2016 Postmortem

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)

18. That's the point!

Reply to nashville_brook (Reply #13)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:00 PM

Apr 2016

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

64 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This year, Hillary only got 1,054,083 votes. She actually got 14,413 fewer than she got in '08. [View all] JDPriestly Apr 2016 OP

Every time you paint Hillary as a bad candidate, it makes Bernie look evern worse for losing to her. CrowCityDem Apr 2016 #1

+1000! IamMab Apr 2016 #12

Voter suppression helps her a lot. basselope Apr 2016 #14

In Hillary's "home state?" JDPriestly Apr 2016 #24

It was Bernie's home state, so he said. Keep telling yourself a 16 point loss is a win. CrowCityDem Apr 2016 #33

Bernie's home state in that it was his birth state, but Hillary's state in that she represented JDPriestly Apr 2016 #37

Why not spin it as Bernie is a better candidate than Obama? Oh, that's right, he's not. CrowCityDem Apr 2016 #42

Facts are facts. Bernie did better in New York than Obama did. It's the numbers, not my opinion. JDPriestly Apr 2016 #45

The numbers aren't wrong. They just don't mean very much. CrowCityDem Apr 2016 #50

And yet, unlike Obama woolldog Apr 2016 #54

She has artificial "advantages" while he has authentic populist strength. senz Apr 2016 #57

Yeah, the "artificial" advantage of being Secretary Of State, and the single most respected woman. CrowCityDem Apr 2016 #60

SOS via post-election deal. Clumsy, reckless, disastrous results. "Respected" via power. senz Apr 2016 #61

Interesting! 👍 WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2016 #2

A lot of voters were caught in the registration dump -- at least 20,000. Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #3

Well hell, in that case Jackie Wilson Said Apr 2016 #4

Sanders outspent Clinton by several million dollars. Obama didn't spend any money on ads here. geek tragedy Apr 2016 #5

It's Clinton's home state. She had a huge advantage supposedly from the get-go. JDPriestly Apr 2016 #17

58-42 in the state with the second most delegates. geek tragedy Apr 2016 #30

Yeah, that's one difference between now and then. Orsino Apr 2016 #48

So its Bernies home state and he outspent her 2-1 MattP Apr 2016 #6

He hasn't lived there for 50 years... Human101948 Apr 2016 #43

So 2008 Hillary will get to be Prez? JoePhilly Apr 2016 #7

Mediocre rationalization impresses nobody. onehandle Apr 2016 #8

Almighty straws I grasp at thee!!! nt Codeine Apr 2016 #9

Facts are facts. Numbers are numbers. JDPriestly Apr 2016 #22

A 1.35% decrease is meaningful to you? Codeine Apr 2016 #59

Let's agree for the sake of argument that it is "noise." JDPriestly Apr 2016 #62

And we can always count on the Peanut Gallery for some nutty rejoinder... Human101948 Apr 2016 #44

He was brilliant because he lost. I don't think he can afford much more brilliance... LanternWaste Apr 2016 #10

This is not about his "losing." It's about her "winning" with fewer votes than she received in 2008 JDPriestly Apr 2016 #63

Give her time. kstewart33 Apr 2016 #11

HRC can't win the general -- that's the bottom line. nashville_brook Apr 2016 #13

They don't understand that. basselope Apr 2016 #15

they will. nashville_brook Apr 2016 #19

Hopefully they will learn... basselope Apr 2016 #23

after their gloating over election fraud/suppression in NY, they're unfortunately not going nashville_brook Apr 2016 #34

A nice little sub-thread of "Democrats" hoping the Democratic nominee loses the General Election. JoePhilly Apr 2016 #40

a nice little post that disingenuously misrepresents the sub-thread nashville_brook Apr 2016 #49

Looks like you'd like Hillary to lose so we all "learn our lesson". JoePhilly Apr 2016 #53

It's not a matter of hope, it is a matter of, there is no way for her to win. basselope Apr 2016 #55

She will win. JoePhilly Apr 2016 #56

That's the point! JDPriestly Apr 2016 #18

precisely! and i lurve how nashville_brook Apr 2016 #21

Lol, what a sad, sad number-wrangling exercise that was Tarc Apr 2016 #16

Fact is, Hillary's numbers went DOWN this year, not up. JDPriestly Apr 2016 #20

Poor l'il poppet Tarc Apr 2016 #25

The drop in the bucket, and I agree the margins are small, shows that Hillary, in her home JDPriestly Apr 2016 #29

Contrast a white, rural open primary state with a multicultural closed one? Ok... Tarc Apr 2016 #32

There are a lot of white, rural states in America. JDPriestly Apr 2016 #64

The MSM is reporting a blowout win Skink Apr 2016 #47

In other words statistical noise mythology Apr 2016 #26

In other words, voting trends. JDPriestly Apr 2016 #27

+ 1 JoePhilly Apr 2016 #41

K/R! So Sanders is tracking better than Obama, who won!!! CentralCoaster Apr 2016 #28

It's good news that we can talk about in the states that are yet to vote. JDPriestly Apr 2016 #31

If you compare all states, he's way in the hole compared to Obama last time Zynx Apr 2016 #36

None of this matters very much because Bernie lost Texas and Florida 2-1. Zynx Apr 2016 #35

#berniemath!...nt SidDithers Apr 2016 #38

Damn. Arizona and Brooklyn! WhiteTara Apr 2016 #39

60 precincts in areas that went heavily for Hillary seem to be unreported still Dem2 Apr 2016 #46

You didn't include Hillary's vote percent LiberalFighter Apr 2016 #51

People ignored this. northernsouthern Apr 2016 #52

Thanks, JD. Hill supporters are trying to psyche us out. We should ignore their lies senz Apr 2016 #58