt and must’ve flipped a good amount of Bernie supporters.

rsj_hn 8y ago

I think that was part of it -- the "deplorables" line really hurt her. Hillary didn't have anywhere near the political talent that Bill had, where by "political talent" I mean being able to connect with people and bring you over to their side. I was stunned when she was nominated, because I couldn't imagine her winning a national election. I think Al Gore had similar issues vis-a-vis Bush. He was just robotic, condescending in his stump speeches and debates. He was the exact wrong person to nominate to run against Bush, just in terms of his public persona. The TV age really changed politics, and treating people with respect and not talking down to them matters. I think this rules out a lot of people who would otherwise make capable administrators, but that's how it is. And all of these people may be great one on one, but stick them in front of a camera, and man, they are cringe-worthy. While I'm at it, Elizabeth Warren has the same problem. She comes off as a schoolmarm, constantly talking down to people. Please don't nominate her, Democrats, don't keep doing this. It would be nice to bring two party rule back to this country, so get someone who can win -- someone in the Bill Clinton, Barack Obama mold, who is able to be passionate about something while at the same time doesn't sound like they are scolding you for having the wrong views.

AmericanChopper 8y ago
Well said. >I was stunned when she was nominated, because I couldn't imagine her winning a national election. I think the way she got herself nominated didn’t do her any favors either. It was quite transparently corrupt and must’ve flipped a good amount of Bernie supporters.