Bernie filled stadiums. Much as I like Hillary, she just wasn't an exciting candidate.

[RBInMaine]

Last edited Fri Dec 16, 2016, 04:56 PM - Edit history (2)

Enough of the Bernie bashing. That's ridiculous. He filled stadiums. He brought millions into the party. He excited people with a CLEAR and COMPELLING message. I wish I had a dime for everyone I know who said they would have voted for Bernie if he had been our nominee.

Please don't get me wrong. I really like Hillary and really wanted her to win. But the hard truth is Hillary could barely get a thousand people to attend her primary rallies and had mostly pretty small general election rallies too. Her primary campaign was just plain lackluster. She was seen as the past and the establishment in an era where people are just sick and tired of insiders. They wanted someone new. She and her team made huge mistakes not campaigning where necessary, not having a CLEAR and COMPELLING populist economic message front and center, and trying to win over moderate suburban Republican women who were SOFT in their support instead of shoring up the working class base. She also spent too much time with donors or off the campaign trail in August and September. Very bad moves!

Polling indicates that Bernie had a much better chance of beating Trump than did Clinton. Would that have happened? Not sure. Bloomberg was talking about getting in if Bernie had done so and that could have ruined him with a split vote. But in a head to head I think both Hillary and Bernie would have won (the third party candidates screwed it up for us too), and Bernie would have won by more than Hillary and probably much more.

Right now the party needs a MASSIVE re-boot with a return to the 50 state strategy, and the message of JOBS FOR EVERYONE EVERYWHERE (including small town America which is HURTING)!!

We are in an era of OUTSIDER POLITICS, and Hillary, sadly, was the ultimate insider.

[NCTraveler]

1. Some serious BS with this line.

"I wish I had a dime for everyone I know who said they would have voted for Bernie if he had been our nominee."

They had their chance to vote. Over four million unenthusiastic people showed up for Clinton. That isn't the only questionable part of your op.

Unless you are saying it would get you a pack of gum.

[RBInMaine]

2. And many more did not show up or went third party or to Trump. Those are just the facts.

[George II]

10. And many more voted for Clinton than Trump. Just the fact.

Why do you guys keep fighting this fight?

[virtualobserver]

54. Why? Because a Hillary nomination led to a Trump Presidency.

Trump is the most embarrassing President-elect in modern history. A competent campaign should have crushed him by 10 million votes.

[redqueen]

77. This. nt

[RazBerryBeret]

78. THIS. is the bottom line.

big picture, non emotional perspective: Republicans ran the candidate with the highest "strongly unfavorable" rating in history.
We chose the candidate with the second highest "strongly unfavorable" rating in history.

[LongtimeAZDem]

79. Sanders and his supporters carrying water for the Republicans led to a Trump Presidency

And they're still doing it.

[virtualobserver]

80. nonsense....you imagine Hillary as a fragile victim....

not true. Just a poorly run campaign.

[LongtimeAZDem]

82. Not at all; Sanders supporters repeated Republican attacks as gospel,

screamed "Never Hillary", whined and cried all the way to the convention and beyond, and then didn't show up to vote.

Own what you have done.

[virtualobserver]

83. I supported Sanders, and voted for Hillary in the GE.

Hillary's campaign wanted Trump and they couldn't handle him in the GE

It was clear in the primary that Bernie polled better than Hillary against Trump.

Perhaps you and the DNC should "own what you have done".

[dionysus]

106. That's bullshit. The bernie or bust crew wasn't large enough to to that. The vast

majority of bernie voters went with hillary.

[otohara]

173. They Went 3rd Party or Not At All & We Lost

so you're wrong -

White young liberals are the reason we lost they did it out of spite and hate.

[dionysus]

176. Can you prove any of that with data, and not some anecdote from JPR types? If you can actually prove

this, I'll be glad to admit i'm wrong. There's a lot of factors that added up to a loss, and i don't think young liberals sulking over the primary was one of them.

[otohara]

177. Here

Peer pressure is a powerful tool and many IGNORED Sanders campaign message - because he became a sellout with many of them the moment he endorsed Hillary.

https://ww2.kqed.org/lowdown/2016/11/14/how-millennials-voted/

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/12/it-wasnt-the-white-working-class-that-cost-hillary.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-09/what-this-election-taught-us-about-millennial-voters

I don't frequent JPR - don't know much about them.

[Dustlawyer]

155. Hillary was fighting an anti-establishment head wind.

It did not help that Trump was able to make hay off of what Hillary and the DNC did to Bernie and his campaign.

Bernie had every right to run and most thought it better for him to run as a Democrat to avoid a Nadar situation. He campaigned for Hillary in the General despite what was done to him in the Primary.

I agree we need to move on, but we need to objectively take a look at the problems in our Party. In my mind, the corporate influence by way of campaign donations, soft and dark money, Super PACS, and the revolving door need to go! Whether you like it or not, Hillary was too closely associated with thease things.

Democrats should not be aligning with these influences, it is counter to who we are and what we expect in our government. Bernie demonstrated that a populist approach can bring in enough money. People are tired of Wall Street owning our politicians and giving them free reign to rip us off with no repercussions. Trump will only reinforce the need to get the Plutocrat's out of the picture. We need to be ready for the next election and come to it with clean hands!

[seaglass]

89. And clearly Bernie did not have a competent campaign as he couldn't even win the primary. n/t

[virtualobserver]

98. Bernie was a complete unknown, yet he did well...especially considering DWS's debate freeze out.....

......designed to help the well known candidate, Hillary.

[seaglass]

99. Why was he unknown if he was in Congress for 30 years and on talk radio for 10?

Not very effective I'd guess.

[virtualobserver]

139. He is well known now, and highly regarded, nationwide.....

so it will be interesting to see his impact.

[otohara]

174. His 10 Years On Radio Was Effective In Demonizing Democrats

I used to look forward to listening to BwB - until his disdain for our party and our president became unbearable.

[sheshe2]

129. Unknown after 30 years in the Senate?

That says a lot.

[virtualobserver]

140. He is not unknown any more....and is highly regarded...which says a lot more.

[sheshe2]

143. Yes he is.

A good man.

[jmowreader]

141. So would a Bernie nomination

"Bernie Sanders is a socialist who is going to raise your taxes to give free stuff to people who didn't earn it."

That is the standard Republican attack against us. You know what the difference would have been with Bernie on the ticket? THAT WAS HIS PLATFORM! Instead of looking at a six-state GOP pickup, we'd be looking at a 49-state GOP sweep.

[virtualobserver]

161. we know that Hillary lost....

your scenario about Bernie is purely imaginary. Bernie would have made it a battle between the Oligarchs and the people and would have won the argument.

People trusted Bernie, and did not trust either Trump or Hillary.

[Kentonio]

168. Why?

That's exactly the same line they used non-stop against Obama for 8 years, it had lost it's ability to hurt as much due to constant repetition.

[braddy]

75. 4.3 million more votes in California, which we will see more of in the future, it wasn't nationally.

[SFnomad]

154. Re: 4.3 million more votes in California

So, if you take away 12% of the US population, then you can say that tRump won the popular vote? Really?

I could take away another 12% of the US population and show that Clinton won what's left. Is there really any point to this?

[Island Blue]

36. If they were that fucking stupid

they deserve what is about to be unleashed upon them - unfortunately, the rest of us do not.

[DK504]

132. This was about issues

not a popularity contest. The fact that a large number of Americans stayed home or pulled a protest vote and pouted over their "dislike" Hillary, I could care less. The pout vote put us in a bad position, beyond a bad position, we're in big trouble.

[otohara]

172. So You Must Attend A Rally

I'm 63 now - don't do rallies anymore - last one was 2008 when I was 55.


Your state had 4000 participate in the caucus.
Why is that?
I read on Twitter Sanders won Maine in a landslide - that's how clueless they are - they look at the percentage and think wow - never checking to see how few took part due to many legitimate reasons.

Same in Colorado - only 127,000 participated. Do you think that's right?

Hillary did a small rally here - and won the state by 3 pts. Had we had a primary she would have won - thank God no more caucuses will be held in CO - unfortunately it's going to be open.

[LaydeeBug]

146. They were *also* a LOT of alt-righters there that were NEVER voting for him in the general.

They just wanted a fractured Democratic party

[Ken Burch]

4. And some of her supporters dismissed the very idea of building enthusiasm.

They acted as though there was something wrong with the idea of a candidate that encouraged her or his supporters to feel that change was possible or even desirable.

My question is, how the hell do you win an election if you DON'T create a real sense of excitement and possibility?

Especially among young voters whose loyalties haven't really been established yet?

Other than the capacity to generate enthusiasm, to make people feel that it's worth it to vote FOR us rather than just against the ReThugs, what else have we GOT?

When have we, as a party, ever done well by DAMPENING enthusiasm and quelling passion?

And why did the HRC campaign choose not to try to build enthusiasm by running ads where she mentioned the Sanders proposals that were added to the platform, or which encouraged the young to get involved with THIS party and work for what they cared about within it?

I assume HRC supporters felt enthusiasm for their candidate...if they did, who were they to belittle anyone for feeling it about other candidates?

[George II]

13. When has "enthusiasm" or lack thereof, ever been an issue in a Presidential election?

[Ken Burch]

14. Not an issue...a factor.

Barack Obama generated enthusiasm. He won(twice).

If Michelle Obama ever runs, she will as well. And she will win.

So did Bill Clinton(his victory was largely about personal charisma-he'd have won on ANY platform). He won.

So did JFK(he won narrowly, but mainly as a result of a MASSIVE increase in voter turnout from the previous election). He won.

Humphrey failed to in '68. He lost.

Jimmy Carter failed to in '80. He lost.

Mondale failed to in '84. He lost.

Dukakis failed to in '88. He lost.

Gore failed to in '00. He lost in the EC.

Kerry failed to in '04. He lost.

[George II]

18. I don't think "charisma" had much to do with some, if not all, of those elections.

Humphrey was bucking the Vietnam War and a very moderate (almost "liberal&quot Nixon who previously lost to "charismatic" Kennedy. Carter won in 1976, so his lack of "charisma" wasn't entirely debilitating, the Iran hostage crisis was instrumental in defeating him. Mondale was running against a popular incumbent (whether you agreed with him or not).
Dukakis lost to a very popular incumbent VP.
We can argue about whether or not Gore lost in 2000, just as we can argue about whether or not Clinton lost this year.

If one looked at the issues in play in most of those elections, those are what defeated your examples.

[Ken Burch]

20. In 1976, the Democrats were going to take the White House no matter what.

That's why I didn't address it.

And I made the distinction that Gore lost in the EC.

[oberliner]

26. That is definitely not true

1976 was extremely close from start to finish.

[Ken Burch]

45. Carter was thirty points ahead at one point in the summer.

If it hadn't been for a pair of gaffes for which the liberal wing of the party bore no responsibility at all-the "ethnic purity" speech, with its attempts to pander to racist Northern whites with the implication the he'd be fine with keeping blacks out of their neighborhoods, and the much sillier "lusted after women in my heart" thing in the Playboy interview(everyone only bought that issue for the articles, of course-Ford would not have come anywhere close to pulling that out.

I suspect we'd have won by a much more comfortable margin with Jerry Brown, Frank Church or "Mo" Udall as the nominee.

[oberliner]

48. It was tied in October

With Ford leading late in the month.

It was also tied in March.

[MrPurple]

102. It was very close - Ford had bad gaffe too (saying Poland wasn't under Soviet influence)

[braddy]

74. I don't recall Nixon being known as the "moderate/liberal" in 1968, in fact he wasn't.

[George II]

85. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_Republican

[braddy]

86. Nixon was not seen as the moderate/liberal candidate in 1968, and he was running against Rockefeller

and Romney.

[George II]

92. What one is "seen as" and what one actually "was" are two totally different things.

[braddy]

93. Nixon was not a liberal in 1968, and Rockefeller was running against him in 1968.

[MrPurple]

103. Compared to 1968 field, Nixon wasn't liberal. Compared to today's Rethugs, he is.

[lastone]

64. Very good post Ken

Thanks for starting what should be obvious.

[mythology]

5. There's a problem with your theory

In the primaries, polling found Clinton supporters to be more highly enthusiastic than Sanders supporters.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/190343/trump-clinton-supporters-lead-enthusiasm.aspx

[Exilednight]

7. Didn't Gallup predict a Hillary win in the GE?

[yallerdawg]

27. And didn't she win?

By almost 3,000,000 votes?

I'd say, yes, the election WAS rigged.

[Exilednight]

40. Where will she be on inauguration day?

[MadBadger]

104. Gallup didnt poll the presidential race this cycle

No idea where you got that.

[Exilednight]

111. Who said anything about polling?

My question was directed towards who they predicted to win the election.

538 doesn't actually poll, but they still do predictions, and yes Gallup did have a prediction.

[aidbo]

6. No no no! We need more of the same! It's been working out so well!

for folks with broken sarcasm detectors.

[JI7]

8. she still got more people to actually vote for her

[dionysus]

107. Sure. But considering who she was running against, it should have

been the biggest landslide in history...

[JI7]

110. look at what congress is made up of

There are a lot of people who support shit types.

Look at west virgina racist getting her job back because people there didn't think it was fair for a white person to lose their job over something like that.

[dionysus]

112. Good points. Sadly, that means there's more racism and misogny out there

than we thought...

[sheshe2]

130. It was by 3 mil votes,

[dionysus]

138. We both no, to gore's lament, that's not what we're talking about.

Remember when reagan (shudder) beat mondale by around 18 million votes? THAT'S what we should have been looking at.

We should have beaten him by reagan marguns, bith popular vote AND electoral college. Our victory should have been as yuge as trumps lirs, and you know it.

[lunamagica]

160. She ran against trump, who had already defeated 16 other contenders, agains the KGB, against Comey,

Against Assange...things aren't so simple as you want to paint them

[dionysus]

167. Let's not grant trump any credit where credit is not due. And to suggest the voters were

so easily swayed by wikileaks dumping podesta emails (add that in the same category as the email server: unnecessary mistakes and or shit we just didn't need) and the other stuff you mentioned, it means her support was wide but not deep. Look at the shit exposed about trump, it showed him to be a creeper amd shitbag, but it didn't drive his support away.

How can it be a bumch of ahit we consider trifling is enougj to drive hillary voters aeay and that's a reasonable excuse for losing votes, whereas worse shit is exposed about trump and he retains his support.

Are we saying trumps supporters were more loyal, whereas hillary's support was weaker?

I stand by my statement: trump should have got smoked as bad as mondale did.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

122. Yes, but by spending more time campaigning in Cali than Wisconsin, we got the Fuhrer-Elect. Not a good strategy going for the win in the popular vote.

[George II]

9. Why didn't that translate into votes?

[Ken Burch]

16. It translated into far more votes than anyone expected.

43% of the primary vote isn't nothing.

(Had it not been for the perception that the early superdelegate endorsements had ended the contest before it started, it's likely that the Sanders vote share would have been higher).

[George II]

19. 55+% is much more. And that "superdelegate" excuse is just that, an excuse. How many of the.....

....30 million people who voted even knew what superdelegates were when they voted?

[Ken Burch]

21. Almost all of them.

The support pledges of the supers were largely announced before the primaries.

You don't think one candidate being essentially gifted 300 delegates prior to the voting had an effect on voter perceptions about the state of the race?

Hillary might have won without them, but it would have been a much closer contest.

[George II]

22. You're entitled to your opinion. But I doubt you can bolster that opinion with fact.

[Ken Burch]

23. It's a fact that Bernie did far better than anyone expected.

Under the circumstances, 43% of the primary vote was an exemplary performance.

There's really no good reason for anyone to STILL be arguing that Bernie should never have run(any MORE than anyone should still be arguing that Bernie should have been nominated instead of Hillary).

[George II]

24. I referring to your fact that "almost all" of the 30 million people who participated....

...in the primaries knew what superdelegates are.

I may have missed it, but I haven't seen anyone recently who was arguing that Sanders should never have run. The fact is he did become a candidate and Clinton won the nomination, very handily.

This is an interesting graphic (yellow is Clinton, green is Sanders):

[Autumn]

63. Yet Hillary only won what was it, 4 out of all of those yellow states in the general?

She won CO easily in the GE even though Bernie won it in the primary but them we had damn good reasons to vote.

[JI7]

100. the write in is still pretty much wanting or ok with Trump as president

[dionysus]

108. Yes, let's shrink the party... perhaps we can teot out another classic like

if we triangulate more we can swoop up angey republicans, who cares if we flush liberal votes down the toilet!

[HassleCat]

117. Your map illustrates the southern primary strategy.

Look at the solid yellow region across the southeast. Our party is heavily black in those states, although black voters do not make up such a large fraction of overall voters. The result is primaries where black voters have a big influence on our party, and general elections where white voters dominate. This is significant in the southeast because blacks and whites don't like each other, meaning our southern strategy tends to favor candidates who will have trouble in the general election. We have to live with this because we are not willing to cozy up to southern white voters by ignoring concerns of black voters.

The big question comes when you look at that swath of Bernie primary wins across the north. Those states should have gone to Hillary, and several of them almost did. The fact they didn't suggests our appeal is narrowing, concentrating more on minority voters particularly black voters. This might be a result of racism, or white resentment, or white backlash, or something like that. It could also be attributed to our failure to remind white working class voters that we are doing positive things for them, that we represent their interests and concerns far better than the other party. If you want to blame it on Bernie, it's true he got those states whipped up about his economic justice ideas, only to leave them flat when he couldn't win the nomination.

Being Democrats, I suppose we will never figure out what happened, let alone what to do about it. It's easier and more fun to blame each other and debate which segment of the electorate we should write off. We do the circular firing squad thing so well.

[George II]

118. It shows the fact that Sanders may not be as progressive as some would like to think.

[HassleCat]

119. Or perhaps more progressive.

Too progressive for some, and not progressive enough for others. That's an issue that bears only a little on our larger problem, but it is worth considering where we should land on certain issues.

[forjusticethunders]

158. The fundamental problem is that by and large

the Electoral College systematically devalues black votes.

Black votes are either concentrated in states where:

There are too many racist whites for black Democratic voters to overcome, so it doesn't matter if every black voter votes D or none of us do.
There are NOT ENOUGH racist whites for the black vote to be decisive (California, New York, Maryland) so loyal black Democratic voters just end up running up the score and it doesn't count because winning a state by 10 points is the same as winning by 0.5% or 40%.
In the states where black votes ARE decisive, guess which states have voter suppression targeted at them?

[Cha]

33. Exactly, George.. why didn't the "big stadiums" translate

into votes? Why did Hillary's message get 3 3/4 Million more votes than BS?

Because they liked what she had to say and knew she was actually qualified to be POTUS.

Those "stadiums" are over rated.

[JHan]

58. 80,000 who gave Trump the E.C can barely fill a stadium themselves..

And Enthusiasm sounds awfully like: "Let me tell voters a whole bunch of BS to get them to vote for me"

I'm tired of it but most people like it I guess.

I'm fine with criticisms of strategy but all this nonsense falls into the "Hillary is unlikeable" canard - and guess why she is seen as unlikable?

Seems I need to draw a damn map for some democrats so they see the point of sustained GOP smear campaigns.

[dionysus]

109. You're missing the point. The point is, if she excited people the way bernie did, or got

new voters into politics, that she would have smomed teump, like she was supposed to... if we make excuses for our mistakes, or refuse to even acknowledge them, we're going to lose again and again.

Trump, shit bag thay he is, did one huge thing hillary didn't; he got disaffected voters excited and grew his base. She excited the base, and that was it.

[SaschaHM]

11. Do you really think that the GOP...

and the MSM would have had any trouble painting a 70+ year old man whose only steady career has been running for office or being in office as an insider when compared to Trump? You don't spend over 2 decades in Washington and get to be an outsider.


And that's after getting over the hurdle that was winning the primary, which despite having crowds, he was unable to do. I mean, hell if Clinton couldn't get to Obama levels with AA voters, the guy who lost them state by state in the primary wouldn't have as well.

[Warren DeMontague]

12. neither of them are gonna run again in 4 years, so I suggest looking forward.

My advice is to stop tapping these dull-ass east coast baby boomer beltway types and find some leadership that is preferably Gen X or younger, represents the forgotten West Coast wing of the Democratic Party, and strongly supports things like marijuana legalization.

[ms liberty]

162. I like Gavin Newsom. Great pic.

He stuck his neck out on gay marriage and the party did not treat him well. Nobody wanted to be seen with him for a while over that, but he was right. I saw him give a talk about the issues and his viewpoint not too long after he did it,, on the UC channel. I think the talk was at UC Davis. I liked him, a lot.

[Warren DeMontague]

163. Exactly. Because that's what leaders do. They lead.

I fully admit that back in the day when he was running for SF mayor against.. Matt Gonzales, I think, for the Greens? I had Newsom down as an overly-slick, blow dried Marina Yuppie. Just goes to show, judging books and covers and all that.

[uponit7771]

15. Comey, voter suppression And Russia... Empirical factors everything else is guessing

[Kolesar]

56. Like the DU gunner in NC who claims that's what the voters were grumbling about Nov 8..eom

[asuhornets]

17. Bernie Sanders did absolutely nothing for me, my family, and friends...nt

[ucrdem]

25. Not in my town he didn't, but the press pretended he did.

How many other stadiums did he "fill" like this one, which I photographed while Sanders was actually speaking in a modest hall elsewhere on site?

[CentralMass]

28. That is magnanimous of you RBinMaine.. Thanks.

[coolbreeze77]

29. Small town America and the rural areas won't vote for us we need to get the Obama coalition and the

college kids back.

[Squinch]

30. Ugh... Staaaaaaaaahp! Just Staaaaahp!

[stopbush]

31. Exciting is horribly overrated.

You know who was even more exciting than Sanders? Trump.

[rzemanfl]

32. Please stop this already. n/t

[AgadorSparticus]

37. +1,000,000

[tecelote]

51. Yes.

This infighting is doing nothing to combat Comrade Donald.

[Tarheel_Dem]

34. Bernie "filled stadiums" with white people. That's not the Democratic party, and for that I'm.....

eternally grateful. Stadiums full of people didn't translate into votes for Sanders, and neither will re-writing history.

[sheshe2]

133. Brava!

[kcr]

148. Yep. His brand of economic populism became a turnoff.

For all the talk of what a Socialist he is, he sure didn't seem like one to me. It's not inclusive at all, and whenever it's pointed out, you're beat up about how inclusive it it is so you can feel nice and included, too. We should be pressing for economic equality for all. His messaging has really become off since the election.

[oasis]

35. Hillary's campaign was designed for her to listen to voters. Bernie's campaign

was designed to have voters listen to promises.

[EffieBlack]

60. Bingo!

[TCJ70]

94. So Hillary never made promises...

...interesting memory you have there...

[oasis]

95. It was Bernie's "pie-in-the-sky"pitch that filled the stadiums.

Hillary had the dry, "here's how we pay for our proposals" approach.

[TCJ70]

97. Pie-in-the-sky...kinda like "Hope and Change". So vague, right? N/t

[oasis]

101. "Vague"? Not to those who recognize bullshit when they hear it.

Many of us have been around the block a time or two.

[synergie]

38. HRC didn't rent stadiums, she did smaller venues and events that involved meeting with and talking

to people. Bernie didn't bring out voters. He told the ones following him around like groupies incorrect things, and told them their vote didn't matter. They listened. There is literally nothing but false beliefs and fantasies to pretend that Bernie, who couldn't even win a primary and had no ability to persuade his voters to actually come out and vote against the Orange one, or even himself would have won "more votes" than Hillary, who literally pulled in a historic number of actual votes.

I guess you missed what Hillary's actual policy speeches were, since she had actual plans to bring about jobs for everyone, even the stupid people who bought Donnie's BS about bringing back coal and manufacturing jobs.

I'm sorry but that's a load of BS. We are in an era of rewarding the stupid who don't like facts, but adore foreign propaganda, fed to them by RT.

Hillary won actual votes, had actual plans,and despite the toxic amount of hate, lies and propaganda used against her by RWers and those who unthinkingly spewed out literally the same talking points from the supposed left SHE STILL WON VOTES.

Please stop with this Bernie could have done something, he's still not doing anything, he's been in congress and in power longer than she has, he's just achieved less. Donnie is also an "insider" he's just a moron who wasn't expecting to win, til it was handed to him by people who don't want effective leadership in the US. The same group pushing Bernie. This was RW and Russian ratfucking, let's not pretend otherwise. The ACTUAL polls, where voters voted prove that your understanding of what went on here is not correct.

[EffieBlack]

61. Spot on perfect analysis!

[PassingFair]

88. BS ... it cost a LOT of money

... to get into those "events"

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

156. Bingo.

A lot of those events were fundraisers. You get raise a lot more money in California than the rust belt.

[Dem2]

39. Lol

m'kay... this isn't how Democrats do analysis. Sad.

[grossproffit]

41. A new hobby might be in order.

[ismnotwasm]

42. Oh bullshit.

[justhanginon]

53. I like this. Succinct and right on the money!

[NanceGreggs]

43. Bernie filled stadiums.

Bernie had more bumperstickers and yard signs.

Bernie had a cooler logo, and a snappier slogan.

A little bird even landed on his podium once, like a sign from the universe.

And Bernie lost.

By a lot.

In the end, the only voters who count are the ones that show their enthusiasm by going to the polls.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

114. And to put a finer point on it, voters in Michigan, Wisconsin and Ohio count even more.

Too bad our message of "for and against NAFTA" and "for and against TPP" didn't generate enough enthusiasm where it really mattered.

[NanceGreggs]

136. To put an even finer point on it ...

... too bad people who saw the Outsourcer-in-Chief as the champion of those who had their jobs outsourced.

Stupid is as stupid votes.

And let's just ignore Russian intervention, voter supression, and Comey's pronouncement that HRC was still under investigation as being non influential.

Too bad THOSE things are completely ignored - especially by those who insist that HRC was the "wrong candidate" with the "wrong message", who still managed to win the popular vote.

[VOX]

44. Useless post/thread. For Christ's sake, please stop this. n/t

Last edited Sat Dec 17, 2016, 03:23 AM - Edit history (1)

[Hekate]

46. Hillary filled voting booths. Much as I liked BS, he lost the primary by millions.

Enough of the Hillary bashing. That's ridiculous. She filled voting booths with Democrats young and old, poor and middle class, AND SHE WON THE GE BY THREE MILLION VOTES with a CLEAR and COMPELLING MESSAGE.

Will you please just stop this? Itis inaccurate and is getting very very old.

[Orsino]

47. Excitement isn't everything.

I loved Sanders' agenda, and voted for it, but that doesn't mean I'm sure he would have been a "better" candidate. We don't get to find out the answer to that question, and will probably never agree on measuring sticks.

Clinton, despite the alleged excitement gap, was terrifically popular with more people, and was decades networked into the Democratic machine. She was ready to run it and run it well, even if her ideas were more old-fashioned and less progressive. She was a great candidate, but one with some convenient carrying handles for the wingnut-wranglers in the media.

Modern Dems are always out-shouted. Sanders wasn't as charismatic, and looked like a Larry David impersonation. His quiet socialism had not, over decades, peeled away the support of people of color from the powerful Clinton branding. Yet he was Benghazi-free, and had not signed onto the AUMF. His message had a window of opportunity that we chose not to use in 2016, so whatever unique hope he offered for the next presidency is gone.

People will argue forever about who would have won if this or that hadn't happened, but they're all grinding favorite axes. None of us knows.

[DFW]

49. The Beatles filled stadiums, too

At least they seemed to know that none of them had any business running for Prime Minister.

[Kolesar]

57. Well, when you are bigger than God...

[DFW]

70. Lennon wrote better songs

And he was real. Give him 2000 years, and he would have built up a songlist that would have made the psalms seem like a Mother Goose anthology.

[Kolesar]

145. Paul McCartney had considerable activism on animal rights and climate protection

He would have had more to say to an audience than "free college" and "should have jailed the bankers".
But, alas, he is a royal subject and hence we cannot compare his prospects of running for President.

[Yo_Mama]

50. It's not that Hillary wasn't an exciting candidate, it's that Bernie was speaking to people's hearts

Issues in 2016 to many voters were:

Corporatism - the perception that both top Dems and top Republicans in Congress are paid off by corporate lobbyists and do their bidding. Take just the issue of pharmaceutical prices - this is not a conspiracy theory. Voters are correct about this in many instances. Bernie spoke to the corporate domination of our domestic politics with passion and with considerable truth, and that excited voters. H1B visas and uncontrolled immigration causing low wages are included. Generic medications going up 500, 1000 percent in a few years.

Bad government - links up with corporatism, and this is a terrible worry for the most vulnerable among us.

Too many wars overseas. Americans don't like them; it seems neverending.

PPACA (Obamacare) - it's not that Americans don't think insurance/medical care reform is needed, it's just that PPACA harmed at least as many as it helped, and now that the insurance situation is degenerating in many states, this feeds back into the perception that the corporations are controlling the process. In some areas every policy is a shitty narrow-network one. The deductibles are too high and prevent many from accessing medical care. Insurance companies are among the least-loved corporate entities in our society, and our government has created a situation in which they have a monopoly in many areas with no effective checks or curbs upon their misdeeds.

Basic economic security - protecting the social benefit network. Too many are falling through the cracks.

Voters did not find Hillary nearly as believable on these topics as the "outsiders". Sanders was credible through and through.

[JudyM]

68. ... and speaking to people's hearts is what was exciting. Just look at the faces of people at his

speeches...

[sheshe2]

134. I don't see the images you posted.

Here is Hill



Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton simultaneously comforted a young girl concerned about bullying and subtly hit Donald Trump during a town hall in Keota, Iowa, Tuesday.

At the end of the event, fifth-grader Hannah Tandy asked Clinton what she would do about bullying.

“I have asthma, and occasionally I’ve heard people talking behind my back about not wanting to be near me because I have asthma,” Tandy said. “I mean, people, it’s not contagious.”

Clinton told Tandy she was “very brave” for asking her question, then appeared to reference her own challenges with Republican adversaries like Donald Trump, who the night before had referred to Clinton’s loss to President Barack Obama in 2008 using an especially crude Yiddish slang term. Trump also said the bathroom break that briefly delayed Clinton’s return to the stage during Saturday’s Democratic primary debate was “disgusting.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-donald-trump_us_5679b055e4b06fa6887f0920

__________________________________
You have some links?

[Lil Missy]

52. Bernie filled the stadiums with people who didn't vote. Hillary filled the voting booths. n/t

[Kolesar]

55. Sanders was devoid of substance: free college, should have locked up the bankers, ...

There is about no legacy of his "agenda".

I blame Mrs. Sanders for keeping him in the race when he got to the "beat up Hillary" phase.

[democratisphere]

59. Difficult to be exciting when you are constantly fighting off....

hacking russians, wikileaks, fake news from every direction, email BS, Bengazi BS, a ranting raving psychopath that lies about everything and on and on. Trump would have chewed up Bernie and spit him out. More people voted for Clinton, by a wide margin, than anyone else. Enough said.

[Dream Girl]

62. Bernie mostly "filled stadiums" on college campuses ...he was the cool grandpa

Who promised free college tuition, loan forgiveness, unicorns and rainbows.

[Demsrule86]

65. Much as I liked Bernie Sanders at first

he could not get enough votes to win a primary...he filled stadiums but not the precincts. His wins came in mostly caucus states and after hearing his 'talk' in Wisconsin, it is clear, why he could not appeal to people of color...to take on political correctness which we all know is code for racism...in the era of Trump...not helpful

[tammywammy]

66. Yeah, but filled stadiums didn't translate into more votes for him.

[treestar]

67. Like with Gore I just can't answer

I don't understand the need for the POTUS to be "exciting." It's not a movie, it's a real office.

[JudyM]

69. Spoken like an intellectual. Pity we don't have a country full of them.

[bettyellen]

72. Seriously- this cult of personality shit is killing us. Enough.

[Emilybemily]

71. Enjoy the Trump presidency

Thanks to goddamned third party voters and whiny Berniebros.

[LongtimeAZDem]

84. +1 (nt)

[NCTraveler]

73. Inaccurate analysis in an attempt to stoke division.

More people were enthused to vote for her than Trump. The guy you say filled stadiums got his ass handed to him when it came to the vote.

[guillaumeb]

76. If we are indeed in an era of "outsider politics", why are 98% of incumbents re-elected?

We are in an era of money politics quite similar to the late 19th early 20th centuries.

[mike_c]

81. absolutely spot on....

The butt hurt in these responses notwithstanding.

[ucrdem]

87. She was smart, she worked hard, she was honest and she was flexible.

Add "exceptionally" to each adjective. Did she have Bill's dazzle? No but she had Bill and he campaigned as hard for her as he had for himself in 92. Some of us found that exciting. I heard them both last summer and they were dynamite. I also heard Bernie and my strong impression was that he was selling banana oil to a politically naive crowd that was unlikely to vote period let alone vote for Hill or any other Dem on November 8.

p.s. and Bernie wasn't "in" a stadium, he was by a stadium, in a dinky hall that used room dividers to make it seem like an SRO overflow crowd. Very crafty but unfair to the attendees left standing outside to serve as unwitting props for the six-o'clock news cameras.

[sheshe2]

135. Ouch!

[Cha]

166. Mahalo, ucr!

[Lil Missy]

90. Bernie Lost. Move on with your life. Hillary won the Primary and the General in popular vote.

Join the Democratic Party already. Or not.

[dionysus]

121. Are we supposed to learn from our mistakes, or circle the wagons and pretend they don't exist?

It doesn't benefit us in any way to be in denial about things we did wrong. Yes, some shit was out of our control, bit not all of it.

It's a cold truth that had she excited more than just the base, it may have overcome the shit that she *couldn't* control. What the hell is wrong with admitting this? What is so taboo about analyzing what went wrong, and making improvements where needed? That's just common sense.

Shit is getting silly when recognizing mistakes, any kind of mistake, is viewed as party treason... we must pretend the campaign was perfect...

[hellofromreddit]

128. Agreed.

Shit is getting silly when recognizing mistakes, any kind of mistake, is viewed as party treason... we must pretend the campaign was perfect...

I'm used to it out of the republican party. It's a big disappointment to see that kind of thinking infesting the democrats.

[Lil Missy]

142. She won. It was stolen. End of story.

P.S Bernie would have lost in a landslide.

[dionysus]

144. Well, tell yourself whatever makes you feel good. As far as bernie, he didn't

run in the general election, so speculation is just that. Was that supposed to hurt my feelings?

In other words.. he would have gotten beaten worse than hillary? That's your response to losing? Not looking how to improve the party based on analysizing her failure in certain aspects of her campaign, and adjusting accordingly, but... insisting that her primary opponent... would have lost... worse?

Posts like that basically reduce yourselves to acting like little kids throwing a tantrum.

[Lil Missy]

147. and yours amount to "concern trolling".

[dionysus]

149. Yes, i am concerned your wing of the party might cause consecutive losses, the way shit is going!

You can't do anything to improve our showing, because you refuse to admit anything was done poorly, and insist our campaign was perfectly run.

Instead of looking to see what can be done differently so we don't repeat this loss, you cycle the blame around between the media, the gop, and her primary opponent. Instead of taking good ideas from her primary opponent and supporters, you denigrate them and some folks are now talking about being an even less inclusive party, and writing off entire voting blocs!

It's like blindly lashing out in grief and anger and blaming every damn person and thing around you EXCEPT THE CADIDATE WHO LOST TO AN EMPTY TOUPEE!

You don't own the democratic party, so don't call my interest in seeing us improve so we don't lose to fucking trump twice "concern trolling".



Btw, what year was the first election you voted in? I've voted for democratic candidates every election for the last 20 years, as long as i have been old enough to vote. I'll not have you attempt to dictate what democrats should and shouldn't say or think regarding this election loss!

How about you guys pull it together and help the party recover and move forward, dammit!

[totodeinhere]

164. President Obama said at his recent press conference that there is no evidence that the actual vote

was compromised.

Obama stuck to the script, and said Russia "in fact" had "hacked into the DNC," but that the actual voting process was not compromised. The White House was just trying to "let people know" what was going on, and the media interpreted the reasons.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-16/obama-blames-russia-hacking-slams-domestic-propagandists-rise-fake-news

So if Obama is correct then it comes down to whether or not Russian hacking into the DNC and John Podesta's email is tantamount to "stealing" the election or just meddling in the election.

Historians are going to be discussing this and debating this for years to come.

[formerGreenParty]

96. didn't like Hillary but still voted for her

Also know people who just didn't vote after Bernie. I think Bernie would have beaten Trump handily. Every democrat I speak to thinks the same. I live in a very blue state and don't know anyone who actually wanted Hillary as the candidate. I know there were actual Hillary supporters, but none of the progressives I am friendly with had any positive feelings towards her other than hoping she'd beat Trump.

[dionysus]

105. She wasn't that bad.. she did generate a lot of excitement.. but among the hardcore base. But she

didn't geneeate the excitement where it was needed: the young, forst time voters and fence sitters and independants, who were swayed by the media, bullshit stories, and a lackluster candidate...

[Charles Bukowski]

113. I hope they're excited about the massive shit sandwich

Last edited Sun Dec 18, 2016, 08:27 PM - Edit history (1)

Trump's about to feed them.

They asked for it.

[dionysus]

120. Sometimes i believe that as a country, we collectively deserve what we ask for...

Sucks for those who voted wisely, however.

[andym]

116. Enthusiasm helps, but look at the two George Bush's for examples of candidates who won

without strong enthusiasm. I believe George McGovern generated a lot of enthusiasm, especially among the young, but didn't do well at all.

Of course, excitement helps, but it is but one component. Trump generated a lot of excitement, yet really did not do well-- he lucked out in the election really, only because Hillary's popularity was as low as his.

[Historic NY]

123. So your opinion is large crowds votes.....

how come Clinton edged Sanders in total vote in the primaries, then?

[DonCoquixote]

124. thank you

I hate to say it, but I did not expect this post coming from you. Pleasant surprise, no sarcasm at all.

[crazycatlady]

125. Without rehashing the primary

One of the things a presidential candidate needs to win is charisma. Hillary just did not have it. She tried, but I believe it is not a trait that can be learned. Bill does, President Obama does, The Donald does. Past losers who lack charisma are Mitt Romney and John Kerry.

[brooklynite]

126. Bernie filled stadiums, Hillary got more votes. Trump filled stadiums, Hillary got more votes.

[TCJ70]

150. Trump won. Maybe we should have gone with the guy who filled stadiums...n/t

[brooklynite]

151. Do you want imagine Trump had no oppo to use against Sanders?

[TCJ70]

153. Did I say that? n/t

[underthematrix]

127. When one party rigs an election, it's really not a win.

It's called a coup and there are no peaceful means to toppling a dictator who will control all 3 branches of govt on Jan 20, 2017 at 12:01pm

[pnwmom]

131. Utter GARBAGE. Hillary drew virtually the same number of votes as Obama 2012

and almost 2.9 million more than Trump -- despite the millions of votes lost to suppression.

Filling stadiums isn't a good measure of anything except how much time the attendees have on their hands, and how much tolerance they have for yelling and screaming.

[think]

152. The DNC had 4 of it's top members resign including the chair person. What was that about?

[LiberalFighter]

157. Wow!

If Sanders would had done better than he should had won the primary phase. But he didn't. His message was not clear and compelling.

Sanders did not bring millions into the party. If he had, where the hell were they?

[lunamagica]

159. If he was so exciting, why didn't he excite people to vote?

His rallies were near college campuses. the kids thought it was a fun and free thing to do. Why didn't he excite them all the way to the polls?

Why was dull, unexciting Hillary able o motivate four more million voters that Sanders?

Face it, he never came even close to sealing the deal. He stayed on way after he had any chance, and he knew it.

[Kentonio]

169. Let's also not forget the huge numbers of new supporters

Who flocked to the party in the wave of enthusiasm for Bernie, and were then told they couldn't actually vote for him because of party rules saying they had to have registered many months earlier.

[baldguy]

170. Seems excitement won out over actual ability & competence.

The next 4 years will certainly be "exciting".

[otohara]

171. As An Older Voter - Bullshit

my days of large rallies ended in 2008.

- saw Obama with 100,000 other people but that was 8 years ago and I got older.
This ageism divide due to Sanders is nauseating. He pitted old vs young, white vs black, Hispanic vs white...parents vs their kids.

[realmirage]

175. Lots of truth here.