As if the typical Republican voter would have preferred a clearly idealistic self-described socialist after 8 years of supposed liberalism. They layed the blame on us, like they layed the blamed on Bush and will lay it on Trump. Our best hope was a moderate, but nobody cares enough to tell the difference between Hillary and an Independent Socialist outsider.
If Sanders did manage to win, it would have been due to the growing "fuck everything" faction. The Tea Party and the "Sanders lost? He was cheated! Imma vote Trump as if he isn't the exact opposite!!"
Sorry if that was insensitive, my new year's resolution is to stop being such a baby about offending morons.
This exact play towards the center conventional wisdom is why Clinton lost a race she easily should have won. She presumed that the female, black, and worker votes was hers because she was the moderate and she was a Democrat.
Guess what, the most original sin is to be boring, and that's what Clinton was: boring. Trump punched ten classes above his ability because he was the only exciting person in the race. Nobody went into a booth on that day and was euphoric to vote for the Most Likely Reptilian Overlord 2016, except maniac.
As for the personal attack, have it your way. I certainly won't take offense to your loving embrace of our society's ongoing suicide by mediocrity. Not like we'll live to see it if people don't get their heads out of their asses about convention.
Bernie would've been smashed in the general election, though. AFAIH, the only Democrats that got in Senate and House this election season are the "moderate" Blue Dog types, everyone who Sanders supported have failed miserably.
This simply isn't true. Politics isn't a tug of war between left and right boundaries determining who gets in and who can't. It is often perceived that way due to outcomes, but those outcomes are seen only in the hindsight of the winner. If Clinton had pulled out the race she probably would have also pulled the Senate, even by that 1% margin. Political outcomes are as much a consequence of performance as they are of circumstances, and if there's any candidate for whom victory was not ordained by fundamentals it was Trump.
Sanders polled better than Clinton. Don't give me your what-ifs, because Clinton's overall trend during the election didn't get radically altered by exposure to Trump, and if anything went up.
Sanders also absolutely would have gotten the moderate Democrat vote better, simply because he was more interesting overall and specifically because of his attention to the exact same blue collar economic concerns that a lot of, maybe the most of swing voters went on. Not only that, but there's the Democrat base to consider. Millions of them didn't vote Trump, millions of them just stayed in. Sanders isn't a stay-in kind of guy, especially not for the youth vote.
It's time to face up. He was the right man for the job, and he got passed up for it by the influence of the Clintons. At least their name will be synonymous with "loser" like Bush's until the end of time.
Author
Topic: Doc Helgoland's Asylum for the Politically American: T+0 (Read 1419059 times)