The 119th United States Congress

[Tiger337]

10 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Here to remind people that over three million more people voted for Hillary for president than for Trump.

She ran a bad campaign  She didn't campaign hard enough in some swing states and lost them.  I really hope there are some new candidates with pulses next time.  

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, Motown Bombers said:

How much resources did the party put into Biden vs the other candidates? Put a number on it because Biden was broke heading into South Carolina and closing offices. Elizabeth Warren's people were even bringing coffins to his campaign. 

Yeah - it's not accurate to say the the party ever anointed Biden. He did take it by winning the votes, not the party pols.

You can argue Hillary was a different story - the SuperDelegate setup was going to make it hard for anyone else even if she hadn't finally outrun Bernie in the primaries. To say she wasn't an inside choice because she won the primaries when no-one other than an outsider like Bernie was willing to run against her also misses the reality.

And in 2024 was just a total screw up looked at in term of nominating process.

Edited Sunday at 08:05 PM by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

15 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

She ran a bad campaign  She didn't campaign hard enough in some swing states and lost them.  I really hope there are some new candidates with pulses next time.  

What was horrible was not Hillary as a candidate. What was horrible is a system that allows the guys with the second most votes to win the election.

I know, that idea is already baked in and Hillary should have campaigned around it. But if the kind of hindsight that allows us the luxury of clubbing Hillary nine years after the fact truly is 20/20, then it behooves us to remember what the election looked like it was going to be just a couple days prior to Election Day 2016:

Point being, all the way up to Election Day itself, it looked like everything was going her way, and everybody was surprised and shocked by the outcome. So please let's not pretend as though we could all see it coming throughout the entire campaign. Nobody did. Not even the Trump people. Remember?

[Motown Bombers]

9 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Yeah - it's not accurate to say the the party ever anointed Biden. He did take it by winning the votes, not the party pols.

You can argue Hillary was a different story - the SuperDelegate setup was going to make it hard for anyone else even if she hadn't finally outrun Bernie in the primaries. To say she wasn't an inside choice because she won the primaries when no-one other than an outsider like Bernie was willing to run against her also misses the reality.

And in 2024 was just a total screw up looked at in term of nominating process.

Martin O'Malley ran in the 2016 primary and was at one time considered a serious contender.

"Finally outrun Bernie" by leading Sanders from the beginning. He simply wouldn't go away. By the way, Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat. He makes that clear. He is only a Democrat when he wants to be president. He then loses, says it's rigged, and promptly leaves the party. 

[gehringer_2]

1 minute ago, chasfh said:

What was horrible was not Hillary as a candidate. What was horrible is a system that allows the guys with the second most votes to win the election.

I know, that idea is already baked in and Hillary should have campaigned around it. But if the kind of hindsight that allows us the luxury of clubbing Hillary nine years after the fact truly is 20/20, then it behooves us to remember what the election looked like it was going to be just a couple days prior to Election Day 2016:

Point being, all the way up to Election Day itself, it looked like everything was going her way, and everybody was surprised and shocked by the outcome. So please let's not pretend as though we could all see it coming throughout the entire campaign. Nobody did. Not even the Trump people. Remember?

what difference does it make that people didn't see it coming? In the end Trump still won the votes  he needed and she didn't.

[gehringer_2]

19 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

He simply wouldn't go away

I think the campaign finance rules must make campaigning for the sake of campaigning too attractive.

[chasfh]

52 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

what difference does it make that people didn't see it coming? In the end Trump still won the votes  he needed and she didn't.

Yes, that's true in and of itself, and of course I can't reasonably not agree with that. And necessary hard lessons were definitely learned, or at least beginning to be learned. But that assessment also works against the cathartic slathering on of blame onto Hillary that she was obviously—obviously!—a horrible candidate. That's one of the best examples of convenient 20/20 hindsight I can muster, and that's not a slam on anyone in particular, because there's no one person alone in doing this. A lot of people, perhaps most posters here, have been engaging in the very same thing ever since, and it has never set right with me, because I can't recall any of those same posters sounding any alarm bells in 2016 about the obvious! Trump victory that was going to happen.

[Kacie]

There's also that little election interference thing.  

[CMRivdogs]

How many others on both sides of the aisle have done this. They need the Martha Stewart treatment and banned from holding office and voting again

 

[chasfh]

It's all legal, so what's the ****ing problem? 😶