Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, September 16, 2017

Hadley Freeman, The Guardian: Of course people can argue with [Hillary] Clinton's ideas. But to dismiss her book without even reading it, with the demand that she "shut the --- up" is yet more evidence of the misogyny that has always, obviously, been behind the outsized vitriol she attracts. Worse, she is now an uncomfortable reminder for white liberals that the majority of white Americans would rather vote for a man with a long history of racism than a woman. For all the talk about how Clinton lost because she neglected the working class, 88% of African Americans, who have endured far worse and longer economic hardship than white Americans, voted for her.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Ta-Nehisi Coates writes in his new book, We Were Eight Years in Power: "Certainly not every Trump voter is a white supremacist. But every Trump voter felt it acceptable to hand the fate of the country over to one." There is no justification for that, no matter how much others try to blame Clinton. But national self-awareness is painful. How much easier just to burn the witch, and her book.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

What a crock of shizzle.

#1 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-09-16 08:08 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Had Hillary been male she would have won.

Animas be powerful.

#2 | Posted by Zed at 2017-09-16 08:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Oh sure. It's everybody's fault but Hillary's.

She campaigned part time. When she did campaign, she was generous with her time for wealthy donors. Foreign or domestic, as long as they showed the money.

If you libs keep blaming everybody else but yourselves, you'll keep losing elections.

#3 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-16 08:31 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

There are more misogynists than racists.

#4 | Posted by Zed at 2017-09-16 08:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I agree with the misogyny. Baffles me why people are reluctant to admit it.

Yes to #4.

#5 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-09-16 08:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Baffles me why people are reluctant to admit it.

Because it's --------. That should explain your quandary.

#6 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-16 08:51 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#6 only the blind.

#7 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-09-16 08:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

A nation mired in misogyny and racism, which seem to go together.

Misogynists, however, usually don't know that they are, say psychologists. Racists do, though.

#8 | Posted by Corky at 2017-09-16 08:53 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Misogynists, however, usually don't know that they are"

It appears to be true. Effed up.

#9 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-09-16 08:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If I were a voter, I would vote for Trump for one reason.
I rather look at Ivanka and Melenie for the next four years than Hillary and Chelsea. Ugh!

Methinks liberals might be confusing chauvinist for mysygonist.

#10 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-16 09:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

That is misogyny Ray.

#11 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-09-16 09:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#11

Sticks and stones .....

#12 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-16 09:15 PM | Reply

That is misogyny Ray.

Basing voting preferences on "has been" and "never was" models related to the candidate?

I'm not sure how one would define that.

#13 | Posted by REDIAL at 2017-09-16 09:22 PM | Reply

Hillary and Chelsea are cute,RAY.

#14 | Posted by Zed at 2017-09-16 09:26 PM | Reply

"If you libs keep blaming everybody else but yourselves, you'll keep losing elections."

(Spent the last eight years blaming Obama.)

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-16 09:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Zed

You would find a gorilla cute if it were a liberal Democrat.

#16 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-16 09:30 PM | Reply

"Basing voting preferences on "has been" and "never was" models related to the candidate?"

???

I think he's talking about his mini-ray.

#17 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-09-16 09:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I think he's talking about his mini-ray.

He could still raise the bar a lot.

#18 | Posted by REDIAL at 2017-09-16 09:34 PM | Reply

Oh wait... he's old. Maybe not.

#19 | Posted by REDIAL at 2017-09-16 09:34 PM | Reply

(Spent the last eight years blaming Obama.)
#15 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Sorry man. I don't think like you.
Politics is an incurable social problem.
From a political perspective, Obama did his job well.

#20 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-16 09:36 PM | Reply

I think he's talking about his mini-ray.

I don't talk about my min-Ray.

#21 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-16 09:39 PM | Reply

Something Clinton-haters repeatedly overlook (from the article):

A long-running justification for this loathing of Clinton, one that has been trotted out often since her election loss, and now again as an excuse to bash her book, is that she is uniquely unlikable. "She was a terrible candidate!" go the cries, ignoring the fact she was the most qualified candidate in a generation, who got more votes than any candidate ever, with the exception of Barack Obama in 2008.

#23 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-09-16 09:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

"...ignoring the fact she was the most qualified candidate in a generation, who got more votes than any candidate ever, with the exception of Barack Obama in 2008." - #23 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-09-16 09:55 PM

Bravo, Gal. And 100% correct. And Newsworthy.

But don't tell Laura that.

"There are no signs that the LGBT community will be in the crosshairs of a Trump administration. In fact that evidence is just the opposite." - #94 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-01-22 09:13 PM
And...
"Trump is your classic New York liberal." - #72 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2016-11-06 05:56 PM
Oops.

#25 | Posted by Hans at 2017-09-16 10:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I'm not even convinced she really did lose in WI and MI, and I'm in good company:

The Republican Sabotage of the Vote Recounts in Michigan and Wisconsin Michigan officials declared in late November that Trump won the state's count by 10,704 votes. But hold on -- a record 75,355 ballots were not counted.

The uncounted ballots came mostly from Detroit and Flint, majority-Black cities that vote Democratic.

According to the machines that read their ballots, these voters waited in line, sometimes for hours, yet did not choose a president. Really?

That's why Dr. Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate, paid millions of dollars for a human eyeball count of the uncounted votes. While labeled a "recount," its real purpose is to count the 75,355 votes [in MI] never counted in the first place.

I met with Stein, who told me she was stunned by this overt sabotage of the recount. "It's shocking to think that the discounting of these votes may be making the critical difference in the outcome of the election," she said.

#26 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-09-16 10:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

This story was repeated in Wisconsin, which uses the same Opti-Scan system as Michigan. There, the uncounted votes, sometimes called "spoiled" or "invalidated" ballots, were concentrated in Black-majority Milwaukee. Stein put up over $3 million of donated funds for the human eye review in Wisconsin, but GOP state officials authorized Milwaukee County to recount simply by running the ballots through the same blind machines. Not surprisingly, this instant replay produced the same questionable result.

Stein was also disturbed by the number of voters who never got to cast ballots. "Whether it's because of the chaos [because] some polling centers are closed, and then some are moved, and there's all kinds of mix-ups," she said. "So, a lot of people are filling out provisional ballots, or they were being tossed off the voter rolls by Interstate Crosscheck."

Interstate Crosscheck is a list that was created by Donald Trump supporter and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach to hunt down and imprison voters who illegally voted or registered in two states in one election.

An eye-popping 499,092 Michiganders are on the Crosscheck suspect list. The list, which my team uncovered in an investigation for Rolling Stone, cost approximately 50,000 of the state's voters their registrations. Disproportionately, the purged voters were Blacks, Latinos and that other solid Democratic demographic, Muslim Americans. (Dearborn, Michigan, has the highest concentration of Arab Americans in the US.)

Jill Stein didn't buy it. Responding to both Michigan's and Trump's claim that voter rolls are loaded with fraudulent double voters, Stein said, "It's the opposite of what he is saying: not people who are voting fraudulently and illegally, but actually legitimate voters who have had their right to vote taken away from them by Kris Kobach and by Donald Trump."

Crosscheck likely cost tens of thousands their vote in Pennsylvania as well.

"It is a Jim Crow system, and it all needs to be fixed," Stein concluded. "It's not rocket science. This is just plain, basic democracy."

www.truth-out.org

This does not bode well for Dems in 2018 and 2020

#27 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-09-16 10:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"---------- whips out the creepy database yet again." - #29 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-09-16 10:06 PM

Another example of rightwingnuts afraid of owning their own words.

#30 | Posted by Hans at 2017-09-16 10:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Oh lovely more excuses coming for why Hillary lost. Not surprising however.

#31 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-09-16 10:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Oh lovely more excuses coming for why Hillary lost." - #31 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-09-16 10:11 PM

"Laura's constant attacks on Hillary -- and those of other people on the left like her -- had a lot to do with electing Trump." - #12 | Posted by rcade at 2017-04-02 11:53 AM
Indeed.

#32 | Posted by Hans at 2017-09-16 10:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

You should pay attention to Jill Stein's concerns, Laura, because next time it could be Bernie's name on the ballot, and if the GOP managed to suppress the vote and leave a significant number of votes uncounted in 2016, there will be nothing to prevent them from doing it in 2020 if people don't speak out.

#34 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-09-16 10:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"He offers nothing to the DR community..." - #33 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-09-16 10:15 PM

Obviously, I offer enough that you felt compelled to comment.

Speaks volumes.

#35 | Posted by Hans at 2017-09-16 10:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Politics is an incurable social problem."

Is this how you say "government is a necessary evil" when you can't quite remember how that one goes?

#36 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-16 10:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Is this how you say "government is a necessary evil" when you can't quite remember how that one goes?

No. I say government is an unnecessary evil. It's dinosaur not fit for the modern age.
It outgrew the market economy that supports it. That's why it's in the late stage of collapse.

#37 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-16 10:23 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"No. I say government is an unnecessary evil."

So when it comes to voting, you reject choosing the lesser of many evils too?

#39 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-16 10:26 PM | Reply

You should pay attention to Jill Stein's concerns, Laura, because next time it could be Bernie's name on the ballot, and if the GOP managed to suppress the vote and leave a significant number of votes uncounted in 2016, there will be nothing to prevent them from doing it in 2020 if people don't speak out.

Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-09-16 10:16 PM | Reply

That's rich considering you think she's a Russian Agent.

#40 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-09-16 10:27 PM | Reply

So when it comes to voting, you reject choosing the lesser of many evils too?

The whole damn system is evil. That's why I don't vote.

#41 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-16 10:29 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"That's rich considering you think she's a Russian Agent."

I said I think she was an unwitting useful idiot to Putin. There's a big difference between that and being a witting Russian agent. Nice deflection, btw.

#42 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-09-16 10:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

I said I think she was an unwitting useful idiot to Putin. There's a big difference between that and being a witting Russian agent. Nice deflection, btw.

Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-09-16 10:31 PM | Reply

No deflection dear just the truth.

#43 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-09-16 10:32 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"No deflection dear..." - #43 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-09-16 10:32 PM

Never seen Gal, CalifChris, danni, TreesGoneWild or Lisa refer to another female DR poster as "dear."

#44 | Posted by Hans at 2017-09-16 10:37 PM | Reply

Some think Stein is a Russian agent. I think she was an unwitting useful idiot. I think some folks in Trump's campaign (Manafort, Flynn and Page, e.g.) may have been witting Russian agents. Mueller's investigation will let us know one way or the other about them.

#45 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-09-16 10:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Never seen Gal, CalifChris, danni, TreesGoneWild or Lisa refer to another female DR poster as "dear."

Just part of Laura's condescension disguised as faux Southern charm, i.e., her version of "bless your heart." No biggie.

#46 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-09-16 10:40 PM | Reply

"Just part of Laura's condescension disguised as faux Southern charm, i.e., her version of "bless your heart." - #46 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-09-16 10:40 PM

Makes sense, Gal.

You deftly handle it, well, like a woman, Southern or otherwise.

Thanks.

#47 | Posted by Hans at 2017-09-16 10:44 PM | Reply

Being sick and tired of endless war, from Obama, both Bushes, both Clintons, Reagan, Nixon, Kennedy has nothing to do with misogyny. Trump hasn't started one yet, and promised not to during the campaign, but a Trump promise is completely useless.

#48 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-09-16 10:47 PM | Reply

Sometimes when she calls me dear, I return the favor and call her hon. Or at least, I'm tempted to. ;) It's all good.

#49 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-09-16 10:49 PM | Reply

I can't wait to read how history looks back on this time.

Surely the shortest text book of all time?

The totality will read:

"Hillary lost and it was all her fault. Any further analysis is forbidden."

Exams will be just one multiple choice answer:

Was everything Hillary's fault? Y/N

#50 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-09-16 10:49 PM | Reply

#46 her passive aggressive bs is beyond annoying to me. I respect your ability to absorb it.

#51 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-09-16 10:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

www.truth-out.org

An article by Crosscheck conspiracy theory originator, Greg Palast. Please, Gal, tell me you don't buy that b.s.

Interstate Crosscheck is a list that was created by ... Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach ...

Nope, it originated with his predecessor, Thornburgh, and three other states in December 2005. It's not "a" list. It's multiple lists, one for each state participant's data base comparison. Palast can't even get basic facts correct.

Disproportionately, the purged voters were Blacks, Latinos and that other solid Democratic demographic, Muslim Americans.

More Palast b.s. Almost identical claims were, or are being, made in at least three lawsuits regarding voter list maintenance, required by federal law, one in Ohio and two in Georgia. Both are Crosscheck participants. The Ohio suit was brought by voting a rights warrior, the ACLU. The Georgia suits by the NAACP and other voting rights warriors. In none of the three suits was Crosscheck even mentioned in passing much less as some kind of participant in the "purges." The Ohio suit is currently pending in the USSC.

Crosscheck likely cost tens of thousands their vote in Pennsylvania as well.

More Palast b.s. The Pennsylvania ACLU opened an investigation into Crosscheck in that state. They obtained copies of documentation regarding the program from their SOS, some 80 odd pages. The documentation directly contradicts a number of Palast's sensationalist claims. The investigation died on the vine several years ago.

#52 | Posted by et_al at 2017-09-16 11:44 PM | Reply

"In none of the three suits was Crosscheck even mentioned in passing much less as some kind of participant in the "purges."

What's that got to do with anything?
They're supposed to sue a list?

#53 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-16 11:49 PM | Reply

If you didn't vote for me and don't think I should be president then you're a misogynist!

"Hillary"

#54 | Posted by Crassus at 2017-09-17 12:27 AM | Reply

I do not doubt that misogyny is a factor in the negative feelings many people feel toward HRC. But not all people. And it is pretense to believe that even if misogyny were taken out of the equation that all those negative feelings about HRC would go away. HRC's negatives went far, far beyond misogyny.

#55 | Posted by moder8 at 2017-09-17 01:20 AM | Reply

Huh? Lock her up.

#56 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2017-09-17 02:34 AM | Reply

Be angrier though.

#63 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-17 06:29 AM | Reply

#52, etal,

In a very public manner, Kathleen Harris used a precursor of crosscheck to achieve a target number of voters dropped from Florida voter registration, targeting Democratic stronghold voting districts. A Florida State investigator, acting alone, died of an apparent suicide across the border in Georgia, where autopsies are not mandatory. Gore still won by about 100 votes, but none of that matters now thanks to a string of Republican dirty tricks and indifference.

In this country 7% of the population moves every year. No one un-registers themselves. All they do is re-register in their new precinct. So cross-check will generate 11 million apparent red flags every year even though no voting fraud is involved. A Karl Rove trick is to send college students an address verification form in July-August when they are likely not in school and use no response to drop them from the roles. These are immoral dirty tricks. A couple of examples in many of deliberate voter suppression by Republicans. Its what they do, since their base represents about 25% of all voters.

#64 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-09-17 07:01 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

When she did campaign, she was generous with her time for wealthy donors.

Every presidential candidate courts wealthy donors.

This is yet another example where Hillary does what every other candidate does and she's the only one criticized for it. The woman has to play by a harder set of rules while America works out its gender issues.

#65 | Posted by rcade at 2017-09-17 09:27 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

And it is pretense to believe that even if misogyny were taken out of the equation that all those negative feelings about HRC would go away.

No one has ever asserted that all negative feelings against Hillary should go away. She's a politician. All politicians are going to be disliked by a segment of the population.

But Hillary attracts a level of venom that's quite obviously fed by a large amount of misogyny. Some American men will never accept a woman as a potential leader. I hope this is an older generation problem that will be cured by younger, more tolerant voters becoming the majority. But sometimes I wonder. The GamerGate movement makes me wonder if there are a lot of young men with irredeemably screwed up attitudes about women.

#66 | Posted by rcade at 2017-09-17 09:36 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Hillary was defeated by damaged self concepts---

Those of men who hate women out of fear of, or history of, rejection by them.

Those of men and women who think little of themselves and don't care that Trump represents an essential repudiation of ordinary social values.

#67 | Posted by Zed at 2017-09-17 09:53 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Judge Jeanine to Hillary: You Lost Because Because People Don't Like You

#68 | Posted by MSgt at 2017-09-17 10:03 AM | Reply

Every presidential candidate courts wealthy donors.

Yes they do. Hillary was so confident about winning that she spent far too little time doing public appearances. Trump campaigned tirelessly in public forums. He drew bigger crowds than there were seats. Hillary's public appearances had a poor showing. Trump looked strong. Hillary with her fainting spells and difficulty walking looked weak. Add that to Hillary's long track record of being as corrupt as sin, Americans had enough of her. That's why Trump's "drain the swamp" proved to be a winning slogan.

The Truman-Dewey campaign is a good analogy about showing energy and leadership. We saw the same differences between a young Bush and an old crippled McCain, and many other campaigns.

I would argue that Americans don't care about gender. Whether it's alpha-male or alpha-female, they want strong leaders who can tap into the public mood. In the current political climate, there is growing disenchantment with politics as usual which the Clintons clearly represented. She has too many negatives. If it wasn't for California, Trump would have had the majority popular vote too.

#69 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-17 10:07 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Yes, RAY. Argue people don't care about gender.

#70 | Posted by Zed at 2017-09-17 10:22 AM | Reply

Now argue they don't care about money.

#71 | Posted by Zed at 2017-09-17 10:23 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Hillary was only defeated by the electoral college, a system which only operates during a Presidential election in the USA and nowhere else in the world. Since the age of computers, the electoral college system invites flipping outcomes by committing tiny changes in a few critical voting districts, thereby overriding the popular vote, always for Republicans.

Of course there are misogynists and racist voters living in our country. They get to vote. Democratic strongholds targeted by Republicans, like being black or a college student complicates voting unlike being a misogynist or racist. Whether they play a larger obstacle to free and fair elections compared to the electoral college system or Republican targeted voting obstructionism is putting the cart before the horse.

#72 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-09-17 10:31 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Zed

Yes, RAY. Argue people don't care about gender.
Now argue they don't care about money.

Sure. When it comes to money, Americans don't care which gender enriches them.

There are two camps:
The Americans who voted for Hillary don't care who pays.
The Americans who voted for Trump are tired of paying.

#73 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-17 10:49 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

- The Americans who voted for Trump are tired of paying.

According to them, Trump voters felt "oppressed" because they are white (and male), which caused them no end of, "cultural" anxiety" because of minority demographic voters.

#74 | Posted by Corky at 2017-09-17 10:57 AM | Reply

tax the rich, feed the poor
until there are no poor no more
...but first get them sterilized

Trump's campaign emphasized more jobs, limiting immigration and an end to foreign interventions. Since the election the emphasis has been more military spending, lower taxes for the rich and ending Obamacare.

#75 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-09-17 11:01 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Corky

You spend too much time reading left-wing media crap. You need to broaden your reading.

#76 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-17 11:06 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Trump's campaign emphasized more jobs, limiting immigration and an end to foreign interventions. Since the election the emphasis has been more military spending, lower taxes for the rich and ending Obamacare.

As sure as gravity, a politician will say whatever he feels will get him elected. Politics is NEVER about truth.

#77 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-17 11:09 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

ray, what is your engineering degree in? What school?

#78 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-09-17 11:09 AM | Reply

#76 |

Scientific studies reporting what actual Trump voters actually say motivated their vote are not left wing media crap.... although rwingers seem to have a morbid fear of both science and facts.

#79 | Posted by Corky at 2017-09-17 11:17 AM | Reply

#78 | Posted by bayviking

Fairleigh Dickinson University, New Jersey, BSME 1972
It took eight years at nights.

Why is this important?

#80 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-17 11:18 AM | Reply

there are a lot of young men with irredeemably screwed up attitudes about women.

#66 | POSTED BY RCADE AT 2017-09-17 09:36 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

I worry about this. Young men are uncertain about the future and taking it out on women because they can.

#81 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-09-17 11:22 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Give me a break, Corky

The left wing spin on anything Trump does and says is relentless.

The Russian connection? That was hilarious.

You people even complain when Melania wears spiked heals.

#82 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-17 11:24 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Vitriol Towards Hillary Reveals Nation Mired in Misogyny
----

LOL

#83 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2017-09-17 11:51 AM | Reply

Voting for the Iraq War was a bad idea.

"OMG WOMAN HATER!!!"

She may be too beholden to Wall Street.

"OMG 9/11 AND MISOGYNY!!!"

Southern states tend to be red states.

"RACIST!!!"

--Summary of talking to a typical die hard Hillary voter

#84 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2017-09-17 11:55 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#72 | POSTED BY BAYVIKING AT 2017-09-17 10:31 AM

She also just fumbled a bunch of states Obama won handedly, because she was one of the worst candidates Dems have ever put up, worse than Dukakis even.

#85 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2017-09-17 11:58 AM | Reply

Ray,

I would never have expected a mechanical engineer to hold so many incorrect heat transfer mechanisms about the planet earth in his brain.

On the other hand you see through some of the western propaganda most people swallow, like the Russia stole the election story, part of a much larger US attack that has been obvious since Sochi.

But, surely, by now, you recognize Trump is an arrogant fool, incapable of thinking tactically or strategically, who tweets and operates exclusively from FAUX TV talking points. Even Ann Coulter recognizes that a dangerous buffoon we have with a finger on the trigger.

#86 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-09-17 12:12 PM | Reply

She also just fumbled a bunch of states Obama won handedly, because she was one of the worst candidates Dems have ever put up, worse than Dukakis even.
#85 | POSTED BY LIVE_OR_DIE

IMO its not that she was a bad candidate, its that she listened to her own applause, listened to a press that anointed her before the election.

The hubris of Hillary and her campaign can't be understated. If she fought the good fight to the end, she probably would have won.

In this way she was a terrible candidate running a horrible campaign, because the press had her back, she didn't fight to the end.

At this point, what difference does it make, she should take the loss like a man ....

#87 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-09-17 12:38 PM | Reply

Bay

I would never have expected a mechanical engineer to hold so many incorrect heat transfer mechanisms about the planet earth in his brain.

Aside from the error between conduction and radiation, I stand by what I said. It is impossible for the greenhouse effect to cause the atmosphere to accumulate heat over more than a day. FYI, IPPC models have been consistently wrong by a large margin. Earth has been in a warming period for 12,000 years. It's going back to ice age weather. All have to do with sun cycles.

All Trump means to me, is that he represents a growing distrust in government. Beyond that, he's just another stooge for the deep state. A politician doesn't get to run for office unless the men behind the curtain says he can. Coulter was a fool for supporting him in the first place. People get this religious idea that a presidential candidate is going swoop down from the clouds and save them.

#88 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-17 12:38 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Pondering this some more, you know she is a horrible person, and her defenders are excuse makers.

Instead of saying, yeah I messed up, and owning it, she passes it off on others as faults, and what she imagines the faults of the country are.

Only a horrible class of person does this.

"Don't be upset with the results you didn't get from the work you didn't do" ~ EricThomas

#89 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-09-17 12:49 PM | Reply

Instead of saying, yeah I messed up, and owning it, she passes it off on others as faults, and what she imagines the faults of the country are.

This is more irrational Hillary hate. She takes plenty of blame in her book. She also talks about some other factors in her defeat, which is all the haters focus on because none of you care about what she actually says.

#90 | Posted by rcade at 2017-09-17 12:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

HRC blah blah blah blah blah blah HRC blah blah blah Trump
blah blah blah Bernie blah blah blah but HRC blah blah blah Trump is blah blah blah but Bernie could have blah blah blah.

Wake me up when, there's new news.

#92 | Posted by PinkyanTheBrain at 2017-09-17 01:12 PM | Reply

"Aside from the error between conduction and radiation, I stand by what I said. It is impossible for the greenhouse effect to cause the atmosphere to accumulate heat over more than a day."

Ray.

The greenhouse effect is more than the atmosphere accumulating heat.

It's the atmosphere reflecting radiated heat from the earth back to the surface.

It's not a heat capacity issue.

But perhaps you'd like to explain why Venus is hotter than Mercury, even though Mercury is closer to the sun.

#96 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-17 01:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

[...] Here is a perfect example of not doing the work needed, why was she in California multiple times?
fivethirtyeight.com

#97 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-09-17 02:03 PM | Reply

"It wasn't healthy or productive to dwell on the ways I felt I'd been shivved."

Really? Shived?

"I wish so badly we were a country where a candidate who said, ‘My story is the story of a life shaped by and devoted to the movement for women's liberation' would be cheered, not jeered. But that's not who we are."
Bad people of this country.....

53 percent were white women that voted against her.....

"What did matter, and had a lasting impact, was that Bernie's presence in the race meant that I had less space and credibility to run the kind of progressive campaign that had helped me win Ohio and Pennsylvania in 2008."

Bernie blaming ....

Quotes from Hillary -"What Happened"

#98 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-09-17 02:07 PM | Reply

"What did matter, and had a lasting impact, was that Bernie's presence in the race meant that I had less space and credibility to run the kind of progressive campaign that had helped me win Ohio and Pennsylvania in 2008."

Do you disagree?

#99 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-17 02:11 PM | Reply

Snoofy

It's pointless to argue over this again. You have no idea what I'm talking about.

The IPPC models have been consistently wrong as was Gore's hockey stick. That's another disproof.

This is really about taxes, not science.

#100 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-17 02:12 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

"You have no idea what I'm talking about."

I know you're wrong.
Explain why Venus is hotter than Mercury.
The answer to that will help you understand why you're wrong.

#101 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-17 02:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I haven't studied it.
I'm really done with this topic.

#102 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-17 02:22 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

You're a moron Ray. A stubborn one too.

#103 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-17 02:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

... why was she in California multiple times?

She went to California for fundraisers. Do you have any more questions that are completely obvious?

#104 | Posted by rcade at 2017-09-17 02:24 PM | Reply

What do Hillary Clinton and global warming have in common? A lot of hot air.

#105 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2017-09-17 02:25 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

You're a moron Ray. A stubborn one too.

Sticks and stones ...

#106 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-17 02:29 PM | Reply

What do Hillary's depends and the atmosphere have in common? They're both holding too much methane.

#108 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2017-09-17 02:32 PM | Reply

I don't think you're stubborn, RAY.

#109 | Posted by Zed at 2017-09-17 02:33 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

I don't think you're stubborn, RAY.

See Snoofy. Somebody loves me.

#110 | Posted by Ray at 2017-09-17 02:36 PM | Reply

'A nation mired in misogyny', I would guess if you are a libby and the greatest dem candidate in the nation says so, you must think it true - LOLAY

#111 | Posted by MSgt at 2017-09-17 02:40 PM | Reply

"What Happened" reads like a drive-by shooting rampage. The book is a score-settling scattershot rant, insulting everyone who stood in Clinton's way, from Bernie Sanders to James Comey. Amid Hillary's list of villains, even toothless Joe Biden gets a gut-shot.

Bill and Hillary are prolific liars, but Hillary is graceless and transparent at it. She is the nastiest political figure in America since Nixon. Yet, without Nixon's Machiavellian genius for political manipulation. She could never hide her aspiration for power; her desire to become a war criminal alongside her mentor Henry Kissinger. Americans don't mind politicians with a lust for blood, but they prefer them not to advertise it. (Jeffrey St Claire)

Yet, Trump is far worse. A bigger liar, an ignoramus incapable and uninterested in abstract thought, but quick to inflate all conflicts, personal, domestic and international. As if a President has time for petty personal vendettas. His extensive relationships with Russian billionaire gangsters is a consequence of Western Banks refusing to conduct any more business with him.

#112 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-09-17 03:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Do you disagree?
#99 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Yes, welcome to the real world.... Is Bernie in the middle?

All politicians move from extreme to the middle. Trump had to contend with 14 or so other contenders .... so what.....

Fact is she didn't campaign well, she believed her loving press and fell for their biased polls, fact is you cherry pick from overwhelming evidence of blaming everyone but herself, and can only find one example where you agree, its hillarious.

She also blamed voter suppression, she didn't even visit WI........ she was out hustled, outplayed and outsmarted.

Her book contains one whole chapter on misogyny... that sure is taking responsibility and blame.

But, asked to choose her biggest regret, Clinton didn't look inward.

"Losing is my biggest regret," she said. "And losing to someone who was not qualified and did not have the experience or the temperament to be president of the United States. That is my biggest regret."
In the states Clinton lost, she argues voter ID requirements and other changes in the law made it harder for people who supported her to vote.

"In Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, in particular, as well as North Carolina, there was a concerted effort to suppress the vote," she said, recounting anecdotes about people whose identification didn't qualify them to vote in Milwaukee.

Even the in the bag NPR ....

www.npr.org

#113 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-09-17 03:34 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Yes"

(followed by a bunch of unrelated stuff)

Okay, you disagree with her; I agree with her.

I thought she had a valid point, which is that since Bernie was to the left of Hillary, it was hard for Hillary to claim the progressive mantle. How do you claim to be the Progressive candidate when Bernie is in the race? You kinda can't. You're stuck being the Establishment candidate now. That was her point. She's right.

#114 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-17 03:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Is Bernie in the middle?"

No, Bernie is not in the middle, and neither are progressives in the middle.

#115 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-17 03:43 PM | Reply

it was hard for Hillary to claim the progressive mantle. How do you claim to be the Progressive candidate when Bernie is in the race? You kinda can't. You're stuck being the Establishment candidate now. That was her point. She's right.
#114 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2017-09-17 03:42 PM

Being the pro war whore of wall street among dems doesn't help either.

#116 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2017-09-17 05:00 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#116

Such a way with words you have. It's almost like they shouldn't have held you back in third grade so many times.

#117 | Posted by Corky at 2017-09-17 05:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#117 - ad hominem in lieu of argument

#118 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2017-09-17 06:04 PM | Reply

#117 - ad hominem in lieu of argument

#118 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE

It's what he refers to as "relevant".

#119 | Posted by jpw at 2017-09-17 10:42 PM | Reply

#117 - ad hominem in lieu of argument

That's pretty much all Corky has, except for his newfound phrase "false equivalency."

#120 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-09-17 11:00 PM | Reply

Ray says he has a BSME from Fairleigh Dickenson U. I attended Rutgers U. We used to refer to them as "Fairly Ridiculous". But, that aside, are we somehow supposed to grant that one BS more credibility than hundreds of PhD's (who specialize in the field) from the world's best scientific research universities? Yeah, that is fairly ridiculous.

#121 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2017-09-18 01:21 AM | Reply

Being the pro war whore of wall street among dems doesn't help either.

#116 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE

Compared to Trump, not even close. He has Wall St. in his cabinet, and so far he seems to be working on starting at least two wars in Korea and Iran. And he's going to wipe out ISIS (according to him) so I guess he'll be doing a lot of bombing and shooting somewhere in the Middle East. Remind me how many wars Hillary started. Yes, she voted in favor of giving Bush a military option (which he said he would come back to Congress and the UN if he decided to invoke it, but never did) in Iraq, but so did all of the Republicans. So now Republicans (the real warmongers) are in control of the entire government. And this is somehow better than Hillary? And even if Trump should be impeached, we've got Mike "Onward Christian Soldiers" Pence waiting to take over.

#122 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2017-09-18 01:30 AM | Reply

Remind me how many wars Hillary started.

#122 | POSTED BY WHODAMAN AT 2017-09-18 01:30 AM | REPLY

Hillary pushed Obama into a "No Fly Zone", which was actually a direct close air support campaign of partisan rebels, which in turn led to a massive proliferation of weapons across North Africa, all the way into Syria which greatly lengthened the conflict and the worst refugee crisis since WW2.

#123 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-09-18 08:14 AM | Reply

I have to add, a close air support campaign that used twitter to relay information to the Pentagon to attack targets that had not at all been vetted by American sources, bombing targets the pilots had absolutely zero way of identifying and could have been anything including people that owned money to the person tweeting in the coordinates.

#124 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-09-18 08:15 AM | Reply

I didn't realize Hillary was in the Chain of Command. I guess all of that was Obama's fault, then, right? I don't guess the Joint Chiefs and the rest of the Generals had anything to do with it, either. Just because somebody supported a policy once that you disagree with doesn't disqualify them for the rest of us. Can you name any candidate for national office that never did anything you disagree with?

#125 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2017-09-18 09:47 AM | Reply

You wanted a reminder, you got one. She was the Secretary of State and pushed the military intervention hard, convincing Obama who didn't want to do it. Feel free to move the goalposts however you like, but lets not go around pretending Hillary is a dove of peace.

#126 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-09-18 10:07 AM | Reply

Crazy that people are saying misogyny for her loss. How about the country is divided by parties and that played a major factor. Most voters are clueless and just vote for whatever party they're affiliated with, even though they don't even understand the issues and their parties views on the issues.

#127 | Posted by Will123 at 2017-09-18 10:58 AM | Reply

The divide will always be between the perceptions of those who supported HRC and those who felt she was unacceptable. In the eyes of her supporters, misogyny will always lie at the heart of opposition to HRC by progressives and independents. In the eyes of people such as myself, while I have to acknowledge that misogyny clearly did play a role in some of the opposition to HRC, the main reasons for her lack of appeal was her dishonesty, her beholdency to Wall Street and Corporate America, her willingness to war monger and her willingness to triangulate any issue under the sun.

#128 | Posted by moder8 at 2017-09-18 12:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

I have to acknowledge that misogyny clearly did play a role in some of the opposition to HRC, the main reasons for her lack of appeal was her dishonesty, her beholdency to Wall Street and Corporate America, her willingness to war monger and her willingness to triangulate any issue under the sun.

#128 | Posted by moder8

A-MEN.

But the problem with hillary supporters is they just can't admit to themselves or anyone else that these issues are problems, therefore they attack anyone who hates hillary as misogynistic, which only strengthens the conservative case of liberals being intolerant PC police, which wins more votes for republicans.

As a feminist, I hate a bank-controlled women just as much as I hate bank-controlled men. Any true feminist would do the same, not overlook flaws in a woman that they'd oppose in a man.

#129 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-09-18 01:22 PM | Reply

Crazy that people are saying misogyny for her loss. How about the country is divided by parties and that played a major factor. Most voters are clueless and just vote for whatever party they're affiliated with, even though they don't even understand the issues and their parties views on the issues.

#127 | POSTED BY WILL123

Be honest.

People were completely willing to overlook Trump's continuous fraud, racism, sexism, pedophilia, and sexual assaults while literally everything, even the completely fabricated, was held against Hillary by many moderates and nearly all conservatives.

There are really no explanations other than the obvious whether you want to admit it or not.

#130 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-09-18 02:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

There are really no explanations other than the obvious whether you want to admit it or not.

#130 | Posted by Sycophant

There is actually a very simple explanation - people were DESPERATE for an outsider.

So desperate that they were willing to overlook trump's massive flaws in hopes of electing a president who wasn't beholden to bankers and lobbyists.

So desperate that they preferred a monster from outside the system to a competent adult from inside the system.

That has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with frustration with a corrupt system.

Dems offered them an elitist puppet, repubs offered them the possibility of real change. They took it.

Dems should learn from this important lesson instead of closing their eyes and ear and screaming "MISOGYNY!"

#131 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-09-18 02:40 PM | Reply

#131 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at

If Hillary were male she would have won. If there weren't Russian and Republican electoral shenanigans, she would have won.

People "ignored" Donald's massive faults, in part, because he seemed to be the misshapen superman they themselves wanted to be. His superpowers included lying and getting away with it; stealing and getting away with it; grabbing ----- and getting away wit it.

When you hate your life that all sounds pretty good.

#132 | Posted by Zed at 2017-09-18 02:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Why is it so hard to digest the fact that people wanted a political outsider?

#133 | Posted by kwrx25 at 2017-09-18 02:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Why is it so hard to digest the fact that people wanted a political outsider?

#133 | Posted by kwrx25 at 2017-09-18 02:57 PM | Reply

To have voted for that particular outsider means a whole where your personal pride used to be.

I can accept that people without personal pride voted for Trump. It was likely even a perverse asset for him.

#134 | Posted by Zed at 2017-09-18 03:00 PM | Reply

Why is it so hard to digest the fact that people wanted a political outsider?

#133 | Posted by kwrx25

Because that would mean in the next election they'd have to nominate some outsiders, and the current corrupt DNC fundraising system doesn't allow for that.

#135 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-09-18 03:00 PM | Reply

If Hillary were male she would have won. If there weren't Russian and Republican electoral shenanigans, she would have won.

#132 | Posted by Zed

There are a lot of WHAT IFs in 2016.

If hillary didn't have a record of bad judgement she might have won- but the iraq war, wall street deregulation, having been against gay marriage and for harsh criminal sentencing, it all hurt her.

If she weren't addicted to corporate campaign cash she might have won. She was taking bribes from the banks while claiming to be a liberal. Intelligent people know that stinks.

Hillary's faults were faults she created. Her gender wouldn't have made he lose if she didn't have a ton of other faults.

We could also say if bernie were female he'd have beaten hillary. Being a white male counts against you in a dem primary.

#136 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-09-18 03:05 PM | Reply

"If hillary didn't have a record of bad judgement she might have won"

If only Trump had a record to compare...

#137 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-18 03:13 PM | Reply

"Had Hillary been male she would have won."

That's like saying if Al Gore had been male he would have won.

#138 | Posted by sentinel at 2017-09-18 03:15 PM | Reply

It's always going to be funny how you were able to find reasons to rule out Hillary based on a mountain of evidence, but with scant information you decided Trump must somehow be better.

There's even a saying for it, "The Devil you know."

#139 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-18 03:16 PM | Reply

It's always going to be funny how you were able to find reasons to rule out Hillary based on a mountain of evidence, but with scant information you decided Trump must somehow be better.

There's even a saying for it, "The Devil you know."

#139 | Posted by snoofy

If your highest priority was electing someone not part of the system, the choice made perfect sense.

Hillary had proven to do support the bankers and warmongers status quo.

The alternative was a morally bankrupt monster who might shake up the system.

That's how desperate people were for change. Instead of listening to them and nominating an agent of change, they ignored them and lost.

#140 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-09-18 03:27 PM | Reply

If your highest priority was electing someone not part of the system, the choice made perfect sense.

"The System" being Presidents who fill the Treasury Department with Wall Street execs, like Trump did?

Not seeing how the choice made sense. Not even a little.

Oh, did you not think that was gonna happen???

#141 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-18 03:39 PM | Reply

"That's how desperate people were for change."

I agree that people were desperate for change.

So there's that.

Desperate people tend to make desperate decisions.

So there's that too.

#142 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-18 03:42 PM | Reply

The System" being Presidents who fill the Treasury Department with Wall Street execs, like Trump did?

Not seeing how the choice made sense. Not even a little.

Oh, did you not think that was gonna happen???

#141 | Posted by snoofy

Hey I wasn't dumb enough to fall for it but many were.

He campaigned AGAINST goldman sachs, then hired a bunch of goldman sachs bankers.

But it was the campaigning AGAINST them that won him some votes from the anti establishment crowd, and hillary's loyalty to them that cost her those votes.

#143 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-09-18 03:59 PM | Reply

There are so many small and large reasons you can use to say "if Hillary had/had not 'x' she would have won". She still lost to the worst Presidential candidate in the history of U.S. history, ever. Period! (ha) Hillary herself lists dozens of "reasons" she didn't win. You should see the list of reasons Trump should not have won. They are longer and more egregious than the reasons Hillary should have won. That's how bad of a candidate Hillary Clinton was. She lost to Trump. When you lose to a sexist, racist, homophobic, egotistical narcissist like Trump...what does that say about YOU? You lost to HIM? How? How did you screw up the easiest win ever?

#144 | Posted by gavaster at 2017-09-18 04:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"When you lose to a sexist, racist, homophobic, egotistical narcissist like Trump...what does that say about YOU?"

Says more about the electorate, don't you think?

#145 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-18 04:24 PM | Reply

Obama wouldn't have lost to him, it says the candidate put up against him was complete garbage. Trash, even.

#146 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2017-09-18 04:30 PM | Reply

It says Clinton was a far worse candidate than Trump, except the problem there is she got far more votes than Trump.

#147 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-18 04:34 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

So based on sheer number of votes, none of this "she was soooo awful" really adds up.

#148 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-18 04:35 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

It really does, Obama appealed to the coasts, and enough of the rest of the country to win. Hillary didn't, because she was trash.

#149 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2017-09-18 04:37 PM | Reply

And Obama was black, a bigger disadvantage tgan Hillary's ovaries.

And he still won. She didn't, because she was a trash candidate.

#150 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2017-09-18 04:38 PM | Reply

I said numerous times leading up to the election that Hillary needed to have the equivalent of a "Sista Souljah" moment, to show she was triangulating. Even calling out that "Bernie Bros" nonsense would've sufficed, I think. But instead she decided she didn't need those votes.

#151 | Posted by sentinel at 2017-09-18 05:13 PM | Reply

qz.com

More women voted for Hillary than Trump. So women were sexist.

More white women voted for Trump than Hillary, so that makes the white women, other than stupid, racist? nope. misognist? nope.
Just misguided I guess.

95% of black women voted for Hillary over Trump. So, black women are sexist because they chose the woman over the man.

This is such a stupid game of why?

#152 | Posted by Petrous at 2017-09-18 05:15 PM | Reply

Bill Clinton would have won over Hillary. Then again, I think Chelsea would have won over Hillary.

#153 | Posted by Petrous at 2017-09-18 05:16 PM | Reply

--Petrous

Trump won states Obama won before him, that has nothing to do with demographics; it's because Dems ran one of the worst candidates in history in response to one of the worst candidates in history. Reminding them of this simple fact is a great public service.

#154 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2017-09-18 05:21 PM | Reply

The "conservatives", because they can engineer an Electoral College victory, take the position that people who live in places like California and New York don't matter; that people who live in the big metropolitan areas don't matter. Only the suburban, exurban, and rural "heartland" people in "flyover country" are "real Americans" and whatever they want should be the we way we live, even though they are outnumbered.

The fact is that more people in the House (gerrymandered districts), Senate (small states vs. large states), POTUS (popular vote) voted for Democratic candidates than Republicans. So, while Republicans may have power legitimately according to the rules, they don't represent the majority of the American people.

#155 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2017-09-18 05:49 PM | Reply

"But it was the campaigning AGAINST them that won him some votes from the anti establishment crowd"

Unfortunately, that crowd doesn't really know what "establishment" really means. They believed Trump was a DC outsider which is meaningless if he intends to fill the swamp with the cast of characters he has.

#156 | Posted by eberly at 2017-09-18 05:51 PM | Reply

Man let it go. Hillary lost. Wait until the next election and there will be a suicide watch on half of the Lib's.

#157 | Posted by Federalist at 2017-09-18 06:09 PM | Reply

I don't think HRC supporters are ever going to let the issue go. Ten years from now there will still be the occasional comment from an HRC supporter reminding us how misogyny doomed her in 2016. With far better justification we saw the same thing after GWB and the SC cheated Gore out of the 2000 presidency.

#158 | Posted by moder8 at 2017-09-18 06:20 PM | Reply

that people who live in places like California and New York don't matter
---

They matter quite a bit, those two places give a candidate about half the EVs they need.

#159 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2017-09-18 06:40 PM | Reply

#145 - SNOOFY

The electorate were given two choices. Who gets elected doesn't define anyone. Too many data points to plot to choose one attribute of a candidate and claim that one data point won/lost the election for either candidate.

#160 | Posted by gavaster at 2017-09-18 07:08 PM | Reply

"When you lose to a sexist, racist, homophobic, egotistical narcissist like Trump...what does that say about YOU?"

Says more about the electorate, don't you think?

#145 | Posted by snoofy

Yes, as I've been saying- It says they were DESPERATE for an anti establishment candidate and trump was the only one available, since the dems nominated hillary.

#161 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-09-18 07:11 PM | Reply

Hey Snoofy how about hoe Hillary won in New Hampshire?
manhattanbabe.com

#162 | Posted by Federalist at 2017-09-18 07:12 PM | Reply

"Unfortunately, that crowd doesn't really know what "establishment" really means."

When it's the establishment they don't like they call it "Deep State."

When it's the establishment they do like, they call it "We are a nation of laws."

They make the ol' switcheroo without even realizing they are doing it to themselves.

#163 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-18 07:13 PM | Reply

Man let it go. Hillary lost. Wait until the next election and there will be a suicide watch on half of the Lib's.

#157 | Posted by Federalist

Everyone knows that. This isn't about the past. It's about the future. But some dems are blind as to what direction to go because they're in denial about why they lost. That's why we're not done discussing 2016.

#164 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-09-18 07:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"It says they were DESPERATE for an anti establishment candidate and trump was the only one available."

LOL.

They convinced themselves "He's running against Hillary, so he must be running for the things we want."

But he wasn't.

Maybe you'd care to name more anti-establishment billionaires. Koch Bros?

I think Obama was the anti-establishment candidate, and the people whose reaction to Obama was "we want our country back" also wanted the old establishment back. And I think they get a lot more of that with Trump than Clinton.

#165 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-18 07:18 PM | Reply

Speaks, let's just review the demographics.
Over 50% of whites voted for Trump.
You think the white majority is anti-establishment?

LMFAO.

#166 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-18 07:31 PM | Reply

They convinced themselves "He's running against Hillary, so he must be running for the things we want."

But he wasn't.

Maybe you'd care to name more anti-establishment billionaires. Koch Bros?

I think Obama was the anti-establishment candidate, and the people whose reaction to Obama was "we want our country back" also wanted the old establishment back. And I think they get a lot more of that with Trump than Clinton.

#165 | Posted by snoofy

It was clearly a con job, but it wouldn't have worked if the dems hadn't handed the CHANGE mantle to republicans by nominating hillary.

Obama was the CHANGE vote in 2008, but then he betrayed that vote by appointing the same bankers who crashed the economy and continuing the wars people voted to end. If he had fought harder to change the corrupt system, it wouldn't have been ripe for trump to swoop in. Obama's lack of change and loyalty to the bankers hurt the dems big time.

#167 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-09-18 07:35 PM | Reply

Speaks, let's just review the demographics.
Over 50% of whites voted for Trump.
You think the white majority is anti-establishment?

LMFAO.

#166 | Posted by snoofy

Most trump voters are dumb enough to feel like they are anti-establishment even when the establishment has benefited them greatly.

Trump had many types of support - racists, homophobes, morons, disillusioned obama voters, and anti elitist voters. He couldn't have won without all of them. Some of them would never vote dem, and some would have if they dems didn't nominate a corporate puppet. It was likely enough to make the difference.

#168 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-09-18 07:38 PM | Reply

A bunch of states that could be somewhat representative of the "white majority" gave Obama all of their EVs when he ran, but continue to watch class as the shills pretend anything but the low quality of the candidate caused Hillary to lose in those same states. Lol

#169 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2017-09-18 08:07 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2017 World Readable

Drudge Retort