Hillary Clinton would be president right now if Obama had gone public in September or October

[jodymarie aimee]

GUARDIAN ARTICLE, BEST I HAVE READ.

In Obama’s defense, there were valid reasons for slow-walking an American response to Putin. The president was rightly concerned about provoking a Russian cyber-attack on voting machines on Election Day. And Obama and his top aides brooded over whether any public announcement would merely feed Trump’s bleats about a “rigged” election.

In hindsight, it was the wrong call.

Democracy requires openness and honesty in the belief that the voters can handle the truth. But Obama, confident in Clinton’s electoral prospects, instead chose stealth and indirection. A governmental statement in early October about Russia’s “active measures” did not even mention Putin by name. And within minutes, that hedged three-paragraph document was upstaged by the release of Trump’s “Access Hollywood” tape about the joys of grabbing women’s private parts.

A presidential race decided by 78,000 votes in three states was awash with might-have-beens. In all likelihood, Hillary Clinton would be president right now if Obama had gone public in September or October with what he knew about Putin’s efforts to pilfer the election. But even if such presidential truth telling had boomeranged politically, it would have set a name-and-shame precedent about how the United States responds to all foreign efforts to tamper with an election.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/28/obama-wrong-russian-interference-election-legacy?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+USA+-+Collections+2017&utm_term=232674&subid=17536001&CMP=GT_US_collection

[rzemanfl]

1. This would be moot if so many white women had not voted for a pussy grabber.

What about Senator turtle neck?

[ehrnst]

8. Romney got 54% of the white vote in 2012.

But there was no gnashing of the teeth about losing the White vote.

[rzemanfl]

9. Romney did not say he could kick white men in the balls because he was famous. n/t

[ehrnst]

12. So, again, why did Dems not gnash their teeth about losing the white vote in 2012? (nt)

[rzemanfl]

13. You are deliberately not getting my point. Have a nice day. n/t

[ehrnst]

29. If that makes you feel better... Have a nice day. n/t

[ehrnst]

35. Women who derive their identity and power from the men they align with

will vote for a "strong man" type, especially if the candidate is supported by the men in their life, even if the candidate talks crudely about other women.

So, it's not surprising that women will vote for a man that is sexist, indeed, many are taught growing up that boys will be boys, and men are pigs, and that's just the way of things.

But all of the sudden some people think that because more white women than not voted for DT is some sort of horrific revelation about the Democratic party, and gloss over the fact that the majority of women voted for Hillary.

But when a majority of whites went GOP in 2012, it was assumed that racism was the reason, not the party direction or the candidate.

Is that clearer?

[rzemanfl]

47. Your first two paragraphs make your position on this clearer and explain what I found

inconceivable (i.e., that women would vote for a sexist pig sexual assaulter). I guess I have had the good fortune not to meet many women like the ones you describe, probably because I avoid places where their type would congregate (e.g., country clubs, churches). I do not see this as a "horrific revelation about the Democratic party" but as a horrific revelation about white women, who I mistakenly believed identified more with women than whiteness.

I apologize for sounding snotty when we were trying to convey our thoughts with too few words.

[ehrnst]

49. Yes, it is horrific, which is why I moved away from the deep red midwest as an adult.

But I have met women on the left, mostly young adults, who indeed draw their power from the men that they are aligned with.

"I don't need feminism because...." is a dead giveaway.

If you think that is a rare statement, you are sheltered indeed.

Here is some information on those women:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/14/us/women-voters-trump.html

"A ‘Good Man, Deep Down"

"Do I think Trump’s trying to send women back to the kitchen? No, his daughter is a great example. She ran the women-who-work campaign long before he ran for president."

"I felt he had what it would take to get the country back on track. Being P.C. was going to kill the country. He speaks his mind and because of that, he’s not going to lie to you. I don’t want immigrants, accepting them without doing the background checks. Are these people terrorists? I don’t want to live in a country where we have to worry about going to the movie theater or the mall. Let’s be on the offensive, versus the defensive."

"Trump’s a successful businessman, and I feel like that’s what America needs to bring our economy back. I don’t think Donald Trump is really Republican, to be quite honest with you. He’s not in a box. One of the most attractive things to me is he can’t be boxed. He wants to bring America back to what it was before. I don’t think it’s taking us back to women have no rights or slavery days."

"Benghazi. The emails. The I.R.S. She’s a liar. The Clintons got wealthy because of their position. I’d rather have someone there who doesn’t need the money. He’s got a message. He’s going to make a change. Her message was all him. All negative ads." (someone who swallowed the propaganda whole)

"But there are allegations about killing people who get in her way — Vince Foster, people like that. Someone who has a big bravado is not as concerning to me as someone who might kill people who get in her way." (another person who swallowed the propaganda whole)

"I run my household like a business, my classroom like a business. I expect him to run the country in such a manner. You don’t pay more money out than you have. You want to have your budget under control. You want to know the people you’re working with are above average. You want to pick the people based on what they can do, not on what they did for you. He’s not getting large amounts from donors based on what you’ll do for me later."

"To say women are going backwards would be wrong. Look at how much Trump hires women, how much he does rely on women, how much he relies on his own daughter. I’m sort of amazed by her. She may pull him more into the middle. She’ll be a good voice for women."

So, now do you understand that there are women who think that Ivanka is more of a feminist than Hillary? And that they might find DT less of a threat with that mindset?

[rzemanfl]

50. I am about to turn seventy and don't meet many young women. Age is its own form

of shelter. I have never seen a mess like the one the country is in now.

[ehrnst]

57. Young women are especially vulnerable to the need for male approval.

They are bombarded with messages every day from every direction that male approval is the highest validation that they could receive.

I saw that on both the left and right this election year.

[pangaia]

61. You know, I am 73.

I have done a lot in my life, traveled the world. Most of the time spent with artistic types.. creative people.

I can honestly say I am not aware that I have EVER spent any time with women who think like this. Oh, I am sure I have been in the room with some, no doubt. And even spoken to some.

But never would I waste time on anyone like that.

WAIT !!!
I WILL say however, that on our townhouse HOA Board of Directors, of which I am a member, there IS one woman like that. I can feel wherever she is as... different from the rest of the space. It is almost like having an itching rash on one side of a leg. Of course her husband is the same. LOL.

It is painful to sit there.

[Quanta]

65. It wasn't just white women-

There is plenty of blame to go around. This reminds me of a clip I saw earlier of the Big Brother cast being informed that Trum won...let me see if I can find it.

[rzemanfl]

66. Thank you for that. n/t

[bettyellen]

69. Men put Trump in office. We both know that. You'll got to reach out to those that don't respect us

Enough to be disgusted by heir vote for him.

[rzemanfl]

71. There were not enough men who voted to put Trump in office, the votes of 34,000

women in three states that went to the male candidate (I use male loosely here) gave us Drumpf.

[shraby]

2. If he had, mcconnell was ready to call foul that the President was trying to sway the election.

He said as much when congress was informed in a closed meeting.

[Zambero]

10. Yes, exactly

President Obama goes and puts his thumb on the electoral scale with a "hoax fake news" story, Hillary wins, and the election is therefore "rigged" just as Trump predicted. Or since Trump isn't going to win anyway, just keep quiet and let the investigations into hacking quietly proceed.

Given the shockingly horrific outcome few would have expected, scenario one could have made a difference. But the calculus was not proceed with actions that would validate Trump's claim of rigging among his base, which would have also spawned endless howls of an illegitimate Hillary Clinton presidency. I can understand Obama's rationale at the time, but wish he had done otherwise.

[brush]

40. There are ways around that. We are too nice. A few well-timed and well-placed leaks would have...

gotten the news out.

I can't believe no one in the admin thought of that.

That's how Washington works. We see that happening everyday with this collusion mess.

We have to keep our foot on their necks until the election is over or we fall victim to last minute letters from partisan hack, repug FBI directors.

[tazkcmo]

3. I doubt it very seriously.

15 byears ago, probably but now? No way. They're too far gone and only their extreme suffering which is obviously caused by their RW gods will bring them around. Even given that, I'm convinced many millions of wingers would gladly give their lives if meant one iota of unpleasantness for a liberal. Yes, they're that screwed up.

[L. Coyote]

4. Hillary Clinton would be president right now if Republicans didn't cheat and steal elections.

[BlueCaliDem]

26. THIS! Why aren't more Dems/Liberals talking about voter suppression/voter purge tactics

that, since the gutting of the VRA in 2011 taking away protections for PoC, were enacted for the first time in 2016 that made a HUGE difference in the numbers??

Instead, some supposedly on our side are trying to lay the blame on either Hillary Clinton or President Obama.

Un-effing-believable!

[Lotusflower70]

5. Nope

The accusations of "rigged" would have tainted the election. Either way, the election is tainted. President Obama did the honorable thing because he is an honorable man. He would get blamed either way as well. Hindsight is always 20/20.

[solara]

18. Hear! Hear! n/t

[BlueCaliDem]

27. EXACTLY!! Thank you! eom

[Lotusflower70]

31. You're welcome

It's ridiculous how many people want to blame him for something that isn't his fault. And think that course of action would have magically put Hillary in the White House. This is another attempt to anger and divide.

[spanone]

6. Yes let's blame this on Obama

[Demsrule86]

7. So now you want to blame Obama ...and play into Trump's hands? Bad idea.

[cilla4progress]

11. I don't t blame Obama

But if I had been there advising him I would have urged complete transparency.

Of course, hindsight's always 20/ 20.

[BannonsLiver]

14. ...

[L. Coyote]

15. OP-Ed by Walter Shapiro, and he's only got 10 likes on Twitter for it. LOL.

My guess, no American paper would run this useless dithering. Maybe we've heard "blame Obama" way too many times on this side of the pond.

The "presidential race decided by 78,000 votes in three states" is wrong, a 78,000 vote margin means half that many votes decided the race. When you switch a vote you add one vote to one column and subtract one vote from the other column. Obviously, Walter knows very little about how to rig an election.

[tonyt53]

16. HRC would be President now is many so-called Dems had voted for her instead of 3rd party.

It really is that simple.

[m-lekktor]

46. I doubt the people who voted 3rd party were so-called DEMS. most people are registered independent.

[DFW]

17. Maybe, maybe not

McTurtle blocked the nomination of Merrick Garland for Supreme Court for a year. He seemed extremely confident that Hillary would not get to nominate anyone ever. Against all polls, odds, and indications to the contrary.

He seemed very much like someone who already KNEW--not suspected, KNEW--on January 2016 that the Democratic nominee, whoever it was, would NOT be the next president.

[karynnj]

25. Let's assume that he even saw the election as 50/50 or even better for the Republicans,

he would still do the same.

He also had to know that it was likely that he could be back in the minority in 2017-- but no worse than the 48 Senators the Democrats now have. He likely made the assessment that they would be no worse off if Clinton won and had a 52/48 Senate than he was with Obama nominating MG. On the other hand, he KNEW that any Republican as President would nominate someone who would - from his perspective be a big win in comparison.

So, he had little to lose and much to gain. How low could the odds be to take that kind of chance? IMO, pretty low - Not to mention, there was a personal gain. Consider it was red meat that the base loved for him to do this to Obama.

[Orangepeel]

19. Nonsense. Everybody knew that Russia was interfering in the election!

Clinton flat out said so in one of the debates ("no puppet!&quot . Obama making an official statement about it would have done nothing. Republicans would still denounce it as political and the media would still have been showing trump rallies nonstop.

[EffieBlack]

37. EXACTLY

The media and Congress are acting like they didn't have a clue and if ONLY Obama had told them, they would have taken the information and run with it, handled it responsibly and gotten the word out to the American people in an intelligent, cohesive manner.

Right.

But we know what would really have happened. It would have been a mess. Trump would have turned it into a shitstorm which the media would jump into and obsess over. The stories would have all been about whether or how Obama was trying to swing the election. And, as usual, it would all have been Hillary's fault.

Let's be real.

[delisen]

64. A candidate saying something is not the same as a president making an official announcement

[SweetieD]

20. That is wishful thinking. Nt

[HipChick]

21. Disagree..half the population didn't care enough to vote..

I'm not going with blame Obama game for this..

[Kleveland]

22. We will never know. Move on, sensless to dwell on this point.

We have a living horror in the White House, and in congress.

This needs to be changed, and we need to do while we can.... assuming that we still will have the power as honest citizens.

There is no excuse not to get out and vote.

[octoberlib]

23. Everybody thought there was no way Trump would be elected and this includes

all the Republicans I talked to.

[karynnj]

24. You never really know what would have happened had you taken the other path

I respect Shapiro's reporting, but he really does not make the case that had Obama personally said more, the results would have been different. He simply notes how very close the race was.

What I DO know is that anyone who watched the last debate heard - very clearly - that the 17 intelligence agencies agreed that Russia had hacked the DNC and Podesta. Many who hadn't watched it, saw it anyway on comedy shows as it led to the HRC calling Trump a puppet of Russia and Trump responding that she was the puppet. This was mocked, often with puppets on almost every late night comedy show and those videos went viral.

The CBS/NYT poll taken between 10/28 and 11/1 asked:

"How concerned are you about a foreign government attempting to influence election and voting systems in the United States in order to disrupt or alter the 2016 elections: very concerned, somewhat concerned, not very concerned or not at all concerned?"

The results were that 33 percent labeled themselves as very concerned and 30 percent labeled themselves as somewhat concerned. This means that 63 percent of the country were aware of this.

( http://pollingreport.com/wh16.htm - scroll down the date sorted polls to find the CBS/NYT poll. )

In 2016's media culture when the media often shifted from HRC speaking or Barack Obama speaking live to people milling about BEFORE a Trump event and then sticking to Trump for far longer than anyone else, do you really think more people would have heard the allegation or more importantly, that a higher percent would have believed President Obama? Note from the poll - we are down to 36 percent who either were only slightly concerned or not concerned at all. Note I could not find what I wanted which was a question that asked if you had heard anything about Russia being involved. Here the 36% is close to what was the right wing Trump base.

I think that overall the Obamas were a net positive for HRC. They emotionally touched many people in their speeches who Clinton herself had a tougher time reaching. Their involvement was unprecedented. On this issue, note that 63% not only heard but were concerned. It is hard to believe that that would increase. Note that Obama could not have said that Trump was colluding with Russia. Now, Obama could have added sanctions and the reasons he didn't were explained in the WP. He was concerned that doing so could imperil the actual election.

Consider that Trump's main response to the Russia accusations was to say this is because Obama was weak and Putin did not respect him. (Here a HRC response that pointed out the sanctions were the strongest non military reaction possible and they shrunk the Russian economy might have helped counter Trump's comment. Trump's comment played on the Republicans still getting credit on being better on national security.)

[ciaobaby]

28. Oh great - now it's Obama's fault.

Will it ever be Hillary's fault ?

[Squinch]

36. You're kidding, right?

[Cha]

59. Oh great.. let's blame the Russians hacking and flipping votes,

comey, Voter Suppression, and GD 3rd party Liars on Hillary.

[lame54]

30. Comey would still have had the last word...

In a season of failed predictions there is no way to tell how it would have turned out

[yallerdawg]

43. Obama - or Lynch - should have fired Comey's ass!

And then said, "By the way, while there's nothing to this Hillary email BS, we are investigating multiple Trump campaign officials interactions and possible collusion with Russian operatives who are interfering in our American election!"

A whiny loser would have been so much better than a demented crackpot in the White House!

[BumRushDaShow]

32. More ODS. nt

[EffieBlack]

33. No-she likely would have lost anyway

And then we'd be blaming Obama and saying, " He should have just waited and dealt with it after the election. Clinton would be president right now if Obama hadn't gotten involved.,"

[BannonsLiver]

38. She was a flawed candidate

People seem all too willing to forget that.

[yallerdawg]

41. Just HER bad luck to run against a perfect candidate.

Is THAT what we're forgetting?

[Skittles]

67. 90% of her "flaws" are total repuke-created bullshit

[JI7]

60. yup. like that loretta lynch tarmac thing

They would have treated it as obama unfairly helping Clinton.

[ElementaryPenguin]

34. You're right.

I love Obama, but I was very disappointed how he handled his historic moment - "his Cuban Missile Crisis, WW, Great Depression, Civil War" - he came up short in this one regard - and it was a HUGE ONE! All the money and blood spent to defend this country and it could be lost without a shot being fired or a drop of blood being spilled. Thank God for the intelligence community and some parts of the press. (and quite a number of Dems)

[jalan48]

39. If it were a Republican President in office would he/she have made the cyber attack public?

It's a great example of why we lose elections, even when the victory is gift wrapped and handed to us.

[Takket]

42. Hillary would have lost by more

Just reference the double standard in coverage in the media for dems and rethugs.

[yallerdawg]

44. But after December when Obama SAID the Russians interfered...

it has been "Russia, Russia, Russia" ever since.

Instead, all we got before the election was Comey and emails (mums the word on Russia) - a member of the Obama administration, by the way.

After the election is a little late to announce the "official position," expel Russians and add more sanctions. That wouldn't have changed the game in August, September, October, first week of November?

[yodermon]

45. NOPE. Putin would just have modified his active measures to adapt to conditions.

It was an actively managed coup, and it is still being managed.

"if only this" "if only that"

NOPE. "If only Russia hadn't stolen the election" is really the only operative valid question to raise.

If only she hadn't worn such a short skirt...

See.?

[Blue_Tires]

48. Or Dem voters just could have shown up in equivalent numbers...

Last edited Wed Jun 28, 2017, 06:21 PM - Edit history (1)

Or the Russians, you know, could have not rigged the election...

Besides, anybody who didn't know this before the election only has themselves to blame

[DefenseLawyer]

51. This list is getting a little unwieldy n/t

[Vinca]

52. I'm getting kind of pissed that O is getting so much blame for this. He was damned if he did,

damned if he didn't. He made what he thought was the right decision at the time and we should stop chastising him for it. If Hillary had won, where would we be now? Still investigating Russia with impeachment proceedings underway.

[Starry Messenger]

53. No.

It was a very strange election with tons of factors. We will be discussing it for years. I think we were in for the white-lash vote, judging by the huge numbers of whites who went for Trump. If you were a former Obama voter who was into Trump, why would further revelations about Russia convince you otherwise in Sept. or October?

[stopbush]

54. It's so obvious! Obama wanted tRump to win because he (Obama) would then look

even better in retrospect!

Isn't that exactly what has happened???

Jeebus, it's right in front of our noses!!

[Tiggeroshii]

55. We get screwe for being better people

[Eliot Rosewater]

56. The election was stolen, the GOP must vacate the white house and then I want

to look at how many house and senate seats were stolen.

Gorsuch must be removed GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Or this country is over

[JI7]

58. You have a lot of faith in the media

[Ilsa]

62. The damage was done: the Bernie-or-bust crows voted for Trump or

Stein or someone else, but not HRC, not after the DNC email wiki leaks.

I read that the Cyber Bears included malware with the Wikileaks email payload. Anyone who downloaded it might have gotten infected if their security was out of date.

[Aristus]

63. Ah, more Blame Obama boilerplate.

Duly noted...

[oberliner]

68. Not true

Probably would have had the opposite effect, in fact.

[LittleBlue]

70. We got Trump because the president was afraid of a turtle looking wacko from Kentucky

Obama's reluctance to directly engage Republican nonsense plagued him till the end. There were times when he genuinely looked afraid to take on Republicans.

[rockfordfile]

72. I agree

It's because of Republicans that he didn't come out with the information.