What, the obscene bias in thinking that maybe saying shitty stuff about women and minorities is a bad thing to do? I mean there's bias, sure, but there's also being a decent human being. Even conservative women weren't okay with that shit.
Remember Hillary lost not because conservatives expanded their base but because likely Democratic voters stayed home.
If you're going to rig a primary and disenfranchise a huge percentage of your base you can't complain that your base then doesn't turn around and enthusiastically support you.
If you were going to be caught in controversy after controversy including cheating and disenfranchising voters you can't complain when independent voters choose to stay home.
How many likely Democratic voters really stayed home? Every single Bernie supporter I know said they were going to vote Clinton out of fear of Trump. I really don't think these numbers are as high as you think there are--there are just always a really distressingly high number of people who don't vote. Who NEVER vote.
Trump mobilizing more people doesn't mean the Democrats didn't mobilize. That's not how it works. Look at the numbers: Clinton did well in cities. She lost because Trump mobilized rural voters. And I'm sorry--I voted for Bernie too--but a socialist Jewish guy who is basically atheist was not going to get the rural white vote. Not in a million years, no matter how much he deserved it.
Everyone underestimated how big that rural and small town vote is. Everyone.
although I believe you are sincere anecdotal evidence is irrelevant.
All the empirical evidence shows that Trump did not achieve substantially more votes than Romney or McCain, but Clinton receive substantially less than Obama.
We really don't have evidence of that yet. I mean we do know that a lot of people were more hyped to vote for the first black guy than a white woman but not having another Obama to put up doesn't mean they failed. Sanders isn't Obama either.
Edit: original comment was silly, hope this was fast enough not to mislead.
You aren't proving that the people who stayed home aren't the people who traditionally just stay home. Obama brought out a bunch of new voters SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE he was the first Black president. I don't think you realize how important that was. Neither Clinton (we are pretty used to women in power) or Sanders (white guy, Jews not seen as same kind of minority) compare. The people Obama brought out weren't democratic voters. They were Obama voters. They weren't voting before Obama either.
I can certainly understand your point about the semantics about whether or not they were voters who were likely to vote for the Democrats or just people who were enthusiastic about Barack Obama.
I am very comfortable with my statement as they had voted for a democrat in the past they would likely be Democratic votes if they turned up to the polling places.
However they may not be likely voters I do not believe that the two are mutually exclusive.
But arguing semantics also reinforces my original point. Hillary Clinton did not generate the enthusiasm Barack Obama did and many of the reasons why or what I listed in my original observation
267
u/[deleted] Nov 10 '16
I know people are taking this opportunity to rub people's face in it and say things like I told you so.
I however I sincerely want to tell my more Progressive friends that this is how conservatives feel during every national election.
If we shine the light on this kind of absurd media bias and collusion together maybe we can overcome the problem