@abe182 That question will be studied for a long time. A few things come to mind: Voter turn out in the 2016 election was 55%. 45% of the voters just didn't bother to vote. Also,Russian trolls flooded the internet with anti-Hillary Clinton conspiracy theories, Pizzagate, etc. Numbers of Americans were so uneducated and gullible, they believed even the most preposterous conspiracy stories.
@abe182 Like I said to my friends after the election: ABC... always be closing. Trump could close, Clinton could not. It's really that simple. An election is no different than buying anything else. Somebody will pitch and close-- or not.
I don't think there's any single reason Trump won. Clinton's pitch was horrible and her product sucked. At least Trump had a promise of a better product. Another election by elimination? That's how I see it.
@abe182 It's one thing to argue *now* that Trump's product is better in different ways. But running up to 2016-- I didn't see his product as being attractive at all. I think all in all, his pitch is his strength.
I’ve said this on previous threads. He ran against a candidate who was anointed who had “at least I’m not him” and “it’s my turn” as the cornerstones of her campaign. Any Republican would have won in 2016 against an opponent who wasn’t battle tested and had the nomination gift wrapped and handed to them like she did. One thing I actually agree with Trump on is that the DNC process was rigged. They even awarded her delegates in Iowa at the caucuses based on f’n coin flips. Everything they did from superdelegates to burying their televised debates on Saturday nights only worked to dampen their voters’ enthusiasm and tamp down turnout. On the flip side, he emerged from a highly contested primary process and was battle tested. On top of that, his team had a very clear electoral strategy in key midwestern states, which she took for granted. The Russians may have helped him with their chicanery, but surely the Russians didn’t prevent her from spending time in Wisconsin. She and the DNC earned that defeat.
@abe182 I actually said nothing positive about Clinton or Obama. One can evaluate the products without comparing them to other products. Trump's platform, on it's own merits, was weak for a liberal free-market economist & social and religious conservative.
@SW-User do you think the dems will learn from it?
SW-User
It seems like they already have and possibly to a fault. They seem so focused on leveling their own playing field that they’re allowing too many people who have absolutely zero chance (Yang and Williamson for starters) to take away valuable face time and air time from their candidates who do have a shot. The GOP had a similar dilemma in 2015-2016, but I think their solution was much more appropriate with those kid table debates on the same night but not in prime time. Those debates were more like undercards at a boxing event and didn’t suck any oxygen from the front runners, who were all on stage at the same time in every debate. I don’t think the format that Democrats are using is doing them any favors. @abe182
I’m not sure what you’re talking about. Abe asked questions about how Trump won, and I minced no words about how I believe Democrats rigged the process in 2016. Then he asked a follow up about whether I thought the Democrats learned anything from 2016, and I was critical of their current debate format. I’m not sure where you’ve gotten the impression that there was any whining involved. I call balls and strikes as I see them.
@SW-User I'm still floored by the amateur mix of the primary
SW-User
Ok. That makes more sense. I couldn’t figure out what you were talking about. 😆 @jackjjackson
SW-User
The party challenging the incumbent party will always start with a clown car full of candidates. I just think Republicans handled their 2016 clown car so much better than Democrats are handling their 2020 clown car. They should relegate their B-team (especially Yang’s $1000 a month solution for everything and Williamson’s win-with-love tangents) to an earlier debate that’s tucked out of the way while forcing all their front runners on the same stage at the same time. The only possible explanation for that asinine format is that they’re twisting themselves like pretzels to avoid anything that might appear as a coronation similar to the sham they ran in 2016. @abe182
