Trump's victory: what was at the bottom of it?

People wanting change, period. I elaborated elsewhere.

While I think it was a desire for "change" (and a smaller number who just wanted to see liberals cry) that made voting for Trump acceptable, the fact remains that a better candidate would have beaten him, probably crushingly. So I think Hillary and all her negatives is the single greatest reason for her defeat.

It is a mix, although I voted rejection of Clinton as I think that was the most important nail in the coffin.

Here's the way it is.

About 30% of the population support either GOP or Democrats regardless of who the candidate is. However, those people may or may not come out to actually vote depending on the candidate. Clinton, unlike Trump or Obama, generated no excitement from the D side, but a lot of anger from the R side. People saw her not only as corrupt and dishonest, but also she is the establishment candidate.

There was the fact that people want change. Almost anyone you ask, left or right, will tell you that the system is rigged. She couldn't be the agent of change. She was also stuck, however unfairly, because she needed Obama's support and his base. He's still more popular. So she couldn't openly criticize him. Plus, there was the popularity of Bernie, so she was stuck between Barack and a Bernie place. People were fed up with the R's because they couldn't get Obamacare repealed. (Trump may not either) but she couldn't do much to even criticize it. Bernie called for single payer, she wouldn't even do that.

She was a bad candidate. I refused to vote for Trump, but I didn't vote for her either. If they had run someone more palatable, without her baggage, I would have.

Back on AW, people seemed to often fawn over her say on the debates, but I never felt she came off all that great, except compared to Trump. Take her answer on the supreme court.

www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/19/the-final-trump-clinton-debate-transcript-annotated/

"And I feel strongly that the Supreme Court needs to stand on the side of the American people, not on the side of the powerful corporations and the wealthy. For me, that means that we need a Supreme Court that will stand up on behalf of women's rights, on behalf of the rights of the LGBT community, that will stand up and say no to Citizens United, a decision that has undermined the election system in our country because of the way it permits dark, unaccountable money to come into our electoral system.

That's how I see the court, and the kind of people that I would be looking to nominate to the court would be in the great tradition of standing up to the powerful, standing up on behalf of our rights as Americans.

And I look forward to having that opportunity. I would hope that the Senate would do its job and confirm the nominee that President Obama has sent to them. That's the way the Constitution fundamentally should operate. The president nominates, and then the Senate advises and consents, or not, but they go forward with the process."


The courts job isn't to look out for anyone, powerful or poor, and it's not to lead the country. It's to interpret the law. Checks and balances. Not another form of the legislative branch. Her remarks on Heller made it seem like there was a toddler involved, but it had to do with a total ban on handguns and was brought by a cop. (Maybe she heard Heller and thought little hellion?)

There's a reason why when she left the White House, she moved to New York to run for the Senate and not Arkansas. She only plays well in deep blue states, and even then not to the point of excitement.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEkG9seHJco

Maybe someone should ask these people what happened.

I think that's about as credible as all the alt-righters who were claiming a massive conspiracy to rig the election for Clinton beforehand.

The number of people you'd have to organize to pull off something like that would be huge, and there's no way to keep that big a project secret.

Both good points. There's been a LOT of conspiracy theorizing this election.

Yeah, it's all about how bad America is, how people were convinced that Clinton who according to some was the most qualified candidate next to God himself was just a liar by the mean right wing conspiracy and Comey who was the 2nd coming of Christ in July is now the Anti-Christ.

There's no possibility that the dems picked a bad candidate. I still see people talking about how we shouldn't say that, we should talk about how bad Trump was, despite the fact that he won. It's unreal.