• DoctorTYVM@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Clinton was right about everything. In 20 years its going to be really hard to explain why she wasn’t the obvious choice who should have won by a landslide

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      No it isn’t. She wasn’t relatable or likeable at all. People wanted an outsider and HRC is about as much of an insider as you could be.

      • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        She wasn’t relatable or likeable at all

        Neither is Trump. Hillary was obviously the better choice.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Trump is about as likeable as a rabid dingo. Clinton was better in absolutely every way to people with two neurons to rub together.

        • krashmo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          It doesn’t take much to be better than Trump. Still, Clinton campaigned as if winning was a foregone conclusion and then she found out that it wasn’t.

          • DarthBueller@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Some of us remember the 90’s, and the ubiquitous bumper stickers implying that while Bill was President, Hillary was in charge. Playing on sexist tropes, calling her a bitch of the canine variety, “I didn’t vote for Hillary,” “She’s not my president,” etc… Hillary was well hated before she ever ran for President.

            • 24_at_the_withers@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I remember all this, and I fell for it. Due to years of propaganda against her, I just had this mild feeling of revulsion to Hillary. I primaried for Bernie in a district that’s very close in demographics to the national average, and was stunned that Hillary had about a 4x as many supporters. But once she became the official Dem candidate, I started watching her campaign events, debates and researched her political history. Hillary was a fantastic candidate and after watching her in action I fully understood WHY there had been decades of propaganda from the right against her - she was incredibly dangerous to them - not only because of her likelihood to win, but even moreso due to how effective she would be as president.

              • DarthBueller@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                My impression of her in 2016 was that she’d be a neoliberal centrist that would make similar missteps to Bill Clinton, and I wanted nothing of it. Bill was lauded for bargaining with the GOP controlled Congress, but people like me had to help fight against the effects of his deals with the devil. There were a LOT of POC grandmas in public housing getting booted out because the housing project’s super alleged that their grandkids were dealing drugs - the changes to HUD regulations allowed grandma to be at fault for failing to control their grandkids. And there was a not-insubstantial number of project supers that would just make shit up because they ruled over the projects like it was their private fiefdom. I worked in Legal Aid at the time.

                Also, Hillary’s charisma was lacking. Not that charisma is all-important, but she just seemed fake as fuck. I wanted Warren because of her focus on consumer protection and debtor friendly bankruptcy reform.

    • flipht@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s actually an easy explanation.

      People were more concerned with a Democrat being likeable, after decades of character assassination, while they didn’t care that the republican was a criminal, and also foreign interference and an FBI that was paralyzed by biased agents and management fear of appearing biased, actual outcomes be damned.

      It was a perfect storm of regressive misinformation and every individual with the ability to stop the train wreck trying to cover their own asses and pass the buck instead.

      • kameecoding@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        wasn’t this also the election that was heavily influenced by Cambridge Analytica? while Facebook being the biggest social media site in thebworld/us?

        • ThrowawayOnLemmy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I just want to also call out the Internet Research Agency, Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear: All Russian information groups, a disrupted our elections in one way or another through different types of social engineering, hacking, trolling and misinformation creation. They went after individualls, businesses, and government organizations, not limited to the DNC.

    • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Everything is a bit of a stretch. She was certainly wrong about how she ran her campaign. Poisoning the well in the primary worked out so fucking well for her. It was her turn, she earned it. No reason to convince the voters to show up by campaigning, or creating a platform people were excited about. Just say how bad Bernie is, then how bad trump is a few times and hide.

      • kandoh@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, the DNC clearing the field for her looks really bad in hindsight. A lot would be different if Biden had run in 2016 when the whole Bidenbro phenomenon was really popular.

        • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Agreed. Biden running would of in itself made me feel 100x better about the primary process. She was clearly anointed by the DNC before the primary even started. They couldn’t even at least pretend we had a choice…

          • archiotterpup@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Right, but in the end she was going to get the votes anyway. Bernie couldn’t perform as well in the South which is a major voting block. Bernie did a great job of attracting young and white male voters. He didn’t pull the number of black voters and white women to overcome Clinton’s lead.

            I say this as a Warren voter.

            • krashmo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Bernie couldn’t perform as well in the South which is a major voting block.

              Major voting bloc in what, the primaries? Why is that even relevant? Democrats don’t win in the South. That sucks if you’re a Dem voter in the South but basing who the candidate is going to be in a national election on winning some primaries in states that won’t go blue in that election is pointless. The South is a lost cause. There’s no reason to care what they think about the Democratic nominee.

    • 5in1k@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      She didn’t even campaign in Michigan thinking it was a sure thing. She ran a terrible campaign.