Hillary was unlikeable because she was a woman who wasn't submissive. Sexist people hate that. Everyone who ever met her loves her. The only unlikable thing is her unwillingness to take bullshit. Hillary was in-line to win by a landslide "unlikeable" or not. It took the media buying into a lie and Comey making misleading statements about her being under investigation (with no actual crimes suspected) a week before the election for Trump to win by the tightest margin ever.
The DNC is the party who notoriously dropkicks people on the merest whiff of impropriety. And here we had a fabricated criminal controversy. We played right into Trump's hands.
...just food for thought. Ever notice how we Americans seem to remember VIRTUALLY EVERY Democratic presidential candidate in a bad light over some sort non-substantial reason or another like "unlikeable" or "tried too hard" or "claimed to invent the internet" or "was a douchebag"? Ever notice how older Democrats still somehow remember RONALD FUCKING REAGAN as the best president of their lives?
The Republicans bought the propaganda machine when Nixon lost. It's all a goddamn lie.
Hillary was unlikeable because she was a woman who wasn't submissive. Sexist people hate that. Everyone who ever met her loves her.
I mean, that's just validating her own reasoning on why she lost the election. She didn't win because she was arrogant, and decided she didn't have to campaign in Michigan.
People also didn't like the fact that she and the DNC colluded together to torpedo Sander's primary at any given chance.
I personally don't like her because of what the Clinton's have done to the DNC over the last 2 decades, particularly their championing of 3rd way politics.
Offhandedly blaming every valid criticism as Republican propaganda does nothing but drive people away. Hillary Clinton was obviously a bad candidate, this is self evident in the fact that she lost to a conman.
It's not the job of the DNC to blame voters for not voting for their chosen candidate, it's their job to give us candidates that we want to vote for.
People also didn’t like the fact that she and the DNC colluded together to torpedo Sander’s primary at any given chance
And she didn't. People keep repeating this, but it's not a fact. The DNC started transitioning over to Hillary after Bernie already had statistically ZERO chance but before he formally resigned. A bunch of people (including Bernie) got pissed about that, but not only is it not unheard-of, it's downright sensible when Bernie wasn't even planning to run on the Democratic ticket no matter what happened.
As I keep saying elsewhere. It's really weird that everyone seems to hate Democrats who run for president more than Republicans who run for President, but for reasons they can never quite pin down to anything related to facts.
I personally don’t like her because of what the Clinton’s have done to the DNC over the last 2 decades, particularly their championing of 3rd way politics.
Bill was a moderate. Yeah, I know. Hillary was further to the left than her husband. Should we have given Trump the 2016 presidency because Hillary was married to a moderate?
Offhandedly blaming every valid criticism as Republican propaganda does nothing but drive people away
"Offhandedly blaming 9/11 on the Taliban does nothing but drive people away". There's no question 2016 was Republican propaganda and Hillary. I ABSOLUTELY have valid criticisms about the Democratic party. But that doesn't mean every stupid criticism should be taken as valid. The Republicans have gotten REALLY good at the propaganda game.
Hillary Clinton was obviously a bad candidate, this is self evident in the fact that she lost to a conman.
As "unpopular" as Hillary was, she was sladed to crush her by historic margins before you account for the Russian hacking scandal. You can disagree with me on that all you want, but if you DON'T get oppositionally defiant on that fact, then you can make no negative statements about her in good faith out of the 2016 election results.
It’s not the job of the DNC to blame voters for not voting for their chosen candidate, it’s their job to give us candidates that we want to vote for
Normally I would agree with you. 2016 was different. If Charles Manson ran for President and won, it's the voters faults. NOBODY who did the least bit of research wasn't shitting their pants on election day 2016.
"Sleep now in the fire." And because we can't fucking learn our lessons and we STILL blame the perfectly viable Hillary Clinton, we are indeed sleeping in the fire that Zack de la Rocha warned us about.
she didn't. People keep repeating this, but it's not a fact. The DNC started transitioning over to Hillary after Bernie already had statistically ZERO chance
really weird that everyone seems to hate Democrats who run for president more than Republicans who run for President, but for reasons they can never quite pin down to anything related to facts.
Lol, just because I criticize Democrats doesn't mean I don't criticize Republicans. It doesn't come up as much because it's a given that Republicans are going to be awful people.
Also, it's not that people don't provide facts, it's just that you ignore them when presented. I noticed you didn't confront the Idiocracy of her not campaigning in Michigan.....
Yeah, I know. Hillary was further to the left than her husband.
Lol, Hilary was just as much of a moderate as bill Clinton, they literally developed American 3rd way politics together.
Should we have given Trump the 2016 presidency because Hillary was married to a moderate?
Lol, what a pointless strawman argument.... Hillary Clinton has her own political career we can judge her upon. Plus, this is moot as Clinton already "gave" trump the Whitehouse by not campaigning in Michigan.
"Offhandedly blaming 9/11 on the Taliban does nothing but drive people away".
Lol, I know your trying to make a point here, but it's as hilariously flawed as your argument. Yes blaming 9/11 completely on the Taliban is highly reductive and does nothing but further entrench Americans in nationalism. 9/11 is the result of blowback from the cold war.
There's no question 2016 was Republican propaganda and Hillary. I ABSOLUTELY have valid criticisms about the Democratic party. But that doesn't mean every stupid criticism should be taken as valid. The Republicans have gotten REALLY good at the propaganda game.
You are conflating valid criticism with "stupid criticism". Nothing I've stated is unsupported by evidence.
As "unpopular" as Hillary was, she was sladed to crush her by historic margins before you account for the Russian hacking scandal.
Except her popularity was already drastically shifting weeks before the comey letter was released. It was always a tight race, what evidence do you have that supports her win by "historic margins"?
The "Comey effect" is literally an idea propagated by her campaign to explain the lost. Even though theres testimony from people on her team that begged her to campaign in key swing states, and blame her ignoring that advise for the lost.
I'm not saying there wasn't interference, I'm just saying that it wasn't solely to blame for her poor performance. You just can't ignore swing potential swing states in that tight of an election.
Normally I would agree with you. 2016 was different. If Charles Manson ran for President and won, it's the voters faults. NOBODY who did the least bit of research wasn't shitting their pants on election day 2016.
I don't really see what you're trying to get across here.....
And because we can't fucking learn our lessons and we STILL blame the perfectly viable Hillary Clinton.
Lol, she lost..... She wasn't a viable candidate, and there were concerns about her campaign throughout the entire process. Historically, running a milquetoast career politician against a firebrand populist is always a poor prospect. The political landscape has changed, but the DNC refuses to change, they just blame the constituency for not playing along.
