Hillary Clinton was not a weak candidate, as some whinny holier than thou microbrained trolls who infest this site want everyone to believe. There was always a concentrated effort stretching over a quarter of a century to destroy her, from the far right who accused her of being an out of control feminist socialist, to the far left who accuse her of being a war mongering corporate sellout.
Thanks to bum wipes like them, as well as the Liberally Biased Mainstream Media™ who buried all her positives and created negatives to hang on her and attack her, we ended up with a corrupt asshole in the White House who smeared his fat unwiped ass over everything regarding the presidency. We wouldn't have had to deal with something like the Coronavirus, because a President Hillary Clinton would have been on it and would have kept any damage down to a bare minimum, then we would have lived our lives back to normal again.
The Ninth Circle of Hell awaits filth, like Gene Hetzel, when they finally die!
Hillary was a problematic candidate that was put up because it was her turn. There is a tremendous machine behind her. I remember the horrible outreach she did. T was and is a monster. I am not, as some would suggest because its easy to assume, for any candjdate, including Bernie, as some of the uncouth here would suggest. Nor do I fill my posts or responses with vitriol or foulness. I also dont assume because its convenient, which sadly a lot of this current work does.
Hillary was already not well liked. Some of that was sexist, although citations of the right's reaction at a convention is not a group who would vote for her anyway. She was a horrible candidate, arrogant. She is a woman, but onr can be a woman and tough without being condescending as she often was and, frankly so many of you are.
People seem to think that the threat of T was enough to win votes rather than also campaigning to grow your electorate
Just as the anti-woke slobs are liars and the T right are antithetical to our democracy's future, vile all, you guys seem locked into your own narratives, the most significant of which is this "lost cause" type narrative that is definitionally a loser's lament, every bit as lame as Ts attempts at election overturning is nihilistic. You always blame everyone but the most obvious culprit: Hillary was a bad candidate and it is foolish to have and to keep pushing this "or else/its your fault" stuff. We fought a revolution to ensure taxation WITH representation, and thats still the standard. No candidate is perfect and so we need to work with the possible. Just because Hillary was possible, however, doesn't mean people can be expected to fall in line if you fail to make the case that you represent their varied interests. If you don't abandon this neo-liberal, and thats who the New Democrats have proven themselves to be time and again, bus, we will lose our republic because you seem to think that Ds are Rs, always falling in line.
And the thing is, its not the Ds you got to win, its the independents. So I would abandon all the talk, no matter how true, that she lost because people don't want women. Thats loser talk. An AA won the presidency, something Id never thought Id see. Its not the stumbling block you want to make it into, any particular status of a candidate. What wins is the candidate and how they campaign.
"Look what you made me do!" has always been the most pathetic of excuses.
Hillary Clinton was not a weak candidate, as some whinny holier than thou microbrained trolls who infest this site want everyone to believe. There was always a concentrated effort stretching over a quarter of a century to destroy her, from the far right who accused her of being an out of control feminist socialist, to the far left who accuse her of being a war mongering corporate sellout.
Thanks to bum wipes like them, as well as the Liberally Biased Mainstream Media™ who buried all her positives and created negatives to hang on her and attack her, we ended up with a corrupt asshole in the White House who smeared his fat unwiped ass over everything regarding the presidency. We wouldn't have had to deal with something like the Coronavirus, because a President Hillary Clinton would have been on it and would have kept any damage down to a bare minimum, then we would have lived our lives back to normal again.
The Ninth Circle of Hell awaits filth, like Gene Hetzel, when they finally die!
Hillary was a problematic candidate that was put up because it was her turn. There is a tremendous machine behind her. I remember the horrible outreach she did. T was and is a monster. I am not, as some would suggest because its easy to assume, for any candjdate, including Bernie, as some of the uncouth here would suggest. Nor do I fill my posts or responses with vitriol or foulness. I also dont assume because its convenient, which sadly a lot of this current work does.
Hillary was already not well liked. Some of that was sexist, although citations of the right's reaction at a convention is not a group who would vote for her anyway. She was a horrible candidate, arrogant. She is a woman, but onr can be a woman and tough without being condescending as she often was and, frankly so many of you are.
People seem to think that the threat of T was enough to win votes rather than also campaigning to grow your electorate
Just as the anti-woke slobs are liars and the T right are antithetical to our democracy's future, vile all, you guys seem locked into your own narratives, the most significant of which is this "lost cause" type narrative that is definitionally a loser's lament, every bit as lame as Ts attempts at election overturning is nihilistic. You always blame everyone but the most obvious culprit: Hillary was a bad candidate and it is foolish to have and to keep pushing this "or else/its your fault" stuff. We fought a revolution to ensure taxation WITH representation, and thats still the standard. No candidate is perfect and so we need to work with the possible. Just because Hillary was possible, however, doesn't mean people can be expected to fall in line if you fail to make the case that you represent their varied interests. If you don't abandon this neo-liberal, and thats who the New Democrats have proven themselves to be time and again, bus, we will lose our republic because you seem to think that Ds are Rs, always falling in line.
And the thing is, its not the Ds you got to win, its the independents. So I would abandon all the talk, no matter how true, that she lost because people don't want women. Thats loser talk. An AA won the presidency, something Id never thought Id see. Its not the stumbling block you want to make it into, any particular status of a candidate. What wins is the candidate and how they campaign.