Why Hillary Lost....According to a Liberal, Minority Female

originally posted by: Krakatoa
a reply to: soberbacchus

How about if the team that lost the big game cheated to get into that competition originally by sabotaging the prior game just to be there? If they had not done that, then perhaps that other team would have had the opportunity to win in the "big game"?

Hmmm.... But, I guess that does not factor into your calculus.

In sports this can happen, a really bad call by a biased referee or judge, the next round happens and they get annihilated because should never have been there, there opponent was actually much better but lost due to favoritism, then they move forward to get wiped out by a person or team that had a fair vetting process to get where they are.

Remind us of anything.....?????

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Krakatoa
a reply to: soberbacchus

How about if the team that lost the big game cheated to get into that competition originally by sabotaging the prior game just to be there?

That was not cheating. No laws regulate the DNC or RNC's selection process. It would be like screaming that it was unfair someone got a promotion at your company.

It was by the books even if it was arguably unfair or sneaky. The RNC did and does equally crappy things. Both private orgs.

Just as I thought....a 4 year old viewpoint. "They did it too....whaaa".

??? Just pointing out that the expectation that the RNC or DNC selects their nominees fairly as per the people is a ridiculous and naïve expectation...dare I say a "4 year old viewpoint"

The point is that the team you hold close to your heart lost. It lost based upon the rules in place.

Where to start with your confusion?

So far there has been none, zero, zilch, nada, proven evidence that would hold up in court regarding the "cheating" you claim. That means, by default, there wasn't any....right?

Just because someone hasn't been charged with a crime does not mean a crime hasn't taken place or that no one will be charged?

You don't appear to be rationally thinking.

Heck, the team I rooted for didn't win either.

I wasn't rooting for a team?

Guess what. You don't get to decide what is cheating or legal. Neither do I.

No..that is for the DOJ and Special Prosecutor Mueller to decide.

So, what is the point of holding on to the old popular vote argument?
The reality is there is none.

I don't remember posting about the popular vote?

Again, escape form the distortion field before it consumes you in it's hatred.

Perhaps say that in the mirror? Your whole post was a fun-house mirror of what I said and some of it just wildly made up.

originally posted by: ReadingOne
a reply to: soberbacchus

"The DNC raised just $3.8 million in July, compared to the $10.2 million raised by the RNC in the same month. While the GOP has no debt, the DNC added slightly to its debt in July, which now sits at $3.4 million.

If money mattered more than votes, you might have a point?

Maybe review fundraising HRC vs. Trump and explain the outcome?

People don't need to contribute to the DNC to think Trump is an unprecedented disaster or recognize the incompetence of the GOP's impotent leadership right now.

Good luck to you..hold on to that hate.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: CB328
That and most Americans are stupid as dirt.

Most Americans voted for Hillary.

It was their being dead that made it an issue.

originally posted by: VforVendettea
It was their being dead that made it an issue.

So? Maybe if Trump were more likeable those 3,000,0000 dead, bad hombres would have voted for him.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: ReadingOne
a reply to: soberbacchus

"The DNC raised just $3.8 million in July, compared to the $10.2 million raised by the RNC in the same month. While the GOP has no debt, the DNC added slightly to its debt in July, which now sits at $3.4 million.

If money mattered more than votes, you might have a point?

Maybe review fundraising HRC vs. Trump and explain the outcome?

People don't need to contribute to the DNC to think Trump is an unprecedented disaster or recognize the incompetence of the GOP's impotent leadership right now.

Good luck to you..hold on to that hate.

I believe his point went beyond just the straight numbers. The point is, people are so sick of the Democratic party they have been unable to fundraise effectively lately. After they were able to garner enough funds for the 2 most expensive campaigns in history (Obama then Clinton), now they're having problems finding people who want to donate. Now if that trend continues into 2018 and 2020, considering they weren't able to beat Donald Trump with the fortune they spent on Hillary, how do you think they're going to do with those votes when they have less money to spend?

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: ReadingOne
a reply to: soberbacchus

"The DNC raised just $3.8 million in July, compared to the $10.2 million raised by the RNC in the same month. While the GOP has no debt, the DNC added slightly to its debt in July, which now sits at $3.4 million.

If money mattered more than votes, you might have a point?

Maybe review fundraising HRC vs. Trump and explain the outcome?

People don't need to contribute to the DNC to think Trump is an unprecedented disaster or recognize the incompetence of the GOP's impotent leadership right now.

Good luck to you..hold on to that hate.

I believe his point went beyond just the straight numbers. The point is, people are so sick of the Democratic party they have been unable to fundraise effectively lately.

Definetly an exhaustion thing going on there with the DNC.
That and the "well" has recently been stressed with a poor result.
Lots of Donors gave big to HRC and lost. They aren't racing to throw good money after bad.

But his point was very obviously that money donated to the DNC reflected some dire prediction for 2018 or 2020 and that the GOP was more popular amongst voters.

Looking at the average make-up of anti-trump protests, they don't appear to be big donor types, nor DNC types, they are a new mass of young voters who don't fully buy into the DNC and established political parties, but they sure think Trump is Satan in the flesh.

Otherwise I don't think a proper measure of 2018 or 2020 outcomes can be gleaned from DNC fundraising just like DNC fundraising in 2016 outstripping the RNC was an indicator of outcome.

a reply to: soberbacchus

It doesn't look dire if this trend continues into the midterms? They needed about 4x as much as Trump just to keep the race close. If they don't pick up their fundraising, their odds of gaining seats in the midterms are not good.

I will agree that there's no way to be certain the trend will continue. It's entirely possible they could turn it around. Right now though it doesn't bode well. Especially when they seem determined not to do a real analysis of why they lost and change the message.

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: soberbacchus

It doesn't look dire if this trend continues into the midterms? They needed about 4x as much as Trump just to keep the race close. If they don't pick up their fundraising, their odds of gaining seats in the midterms are not good.

I will agree that there's no way to be certain the trend will continue. It's entirely possible they could turn it around. Right now though it doesn't bode well. Especially when they seem determined not to do a real analysis of why they lost and change the message.

Again, for the DNC and their target audience, Trump's twitter feed is free DNC advertising.

We will see if the fundraising arm picks up, but I think we are evolving campaign metrics over the last decade. The internet and social media are now dominating and they don't cost a great deal of money.

a reply to: soberbacchus

His Twitter feed is free advertising for hardcore anti-Trumpers who are gonna vote for whoever the Dem nominee is regardless. Most Americans understand issues are more complicated than what he can fit in 140 characters. The "resist" crap turns off a lot of moderates and apolitical voters. If they keep this up 2018 is gonna be painful for them.

She lost because he was better.
Donald>Hillary
Just being a woman is not enough.

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: soberbacchus

His Twitter feed is free advertising for hardcore anti-Trumpers who are gonna vote for whoever the Dem nominee is regardless.

Yes. + Anyone left, right and middle that is rational.

The "resist" crap turns off a lot of moderates and apolitical voters.

No. It was moderate GOP who actually started the @NeverTrump movement. They might be less vocal now, but they aren't turned off by the "resist" folks, they just aren't that extreme.

a reply to: CB328

But...

But...

I thought she won the popular vote?? Didn't she??

a reply to: soberbacchus

Who started it is irrelevant. Right now, moderates are being turned off by the false narratives and the obstructionism coming from the left. You don't have to believe me. We'll see how those midterms go. They can keep doubling down on it. I hope they do.

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: soberbacchus

Who started it is irrelevant. Right now, moderates are being turned off by the false narratives and the obstructionism coming from the left. You don't have to believe me. We'll see how those midterms go. They can keep doubling down on it. I hope they do.

A year away

Guess we will see.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: CB328

But...

But...

I thought she won the popular vote?? Didn't she??

But...

But..

Shouted someone whose go-to excuse is "Voter Fraud!!!!" every time voters don't affirm their warped worldview...

a reply to: soberbacchus

I hear a lot of accusations of "voter fraud"...what I'm not seeing is a whole lot of evidence of voter fraud.

'Course, I'm so over this silliness that I honestly don't care a whole lot. I'm going to worry about my own little corner of the Universe, mind my own business, as it were.

Didn't like her, don't like him.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: soberbacchus

I hear a lot of accusations of "voter fraud"...what I'm not seeing is a whole lot of evidence of voter fraud.

Well you gotta know there's a reason why some states are whining about the "integrity of our election" but won't cooperate with any investigation into the actual voting process.

Remember.Hillary could not beat Obama either and He was a lousy president.She is way in over her head when She runs for President of U.S.

She is also way to arrogant and seems like She is mean and fake laughing.

a reply to: Jobeycool

She's fake everything.