What went wrong?

What went wrong?

Other urls found in this thread:

commentarymagazine.com/uncategorized/hillary-clinton-hair-party-two/
breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2016/12/03/jon-stewart-goes-off-obama-terrible-for-press-freedom-lefts-race-baiting-has-to-stop/
archive.is/SAZZN
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>Wins popular vote to be on TIME cover
>still loses
wew lass

She's a loser. It went right. Some women are born to lose.

...

Like pottery.

...

i instantly grabbed muh dick and tugged one out to this

kek. #anudashoa

well done

they tried to rig it with fake polls but at the end of the day the truth cones out

Probably because people remember the 90s.

Holy shit

That's nothing on what her and her husband did in Serbia, never forget. Hope they face true justice some day.

What will be the cover of Time?

>The face of an utter failure
>At least you tried
>Hillary Clinton, a folk hero

That was the one good thing they did ,Serbia deserves to be cleansed. Fuck you Serb immigrant diaspora shit

please remove this fake news or you may face legal repercussions

es una perdedora

A lot of things
1. Democrats have no ground game. They have spent the past 8 years focusing on winning the presidential elections, courting big donors and wealthy celebrities. Meanwhile, the Republicans focused on mayoral races, state House seats, and governor races, building a strong, ground-based grassroots party apparatus. The Tea Party gave the Republicans this apparatus. This apparatus gives the Republicans a huge grassroots, bottom-up advantage that puts Republicans into direct contact with dinner-on-the-table voters, while Democrats spent all their time interacting with elites who have no sense of reality outside of their bubble. Republicans therefore have a stronger connection to a larger number of voters. You can say that Hillary won the popular vote, but all I have to say to that is that you obviously failed civics class and do not understand the importance of the electoral college.

2. Hillary was a very weak candidate. She already lost one election - 2008 - and it's generally considered a dumb move to run a second election if you already lost another one. Losing one election and spending billions is a sign that the American people don't want that candidate. Hillary Clinton's hubris got the better of her and she spent the past 8 years lining up her shots (i.e. rigging) with the DNC, the big money donors, the media, and so on. Despite the massive amount of top-level support and money, no one could get animated about her. People just saw another 8 years of Obama, and even Democrats started getting sick of Obama - he went back on almost everything he promised in 2008 and Democrats have simply tolerated him because apparently it's better than a Republican. Trump, on the other hand, was the chance for real, palpable change.

cont.

Man I'm getting a little tired of winning.

I'm a Scot with Scottish and Irish ancestry for centuries, sorry to disappoint you. And you should do your research about the NATO bombing of Serbia/ 'Yugoslavia' before you spout such nonsense.

3. The media shilling for Clinton created a bubble and delegitimized her campaign. Only people who didn't pay attention to the election and die-hard Democrats believed it. After the election, countless Democrats have come out to blame the media for Clinton's failure. Why? It wasn't true. While Hillary did perhaps one or two rallies every couple of weeks - which got significant coverage from major media outlets - Trump was pretty much in a different state every day pulling tens of thousands of people to his rallies. The media, the Democrats, and the elites completely ignored this. Anyone could see from this that they were ignoring reality, and that had a huge effect on undecided voters. When the super-rich and wealthy anoint one candidate and obviously favor them over another, that breeds suspicion.

4. The Democrats and their bullying tactics failed on a national scale. We all know what this is - we're racists, we're bigots, we're a basket of deplorables. Insulting voters is not how you get them to vote for you. Labeling half of the country as evil is a great way to lose your own voters who think you're a tactless moron. Those who get insulted and labeled are just going to be more determined to vote against you. Bullying works in far-left states like California and Massachusetts where Republicans are irrelevant. Even in strong Republican states like Montana and Texas, Democrats continue to sit in their little cabals and whisper about sexists, homophobes, and bigots as the reason for their failure.

cont.

Trump actually wins if you subtract the three million illegal votes in the poll. Sad!

>The Democrats and their bullying tactics failed on a national scale. We all know what this is - we're racists, we're bigots, we're a basket of deplorables.
Is the leftist crybully model dead? Probably after this elections it has received a big blow. Even Jon Stewart was backpedaling on racebaiting.

5. Finally, rather than examine their own platform and try to appeal to voters with a broad stroke, the Democrats focused on minority interests. Asians, African Americans, Hispanics, Indians, and other minority groups are not the majority of the country. They can also get really insulted when you assume they're voting one way or another, or that they HAVE to vote one way or another, simply because some stuck-up liberal tells them so. Identity politics and the over-compartmentalization of voter identities created a broken strategy that could never defeat a campaign of civic nationalism.

So, to sum up:
1. Democrats have no grassroots game and has focused as of late on elites rather than elites and regular people.
2. Hillary was a weak candidate to begin with and the Democrats did not assess that 8 more years of Obama was not palatable.
3. The media created a massive bubble that lied to Democrats and drew great suspicion from Republicans and Independents.
4. Democratic bullying tactics insulted voters and exacerbated their bubble problem.
5. Democrats did not choose a strategy appealing to a wide swath of voter identities.

>Even Jon Stewart was backpedaling on racebaiting.
Link?

...

Hillary truly is the champion of those who only won participation trophies.

I'd include "Women" in 5.5
From the get-go, media shilling incorporated that Hillary has no other chance that winning, because women will vote vor her. Well, they also don't like to have such decisions made for them.

Else, very nice posts. Didn't know about the stronger rep grassroots yet.

*all women

This is all true, but fundamentally, Hillary was just a terrible candidate with no charisma.
>When a shot of Hillary speaking was played, the line on the screen dropped like a downhill ski run.
>commentarymagazine.com/uncategorized/hillary-clinton-hair-party-two/
What's even worse is that her sycophantic advisors shielded her from her own unpopularity, so she probably never worked on it.

Too bad!

Dude learn to use a searcher.

breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2016/12/03/jon-stewart-goes-off-obama-terrible-for-press-freedom-lefts-race-baiting-has-to-stop/

Yes, this election sent a pretty clear signal that it's dead. As I said in my post you quoted, they tried crybully tactics in liberal enclaves where they were already going to win as a dry run. This created the false idea that it was an effective strategy. When they tried applying it to the presidential election, well... we saw what happened.
Here: archive.is/SAZZN
See The media bubble was probably the biggest failure on the part of the Democrats. Even the e-mails proved this to be a deliberate strategy: they hoped that repeatedly saying that Clinton was an assured victory would encourage her supporters and discourage her opponents. What it did, instead, was it pacified her supporters (LITERALLY 9 MILLION DEMOCRATS DID NOT SHOW UP TO VOTE) and emboldened her opponents.
Even my sister - who has l i t e r a l l y told me to check my white male privilege - was insulted by the whole "women will only vote for Clinton" rhetoric.
Thanks for the compliments, my dude. Feel free to screen cap them to demolish liberals down the line. I would but I don't know how to make them into a single, clean image.
The Democrats have ignored grassroots for a while because they assume they have it. Republicans don't bring it up because there's no point in stopping an enemy when they're making a mistake.
Hillary was a weak candidate and the Democrat elites were quietly aware, but they chugged along because she had the money, contacts, and overall resources to keep going.
The Democrats put all their eggs in one basket. It was an astounding number of eggs and a lavish basket, but that wasn't enough.

Seeing it put like this I love this whole election even more in retrospect. What a ride.

Gern geschehen, krautbro.

I made this to celebrate, thank you again.

>Even my sister - who has l i t e r a l l y told me to check my white male privilege
Did you check it?

...

The President always gets it. It would make no sense for Clinton to make it given that she lost. How is the loser of the presidential race the most influential person of the year? I guess you could argue that she was such an insipid candidate that she created the environment conducive to Trump's victory.