Eichenwald: The Myths Democrats Swallowed that Cost Them the Presidential Election

[Hekate]

This is an excellent read. Recommend whole thing at link, because he lays it out very clearly and at length. He endured death threats against himself and his family to bring us the truth over and over.

www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

The Myths Democrats Swallowed that Cost Them the Presidential Election

On Friday, I almost assaulted a fan of my work. I was in the Philadelphia International Airport, and a man who recognized me from one of my appearances on a television news show approached. He thanked me for the investigative reporting I had done about Donald Trump before the election, expressed his outrage that the Republican nominee had won and then told me quite gruffly, “Get back to work.” Something about his arrogance struck me, so I asked, “Who did you vote for?”

He replied, “Well, Stein, but—” I interrupted him and said, “You’re lucky it’s illegal for me to punch you in the face.” Then, after telling him to have sex with himself—but with a much cruder term—I turned and walked away.

A certain kind of liberal makes me sick. These people traffic in false equivalencies, always pretending that both nominees are the same, justifying their apathy and not voting or preening about their narcissistic purity as they cast their ballot for a person they know cannot win. I have no problem with anyone who voted for Trump, because they wanted a Trump presidency. I have an enormous problem with anyone who voted for Trump or Stein or Johnson—or who didn’t vote at all—and who now expresses horror about the outcome of this election. If you don’t like the consequences of your own actions, shut the hell up.

Let me explain this as clearly as I can:.... >snip<

[Grey Lemercier]

1. superb article, really lays out a comprehensive case

[Lil Missy]

2. Excellent! Every word of it describes how I feel about 3rd Party voters and those who stayed home

because they "didn't like" Hillary.

And those whining that Bernie didn't get a fair shake. Bullshit!!

As the author says, those people who believe their egos are more important than winning this election can "go have sex with themselves" only in cruder terms.

Go start your own 3rd Party and get out of ours.

(Gosh! I have been holding this in for a week and was too busy being depressed. Now I'm damned angry!)

[Feeling the Bern]

10. Didn't the "start your own 3rd part and get out of ours" nonsense really alienate people

I remember being told in no uncertain terms by her supporters that the Democrats didn't need us or didn't want us.

What should we do then? We won't vote Trump, HRC and her supporters told us to kiss off. . .please explain. And do me a favor. . .don't give me your anger. I voted Clinton by voting against Trump, but would rather have had Bernie.

[bettyellen]

25. In response to Berners who stated the "lock her up" crap- yes. They have to go.

[mcar]

32. They were never Democrats anyway

Just pretenders

[bettyellen]

34. I had friends who were former Dems and Berners, ended up supporting her but

Pushed so much of that crap it was sick. One fucked up his marriage a while with the hatred. Strange stuff.

[mcar]

35. I will never understand the hatred

of this good woman.

[Lil Missy]

42. First of all, drop the pretense that I was talking to you/about you personally.

And, my post specifically referred to those who didn't vote/stayed home because of ....... their ego.

This is a message board, (and a Democratic message board) and I'll express my anger as I please.

What should you do then??? Did you read the article? He expressed, (and I agreed) about what you should do.

You voted Clinton "by voting against Trump"?? Is that code for "I voted third party?? If that's the case, you essentially voted FOR TRUMP.

If that is the case, how dare you lecture to me!

[Feeling the Bern]

47. I voted for Clinton. Prozac. . .good thing to take.

[Lil Missy]

61. As a Bernie website would be good for you ...

[pnwmom]

3. Eichenwald demolishes a key myth: that Bernie would have done better than Hillary.

He himself saw a 2-foot thick pile of opposition research that the RNC had prepared, ready to use if Bernie were the nominee. They must have been licking their chops.

So what would have happened when Sanders hit a real opponent, someone who did not care about alienating the young college voters in his base? I have seen the opposition book assembled by Republicans for Sanders, and it was brutal. The Republicans would have torn him apart. And while Sanders supporters might delude themselves into believing that they could have defended him against all of this, there is a name for politicians who play defense all the time: losers.

Here are a few tastes of what was in store for Sanders, straight out of the Republican playbook: He thinks rape is A-OK. In 1972, when he was 31, Sanders wrote a fictitious essay in which he described a woman enjoying being raped by three men. Yes, there is an explanation for it—a long, complicated one, just like the one that would make clear why the Clinton emails story was nonsense. And we all know how well that worked out.

Then there’s the fact that Sanders was on unemployment until his mid-30s, and that he stole electricity from a neighbor after failing to pay his bills, and that he co-sponsored a bill to ship Vermont’s nuclear waste to a poor Hispanic community in Texas, where it could be dumped. You can just see the words “environmental racist” on Republican billboards. And if you can’t, I already did. They were in the Republican opposition research book as a proposal on how to frame the nuclear waste issue.

Also on the list: Sanders violated campaign finance laws, criticized Clinton for supporting the 1994 crime bill that he voted for, and he voted against the Amber Alert system. His pitch for universal health care would have been used against him too, since it was tried in his home state of Vermont and collapsed due to excessive costs. Worst of all, the Republicans also had video of Sanders at a 1985 rally thrown by the leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua where half a million people chanted, “Here, there, everywhere/the Yankee will die,’’ while President Daniel Ortega condemned “state terrorism” by America. Sanders said, on camera, supporting the Sandinistas was “patriotic.”

And he voted AGAINST the Amber Alert system (yes, he had reasons, but who cares?) and on and on and on.

[bettyellen]

26. And no restrictions on abortion. Dumb platform.

[NBachers]

4. I urge everyone to read this article in it's entirety.

" On the other hand, almost 5 million Obama voters either stayed home or cast their votes for someone else. More than twice as many millennials—a group heavily invested in the “Sanders was cheated out of the nomination” fantasy—voted third-party. The laughably unqualified Jill Stein of the Green Party got 1.3 million votes; those voters almost certainly opposed Trump; if just the Stein voters in Michigan had cast their ballot for Clinton, she probably would have won the state. And there is no telling how many disaffected Sanders voters cast their ballot for Trump.

Of course, there will still be those voters who snarl, “She didn’t earn my vote,” as if somehow their narcissism should override all other considerations in the election. That, however, is not what an election is about. Voters are charged with choosing the best person to lead the country, not the one who appeals the most to their egos.

If you voted for Trump because you supported him, congratulations on your candidate’s victory. But if you didn’t vote for the only person who could defeat him and are now protesting a Trump presidency, may I suggest you shut up and go home. Adults now need to start fixing the damage you have done." Bold added by me.

[sheshe2]

5. I read it the other day and posted it elsewhere.

The stupidity breaks my heart.

Good to see you again, NBachers. I missed you.

[NBachers]

7. Yes - I'd been thinking of you in the off days, and looking forward to getting back together.

These are times when our friendships and alliances really count.

[sheshe2]

9. I had some trouble coming back.

My email, the only one I have did not link to my user name. A second mail was answered by EarlG. He got me back on DU.

I am glad to be here.

[NBachers]

17. Yeah, I kept trying & trying, but never got the "Reset my Password" email. I had to contact Earl too

I'm glad to be back. I tried wading through the dreck that was Facebook DU, but I just couldn't put up with it. Filled with a feeding-frenzy of vile hate and gloating Trump and Sanders cultists.

Onward!

[Polly Hennessey]

38. Me,too

My email did not link to my user name. EarlG fixed me up. Happy now.

[Guilded Lilly]

51. Same email glitch. Got immediate response from the crew

When I emailed them.
Very thankful.

[sheshe2]

6. Thanks for this Hekate.

Read earlier.

Breaks my heart some are so stupid and left us with trump and bannon.

I see war in our near future if Bolton becomes SOS. The Ghoul will not be much better.

[LostOne4Ever]

8. One can post other articles arguing the opposite.

http://usuncut.com/politics/bernie-sanders-would-have-crushed-trump/

The numbers suggest that there may have been enough Sanders votes in those pivotal states to have swung the election in Sanders’ favor if superdelegates and restrictive closed primaries weren’t part of the Democratic primary process. Popular blog All That Is Interesting created an electoral map assuming that Sanders won white, rural rust belt voters in the traditionally blue states that Hillary Clinton lost on Tuesday night in a hypothetical Trump/Sanders general election matchup, giving Sanders with a 303-235 advantage.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/11/10/hillary-clinton-lost-bernie-sanders-could-have-won/?utm_term=.93f1930f8f9c

There will be years of recriminations in our future. Many Democrats will, as is their habit, conclude that the fault lies with the left wing of the party — that progressive party activists did not sufficiently support the candidate or that leftward attacks weakened Clinton. But that notion hides a simple fact: In an election of immense importance, Democratic leadership and voters rejected a hugely popular candidate in favor of a deeply unpopular one and are now paying the price. Some of us will be asking why for years to come.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/presidential-election-donald-trump-would-have-lost-if-bernie-sanders-had-been-the-candidate-a7406346.html

But it was not just anecdotal evidence. A series of polls suggested that Mr Sanders - with his calls for free college tuition, the removal of student debt, a national health service and the removal of big money from politics - would stand a better chance against Mr Trump than Ms Clinton.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/2016-election-poll-bernie-sanders-trump_us_58260f7ee4b0c4b63b0c6928

The national survey of more than 1,600 registered voters, conducted by Gravis Marketing two days before the general election, found that Sanders would have received 56 percent of the vote while Trump would have won 44 percent. The poll was commissioned and financed by outgoing Florida Congressman Alan Grayson, a Democrat who endorsed Sanders in the presidential primary.

[bettyellen]

27. You didn't read the article?

[LostOne4Ever]

28. I did. I rejected its claims. Nt

[pnwmom]

85. You didn't explain why Bernie would have done any better in the general,

considering the 2 foot thick folder of opposition research that Eichenwald described.

Hillary was subject to everything they could throw at her during the general election. Bernie never faced that test. It's silly to argue that because his poll results were higher -- his popularity based on never being subject to serious RNC attack -- that he would have won if he were the nominee.

[mcar]

33. A poll that doesn't take into account

the "vetting" that BS would have received cannot possibly be considered accurate.

[LostOne4Ever]

36. Apparently polls that take all that into account aren't very accurate either. Nt

[mcar]

37. Another reason to ignore this particular poll

[Warren DeMontague]

11. Blaming that sliver of Green voters- and there's always a sliver- isn't gonna work this time.

Why did Hillary write off Wisconsin for months, assuming it was in the bag? Where was the enthusiastic turnout of Obama voters in rust belt states, after we were promised during the primaries how energized those people would be, for Hillary?

The numbers don't lie.

And yes, James Comey was a factor. So was a ridiculous media. And yes, so was voter suppression, "caging", all those tools in the GOP toolbox.

But Jill Stein? People who vote 3rd party waste their votes, but there is always a small percentage of them. Imagining that "this time" their votes belong to us, is folly. We need to win without those people. We need to be able to.

"Berniebros"? No, that shit isn't gonna fly. That's not going to explain why there was a red streak across the electoral map that just coincidentally happened to be the Rust Belt that HRC took for granted.

That happened to coincide with a perception that the candidate was out of touch with the economic concerns of people for whom the recovery never became much of a reality, but who appreciated the Auto Bailout and came out for Obama in 2012.

Her campaign was wildly out of touch, thinking that if it had Katy Perry and Beyonce it could forego formulating a cogent message to economically hurting people looking for more than just more of the same.

[BainsBane]

12. The third party vote was greater in every key state she lost

than Trump's margin of victory. Bernie or Busters also voted for Johnson. I encountered some while I was phone banking.

[Warren DeMontague]

13. I'm not saying they didn't.

but she should have been able to win without the Stein voters or the Libertarians. There are always some. Every 4 years. You can't assume this time it will be different, you can't assume their votes "belong" to you.

She didn't visit Wisconsin at all for months. That was a tactical error. A huge one, acknowledged by people on her campaign.

[BainsBane]

14. I don't think she assumed they belong to her

The analysis is Eichenwald's after all, not Clinton's. I share his anger. I told one to fuck off to his face last week myself--not the one in my own family, who I'm not sure how I'll deal with.

The thing about Wisconsin is that the polls showed her up by a considerable margin. The polls were wrong all the way around. She didn't come to MN after the caucuses either, and she came within 1.4 points of losing. That was a shock to me. No one expected that. Certainly not Trump. They believed they would lose. That's why they are so woefully unprepared for taking office.

[Warren DeMontague]

16. Absolutely. The polls were so far off, I've never seen anything like it.

but given that this is 2016 postmortem, AFAIC that involves trying to figure out what actually happened. I don't know anyone who admits having voted Green, I suspect I have a sibling who voted Libertarian, but she's in a state we won anyway. But we all exist in our little bubbles, which may be part of the problem as well. We don't hear the other side.

Certainly we can do that thing where we add all the Stein votes to the total and yeah, we would have won. Fucking Stein voters! I'm with you. But, there's never been an election in recent history where the Greens got zero votes. Some people actually ARE Greens, not just disaffected Democrats, for whatever reason, just as some people vote Peace and Freedom or Constitution or Transcendental Meditation party or actually think Deez Nuts has a superior foreign policy platform.

If we want to look realistically at what happened- as near as I can tell, the enthusiasm gap was real. That's my take.

And it was predicated upon several things, some having to do with the candidate and her campaign, unfairly, some having to do with the candidate and her campaign, fairly, and some having to do with things totally out of that sphere, like the fact that it's just damn tough for a party to win 3 white house terms in a row.

[BainsBane]

18. Well she won't be a candidate again

So people don't have to worry about that. I saw a hell of a lot of enthusiasm, and the reaction in the streets to the election certainly doesn't suggest a lack of enthusiasm. As I posted in this forum, I didn't realize how much her candidacy meant to me until she lost. I've taken this loss very personally, and I will see her as a powerful symbol of women's struggle for equality as long as I live.

Voter suppression is part of the problem. The GOP controls those rust belt states. They limited access in communities of color. We need to get control of state governments and stop focusing so incessantly on presidential races.

Trade deals are a problem, and the good thing is that the Democrats have learned that. I don't think they will be the party of those deals in the future.

Russ Feingold lost too, so it's not as simple as some want to make it. Racism and sexism were key. We wouldn't be seeing the rash of hate crimes if they weren't.

[Warren DeMontague]

19. I don't think it's simple, at all.

I thought she did a good job as a candidate, particularly from the convention on. Like a lot of people, I truly, genuinely thought she was going to win. If her campaign had issues, that isn't entirely on her.

I agree we need to start winning more statehouses. The 2020 census and associated redistricting needs to be a front burner focus.

[bettyellen]

30. I don't know. I knew a lot of Berners that ended up voting for her but we're spreading misconception

The end. They got a lot wrong about the emails, how individual donations get labeled corporate, the DNC ganging up against Bernie from the beginning (not knowing the dates of the emails) and they were very talkative people- spreading misinformation. A few were doing write ins too. It was sort of crazy.

[Warren DeMontague]

66. The fact that Donna Brazile gave Hillary a debate question in advance... probably didn't help.

but I don't think this was a "Berner" problem. Bernie came out strong for Hillary after the convention. You look at the counties Trump carried that went Obama in 2008 and 2012, this was about the Rust Belt feeling like their economic concerns weren't being listened to. This was not a progressive purity problem.

[bettyellen]

80. It was way before that- they salivated over Guccifer and Wikileaks and all sorts of stupid shit....

And you seem to think he'd have been a miracle tax and spend elitist Dem to get through to those people? He called himself an outsider and flung shit in the general direction of all Dems, but he was just as much a career politician as Hillary. Had worse dirt he never had to endure, and gets to go home unsullied after he allowed his fans to get jacked up on crazy fantasies about a takeover at the convention. Raising taxes would have killed him, it always does with those folks.

[Warren DeMontague]

82. the tone of his campaign may have been more in tune with the mood of the electorate, than hers.

It's not about who is a career politician, it's about who is identified with serving corporate interests versus listening to the people who have lost their manufacturing jobs.

Look, the fact is that those jobs aren't coming back, and we need to find a way to articulate that and help people move forward in a fashion that doesn't sound like "we don't give a shit about you, flyover country"

These are simple and obvious facts, from where I sit. We can re-fight the primaries until the end of time, it's not gonna put one single more Democrat in office.

[Cobalt Violet]

40. They don't want to take responsibility for running a flaw candidate at the worse time.

your 100% right about why and what happened. It really deserves it's own post.

Even after the bubble burst they still don't get it.

[Wilms]

15. New Pre-Election Poll Suggests Bernie Sanders Could Have Trounced Donald Trump

snip

The national survey of more than 1,600 registered voters, conducted by Gravis Marketing two days before the general election, found that Sanders would have received 56 percent of the vote while Trump would have won 44 percent. (Wilms edits to add, "cough&quot The poll was commissioned and financed by outgoing Florida Congressman Alan Grayson, a Democrat who endorsed Sanders in the presidential primary.

The last election result that decisive was Ronald Reagan’s victory over Democrat Walter Mondale in 1984.

snip

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/2016-election-poll-bernie-sanders-trump_us_58260f7ee4b0c4b63b0c6928

[DemonGoddess]

20. Nope.

The rethugs were rough on Hillary, how much rougher do you think they would have been on Bernie? Quite a bit. particularly when you look at the KKK links.

[Lunabell]

21. Yep

Hillary was a very flawed candidate. She has no appeal to the working class Americans and this is why she failed.

[DemonGoddess]

22. Really?

I'm a WORKING CLASS American. So are most people I know. Who all VOTED for Hillary. Even the Republicans I know.

Try something new why don't you?

She was flawed because.... emails, emails, Benghazi, emails, right? Fuck that.

Isn't it wonderful how so many people bought into all the years of rw smears? Isn't it just grand?

Am I angry? You bet I am. But then again, I have family that is already being targeted because the monster was selected. Because white people in rural areas were afraid of a strong woman.

[Lunabell]

24. yep really

Exit polls show just that.

[DemonGoddess]

48. oh puhleeze

You honestly think that Trump is better than Hillary for working people, do you?

[Lunabell]

56. I didn't say that.

At all. Trump lied to his followers and told them what they wanted to hear. He isn't going to follow through on any of it.

[Cobalt Violet]

41. nope. He didn't have her bagage. He was trusted she was not!

She was such a flawed candidate but it was her turn.

[grossproffit]

23. Hillary won the popular vote and they're still counting. Polls had Hillary winning too.

[B Calm]

39. How many voters left blank the two top presidential candidates

on their ballot? How many voters wrote in Bernie, knowing they were throwing away their vote? How many Democratic voters pinched their nose and voted?

Less people voted in this election than the last two presidential elections.

[spooky3]

54. Your last sentence is not true. See the Cook Political Report website. More people voted in 2016

than in 2012 and votes are still being counted in 2016.

And, in 2008, 129446839 votes were cast per Wiki (for Obama and McCain--I don't recall that third party candidates had much presence that year but you could search for their vote total and add it to the 129446839. Per Cook more than 130 mill. have been counted so far in 2016. Other pundits have noted that there are many more votes to count in NY, Calif., etc.

[bettyellen]

29. After a run that never happened? You can't ask someone who didn't see them run what they'd do after

He ran a candidacy- that's way too hypothetical.

[Lil Missy]

43. Oh bullshit. He was barely vetted in the first place and would have fallen apert like a cheap suit

after Trump got started on him.

PS -Read the article - it explains why the "Bernie would have won" bunk is nonsense.

[Wilms]

44. I read it.

Heard it all before, too. Like "he wasn't vetted...".

[athena]

64. You didn't bother to read the article, did you?

Try reading the fourth through seventh paragraphs under the heading "The Myth That Sanders Would Have Won Against Trump".

Sanders was much more vulnerable than Hillary was. It is folly to think that he could have won the election based on a poll taken before the Republican Party had a chance to unleash its machine against him.

[Wilms]

67. I read it.

I mentioned elsewhere that it read like a lot of what was thrown at him in the primary.

[athena]

68. He lost the primary.

And yet, we're supposed to believe he would have won the General.

[Wilms]

70. Are we to go into the particulars?

You're aware how it was stacked against him, but how his message reonated.

HRC is our party's least popular candidate to ever run. And likely no other candidate, other than an incumbant had the road pre-paved as did she.

And we got nuthin'.

[athena]

71. You've got to be kidding.

You really think the first woman presidential candidate of a major party, who faced misogyny at every turn and lost because of misogyny*, "had the road pre-paved."

You are obviously a man. I suggest you try listening to women. Don't dismiss women's opinions just because you would rather think that you live in a totally egalitarian world.

*Hillary won the popular vote. Some men and women voted for Trump because they couldn't bring themselves to vote for a woman. Ergo, Hillary lost the election because of misogyny. If we lived in a totally egalitarian world, in which we didn't hate women for being smart and ambitious and capable, Hillary would have won in a landslide.

[Wilms]

72. Well any perceived or real negative could be hauled out as a reason for the loss.

It was somewhat close enough in the swing states to argue that. I threw out how unpopular she is because it covers all the bases.

[athena]

73. She is unpopular because she is a woman.

Before she decided to run, I was hoping she wouldn't run because I didn't want to see the sexism her candidacy would bring out of the woodwork. And I thought she might lose because she's a woman, and people hate ambitious women. Later, though, she seemed to be doing so well that I allowed myself to become hopeful. This is a heartbreaking result.

This blog post makes the argument better than I can:

Can you imagine a woman’s refusing to release her tax returns? Or spitting racist vitriol regularly? Or riding horses into the sunset with Putin? Or imagine, just for a moment, a female presidential candidate, wearing an ill-fitting silk dress and a scowl. I’m dead serious. Think about a woman vying for commander-in-chief who is anywhere close to being as ridiculous as Donald.

Like a bull, she walks in. Donatella Trump, six foot, boxy, resting bitch face. She’s got an enormous beehive tinted by hovering mists of spray-tan. Her stance is wide. She doesn’t listen, she interrupts, she gets flustered and emotional. She’s easily lost in political conversations and in regular conversations. She is a scam artist who stiffs small businesses and workers. Multiple men say that she used her tiny hands to grope them. And of course there’s her inexplicable obsession with insulting Steve Harvey.

Please. This woman doesn’t get enough signatures to get on the ballot in her home state. Even if she does make it to the general election (LOL), imagine her campaign against the Yale Law-educated champion of children and health care, the former senator and secretary of state, Henry Clinton. Just pause on that for a moment: Donatella Trump vs. Henry Clinton.

Do not tell me that all is equal. It’s not.

(Emphasis mine.)

[Wilms]

74. Or...

email
Benghazi
Third Way
Dynasty
Deplorables
Corrupt
Bill
Democrat

Any of these real or imagined things could have had a yield no different than misogyny. I think it's OK to consider all of it.

[athena]

75. None of those things would have carried any weight had Hillary been male.

For example, you can't honestly claim that the loss of four lives in Benghazi was a bigger disaster than the loss of thousands of lives on 9/11. In fact, the very fact that you would bring up such a list of right-wing attacks against Hillary suggests to me that you were probably against Hillary to begin with.

[Wilms]

76. To you, athena.

You, nor I, are any one else.

[mcar]

31. Excellent article

Stops the "Bernie would have won" nonsense cold.

[MrScorpio]

45. This is why people who that GOPr voters would lay down and vote for Bernie...

Didn't have their heads screwed on straight.

That amount of naivety by lefties about The GOPrs is mind boggling.

[Hekate]

46. Mind boggling indeed

I don't know how long Skinner is going to let the rehashing of the primaries go on, but it sure is bringing the terminally naive out of the woodwork.

[DemonGoddess]

49. you're being too kind

describing the terminally "naive". I would say more, but I'd get hidden were I to let loose.

[Hekate]

50. Same here

[JTFrog]

52. A thousand recs. nt

[JTFrog]

53. 'She didnt earn my vote',

Of course, there will still be those voters who snarl, “She didn’t earn my vote,” as if somehow their narcissism should override all other considerations in the election. That, however, is not what an election is about. Voters are charged with choosing the best person to lead the country, not the one who appeals the most to their egos.

In a nutshell.

[DirkGently]

55. Myth #1: It was everybody's fault but Hillary's.

http://www.inquisitr.com/3704461/hillary-voters-owe-it-to-america-to-stop-calling-everyone-a-nazi-and-start-reading-wikileaks/

I’m not expecting them to admit it out loud, and I’m not expecting it to happen right away; people will need time to process whatever intense emotions are still ripping through their systems. But at some point, liberals are going to have to put down the bullhorn, stop blaming all their colossal blunders on everyone else, and start getting clear on the facts about the nation they call home and the candidate they voted for. That’s the only way we can begin moving this thing in a healthy direction.

[Hekate]

57. So why did she WIN by a million plus votes? Those were cast by real people everywhere.

[DirkGently]

58. She didn't "win." She was destroyed.

We have an electoral college, which everyone knew going in. Your winning candidates win the vote that actually gets counted.

[Hekate]

59. So why aren't our Sanders friends revolting against that?

We know about the EC. It lay dormant during the 20th century, but twice in less than 20 years it has delivered a president who failed to win the actual vote.

Any plans from the left to help deliver us from that evil?

[DirkGently]

60. Because it's more realistic to try actually winning?

The huge glaring failure here was lack of votes overall. I'm open to discussing the EC, but it's not the reason we lost to a candidate who didn't pull as many votes as Mccain or Romney.

We picked a bad candidate.

Also, Dems who talk about "the left" as though it were the enemy are not going to win us anything, ever.

[Hekate]

62. Uh huh

[DirkGently]

63. Snappy!

[Warren DeMontague]

65. getting rid of the Electoral College would require a constitutional amendment.

The same forces which distribute power out across the rural parts of the country for the EC distribute it in terms of the high bar for passing amendments to the Constitution.

You could get everyone in CA and NY to demand abolishing the Electoral College, it still wouldn't go anywhere.

[Hekate]

69. I'm aware of that. But if Bernie thought he could become POTUS, why not this?

It's got to start somewhere.

But let's continue the Hillary blaming. That's real productive.

[Warren DeMontague]

77. or we could continue to whang on Bernie Sanders, because reasons.

Yeah, Bernie did "think he could become POTUS". And maybe he would have. Sure, the conventional wisdom beltway people didn't think he could, but they didn't think Trump could, either, did they? Hell, they thought for sure we'd be seeing Jeb Bush as the GOP nominee.

Maybe you didn't notice, but the self-assured proclamations from Manhattan and DC didn't rack up a particularly good batting average this cycle.

They also thought that getting an endorsement from Beyonce would be more persuasive to the electorate than talking Jobs to rural Michigan. Hmmm, Go figure.

Bernie also did a fuckton better than HRC in the Rust Belt during the primaries and might have actually spoken to the deep economic anxiety of those voters. Maybe.

If we want to "post morterm 2016" we should ask what actually went wrong, and understandably people are going to have differing opinions on that.

Not surprisingly the folks who were pushing the "racist sexist berniebros" narrative now would like us to believe that everything was done hunky dory perfectly in the Clinton campaign and losing was somehow Bernie Sanders' fault.

Now, If someone wants to propose an amendment abolishing the electoral college, I'm all for it. But it's not like it's gonna get ratified by the necessary number of states. By definition it would be removing power from numerous ones and concentrating it in the hands of a couple. Why would other states support that?

[Hekate]

78. or we could continue to whang on Hillary, because reasons

There is actual work before us

[Warren DeMontague]

84. I agree. But if people want to reflexively blame this fuckup on "berniebros" or some shit

well, there are a lot of other narratives which make a fuckton more sense and have evidence to back em up.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/clinton-campaign-neglect_us_582cacb0e4b058ce7aa8b861

[Beartracks]

86. But there is an option to work towards...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact

=============

[Warren DeMontague]

87. true.

And a worthy goal. But still, the folks who benefit from the way things are will be the least likely to want to change it.

We made a lot of noise about this after the 2000 election, IIRC, and then it died down. When it looked like we had a lock on the EC this cycle- shit, I thought we did- certainly no one was mentioning it.

I don't see it changing, but I could be wrong.

[anamnua]

79. The article makes the valid point

that Bernie -- a man for whom I have huge respect -- was effectively virgin territory as far as the Republican propaganda machine was concerned. By the time the Repug attack dogs had finished he would have been seen as America's answer to Joseph Stalin.

[Warren DeMontague]

81. other people have noted that Hillary's negatives were already baked in with a large segment of

the voters.

So, as one GOP strategist put it, normally you have to paint a picture of the opposition. In this case they merely had to reinforce peoples' -right or wrong- preconceived notions.

It is pure speculation at best to assume Sanders would have come out worse in that process.

[Warren DeMontague]

83. The Clinton Campaign Was Undone By Its Own Neglect And A Touch Of Arrogance, Staffers Say

"In key battleground states, calls for help weren’t taken seriously enough."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/clinton-campaign-neglect_us_582cacb0e4b058ce7aa8b861