2016 Postmortem

NRQ891

(217 posts)

15. it's not that simple

Fri Dec 2, 2016, 05:38 PM

Dec 2016

she had tons of baggage

- NAFTA

- the other 'dynasty' president (George W) was a complete disaster, and his brother Jeb was showing up for number 3 in the family, put the nation in a very 'anti-dynasty' mood in both parties - Jeb had the biggest warchest and was completely humilated

- FBI investigation Anthony Weiner scandal, as husband of closest aid, which brought back memories or Monica and putting the nation through an impeachment

- historically high negatives in polling

- Iraq war vote

- wall street paid speeches

The party can say 'we're not going to consider that stuff', but the voter can do whatever they like in a secret ballot

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

83 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If we change NOTHING, how do we make any sort of a comeback in '18 and '20? [View all] Ken Burch Dec 2016 OP

It says a lot that no one is replying. The losing mindset realmirage Dec 2016 #1

lots of people responded. nt La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #54

The Only People Saying Change Nothing... mattocaster6 Dec 2016 #2

I think the senate and house republican wins were actually motivated by 'contain Hillary' NRQ891 Dec 2016 #17

After the election in 2008... Blanks Dec 2016 #28

Was it really the fault of the message, or are their structural issues at work also? guillaumeb Dec 2016 #3

Exactly. It makes little difference who we run if the system is rigged stopbush Dec 2016 #5

Voters on both sides seem certain that the system is rigged. guillaumeb Dec 2016 #6

Gerrymandering results in one thing the house yeoman6987 Dec 2016 #41

True. But gerrymandering results in more state level GOP lawmakers guillaumeb Dec 2016 #45

False. Kingofalldems Dec 2016 #48

Same way as always, let the Repkes f**k it up then come in to clean up rzemanfl Dec 2016 #4

Ken, do you belong to your local county central committee? WhiteTara Dec 2016 #7

But, but.. isn't that what this website is for? to discuss stuff? pangaia Dec 2016 #8

You're right. WhiteTara Dec 2016 #9

yeah and local level politics is part of the discussion JI7 Dec 2016 #10

yes, but only when spoken to lol - nt NRQ891 Dec 2016 #18

I did in Juneau Ken Burch Dec 2016 #22

Your ideas will fall on fertile ground WhiteTara Dec 2016 #24

it worked in california JI7 Dec 2016 #11

Einstein said, the definition of insanity is NRQ891 Dec 2016 #12

I don't know. Laffy Kat Dec 2016 #13

it's not that simple NRQ891 Dec 2016 #15

And Trump had less baggage, how? nt Laffy Kat Dec 2016 #19

he didn't - but it was the people who didn't vote for either, that decided the election NRQ891 Dec 2016 #20

Nah, it was the hundreds of thousands of minority voters who were forced to cast Eliot Rosewater Dec 2016 #27

Wow--welcome to DU! ismnotwasm Dec 2016 #29

'it was the head of the god damn FBI a week before the election releasing a letter' NRQ891 Dec 2016 #36

You need to get your stories straight ismnotwasm Dec 2016 #44

care to elaborate where I'm wrong? NRQ891 Dec 2016 #46

No time ismnotwasm Dec 2016 #56

' I'm not big on back and forth crap' NRQ891 Dec 2016 #57

Agree. Welcome. nt Laffy Kat Dec 2016 #62

He had less political baggage. Exilednight Dec 2016 #74

You are really on those negatives ismnotwasm Dec 2016 #30

you can't tell voters in a secret ballot that they have to ignore *legitimate* negatives! nt NRQ891 Dec 2016 #31

You nailed it. She was weak because she couldn't overcome the lies. Obama managed to do it Exilednight Dec 2016 #73

We don't need to do a thing to change any of that because Hillary isn't running anymore. DanTex Dec 2016 #37

no, she isn't. but the party needs to learn from it NRQ891 Dec 2016 #38

Almost everything you mentioned is specific to Hillary Clinton. DanTex Dec 2016 #40

The Democratic Party must overhaul their computer security yeoman6987 Dec 2016 #47

For sure. DanTex Dec 2016 #49

That talking point right there is part of the problem... NoGoodNamesLeft Dec 2016 #26

yes nt NRQ891 Dec 2016 #39

It's just a guess, but I wonder if those who voted for both Obama and Trump Nay Dec 2016 #43

That's an excellent point and absolutely could be the case with some people NoGoodNamesLeft Dec 2016 #55

Agreed that we shoudn't try to appease bigots or appeal to bigotry Ken Burch Dec 2016 #64

2017 Proving Ground: Virginia Governor and legislative elections 4139 Dec 2016 #14

WashPost: "Trump win shakes up 2017 race for Virginia governor" 4139 Dec 2016 #16

change for change sake isn't a great idea dsc Dec 2016 #21

We must fight to change the party, since they didn't change anything after the 2014 disaster jfern Dec 2016 #23

People who think the enemy is the Democratic Party, need to change. boston bean Dec 2016 #25

people aren't saying the Democratic party is the enemy NRQ891 Dec 2016 #42

Let's try being unashamedly partisan for a change. dawg Dec 2016 #32

THIS! LuvLoogie Dec 2016 #33

Yet that'd work. ismnotwasm Dec 2016 #35

yup. La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #51

Regroup. Reform the line. All in. LuvLoogie Dec 2016 #34

All of us here are committed to keeping the anti-oppression agenda. La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #50

Where did you ever get this idea? stone space Dec 2016 #52

there is a poster of DU who used to constantly justify domestic violence La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #53

Not true. Some here at DU want them deported and their families ripped apart. stone space Dec 2016 #58

Not true. Some folks here support Zimmerman. The Zimmerman supporters even have their own group here stone space Dec 2016 #59

"All of us here are committed to keeping the anti-oppression agenda." BainsBane Dec 2016 #60

The only part I would call for changing Ken Burch Dec 2016 #65

If we change nothing, we will continue to be defeated by Republicans. Tatiana Dec 2016 #61

We're going to get destroyed in 2018 because we're in denial about 2016 LittleBlue Dec 2016 #63

2018 was always going to be difficult for the democratic party yeoman6987 Dec 2016 #66

That's about the 5th time you posted that in the last few weeks. Kingofalldems Dec 2016 #68

Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 2016 #78

She didn't fail on economics no matter how much you'd like to spin it that way. And we all know bettyellen Dec 2016 #67

I haven't posted a single thread since endorsing Hillary a week before the convention Ken Burch Dec 2016 #69

And I think we need to face the fact that if HRC had a penis, she would have won handily. bettyellen Dec 2016 #70

I believe Hillary would have had the exact same showing if she had been male. Ken Burch Dec 2016 #71

HA ha ha no. blows my mind you could say sexism cost her no votes. bettyellen Dec 2016 #79

Not none, but certainly not much among people to her left. Ken Burch Dec 2016 #80

Circular argument. bettyellen Dec 2016 #81

Why is it so important to get people to believe it was racism and sexism and nothing else? Ken Burch Dec 2016 #82

No one said nothing else- but it was NOT economics, get over it. bettyellen Dec 2016 #83

I doubt nothing will change treestar Dec 2016 #72

If Trump and the GOP really make good on economic populisim they will be very hard to beat. hollowdweller Dec 2016 #75

It is more than just a possibility, if he starts to add 35% tarriffs it WILL start a trade war still_one Dec 2016 #76

I highly doubt the status quo will survive the next round of elections. democrank Dec 2016 #77