Question about weak candidates.

[JHan]

53. So What other blasts from the past are we going to use to see who would beat Trump?

Walter Mondale? Dukakis?

An abnormal year in politics produced an abnormal E.C win for Trump.

Dismissing the idiosyncrasies of the E.C. is myopic. This is the second time it's happened over the past couple decades - in all cases to a Democrat President. Something is fundamentally wrong with our system when it produces results that breeds dysfunction. When will we take it seriously? When a president wins only 30% of the popular vote but takes the Presidency because of the Electoral College? Saying "well you agreed to the rules" doesn't make the situation any less bad.

A difference of 80,000 votes could mean any number of things. I noted the hubris of her campaign in their approach to the midwest, but it's not the *only reason*. Such a razor thin loss could be the result of any number of reasons - including Comey, voters who don't care, GOP smears, voter suppression, anything.

The "establishment" got hit hard and who represented the establishment this year? Democrats. Yes , every single anti-establishment argument was a hit against the democratic party, because we are in an incumbent year, which is why Trump's arguments were so potent. Never mind the cravenness of the GOP establishment, they get to hate government when it suits them.

Clinton was a strong candidate: She beat Trump in all the debates, she ran a clean campaign, she focused on issues- and I know this because I bothered to follow her speeches. And she had enough respect for me as a voter to not dish out slogans and false promises and lies in my face, but dared to offer a detailed road map showing how she would get what she needed done.

Instead of crapping on a candidate you disliked, maybe take a more objective view because there are loads of lessons we need to learn about what went down this year.