Imagine a country on the way to a presidential election.
Presidential candidate A is criticized for lying constantly, trying to overturn the last election, stealing top secret documents from government, being involved in financial fraud, and having sexually abused a woman.
Presidential candidate B is criticized for being 4 years older than candidate A.
Then imagine, that this presidential election is a toss-up, because candidate A is really entertaining to watch on tv.
This is where we are.
@randahl We saw this in 2016. Hillary Clinton was one of the most experienced Presidential candidates in US history, and the bar was incredibly high for her while there was none for Trump.
Was she? I remember her only for the huge blunder of letting the embassy cables be distributed to junior analysts like Manning all over the world, and then trying to shift the blame to Assange.
The Dem Party chose her because of internal party politics. Not because of her qualifications as future President, or her appeal to voters.
@JorgeStolfi @cosettepaneque @randahl yeah, definitely not because of appeal, she was a singularly uncharismatic candidate. I mean that is a stupid reason not to vote for her, just sayin'.
@JorgeStolfi @ech @cosettepaneque @randahl That “feature” was a feature of how the media selectively portrayed her.
@Pineywoozle @ech @cosettepaneque @randahl
Was it really? I haven't seen her shine in public speeches or interviews ever -- during, before, or after the campaign.
What were her accomplishments as a State Secretary? One that I recall (besides that blunder of leaking the super-confidential embassy "cables") was her order to the ambassadors to try to collect fingerprints and DNA of foreign leaders in the respective countries. That is, act like spies -- which is totally taboo for ambassadors.
@JorgeStolfi @ech @cosettepaneque @randahl Yes it was. You don’t like her. That’s a you issue. I’ve seen her shine and so have the 3 million more voters than tRump that also gave her the popular vote despite the medias best effort.
@Pineywoozle @JorgeStolfi @cosettepaneque @randahl
You might be right about Jorge, but to the broader point can you link to a speech where she shined in this way? Something inspiring and charismatic? Something that gets people riled up, like the way Trump was getting everyone fired up with his outlandish nonsense?
I mean just read the abstract here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/psq.12490 – this makes the point that as a leader of the then-current regime she was constrained, but still I think a better politician (Palin, Michelle or Barak Obama, Bill, etc) could have overcome that hurdle much better, all else being equal.
FWIW I think Trump lost in 2020 for a somewhat similar reason: during covid he lacked the sort of inspiring, uniting, calming leadership that is helpful during a crisis. (Contrast with Bush after 9/11, who absolutely nailed it.)
(I can't imagine a stupider level of discourse than cheap puns where you corrupt the name of something to tear it down, like writing "DemocRAT" or "REPUGlicans" or whatever. Gah. It's like the trash comment threads on yahoo news from 2003 or something.)
@ech @JorgeStolfi @cosettepaneque @randahl All things could never be equal. The media played on 30 years of lies & she still won the popular vote by millions and lost almost no voters from the primary. That is a statistical anomaly & it’s because we do find her compelling I found her debate speaches inspiring, accurately describing what a disaster tRump would be & so did millions even when the MSM did their same negative dance after.
@Pineywoozle @ech @JorgeStolfi @randahl I must agree with Piney. I've been a fan of HRC since I was a teenager in the 1990s, and I always found her inspiring. Perhaps this is a gendered issue. Many women may have been moved by HRC the way many POC were by Obama. No one could genuinely argue that Obama is not charismatic. My point here is not to compare his charisma to hers; it's about what they represented to many people. There was much sadness and anger among women when she lost.
@Pineywoozle @ech @cosettepaneque @randahl
Again, of course I would have voted for her rather than Trump. That is not the point.
@JorgeStolfi @Pineywoozle @ech @randahl Isn't it? This conversation began because Randahl pointed out that this presidential election is a toss-up, which it should not be. When I said the same thing happened in 2016, you went for HRC's qualifications. Here we are still on that. There was a ridiculously high bar for HRC, and there has never been a bar for Trump. As he's "joked", he probably could shoot someone in Times Square and get elected, and we'd explain it by saying Biden is too old.
@cosettepaneque
In the US, Trump policies allowed covid19 to kill 341 people per 100,000.
Now compare that to
Denmark: 143
Norway: 94
Finland 162
And voters who have lost their loved ones STILL want Trump reelected. Mind blowing.
@Pineywoozle @ech @cosettepaneque @randahl @JorgeStolfi It is easy!
COVID was a hoax so the deaths were just unfortunate. Otherwise, their belief structure falls apart.
#trumpisacriminal
@randahl @cosettepaneque @JorgeStolfi @Pineywoozle @ech It's the trolley problem except that on the other path nobody gets run over but you have to occasionally wear a mask.
@randahl @cosettepaneque @JorgeStolfi @Pineywoozle That's one of the reasons they love him. Getting inheritances a few years early is a small price to pay for a bunch of people they don't know but are kinds of people they despise dying.
@JorgeStolfi @ech @cosettepaneque @randahl The point was you said she wasn’t charismatic and millions of people disagreed with you. They disagreed with you even over the bull horn of lies & negatively from the media, the bull horn of negativity well past the primary from Bernie’s bunch, the bull horn of negativity right before the election from Comey. We still disagree with you, & we still know how much America lost. You bought the lies, that’s a you thing.
@Pineywoozle @ech @cosettepaneque @randahl
Sure, sure, millions loved her. Millions didn't like her much but disliked Trump more.
But not enough millions...
You blame "Bernie's bunch" for "negativity". But it is the other way around: they disliked her because she was too tepid on anything really progressive.
@JorgeStolfi @Pineywoozle @cosettepaneque @randahl ok, if you don't like the DNA thing, then you *really* aren't going to like Trump, so that doesn't really explain why she lost. Like, his whole brand is about throwing out norms that get in the way of results.
And the "it" here is charm/political skill/charisma, not accomplishments.
@ech @JorgeStolfi @cosettepaneque @randahl No she wasn’t. She was painted that way by the press. If she had gotten the type of coverage they gave tRump or Bernie & if they had been reported on accurately she would have won hands down.
@ech @cosettepaneque @randahl
Considering that there were tens of millions of diehard voters on either side, surely there were many millions in the middle of the spectrum, who ended up voting for Trump, or stayed home, just because of that "feature".