Who cost Hillary the election???

[Bruce_T_Laney]

We're coming up on 2 years after the Presidential election, and the Democrats/Liberals are still crying over Hillary's epic loss. Hillary herself has blamed everyone & everything, except herself which is quite self defeating. Too bad she didn't have the fortitude to just stand up & admit her own responsibility. But I'm not interested in that.

What I want to know is just who did cost her the election & how??? Nevermind the current or ongoing narrative of Mueller's investigation. Who do YOU think is responsible & why or how???

If you are or were a Hillary supporter...…..were you or anyone you know influenced in any way to either vote against her? Or not vote at all???(which is a vote for someone, in and of itself mind you)

I could not vote for either Clinton nor Trump so I voted for Johnson...

Did Russian Trolls influence my opinion?

According to the left they did because any vote except for Clinton was influenced by fake news, but my vote was against the system that gives us poor candidates for President...

Now who is really to blame for Clinton failure?

The answer will surprise everyone but it was Hillary stupidity for failing to realize she was not Obama...

As much as I disliked Obama he had the support of the voter in key states in both elections and carried the Green vote unlike Clinton.

What Clinton supporters refuse to accept is Jill Stein cost Clinton states like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania...

They prefer to blame Russia while ignoring the Elephant ( not the GOP ) in the room that was Jill Stein that got Sanders votes in last election.

So as Clinton supporters believe Trump was the Russian Troll they should realize Clinton failure was here own and sure Wikileaks hurt her a little but those like me were never going to vote for her no matter what...

 

[Snouter]

The Donald would have won against Brock Hussaine. American citizens were "woke" and voted accordingly to try to have the government do its job and stop the invasion and stop wars for Izreal. Thus the calamity...

 

[Erinwltr]

I honestly Think that lot of people didn't wanna vote for both, also The FBI and Russia gave the orange a little push.

Issa, you have proved you are pretty crazy, uneducated and pretty clueless in previous threads so your theory might soothe your butthurtness but it denies the fact The Donald won in a LANDSLIDE.

POTUS. You win.

Jezuz Krist, Snouter, is that all you have?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Was your vote influenced in any way???

No.
I was a Hillary supporter in 2008 and in 2016. If she is the nominee in 2020, I will vote for her although I think the Democrats need to move in a different direction.

Mainly because you don't have much choice.

In Germany they have lots of choice.

In the US they have as much choice as the Chinese when they go to vote.

I agree we need election reform.

Well, I've been going on about Proportional Representation for years.

Republicans don't like it because they know they'll lose their unfair advantage, and Democrats don't like it because... no idea.

Both sides don't want change because they haven't been told to want it.

Can you give me a paragraph describing it?

Proportional Representation is that everyone votes. All the votes get counted. Then the seats are handed out based on those votes.

Germany has a 5% level to reach before you get a single seat.

Germany also has a duel system that I like where they have FPTP and then PR on top of this.

Basically Germany has 6 political parties in power, instead of two.

German federal election, 2017 - Wikipedia

In the FPTP voting the CDU/CSU gained 37.2% of the vote and 77% of the seats.

The FDP gained 7% of the votes and zero seats.

In PR the CDU/CSU gained 33% of the votes and 34.7% of the seats.

The FDP gained 10.7% of the votes and 11.28% of the seats.

With PR, 8% of the public changed their vote. With FPTP they voted larger parties, with PR they voted smaller parties.

FPTP is negative voting, people will often vote to stop someone else getting in.

PR is positive voting, you vote for who you want to represent you.

So, the FDP had 10.7% of the voters wanting to vote for them, but with FPTP these people would have been left without representation, simply because the system says so.

 

[Erinwltr]

No.
I was a Hillary supporter in 2008 and in 2016. If she is the nominee in 2020, I will vote for her although I think the Democrats need to move in a different direction.

Mainly because you don't have much choice.

In Germany they have lots of choice.

In the US they have as much choice as the Chinese when they go to vote.

I agree we need election reform.

Well, I've been going on about Proportional Representation for years.

Republicans don't like it because they know they'll lose their unfair advantage, and Democrats don't like it because... no idea.

Both sides don't want change because they haven't been told to want it.

Can you give me a paragraph describing it?

Proportional Representation is that everyone votes. All the votes get counted. Then the seats are handed out based on those votes.

Germany has a 5% level to reach before you get a single seat.

Germany also has a duel system that I like where they have FPTP and then PR on top of this.

Basically Germany has 6 political parties in power, instead of two.

German federal election, 2017 - Wikipedia

In the FPTP voting the CDU/CSU gained 37.2% of the vote and 77% of the seats.

The FDP gained 7% of the votes and zero seats.

In PR the CDU/CSU gained 33% of the votes and 34.7% of the seats.

The FDP gained 10.7% of the votes and 11.28% of the seats.

With PR, 8% of the public changed their vote. With FPTP they voted larger parties, with PR they voted smaller parties.

FPTP is negative voting, people will often vote to stop someone else getting in.

PR is positive voting, you vote for who you want to represent you.

So, the FDP had 10.7% of the voters wanting to vote for them, but with FPTP these people would have been left without representation, simply because the system says so.

Damn. Good Morning.

 

[Snouter]

Erinwlr, if you out of Prep H and too lazy to go to CVS, that is your problem!

 

[Erinwltr]

Erinwlr, if you out of Prep H and too lazy to go to CVS, that is your problem!

Never used it, never will, Snouter.

 

[Snouter]

That explans it

 

[candycorn]

No.
I was a Hillary supporter in 2008 and in 2016. If she is the nominee in 2020, I will vote for her although I think the Democrats need to move in a different direction.

Mainly because you don't have much choice.

In Germany they have lots of choice.

In the US they have as much choice as the Chinese when they go to vote.

I agree we need election reform.

Well, I've been going on about Proportional Representation for years.

Republicans don't like it because they know they'll lose their unfair advantage, and Democrats don't like it because... no idea.

Both sides don't want change because they haven't been told to want it.

Can you give me a paragraph describing it?

Proportional Representation is that everyone votes. All the votes get counted. Then the seats are handed out based on those votes.

Germany has a 5% level to reach before you get a single seat.

Germany also has a duel system that I like where they have FPTP and then PR on top of this.

Basically Germany has 6 political parties in power, instead of two.

German federal election, 2017 - Wikipedia

In the FPTP voting the CDU/CSU gained 37.2% of the vote and 77% of the seats.

The FDP gained 7% of the votes and zero seats.

In PR the CDU/CSU gained 33% of the votes and 34.7% of the seats.

The FDP gained 10.7% of the votes and 11.28% of the seats.

With PR, 8% of the public changed their vote. With FPTP they voted larger parties, with PR they voted smaller parties.

FPTP is negative voting, people will often vote to stop someone else getting in.

PR is positive voting, you vote for who you want to represent you.

So, the FDP had 10.7% of the voters wanting to vote for them, but with FPTP these people would have been left without representation, simply because the system says so.

Are there candidates?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Mainly because you don't have much choice.

In Germany they have lots of choice.

In the US they have as much choice as the Chinese when they go to vote.

I agree we need election reform.

Well, I've been going on about Proportional Representation for years.

Republicans don't like it because they know they'll lose their unfair advantage, and Democrats don't like it because... no idea.

Both sides don't want change because they haven't been told to want it.

Can you give me a paragraph describing it?

Proportional Representation is that everyone votes. All the votes get counted. Then the seats are handed out based on those votes.

Germany has a 5% level to reach before you get a single seat.

Germany also has a duel system that I like where they have FPTP and then PR on top of this.

Basically Germany has 6 political parties in power, instead of two.

German federal election, 2017 - Wikipedia

In the FPTP voting the CDU/CSU gained 37.2% of the vote and 77% of the seats.

The FDP gained 7% of the votes and zero seats.

In PR the CDU/CSU gained 33% of the votes and 34.7% of the seats.

The FDP gained 10.7% of the votes and 11.28% of the seats.

With PR, 8% of the public changed their vote. With FPTP they voted larger parties, with PR they voted smaller parties.

FPTP is negative voting, people will often vote to stop someone else getting in.

PR is positive voting, you vote for who you want to represent you.

So, the FDP had 10.7% of the voters wanting to vote for them, but with FPTP these people would have been left without representation, simply because the system says so.

Are there candidates?

You'll have individual candidates for constituencies like the US for FPTP (The US has FPTP) and then you have lists for PR.

The lists aren't ideal, but it's better than just FPTP on its own.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

New faces for one thing.
Modifying the message
Pragmatic liberalism

So, no new policies, just someone more likeable than Hillary with a better slogan and propaganda...

Obama isn't coming back and nobody believes in hope & change anymore

Sad!

 

[rightwinger]

Comey reversed the election

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

People are tired of this shit.

It's been going on for 50 years.

All both sides do is tell you how the other is fucking you.

... and they would be correct!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Who cost Hillary the election???

HILLARY CLINTON!

I disagree. Mrs. Clinton was pretty toasty drunk during the campaign, she was counting on her handlers to get her in there.

They are the ones who failed, not Mrs. C personally.

So it wasn't her fault for getting drunk?

Weak!

 

[candycorn]

New faces for one thing.
Modifying the message
Pragmatic liberalism

So, no new policies, just someone more likeable than Hillary with a better slogan and propaganda...

Obama isn't coming back and nobody believes in hope & change anymore

Sad!

People still believe in hope and change….Trump’s telling of how rotten the nation is will not change that.

 

[rightwinger]

Without Comeys bombshell, Hillary would have coasted to an easy victory

 

[OODA_Loop]

Without Comeys bombshell, Hillary would have coasted to an easy victory

I love liberal fratricide like a fat kid loves cake.

 

[LeftofLeft]

She ignored the White working man.... plain and short mole. She also lost among Blacks compared to Obama. Probably took the woman vote for granted. Finally, she felt fucking entitled.

Democrats should stop whining about her loss as well. Had they felt the that strong about her they would have told Bernie to wait his turn. Hillary lost the first time to Obama and had to cheat to beat Bernie.

Why is all of this so hard for liberals to understand?

 

[Jantje_Smit]

People still believe in hope and change….

Maybe, but they don't believe the democrats will deliver it

Trump’s telling of how rotten the nation is will not change that.

The orange version of hope & change is called making murica great again, same principle, only for the other side

 

[OODA_Loop]

Economic nationalism and illegal immigration.