https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/po ... ns-defeat/
This article basically summarizes that Hillary is responsible for her own actions, not someone else. What this article does not do is attempt to estimate how many voters changed their votes against Hillary when Comey announced last week that the e-mail investigation was going to open back up. I'm not sure we'll ever really know, and this will be one of the debates going forward. Personally I don't think it did much to change votes.
WaPo: The Comey argument
Re: WaPo: The Comey argument
I agree that there were not many people who changed their votes this late in the game. The bigger question is how many voters just didn't show up because of their disgust with both of the major party candidates? I still find it a little disheartening that voter turnout was only around 50% in such a significant election.
Re: WaPo: The Comey argument
Is that true?? I hadn't seen numbers but I thought it was higher than at least 2012...and maybe 2008. Was that not the case?
Re: WaPo: The Comey argument
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pl ... t-plunged/
Voter turnout declined from 2012, which was also a decline from 2008. The actual number was 56% according to this article.
Voter turnout declined from 2012, which was also a decline from 2008. The actual number was 56% according to this article.
Re: WaPo: The Comey argument
So many people don't care.
Re: WaPo: The Comey argument
Or don't think that either their vote or the results matter.Adam wrote:So many people don't care.
Re: WaPo: The Comey argument
I know one person...The bigger question is how many voters just didn't show up because of their disgust with both of the major party candidates?
This was a disaster. The Democrats forced only one option which I take offence to. A democracy isn't supposed to appoint the options without votes. Trump ran on being against political corruption, and his only opponent was appointed in a corrupt manner.
Forget the emails and everything else. Trump on the other hand, said a lot of good stuff like "Make America Great Again" hard to argue with that, but then the way he made fun of the reporter that was handicapped, that was a defining moment where I said "I can't go and vote for this as the public face of the country". I would have been more likely to give this a pass if it was a joke that got leaked, but this was part of the public campaign.
-
dochielomn
- Posts: 216
- Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 9:16 am
Re: WaPo: The Comey argument
I think the Comey thing did hurt Hilary to an extent. However, the more I read/hear things about Hilary/The Clintons, the more corruption I'm discovering and even if half of what is being said is slightly true, then Hilary should not have gotten in office. To me, I just had a lot of issues with Hilary. Not because she's a woman, but because of the actual person she is and what's she done. The classified server thing with emails, I can understand to an extent. But when you get caught, don't lie to me and tell me that you didn't know what a "C" on a document means. You're a former Senator and Secretary of State, if you don't know what a "C" means, then to me, you're automatically disqualified.
As for Trump, I think Dave Chappelle (on SNL) or someone else make a joke about how if you're a 70yr old with no relevant experience, you're not even getting a job at Walmart or Target. Plus, you factor in outrageous things that he said about closing borders, deportation, building a wall, things that he's said and done to women, and telling Hilary that if he got elected one of the first things he's going to try to go is put her in jail (which I wouldn't mind but I mean, really, you publicly declared that), I mean, I couldn't in good conscience say "yes, I want him to be in charge". So, my protest was to not vote (not that my vote in either RI or NY would have mattered because Hilary easily carried both states). However, part of me also wonders if Trump was just saying things to get elected and didn't actually mean it.
Hilary losing was a combination of things. The Comey thing that late in the game couldn't have helped her. I don't think it swayed any voters but perhaps it made a few more people come out and vote against her. But, when you factor in the corruption that occurred within the DNC, her representing the "establishment", and not really doing a good job at spreading what her message was (I mean, it seemed her message was more about "really, you're going to vote for Trump over me?"), it was just a poor job on all parts. Plus, I'm sure there was some sexism involved with people just saying that they wouldn't vote for her based on her gender. And perhaps some of that offset the female vote that only voted for her because she's a woman.
Overall, this was just a messed up election. But the message has to be about hope and relying on the fact that even with a republican congress, that any extreme measures by Trump would have to go through congress.
As for Trump, I think Dave Chappelle (on SNL) or someone else make a joke about how if you're a 70yr old with no relevant experience, you're not even getting a job at Walmart or Target. Plus, you factor in outrageous things that he said about closing borders, deportation, building a wall, things that he's said and done to women, and telling Hilary that if he got elected one of the first things he's going to try to go is put her in jail (which I wouldn't mind but I mean, really, you publicly declared that), I mean, I couldn't in good conscience say "yes, I want him to be in charge". So, my protest was to not vote (not that my vote in either RI or NY would have mattered because Hilary easily carried both states). However, part of me also wonders if Trump was just saying things to get elected and didn't actually mean it.
Hilary losing was a combination of things. The Comey thing that late in the game couldn't have helped her. I don't think it swayed any voters but perhaps it made a few more people come out and vote against her. But, when you factor in the corruption that occurred within the DNC, her representing the "establishment", and not really doing a good job at spreading what her message was (I mean, it seemed her message was more about "really, you're going to vote for Trump over me?"), it was just a poor job on all parts. Plus, I'm sure there was some sexism involved with people just saying that they wouldn't vote for her based on her gender. And perhaps some of that offset the female vote that only voted for her because she's a woman.
Overall, this was just a messed up election. But the message has to be about hope and relying on the fact that even with a republican congress, that any extreme measures by Trump would have to go through congress.
Re: WaPo: The Comey argument
Well said. I wasn't a fan of Hillary being seen as the inevitable candidate by the DNC from day one. Both she and Trump were historically bad candidates (and people) on so many levels that most of the country would have preferred a third Obama term. Hillary failed to generate enthusiasm among her base and this was ultimately what lost her the election (although she did win the popular vote). This chart more clearly articulates what happened this year. While republicans showed up at roughly the same level they have been since 2004, democrats failed to show up, compared with the levels of turnout during the Obama years.
The one thing that I was hoping would happen this year is that the Republican party would be forced to reexamine their platform after Trump crashed and burned, and in doing so they would pivot to a more libertarian platform. Instead, Trump's victory cemented their alliance with low income rural whites who think protectionism and walling ourselves off from the world is the answer (a group that used to lean democratic). Now it appears as though the Democratic Party will be the one searching for answers and a new platform, though it seems highly unlikely that they would pivot in a Libertarian direction.
The one thing that I was hoping would happen this year is that the Republican party would be forced to reexamine their platform after Trump crashed and burned, and in doing so they would pivot to a more libertarian platform. Instead, Trump's victory cemented their alliance with low income rural whites who think protectionism and walling ourselves off from the world is the answer (a group that used to lean democratic). Now it appears as though the Democratic Party will be the one searching for answers and a new platform, though it seems highly unlikely that they would pivot in a Libertarian direction.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Re: WaPo: The Comey argument
I wouldn't mind if the Republicans seized this opportunity to become more moderate and reject this back and forth extreme that has defined modern politics. So far with very little data, Trump seems to be on this path. For example, deportation of all illegal immigrants? No, looking at criminal record which is at least more reasonable. The wall thing is going to amount to far less than his campaign suggested. Keeping the pieces of Obamacare that work and are popular. He was quoted as saying he doesn't have an issue with gay marriage. And this pattern will continue - but it depends on how congress goes along.