2016 Postmortem

rtracey

(2,062 posts) Mon Dec 5, 2016, 09:13 AM Dec 2016

ok so here it is

Ok so here it is... Thanks whoever decided Trump is going to be a better president then Clinton... you know who you are and I hope you get screwed.

Stein votes/Trump margin:
MI: 51,463/10,704
PA: 49,678/46,765
WI: 31,006/22,177

enough said

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

ok so here it is (Original Post) rtracey Dec 2016 OP

Faulty premise FBaggins Dec 2016 #1

Are you saying they would have went for trump? boston bean Dec 2016 #2

Of course not FBaggins Dec 2016 #3

So many or most were anyone but hillary? boston bean Dec 2016 #4

Having trouble with logic this morning? FBaggins Dec 2016 #5

Millions were disenfranchised. Still she has the highest number of votes of any white man. boston bean Dec 2016 #7

Was there supposed to be a relevant point in there? FBaggins Dec 2016 #8

All of them were relevant in response to your inquiries. whether you see them as relevant or not is boston bean Dec 2016 #10

My guess, they probably would not have voted at all. Exilednight Dec 2016 #9

K&R mcar Dec 2016 #6

FBaggins

(27,708 posts)

1. Faulty premise

Reply to rtracey (Original post)

Mon Dec 5, 2016, 09:17 AM

Dec 2016

You can't assume that Stein votes would have gone for Clinton if Stein wasn't on the ballot.

boston bean

(36,491 posts)

2. Are you saying they would have went for trump?

Reply to FBaggins (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 5, 2016, 09:19 AM

Dec 2016

FBaggins

(27,708 posts)

3. Of course not

Reply to boston bean (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 5, 2016, 09:27 AM

Dec 2016

You can't think of any other possibilities?

boston bean

(36,491 posts)

4. So many or most were anyone but hillary?

Reply to FBaggins (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 5, 2016, 09:32 AM

Dec 2016

If that is the case they were voters who never could be reached and are self fulfilling prophecy deadenders who are to blame for trump. Lefties to pure to vote for the most left candidate capable of defeating trump.

FBaggins

(27,708 posts)

5. Having trouble with logic this morning?

Reply to boston bean (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 5, 2016, 09:40 AM

Dec 2016

This was the first national election where both major candidates had negative approval numbers. There were hundreds of thousands of people who showed up to vote for local races and didn't even vote for President. There isn't any reason that these (or the Johnson voters) would necessarily have voted for either major-party candidate had it been a two-way race.

There were also millions who voted in 2012 or 2008 who saw no reason to turn out for any of the candidates this time around.

If Hillary failed to appeal to them, it's folly to blame them and not her.

boston bean

(36,491 posts)

7. Millions were disenfranchised. Still she has the highest number of votes of any white man.

Reply to FBaggins (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 5, 2016, 09:45 AM

Dec 2016

Ever to run for the presidency.

I suggest you look at numbers of 3rd party voters in 2016 compared to 2012 or 2008.

FBaggins

(27,708 posts)

8. Was there supposed to be a relevant point in there?

Reply to boston bean (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 5, 2016, 10:06 AM

Dec 2016

It may have been deleted.

Why does her vote total matter compared to candidates of particular color/gender who she didn't run against? She had more votes than Dewey and Truman combined... does that matter?

I suggest you look at numbers of 3rd party voters in 2016 compared to 2012 or 2008.

Why? Different issues/candidates/years/economies/issues/etc... mean differing turnout and voter preferences.

The key point you're missing is that even with a successful Democratic President to follow, the premier name in Democratic politics, and an opponent as "gadawful" as Trump... she was unable to persuade enough people to show up and vote for her in the states that she knew she needed to win (FL/NC/OH/NH/MI/WI/PA). That's on her and her campaign.