Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Politics In General Winning

We don’t have a single presidential election; we have 50 small presidential elections. I realize a lot of folks are peeved at that, but it is what it is. When one gets right down to it, only 9 states count. The rest are pre-determined. You had the swing states of Florida, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Iowa, Arizona and Georgia. These states change over time.

Independents gave Trump his win over Hillary in the deciding states of Pennsylvania, 48-41 Trump, Michigan 52-36 Trump, Wisconsin 50-40 Trump, even in Florida Trump won independents 47-43 over Hillary. Granted, Trump’s win was a fluke. Everything had to line up perfect, the earth, moon, sun, the planets, solar system and even galaxies for Trump to win. 2016 was such a unique election in that 25% of all Americans disliked both major party candidates and didn’t want neither one to become the next president. That’s the highest dislike of both candidates ever recorded. It just happened that Trump won that dislike of both candidates group, the group that didn’t want neither one to become president. 25% is one huge number. To top that off 54% of all independents disliked both major party candidate and didn’t want neither one to become president. This by itself makes 2016 unique in our history.

It wasn’t that this dislike factor wasn’t known to both major parties. Plenty of polls showed exactly this. But both parties went ahead and nominated their unwanted candidates anyway. Hillary received 48% of the total vote, meaning 52% of all Americans voted against her as did 54% of all Americans vote against Trump. Clinton didn’t receive a majority of the vote; she received a plurality. Big difference in my mind. Maybe not yours.

I firmly believe that almost any other Democrat, alive or dead other than Clinton would have trounced Trump by 10 points or more. The reverse is also true in my mind. That almost any other candidate than Trump would have beaten Clinton by 10 points. But those were the two choices the major parties gave us.

I’ll leave this with you, in 2016 56% of all Americans had a negative view of Hillary Clinton, 60% of Trump. But where it counted and where it made all the difference as to winner and loser, 70% of independents viewed Clinton negatively, 60% viewed trump negatively enabling Trump to win the nationwide independent vote 46-42 with 12% voting against both casting a ballot for a third party candidate. That 4-point win among independents wasn’t enough to overcome the 6-point Democratic party affiliation advantage nationwide as Hillary won the popular vote by 2 points. But in the deciding states, independents made all the difference.

This is our modern political era we live in today. Where basically the non-political, the non-attentive couch potatoes decide who wins or loses elections. As we strive to make elections easier, get more people to the polls, the more influence and decisive votes couch potatoes will have. We’re turning our elections over to people who don’t care who wins or loses. Or to people who only vote for the candidate they least want to lose. They don’t vote a candidate they want to win, just against a candidate they want to lose the most.

Hillary Clinton is a really good example of somebody who the Republicans destroyed by ranking on her every chance that they had (and they had a lot of chances). Her solution to that problem was to do absolutely nothing and stand above it all. She did, and they did, and they won that battle. The Republicans have proven, several times, that they can destroy people, especially people who won't really fight back. I remember when they went after John Kerry and wrecked him as well (and he was, I think, a real war hero in VietNam). They are VERY good at that!

I have also read that Trump has been losing true believers. Not a lot, but some. One thing I am sure of and that is that he continues to have a LOT of true believers!

I just wish there were some qualifications that presidential candidates must have to run. I also realize that's just never gonna happen. It would, however, be pretty interesting if such a thing was out there. THEN we would hear some very interesting claims which just might take down the entire psychological camp.

As it stands the qualifications are determined by both major parties. Since the advent of the modern primary system in 1976, by those who belong to both major parties via their primary vote. Pre-1976, the national and state party leaders held one heck of a lot of influence in determining who their party’s nominee was as there were just 10-15 primaries nationwide and some of them weren’t binding.

Who did we get under the old system since WWII FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, Nixon. Carter was the first president elected using the modern primary system. He was followed by Reagan, G.H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, G.W. Bush, Obama, Trump and now Biden. Looking at how historians ranked the presidents, FDR, Truman, IKE, LBJ are top ten presidents, JFK number 13 and Nixon 33rd. Not a bad job under the old system. No top 10 presidents since the modern primary system began, although 2018 was the last historian rankings available. Reagan at 11 and Bill Clinton at 13 are the only top 20. Obama and Trump were rated as the historians stated not enough time had passed since they left office in order to evaluate the long-term effects of their policies on the country. Although a CSPAN poll in 2021 had Obama 10 and Trump 44. But C-Span’s was a public opinion poll.

The bottom line as to qualification is determined by people’s vote in each major party’s primaries.

As for Trump losing some supporters, I'll give you his favorable rating among Republicans which may or may not be the same.

Nov 2020 Very Favorable 78% Somewhat Favorable 14%
Today Very Favorable 58% Somewhat Favorable 24%

Including Bernie? I think the argument was that only Clinton could beat Trump, Bernie was too radical.

I don't think the Trump phenomenon can be blamed entirely on Clinton. And I believe it could have easily overrun any other unsuspecting Democrat running a normal campaign.

And I believe Clinton would have trounced any other Republican candidate just like she trounced Trump. But it takes a lot more votes to elect a Democrat than it does to elect a Republican.

I didn’t save the favorable/unfavorable numbers for the primaries in 2016 or the exit polls for all the Democratic primaries. There were only three candidates that were seen in a positive light, seen more favorable than unfavorable. Sanders, Rubio and Kasich. Which goes back to my likeable factor influencing how independents vote.

Here's something to contemplate on reference the 2016 Democratic primaries.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/democratic-primary-electorate-key-findings-from-the-exit-polls/

From Above

Overall, Hillary Clinton won the support of self-identified Democrats who voted in Democratic primaries and caucuses where exit polls were conducted by a margin of nearly 30 percentage points, while self-identified independents voted for Bernie Sanders by a similar margin. Democrats made up 75 percent of voters, while independents made up just 22 percent.

While Bernie Sanders (50 percent) edged out Hillary Clinton (48 percent) among white voters overall, 77 percent of black Democratic primary voters chose Clinton.

Like Barack Obama eight years ago, Bernie Sanders captured the vote of younger voters under 30, and they made up a greater percentage of the electorate in 2016 (17 percent) than in 2008 (14 percent). And Sanders fared better among these younger voters, winning 71 percent of voters under 30 (compared to 59 percent for Obama in 2008).

Much more in that article. I think 2016 was Sanders time to win if he was going to. Compared to Trump and Hillary Clinton, Sanders was well respected. I’ll add this, my candidate for 2016 was Jim Webb, when Webb didn’t campaign, probably knowing the fix was in for Clinton, I switched to Kasich. Once he was gone, it was Johnson who ended up getting my vote. I was rooting for Sanders in the Democratic primaries back in 2016. I would have voted for him over Trump. Last year it was Biden I rooted for; he was the safe candidate to beat Trump. There was never a doubt about that in my mind.

Here's the polling from 2016 on a Sanders vs. Trump matchup.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...eral_election_trump_vs_sanders-5565.html

Now how Sanders would have faired in the general election in 2016 being attacked constantly as a socialist. I don’t know. But his polling numbers vs. Trump were great.

Overall, Clinton won the election. By around 3 Million votes.

Sanders would have lost any election to any candidate. He was ahead of his time...or behind it. At any rate, he was an anachronism. His connection to socialism disqualified him for the presidency in the eyes of Democrats and Republicans alike.

Vermont just keeps electing him to keep him out of Vermont.

Clinton was never a bad candidate, she didn't campaign poorly, she's a decent likable person who won millions more votes than Donald Trump. She would have been a good president.

Only an electoral fluke gave the presidency to Trump. Certainly not the American voters, they never expected Trump to win...he was just a protest vote against business as usual in Washington by an electorate ignored by Washington in favor of corporate interests.

I disagree on the campaign. I thought it was very inept. Lacking in that old college try. Trump made 116 campaign visits, rallies, stops from 1 Sep until election day, Clinton made 71 which looks more than what it was as it included fund raising events in deep blue California and New York. In the deciding states, Trump visited Wisconsin 5 times, Hillary never made it to Wisconsin. Michigan, it was Trump 6 visits, Hillary 1 and in Pennsylvania, Trump 8 to Hillary 5 which included her last campaign rally in Pittsburg election eve. Even in electoral rich Florida, it was Trump 13 visits, stops to Hillary’s 8.

It like Hillary ceded the campaign trail to Trump. Then there was the media, Trump was calling in every morning to almost every morning show whether they supported him or not, Hillary only went on the shows like the View which supported her. Trump was out front every day, the lead story, the headline news maker. He dwarfed Hillary with the media. Hillary also went over 200 days without a press conference. Hillary concentrated on raising money and running political commercial. Hillary had a 2-1 advantage in money raised. 1.191 billion for Hillary, 646.8 for Trump.

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-presidential-campaign-fundraising/

Money wise, Hillary should have run away from Trump. Trump became the first candidate to win the presidency who raised and spent less money then his opponent since 1964. The winning presidential candidate always had the most money and always won. 2016 was an exception. 2020 was the same Biden 1.634 billion to Trump’s 1.088 billion. In third place was Libertarian Jorgensen with less than 3 million.

https://www.opensecrets.org/2020-presidential-race

There’re many more reasons why Hillary lost. Her problem even if you think she was likable, independents didn’t. It was independents that gave the election to Trump. They viewed her as aloof, an elitist know it all who had a fake smile. Now this is history, gone, done with. I’ll buy that quite a lot of people were just tired of business as usual. We never had an election before where so many people disliked and didn’t want neither candidate to become the next president.

Okay, Trump outcampaigned her and she still won. The difference is that Trump thrived on the rallies and the adulation they brought him. He had no intention of delivering good governance if elected, it was all about him.

Did you see what went on at those rallies? The calls for violence against his political enemies? The racism? The bigotry? The Nazis for Trump?

Trump never expected to be elected. Polls said he probably wouldn't be. The media never took him seriously. The debate was a debacle.

It wasn't until near election day that folks began to admit Trump had a chance.

Clinton was on the list of most admired American women for 17 years running. First Lady of Arkansas, First Lady of the United States, a Senator, a Secretary of State. Author, motivational speaker, etc etc etc

She would be our president now except for a fluke. And things would be a lot different.

I think we let a good one get away.

I think that Hillary lost because she thought that she had won even before the election. Just didn't think she could lose and the Democratic party thought the same thing so they were a bit lazy throughout. Same thing happened the guy who lost the election in Virginia. I watched him explain how he had already won the election. He was so sure he publicly said something like "parents have no right to decide what their children learn in school". I think, right now, that Washington state may have a couple of female US senators who are thinking like that right now. Wonder if its a Democratic failure thing.

I think that Trump won because he entertained and TV gave him billions of dollars of free exposure whilst Hillary had to pay for hers. I have often wondered how many of Trump True Believers used to watch his TV show. I have noticed that there are a lot of people who confuse TV Land with Reality. I have to tell my wife, at least once a week, that what she is seeing is in TV Land and has nothing to do with Reality. I have also noticed that teenagers tend to refer to whatever they watch as being real as well.

Everything being said my belief that the American Voting Public seems a bit confused between reality and TV Land.

Hillary "lost" because of an electoral fluke. Not because she thought or said or did anything.

What should never have been a close race at all became a statistical anomaly. Trump whipped up a mob and created a populist wave. A wave of the very people he despises most.

Perhaps you remember that we all thought she was gonna win from the get-go.

I dunno about you but I'll never forget how sh*tty I felt when I went to bed that night. And I was 100% right to feel that way. The next four years panned out exactly as we expected them to. Trump lost his bid for re-election just as we thought he would.

Biden has done nothing exciting or disappointing. He's done about all that could be expected of him. Everybody knew that whoever followed Trump was gonna have a sh*t row to hoe.

With smilax briars and fire ants. Maybe some red-bugs too.

Whoever is gonna save the Democratic Party from itself hasn't shown their face yet. Next coupla years are gonna be fun.