Really? How long are the Dems gonna screw this dead donkey?
No this is NOT a post trying to understand why Clinton lost….most real voters know why….she was a shitty candidate.
Instead this is a look at something that I thought was either dead or dying….the anti-war vote.
There is evidence to support that her loss in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan were from the votes of military families that are weary of all this war stuff….talk and action……
Now an important new study has come out showing that Clinton paid for this arrogance: professors argue that Clinton lost the battleground states of Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan in last year’s presidential election because they had some of the highest casualty rates during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and voters there saw Clinton as the pro-war candidate.
By contrast, her pro-war positions did not hurt her in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and California, the study says; because those states were relatively unscathed by the Middle East wars.
I can see why these people would vote against her as she was perceived as a pro-war candidate where Trump was not…..
This is something that the DNC needs to keep in mind as they scramble to find a message that will play with the voters.
But yet the people in the Clinton admin from the 90’s are trying to get the DNC to move more toward the center…..
“Reject the siren calls of the left” is the advice Mark Penn and Andrew Stein offer for the Democratic Party in a New York Times op-ed. The two make a case for why Democrats have to move back to the centrist position advocated by President Bill Clinton in the mid-’90s—a position they say reversed into a “rush to the left” during President Obama’s last few years in office. That U-turn resulted in an upswing for “identity politics, class warfare, and big government,” all of which have worked against the Democrats at the voting booths, with big losses during Obama’s tenure in terms of legislative seats and control of both houses of Congress.
It has also hurt Dems’ standing with working-class voters, who’ve witnessed “the party being mired too often in political correctness, transgender bathroom issues, and policies offering more help to undocumented immigrants than to the heartland,” the authors write. The “good issues” Democrats should be pushing on as they “reject socialist ideas,” Penn and Stein write: better protections for US workers, a focus on rural areas, the opioid epidemic, and a more balanced take on immigration. “Americans are looking for can-do Democrats in the mold of John F. Kennedy and Bill Clinton—leaders who rose above partisanship to unify the country, who defended human rights and equality passionately, and who also encouraged economic growth and rising wages,” they write. Full op-ed here.
Seriously? If they find a Clinton-esque candidate for 2020 then they will lose again.
The longer these wars continue the more the anti-war vote will come into play…..is my hope…..
Hillary lost because she was a horrible candidate and if they run a centrist next time then they will be asking all these same questions again.
Keep in mind the government of Bubba Clinton is what has brought us to this spot in time……do we want to relive all this again?
The DEms have lost sight of the “fronts” that help their power….the trip to the Center has made the Dem Party a toothless tiger…
“The solution of social problems consisted in the adjustment of conflicting interests; and the real business of politics, then, was simply the control of work and of the conditions under which work was performed. The liberals were altogether wrong in their insistence on individual liberty; in society, the parts must be subordinated to the whole.”
— Saint-Simon, 1802, digested by Edmund Wilson, To The Finland Station, 1940
The Dems need to get in touch with the people they abandoned in the 90’s……or they can watch the party crash and burn yet again.