2016 Postmortem

Donald Ian Rankin

(13,598 posts)

107. Not very, no, and arguably yes, I would say. N.T.

Reply to BainsBane (Original post)

Fri Dec 16, 2016, 12:56 PM

Dec 2016

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

124 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Question about weak candidates. [View all] BainsBane Dec 2016 OP

Definitely only Hillary. She lacks that certain je ne sais quois... Hekate Dec 2016 #1

She just doesn't have the "Presidential look." pnwmom Dec 2016 #6

It is sexism. duffyduff Dec 2016 #58

Maybe ageism too! Many here are saying... Joe941 Dec 2016 #68

That's what would be said meadowlark5 Dec 2016 #101

haha, indeed. Fast Walker 52 Dec 2016 #121

I suggest that all of the candidates be entered into the Olympic weightlifting competition. TexasTowelie Dec 2016 #2

He was up against an even weaker opponent. Crunchy Frog Dec 2016 #88

No, or at least not opposed to their opponents. But I already had a long discussion with you about JCanete Dec 2016 #3

Let me understand this BainsBane Dec 2016 #12

No, what? I'm sorry, I thought I was including Hillary as not being a weak candidate, again, JCanete Dec 2016 #79

If your question is whether I think corporate ownership influences BainsBane Dec 2016 #100

Point is I'm not trying to refight the primaries with you, nor am I trying to turn this into a JCanete Dec 2016 #110

Well, as I said in the other thread BainsBane Dec 2016 #111

This bizarre obsession with bernie is weakest of them all. dionysus Dec 2016 #117

Yeah, I'm the one totally obsessed with Bernie BainsBane Dec 2016 #119

THIS!!!!! I don't understand why so many focus on blaming democrats when AgadorSparticus Dec 2016 #123

Carter was the anti-establishment guy of his time. So, "no". Spitfire of ATJ Dec 2016 #4

Kinda sorta. His background was similar to a number of other Presidents. pnwmom Dec 2016 #7

New York is what got him in.... Spitfire of ATJ Dec 2016 #84

I think a lot of these people BainsBane Dec 2016 #109

Carter was a conservative Democrat of his time BainsBane Dec 2016 #14

This country tends to vote Republican with exceptions.... Spitfire of ATJ Dec 2016 #81

there are many undecideds/independents who tend to alternate party choices. SleeplessinSoCal Dec 2016 #5

but Clinton was just plain "weak"? BainsBane Dec 2016 #15

swift boating isn't irrelevant. SleeplessinSoCal Dec 2016 #73

None of them were weak candidates! MarianJack Dec 2016 #8

Post removed Post removed Dec 2016 #9

There's a difference between seeing someone as "damaged" baldguy Dec 2016 #16

Go back and re-read my post, since you obviously didn't get it the first time. BlueProgressive Dec 2016 #20

You don't think there are "liberals" and "Democrats" who believe RW bullshit? baldguy Dec 2016 #29

Oh, you're saying you believe the right-wing smears you say you've seen posted on this site? BlueProgressive Dec 2016 #30

You've just exposed yourself. 'bye. baldguy Dec 2016 #33

This message was self-deleted by its author BlueProgressive Dec 2016 #38

So the GOP bullshit about the losing candidates above BainsBane Dec 2016 #17

Hillary Clinton was by far the strongest candidate. betsuni Dec 2016 #10

Depends on how you define "weak" FBaggins Dec 2016 #11

A fatally flawed candidate who beat 14 Republican politicians.. JHan Dec 2016 #26

That's certainly his spin. Are you saying that you buy it? FBaggins Dec 2016 #44

That's not spin. JHan Dec 2016 #49

Were Gore, Kerry, Carter woolldog Dec 2016 #13

and Gore and Kerry were good retail politicians? BainsBane Dec 2016 #19

Am I concerned with retail politics? woolldog Dec 2016 #23

This myth that Sanders was pure is outright stupid. Kurt Eichenwald SAW the oppo on Sanders and the BlueCaliDem Dec 2016 #52

I f'ing hate Sanders. woolldog Dec 2016 #60

Sanders is an extremely good retail politician, which is why he has the highest approval rating in karynnj Dec 2016 #61

No, they weren't. And they lost anyway. Hillary, on the other hand, handily beat her opponent EffieBlack Dec 2016 #25

Kerry Gore and Carter didn't have the luxury of running against Trump. woolldog Dec 2016 #28

Keep thinking that... EffieBlack Dec 2016 #37

"Losing to Trump is a whole other level of incompetence" FBaggins Dec 2016 #47

So What other blasts from the past are we going to use to see who would beat Trump? JHan Dec 2016 #53

The lesson for me is don't nominate bad candidates woolldog Dec 2016 #70

Yeah that's your view... JHan Dec 2016 #71

I don't disagree with you woolldog Dec 2016 #75

Here are the facts BainsBane Dec 2016 #108

Huh? woolldog Dec 2016 #112

Well said BainsBane Dec 2016 #97

Hillary beat her opponent? FBaggins Dec 2016 #46

Three million votes, and those are only the ones tht got got counted and not "lost" somehow Hekate Dec 2016 #72

Did those candidates have a pages long list of reasons the public may not trust them? TCJ70 Dec 2016 #18

They also didn't have a 25-year witchhunt, tens of millions of dollars and an entire media industry EffieBlack Dec 2016 #24

which is precisely why the GOP dedicated so much of its resources to trying to BainsBane Dec 2016 #32

You aren't wrong...besides the last half of your last sentence IMO... TCJ70 Dec 2016 #42

Notorious HRC! BainsBane Dec 2016 #51

Kerry was attacked since 1971! karynnj Dec 2016 #66

So relative electoral success BainsBane Dec 2016 #31

I love you EffieBlack Dec 2016 #39

She was strong in the expected places...weak where it mattered... TCJ70 Dec 2016 #40

I don't dispute that the propaganda was effective BainsBane Dec 2016 #45

No one - even here in Vermont - ever thought Bernie would do anywhere near as well as he did karynnj Dec 2016 #67

That "enthusiasm" assumption is certainly popular among the media BainsBane Dec 2016 #78

You can have a smaller group of very enthusiastic people vs a larger group that vote, but are not as karynnj Dec 2016 #96

Bernie lost the primary due to one reason and one reason only. He did not execute a sound strategy. Exilednight Dec 2016 #113

Yes they were all weak too. They had some strengths obviously. el_bryanto Dec 2016 #21

A fair and thoughtful response. BainsBane Dec 2016 #34

Just Hillary. EffieBlack Dec 2016 #22

I just can't quite put my figure on what it is BainsBane Dec 2016 #35

A 59% unfavorable rating among registered voters? Hassin Bin Sober Dec 2016 #102

Just Hillary. I think it's because she possibly owns frilly items of clothing. JHan Dec 2016 #27

pantsuits BainsBane Dec 2016 #36

True...... JHan Dec 2016 #41

It's probably what the pantsuits and frilly things BainsBane Dec 2016 #43

don't know if you've read this.. JHan Dec 2016 #54

I hadn't BainsBane Dec 2016 #56

Hillary inherited a whole Clinton mythology. Orsino Dec 2016 #48

I think you nailed it BainsBane Dec 2016 #50

No Gothmog Dec 2016 #55

Anybody who says that is full of shit. duffyduff Dec 2016 #57

None were/are weak. All had flaws Arazi Dec 2016 #59

They were all excellent candidates, but they weren't all good campaigners, IMO. mtnsnake Dec 2016 #62

just hillary. the rest has penises. La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #63

It took the addition of Russia to beat Hillary in the EC cry baby Dec 2016 #64

I'd asked the same question about "flawed" candidates mcar Dec 2016 #65

and requires no explanation BainsBane Dec 2016 #77

Yes mcar Dec 2016 #82

A loaded question I'm happy to disarm. Act_of_Reparation Dec 2016 #69

3 million votes Hekate Dec 2016 #74

67.9998911234 quintillion votes. Act_of_Reparation Dec 2016 #90

The other candidates lost the electoral college too, and all except one the popular vote. BainsBane Dec 2016 #98

If by "weak candidates" is meant candidates who did not win, guillaumeb Dec 2016 #76

Gore and Kerry melman Dec 2016 #80

Not weak, but relatively untalented politicians who had been insiders for too long geek tragedy Dec 2016 #83

I don't actually think this is fair, to Clinton or these other candidates. Because... JCanete Dec 2016 #87

better qualified to govern doesn't make someone a good candidate. geek tragedy Dec 2016 #89

come on...Bush was a good candidate? Better than gore or Kerry? It takes help to make JCanete Dec 2016 #91

2000 Bush was a better candidate than Gore, absolutely. geek tragedy Dec 2016 #92

how? If the media makes up the rules about what makes you an effective candidate, then yes JCanete Dec 2016 #93

the ability to handle the media is a big key geek tragedy Dec 2016 #94

well, thanks for this discussion....no shit. The question remains, do Republicans actually JCanete Dec 2016 #95

media: steely-eyed skepticism for Dems, starry-eyed wonder for Repubs emulatorloo Dec 2016 #103

I think by the time a candidate wins the nomination, that candidate has real strengths. Yo_Mama Dec 2016 #85

IMO yes. Mondale and Dukakis even more so. Crunchy Frog Dec 2016 #86

Yes, Yes and only in his reelection campaign. Exilednight Dec 2016 #99

In the current bizarro world, Hillary is weaker than the guy she destroyed in the primary. nt LexVegas Dec 2016 #104

Right? BainsBane Dec 2016 #105

Clinton is a female and so it is acceptable to attack her Gothmog Dec 2016 #106

Not very, no, and arguably yes, I would say. N.T. Donald Ian Rankin Dec 2016 #107

No, just HRC jack_krass Dec 2016 #114

I'd say the campaigns of the first three had significant weaknesses as well. Ken Burch Dec 2016 #115

In ways. They lost. Being a weak candidate does not mean they'd be a bad president. dionysus Dec 2016 #116

They and their opponents all had much better favorables than Hillary and Trump jfern Dec 2016 #118

Yet lost by wider margins BainsBane Dec 2016 #120

Gore didn't really lose jfern Dec 2016 #124

We aren't saying she ran a weak campaign because she lost hellofromreddit Dec 2016 #122