[Lord Blackout]

Trump got the cute "I just can't vote for him" **** from the right them after Comey they all came home. Hillary got savaged by the right. They fawned over Wikileaks just as much as the right.

[lightstheyblindme]

Originally posted by Lord Blackout

Like that democrat working class white family from OHIO claiming they elected her and she hurt them. It's just ****ing stupid to ignore the character assassination she had to suffer from both the left and the right that spread from the primary to the GE. Add to that hacked emails, two stupid FBI probes, Benghazi hearing, her 9/11 health episode, Comey's unusual speech, Comey's unusual letter and Wikileaks' daily dumps.

if anything the media was lenient with Hillary. and let's not forget that if Hillary hadn't made the disastrous decision to use a private email server it never would have been an issue. that situation was her own fault. the Benghazi hearing was her own fault - she mishandled that situation and contradicted herself during the Benghazi hearing itself. of course the media should report that Hillary fainted in public months before the election - to not do so would be bad reporting. and of course the media should cover the corrupt primary strategies of the Clinton campaign that Wikileaks revealed. Yes, the Wikileaks scandals were obviously a Russian pst-ops campaign against Hillary but, again, if she hadn't behaved in a deceitful, un-democratic, and power-hungry manner, none of those Wikileaks campaign email leaks would have revealed anything of substance.

[Lord Blackout]

The Bernie campaign holding a Bern The Witch event. Don't think we don't remember.

And of course he didn't mention the emails. The press was covering them 24/7. He got brownie points form that move in the debates and that's it. It didn't stop the incessant coverage of the emails for 600+ days.

[lonnie]

The amount of times I heard and saw the emails, my god

[lonnie]

She was left to fry, from every point. By the time the left noticed the damage done it was too late.

[lightstheyblindme]

Originally posted by Lord Blackout

The Bernie campaign holding a Bern The Witch event. Don't think we don't remember.

And of course he didn't mention the emails. The press was covering them 24/7. He got brownie points form that move in the debates and that's it. It didn't stop the incessant coverage of the emails for 600+ days.

Hillary campaign attacking Bernie for his religion. Don't think we don't remember.

[Lord Blackout]

Originally posted by lightstheyblindme

if anything the media was lenient with Hillary. and let's not forget that if Hillary hadn't made the disastrous decision to use a private email server it never would have been an issue. that situation was her own fault. the Benghazi hearing was her own fault - she mishandled that situation and contradicted herself during the Benghazi hearing itself. of course the media should report that Hillary fainted in public months before the election - to not do so would be bad reporting. and of course the media should cover the corrupt primary strategies of the Clinton campaign that Wikileaks revealed. Yes, the Wikileaks scandals were obviously a Russian pst-ops campaign against Hillary but, again, if she hadn't behaved in a deceitful, un-democratic, and power-hungry manner, none of those Wikileaks campaign email leaks would have revealed anything of substance.

Oh my God, ****ing stop. The media was NOT lenient with Hillary AT ALL. Just because they weren't covering her daily gaffes like Trump, it doesn't mean they were lenient. It just means she handled her campaign greatly and barely made any missteps DURING the campaign.

Harvard Study Confirms The Media Tore Down Clinton, Built Up Trump And Sanders

And yes the emails decision was bad but covering it for 600 days is surely abnormal, no? Especially when they spent less than a week on Trump's corruption scandals. As for Benghazi, she didn't mishandle anything. It's actually generous of her that she took responsibility for it like she did with the Iraq war. She always takes responsibility for things the way people perceive them and she apologizes more than all the other candidates and it never is ENOUGH for the media. A Secretary of State does not handle the security of a diplomatic outpost and covert CIA base (It wasn't an Embassy attack as falsely advertised). Let's not forget that Chris Stevens was her friend and she was in mourning yet she was still dragged to congress every second minute for a desperate witch hunt where the republicans ended up looking stupid and her high favorables started sinking (which was the goal as admited by a GOP congressmen, Condoleezza Rice and Powell) As for Wikileaks, ONLY her campaign was hacked. Let's not forget that. The others' campaign can claim an angelic image all they want but that's only because only her campaign's emails were hacked and released in daily dumps. Not to mention, the emails didn't show her personally attacking Bernie or anything. It was always other people. The only emails of her own that got her in trouble were the Wall St transcripts. That's about it. Let's not blame everything on her.

[Jacketh]

Originally posted by Lord Blackout

How exactly was Hillary's campaign terrible?...

She basically changed her platform to Bernie's and still couldn't win over more than 70% of his supporters at most as well...

Btw 80,000 people decided this election in place of 2.7m voters. Something to keep in mind as well.

I think you just answered your own question.

I don't think pandering to Sanders' and adopting his viewpoints and certain parts of his narrative worked for her. Sure, it helped her get some liberals and youngsters on side, and that is no doubt why she did so well in NY and CA. But those states do not matter. They never mattered. She could get 99% in them. Instead, she needed to reach out to them 80,000 people who decided the election. It was always a strong possibility that if Clinton loss, it would be by winning the popular vote. And she knows all too well that that could happen. She won the 2008 primary by popular vote, remember?

Her campaign really was awful. Ignore the fact she was already unpopular, but she basically adopted some of Sanders' narrative and run on a 'I'm not Donald Trump' platform. Listen to her speeches - so much of it is talking about him. This doesn't energize people. They want to believe and feel something from the candidate they're voting in, like people did with Obama.

In 2008 one of the key reasons she lost the primary was her organisation and campaign team making mistakes. They underestimated Obama and saw Edwards as the main threat. In 2016, it was the same. She didn't visit Wisconsin once, and its hard to argue you ran a good campaign when you lose a state that you didn't even visit once. MI wasn't as visited as much it should have been. More resources should have been spent in PA, as opposed to Arizona.

Her team also ignored Bill's warnings on reaching out to the white working class man in places like WI, PA, and WI.

Her campaign really was a disaster. From picking Kaine, to ignoring Wisconsin, to having no real energy in terms of message (except I'm a woman and not Trump), and to appeasing Sanders' supporters a little too much. There was just no consistency there. The people around her who forged her campaign strategy, just like in 2008, have big questions to answer - because they really, really, got it wrong for her.

[Lord Blackout]

Originally posted by lightstheyblindme

Hillary campaign attacking Bernie for his religion. Don't think we don't remember.

Wrong. It was suggested by a DNC staffer and her campaign didn't pick it up. Like the Birther lie.
I don't see why people blame her for things she didn't use. Like that's some other level of intellectual dishonesty. She never went after Obama's or Bernie's characters.

[lightstheyblindme]

Originally posted by lonnie

She was left to fry, from every point. By the time the left noticed the damage done it was too late.

let's stop acting like Hillary was the innocent victim of the big bad media. Hillary chose to run for President with at least 3 recent scandals weighing her down, including a criminal investigation. she was no martyr. it's time for you guys to accept that Hillary lost because she was a hated candidate and she ran a weak campaign, not because a bunch of third parties conspired against her.

[Lord Blackout]

Originally posted by Jacketh

I think you just answered your own question.

I don't think pandering to Sanders' and adopting his viewpoints and certain parts of his narrative worked for her. Sure, it helped her get some liberals and youngsters on side, and that is no doubt why she did so well in NY and CA. But those states do not matter. They never mattered. She could get 99% in them. Instead, she needed to reach out to them 80,000 people who decided the election. It was always a strong possibility that if Clinton loss, it would be by winning the popular vote. And she knows all too well that that could happen. She won the 2008 primary by popular vote, remember?

Her campaign really was awful. Ignore the fact she was already unpopular, but she basically adopted some of Sanders' narrative and run on a 'I'm not Donald Trump' platform. Listen to her speeches - so much of it is talking about him. This doesn't energize people. They want to believe and feel something from the candidate they're voting in, like people did with Obama.

In 2008 one of the key reasons she lost the primary was her organisation and campaign team making mistakes. They underestimated Obama and saw Edwards as the main threat. In 2016, it was the same. She didn't visit Wisconsin once, and its hard to argue you ran a good campaign when you lose a state that you didn't even visit once. MI wasn't as visited as much it should have been. More resources should have been spent in PA, as opposed to Arizona.

Her team also ignored Bill's warnings on reaching out to the white working class man in places like WI, PA, and WI.

Her campaign really was a disaster. From picking Kaine, to ignoring Wisconsin, to having no real energy in terms of message (except I'm a woman and not Trump), and to appeasing Sanders' supporters a little too much. There was just no consistency there. The people around her who forged her campaign strategy, just like in 2008, have big questions to answer - because they really, really, got it wrong for her.

Adopting a primary rival's policy points is a perfectly traditional strategy. Can't fault her for that. And it's funny because Bernie voters say that she was too entitled and she didn't work hard enough for their votes and you're here saying she worked too hard for their votes so basically she can never win.

And what the hell are you talking about? She made ONE speech about Trump and it was the alt-right speech which sent him on a tour in black neighborhoods and had him freaking out. All of her other speeches were about her plans and policies but TV channels never aired those unlike his own. She had a message; "stronger together" and optimism. She couldn't possibly run on a "doomsday is coming" narrative because it would be dishonest and a knife in Obama's back. She couldn't possibly run on a populist message either because she's already been in the white house. So instead she stuck to actual policies and facts while her opponent ran on nothing but that. Are we gonna ignore the fact that he dedicated half of his speeches to her with the Lock Her Up chants? She talked about him in her speeches for a brief period then moved on to her policies if you watch her every speech.
As for her running on a "I'm not Donald Trump" message, it depends. I don't think anyone who watched the debates couldn't easily tell who's more fit for office. Her ads were overwhelmingly about him which I hated but they were aimed at white women so we can't say she didn't try. And she scheduled her rallies based on the polling at the time which had her safe in the rust belt. Little did she know, those people simply prefered her to Trump. It doesn't mean they'd show up to vote. She campaigned in many swing states and she lost them (FL was quite close for instance and she campaigned a lot in there)
She didn't hold as many rallies as Trump but that's because her rallies are usually small so there are better ways to reach out to people like TV ads and debate prep. As for Kaine, except for being majorly popular in his state, yeah he was pretty useless. That was a bad pick but it's not like VPs make much of a difference anyway unless it was Bernie (But then again, they were just out of a very bitter primary where it took him a month to finally concede and another just to support her)

[NE.]

Ya'll still in here fuming that you didn't get a sassy, independent woman president? Oh aight.

I'm still cackling at the clowns on here who tried to drag Trump for campaigning in the 3 states that were supposedly behind the blue wall and he went in dry and still shattered it anyways lmao.

[lightstheyblindme]

Originally posted by Lord Blackout

Wrong. It was suggested by a DNC staffer and her campaign didn't pick it up. Like the Birther lie.
I don't see why people blame her for things she didn't use. Like that's some other level of intellectual dishonesty. She never went after Obama's or Bernie's characters.

Just because they did it in private does not mean that they did not mock his religion.
There are also leaked emails showing the DNC pitching possible negative CNN segments that would portray Sanders in a negative light. CNN really did earn its reputation as the Clinton News Network this past election cycle.

[Lord Blackout]

Originally posted by lightstheyblindme

Just because they did it in private does not mean that they did not mock his religion.
There are also leaked emails showing the DNC pitching possible negative CNN segments that would portray Sanders in a negative light. CNN really did earn its reputation as the Clinton News Network this past election cycle.

Who are "they"? Because it was one DNC staffer, independent from her campaign, that suggested they use that info and it was never picked up.
And I don't remember these CNN emails you're talking. I remember Debbie being pissed off with Bernie saying on CNN that he was planning to have her fired if he wins, but that's it.

[lightstheyblindme]

Originally posted by Lord Blackout

She couldn't possibly run on a "doomsday is coming" narrative because it would be dishonest and a knife in Obama's back. She couldn't possibly run on a populist message either because she's already been in the white house. So instead she stuck to actual policies and facts while her opponent ran on nothing but that.

It's almost as if her message was fundamentally out of touch with the electorate during this election... imagine that...

Originally posted by Lord Blackout

Are we gonna ignore the fact that he dedicated half of his speeches to her with the Lock Her Up chants?

because his entire narrative focused on displacing Washington politics that was devoted to furthering the interests special interest groups and billionaire donors

Originally posted by Lord Blackout

As for her running on a "I'm not Donald Trump" message, it depends. I don't think anyone who watched the debates couldn't easily tell who's more fit for office.

her entire campaign was about her pushing her own narrative and making the claim that it was "her time," like she was next in the line of Royal succession. when she wasn't holding up her narrative and pretending like she was some feminist icon, she was acting like her overpraised resume was some kind of achievement on its own. at best her message was annoying and ineffective, at worst it was offensive and delusional.

[Lord Blackout]

Originally posted by NE.

Ya'll still in here fuming that you didn't get a sassy, independent woman president? Oh aight.

I'm still cackling at the clowns on here who tried to drag Trump for campaigning in the 3 states that were supposedly behind the blue wall and he went in dry and still shattered it anyways lmao.

Your desperation to reduce her to some popgirl candidate is beyond embarrassing especially when you championed Trump during the primaries and he was the real popstar candidate. Hillary was considered the most qualified candidate in history by 3 former presidents. It ain't because she's sassy (Which she's absolutely not) or independent. It's because she can get the job done (Hence why Trump won't be touching her approval rating at any position she's ever held) You're so bitter at her for some reason for not supposedly caring about black lives when her foundation has saved tens of millions of those in Africa (more than your ass will ever save) and her campaign was the only one in history to acknowledge systemic racism in the justice department (which she got criticized for). Go take a cold shower

Yes, he shattered the blue wall. Good for him. Here's hoping he actually pays back his voters with something substantial unlike the Carrier deal which is nothing but propaganda hot air.

[lightstheyblindme]

Originally posted by Lord Blackout

And I don't remember these CNN emails you're talking. I remember Debbie being pissed off with Bernie saying on CNN that he was planning to have her fired if he wins, but that's it.

Yup the Debbie emails but also these:

In one of the emails, dated May 21, Mark Paustenbach, a committee communications official, wrote to a colleague about the possibility of urging reporters to write that Mr. Sanders’s campaign was “a mess” after a glitch on the committee’s servers gave it access to Clinton voter data.

“Wondering if there’s a good Bernie narrative for a story, which is that Bernie never ever had his act together, that his campaign was a mess,” Mr. Paustenbach wrote to Luis Miranda, the communications director for the committee.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/us...s-clinton.html

[Damien M]

Hillary was a pretty awful candidate but yeah, the left-leaning press pretty much ate their own baby. The press coverage she got was BRUTAL.

[ClashAndBurn]

This arguing is exactly why the Democratic Party will not survive the next 4 years. Hope y'all are ready for 8 years of Trump/Pence.

[Lord Blackout]

Originally posted by lightstheyblindme

It's almost as if her message was fundamentally out of touch with the electorate during this election... imagine that...

because his entire narrative focused on displacing Washington politics that was devoted to furthering the interests special interest groups and billionaire donors

her entire campaign was about her pushing her own narrative and making the claim that it was "her time," like she was next in the line of Royal succession. when she wasn't holding up her narrative and pretending like she was some feminist icon, she was acting like her overpraised resume was some kind of achievement on its own. at best her message was annoying and ineffective, at worst it was offensive and delusional.

Out of touch or in touch, it was the only message she can run on as I explained. And frankly, if it weren't for pressure form Bernie and Trump, there wouldn't have been a need for a populist message.
Yes, she was a little cocky. I'll admit that. But, like, can you blame her? She can walk circles around all of her opponents besides Bernie who challenged her on policy knowledge except he lacked in foreign policy. You're bound to get cocky when you're running against the likes of Trump and Gary Johnson lol. But it's not like she didn't study for the debates, still. She did her homework and a half. And her message was hopeful and positive. If that's awful then so be it.
And no the LockHerUp chants was the most brutal form of character assassination we've ever seen in a modern election. In any other country or for any other candidate, something like that would be disqualifying.

As for your other post, it doesn't say CNN there?