2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: The Fatal Flaw in the Post-Mortem Analyses [View all]PatsFan87
(368 posts)A lot of people don't take the time to educate themselves on a candidate's specific policy plans. They get their information from word of mouth and the corporate media (who suck at "reporting" news, let's be real). If we know this is the case though, why would we have someone so controversial as our candidate? Why would we have someone who we know had low favorability and trustworthy numbers? We knew that would be extremely hard to turn around. I'm not saying it was fair, but the "watercooler chatter" at the office and the chat at sporting events was rarely about issues, it was about emails. We could never get to the real issues because that was the issue. Next time, we need to consider the candidate's possible controversies and pick someone who isn't damaged goods. It's tough to hear but it's being realistic.