2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary Clinton’s No Good, (Record-Breaking, Poll-Winning), Very Bad Week
If you believe the mood and headlines from some of the press, its been a pretty rough week for Hillary Clinton. While there was widespread and substantive coverage of the rollout of her economic agenda, politically, its a different story. One poll showed so much trouble for Hillary that she only had a higher favorability number than any other candidate it tested.
Even worse, multiple polls released this week show that she leads every candidate running in head-to-head matchups. While it is widely known that the growing Hispanic electorate is critical in deciding the election, new polling shows that Hillary Clinton has a disastrous 68 percent approval rating among Hispanic voters and only leads her closest Republican competition (Bush) by 37 points, 64% to 27%.
Not only that, she raised a record amount of primary money for a candidate in their first quarter, with only $8 million (a sum larger than most Republican campaigns raised in total) in donations of less than $200. Hillary also spent too much money building her organization and was only left with more cash on hand than any other campaign raised and more in the bank than the top three Republican campaigns combined.
Its true. Hillary is left in the terrible position of having the most resources of any candidate and being voters top choice to be the next President of the United States.
https://medium.com/@jmpalmieri/hillary-clinton-s-no-good-record-breaking-poll-winning-very-bad-week-8b982ddf7471
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Her bad weeks are most Americans incredible weeks IF they ever get that.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Kurovski
(34,655 posts)stinky link
SunSeeker
(51,771 posts)For some reason--I think it is a hyperlink software issue caused by the @ in the link--the hyperlink stops at medium.com.
Here's the full link:
https://medium.com/@jmpalmieri/hillary-clinton-s-no-good-record-breaking-poll-winning-very-bad-week-8b982ddf7471
Kurovski
(34,655 posts)by dint of posting on a friend's computer and a physical issue.
Just checking.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)I've heard from reliable sources that only the 1%ers are donating. Hummmmmmmm
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Gamecock Lefty
(700 posts)To RAISE HILL in 2016!
uwep
(108 posts)It is about time, after all the denigrating posts. I am happy to see that there are some Hillary supporters on DU.
murielm99
(30,779 posts)Some are staying out of the petty fighting. Others are on enforced vacations due to mass alerts. Speak up for Hillary and you get swarmed.
Please come to the Hillary Clinton room. And defend her in other places, where necessary.
London Lover Man
(371 posts)We Bernie supporters don't like Clinton's positions and platform, but we like her personally.
LuvLoogie
(7,062 posts)Hillary has battlescars and a long game. Read her commencement speech fom Wellesley 1969.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-rodhams-1969-commencement-address/
DownriverDem
(6,232 posts)I want the first woman president to be Hillary. Millions of women and enlightened men want the same thing.
London Lover Man
(371 posts)And many enlightened men and women knows it, and they prefer Bernie.
Cha
(297,888 posts)spreading that misinformation on positive Hillary threads.
NanceGreggs
(27,820 posts)... post desperate things - usually in the form of cliches that get trotted out on a daily basis.
Hillary is bought and paid for by the corporatists and banksters. She is too close to Wall Street, represents the status quo, and has never accomplished anything other than having been married to a president. Her popularity is based solely on name recognition and nothing more. She gets paid for making speeches, which no else has ever done.
She is part of the oligarchy, and a water-carrier for the 1%. In addition, she is a DINO and/or Republican-lite. Any endorsements she gets are the result of nefarious conspiracies, are from people terrified of the Clinton-machine that will ruin them, or are simply unimportant because she was the one who got them. And any endorsements from congressmen/women are status quo endorsements.
Hillarys poll numbers are meaningless, and despite being way ahead in those polls, she can never win the general election. She has too much baggage, and no one trusts her. All of her campaign donations are from Big Banks and her Wall Street buddies, because regular citizens hate her.
Same old/same old. You can't even give her detractors points for creativity - they just keep recycling the same old tired cliches.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Cha
(297,888 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)You are obvious.
Walk away
(9,494 posts)calimary
(81,557 posts)Glad you're here. Fascinating, isn't it? You'd think she was the worst thing on earth since the Bubonic Plague if you read a lot of the stuff around here. Well, she's not. The pragmatists and more realistic among us understand that change does NOT come with some magic candidate, OR overnight. And we've watched her and taken note of her long time in public service and as a silent partner to her husband during HIS long time in public service. We've recognized her lifetime's work on behalf of women and children here, there, and EVERYWHERE. And her efforts, even though not successful, to try to do something about the health care crisis back during the 90s.
Gotta say, too, that I have been able to shut people up on that one. People who harangued about Hillary this and Hillary that and yeah, her health care panel was for shit and her efforts were for shit and this was wrong and that was wrong and everything was bad-and-wrong and wrad-and-bong and blah-blah-blah. And all I had to say was - "hey, at least SOMEBODY rolled up their sleeves and got in there and TRIED to get something done about it. At least she got in there and tried. At least she jumped into the shark tank and tried, criticism and endless fault-finding be damned. And btw, what, pray tell, did YOU do about it, back then? Sit back in the peanut gallery and snipe, too?" Response? SILENCE.
That one has shut people up like nobody's business. Even the Hillary-haters I know. They've got no comeback for that.
Cha
(297,888 posts)the opposition likes to repeat ad nauseum.
Historic NY
(37,457 posts)DownriverDem
(6,232 posts)I will proudly cast my primary vote for Hillary. If Bernie wins the nomination I will proudly vote for him in Nov. 2016. I hope Bernie supporters here will do the same thing if Hillary wins.
calimary
(81,557 posts)Good to have you with us! VERY contentious around here and sometimes we Hillary people (who are in the minority here) dare to stick our necks out and then get our heads chopped off. Be STRONG my friend! We're here, and we have your back! I agree with you completely and I'm voting for her in the primaries. But if Bernie winds up getting the nomination, then I'll vote for him. Unfortunately, there are more than a few in his camp who insist they'll do no such thing.
But then again, many are those who would cut off their own noses to spite everyone else's faces.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)O'Malley is too bland and their isn't anything "unique" about him. There is, but not for the media. He is a wonk. Sanders has played up the "us against the world" meme and it has caught fire with a certain segment. They are invested in pushing up Sanders numbers. The media is not in the bag for him. They just need to provide him cover, often by negative stories on Hillary and positive fluff on Sanders, in order to at least make a race. It is unfortunate they have so much influence. It truly hurts the most qualified person running for President. O'Malley.
A bad week for Hillary would be one of the best years of my life according to her opposition.
Walk away
(9,494 posts)MSNBC and CNN are both interviewing groups that are trying to get Biden into the race. It's a pretty sure sign that Sanders is just not gaining support fast enough to even nip at Hillary's heels. The folks at PoliticsNation were practically salivating at Biden's 30% poll numbers if only he would jump in. I don't see it happening but they are desperate for the ratings that a race will generate.
p.s. I believe that Martin O'Malley is a tragically overlooked contender. It really is a shame because his experience and ideas are completely ignored by the press and deserve to be heard by the American people.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)to BS or higher. Will see.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)sufrommich
(22,871 posts)mean he had a full blown obsession with it. I made the mistake of pulling it off the shelf for a bedtime story one night and saying "lets see what this Alexander kid is up to" ,he was 4 at the time,I swear he was 5 before he got tired of it. I still tremble at the sight of that book. But,yeah,he was a cute little brat.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)to groups of kids in a school library, again and again and again, and never got tired of it.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)He graduated to Where The Sidewalk Ends,which will forever be my favorite book to foist on kids.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)in my middle school classroom today:
If you are a dreamer, come in,
If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar,
A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer...
If you're a pretender come sit by my fire
For we have some flax-golden tales to spin.
Come in!
Come in!
SunSeeker
(51,771 posts)AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Originally from Robert Reich's blog.
This is a big mistake.
Its a mistake politically because people who believe Hillary Clinton is still too close to Wall Street will not be reassured by her position on Glass-Steagall. Many will recall that her husband led the way to repealing Glass Steagall in 1999 at the request of the big Wall Street banks.
Its a big mistake economically because the repeal of Glass-Steagall led directly to the 2008 Wall Street crash, and without it were in danger of another one.
more at http://billmoyers.com/2015/07/16/hillary-clintons-mistake-on-glass-steagall/
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Unfortunately for them there is no real competition for the one decent horse in this race.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)....just not seeing it
riversedge
(70,383 posts)this afternoon I turned on talk radio for a bit. yes, was hannity shooting his vile mouth off. nothing but Right wing hate radio in this area--besides I do tune in a bit once a week to see what the enemy is chatting about.
Anyway. he was giving an overview of his upcoming hour and said it was a bad week for Hillary claiming one poll had her favoribility down to 32. my ears perked up cause I had seen this weeks polls and I did not recall anything about that. then he ragged on about Obama and his refusal to say the words radical Islam etc etc etc. I turned it off then.
I did check once I got home to see if a new poll was out. That lying sack of pig poop.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)with threads by the dozens making it to the GD.
riversedge
(70,383 posts)at times. I skim the subject line quickly and pass them by.
Number23
(24,544 posts)someone who is fairly lukewarm on Hillary and would be happy with any of the candidates, then as a Hillary supporter it has to be either side-splitting or maddening as hell.
On DU, we are constantly regaled with how Sanders is "surging" because he's now only losing by 20 or 30 points.
How in polls conducted by Latin media, he's losing to Hillary something like 8-1 but he got more "applause" from the 400 folks at La Raza that went to see him than Hillary got from the 2000 that went to see her and that these somehow balance each other out.
That Hillary's numbers and support are "slipping" because she was LEADING in some state or among some constituency by 57% and it's now dropped to 52%.
And I just read the Grand Puba of stupidity, the one to top them all. That when someone asked about the fact that Sanders has not gotten a single congressional endorsement, someone actually replied that this was actually a "good" thing because Bernie represents the "will of the people" and doesn't need Congress. If a 2nd grader said something that bleeding stupid, you'd just smile and nod. What do you say when somebody who's probably older than you says something that dumb? That ignorant of how American politics works?
So whenever I see the "Hillary is slipping!!11" either from the media or DU, and the article shows how she's dropped from whipping somebody's ass by 42% to only 36%, I just laugh. What else can you do?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,718 posts)24-1 to be precise and 36-1 among African Americans.
Number23
(24,544 posts)But it's bad every which way that you look at it.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,718 posts)i only report it for your benefit.
Number23
(24,544 posts)73 percent said they would vote for Clinton. No other challenger breaks double digits.
Even if Sanders got 9 percent, Hillary's 73 percent would still be about 8-1. Where are you seeing 24-1?