never will understand why, options as they were, the Democrats didn't run with Biden.
A Biden win would've secured Obama's legacy for generations.
It was really foolish.
The eternal US elections - 2016 edition
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8476
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
-
- Posts: 16973
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am
Re: The eternal US elections - 2016 edition
Honestly we are hearing a lot of that kind of talk but the reality is I think any Democrat would have lost any Republican no matter what this election. The economy sucks so bad.
Censorship isn't necessary
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8476
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: The eternal US elections - 2016 edition
Right. Not to mention how hard it is for an incumbent party to keep a third term.Mr. Perfect wrote:Honestly we are hearing a lot of that kind of talk but the reality is I think any Democrat would have lost any Republican no matter what this election. The economy sucks so bad.
Not to mention- well, he's Joe Biden...
but you probably wouldn't have had the President stupidly putting his legacy on the line and telling a Michigan college audience that this election amounted to a referendum on his presidency.
Re: The eternal US elections - 2016 edition
I'm still stunned that the experts were so blind. Confirmation bias? Self imposed isolation?
I think Nap is right, Obama's self-righteous, condescending lecturing, of those he perceived as low brows, that "my legacy is on the line, and for your own good, you better vote for Hillary" was not a smart move.
Hillary's back up of labeling everyone who did think she was a goddess as a deplorable, was equally stupid. But that is their social circle. They don't know any different.
The night before, when all the MSM, even FOX were pre-broadcasting the meme of the Javit's Center and "the glass ceiling," a little, quiet voice said "You're done. You have tempted Nemesis one too many times."
Who knew the experts were flat Earthers?
I think Nap is right, Obama's self-righteous, condescending lecturing, of those he perceived as low brows, that "my legacy is on the line, and for your own good, you better vote for Hillary" was not a smart move.
Hillary's back up of labeling everyone who did think she was a goddess as a deplorable, was equally stupid. But that is their social circle. They don't know any different.
The night before, when all the MSM, even FOX were pre-broadcasting the meme of the Javit's Center and "the glass ceiling," a little, quiet voice said "You're done. You have tempted Nemesis one too many times."
Who knew the experts were flat Earthers?
Re: The eternal US elections - 2016 edition
And that some people mindlessly accept MSM "projections" without knowing how to critically evaluate data without partisan bias is hardly mine.NapLajoieonSteroids wrote:When I originally posted it, it predicted Trump was projected to be the winner of the popular vote. That changed. It changed sometime after you asking me where it suggested he was predicted to win the popular vote. I decided to update when I noticed the information change.kmich wrote:NapLajoieonSteroids wrote:update on that CNN page: no longer predicting Trump as popular vote winner
Whatever. The current popular vote total:
Clinton: 60,828,358
Trump: 60,261,924
Difference of 566,434 for Clinton. Trump leads in Michigan by 12,000 votes. Trump has won the electoral college but not the popular vote.
I wasn't the only one here who saw it.
It used to look like this:
Which made sense as there were still plenty of areas left for Trump to gain votes. But it was not to be.
That you either didn't see it or didn't know how to navigate the CNN page at the time is not my problem.
Re: The eternal US elections - 2016 edition
Choosing Joe Biden was Obama's first "presidential" decision. He chose a bufoon to ensure that he would not have competition or be shown up. That decision circled back around to eradicate his legacy. Perfect.NapLajoieonSteroids wrote:Right. Not to mention how hard it is for an incumbent party to keep a third term.Mr. Perfect wrote:Honestly we are hearing a lot of that kind of talk but the reality is I think any Democrat would have lost any Republican no matter what this election. The economy sucks so bad.
Not to mention- well, he's Joe Biden...
but you probably wouldn't have had the President stupidly putting his legacy on the line and telling a Michigan college audience that this election amounted to a referendum on his presidency.
Proud Member International Brotherhood of Bullfighters, Rodeo Clowns, and Barrelmen, Local 17
Re: The eternal US elections - 2016 edition
Biden has never been an impressive candidate in his 2 previous runs for the nomination. Biden would not have made a difference other than producing more Democratic turnout in predictably blue states which would have changed nothing in the electoral map. Biden is very much a part of the existing Democratic establishment. Biden would have represented a continuation of the Obama administration just like Clinton.
The Democratic establishment represented continuity. The Republican establishment offered the usual, tired stuff they have been serving up for decades. People wanted change for a variety of reasons, and only Trump and Sanders spoke to that. The Democratic establishment was unified enough to pull the rug out from Sanders to nominate Clinton, but the Republican establishment was too conflicted and leaderless to do the same to Trump. A Trump presidency was pretty much inevitable after the conventions.
The Democratic establishment represented continuity. The Republican establishment offered the usual, tired stuff they have been serving up for decades. People wanted change for a variety of reasons, and only Trump and Sanders spoke to that. The Democratic establishment was unified enough to pull the rug out from Sanders to nominate Clinton, but the Republican establishment was too conflicted and leaderless to do the same to Trump. A Trump presidency was pretty much inevitable after the conventions.