General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAs it turns out, too many people thought Hillary would win easily
I remember about a month before the election, when Hillary had a double digit lead. she had pulled her adds from Wisconsin and Michigan, and started campaigning in Georgia and Arizona. to be fair, I thought she was going to win in a landslide, but I am cautious. I wanted her only to campaign in states that added up to 270 EV.
Many of my friends who had supported Bernie and still held a grudge against Hillary from the primaries voted for Jill Stein or wrote in Bernie. Hillary was going to win anyway, and they wanted to make a point.
And as it turns out, Jim Comey figured Hillary was a shoe-in, so to write that letter 11 days before the election was a way of covering his ass (although he claims it was for Hillary's sake).
But not only that, the Trump side thought they were going to lose, and were trying to keep it close and set themselves up for after the election. They threw caution to the wind. Flynn said, as he made deals with Turkey and Russia in October of 2016, "it only matters if we win", figuring there was no chance. Even the Russians wanted to just keep it close and break Hillary's balls and set her up for a weakened Presidency.
Then came the perfect storm. The votes fell just perfectly for Trump. They were as shocked as we were. How else could you explain the lack of preparations for transition? Trump gave that nothing job to Chris Christie and fired him after he won.
If everyone knew then what we know now, Hillary would have won in a landslide, or at least easily. But we can't go back in time, we can just work as hard as we can to fix it. I'm sure in 1932 Germany people wish they could have had a second chance for fucking up. In 2018 and 2020 America, we have that second chance. Let's not fuck it up this time.
njhoneybadger
(3,910 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)and violations of longstanding JD procedures that shocked and dismayed his colleagues around the nation, a couple hundred of whom weighed in officially on the situation.
Any one of the violations we know about, including de facto breaches of the Hatch Act, was grounds for removing Comey from his position as director of the FBI. For instance, longstanding JD/FBI standard is that nothing is released within 90 days of an election that could affect that election.
This bit is from Deputy AG Rosenstein's memo to Sessions outlining the case for firing Comey. The rest is at the link.
My perspective on these issues is shared by former Attorneys General and Deputy Attorneys General from different eras and both political parties.
Judge Laurence Silberman, who served as Deputy Attorney General under President Ford, wrote that "it is not the bureau's responsibility to opine on whether a matter should be prosecuted." Silberman believes that the Director's "Performance was so inappropriate for an FBI director that [he] doubt[s] the bureau will ever completely recover."
Jamie Gorelick, Deputy Attorney General under President Clinton, joined with Larry Thompson, Deputy Attorney General under President George W. Bush, to opine that the Director had "chosen personally to restrike the balance between transparency and fairness, departing from the department's traditions." They concluded that the Director violated his obligation to "preserve, protect and defend" the traditions of the Department and the FBI.
Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who served under President George W. Bush, observed the Director "stepped way outside his job in disclosing the recommendation in that fashion" because the FBI director "doesn't make that decision."
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/rosenstein-letter-annotated/526116/
There's a lot more, but much is unaddressed in this memo.
For instance, WHY didn't the DNC know Russia was hacking its computer system for months -- while the FBI was monitoring Russia's hacking? The DNC first found out when Wikileaks published the stolen documents to the world just before our national convention.
I think we should assume there's much more we know nothing about. Because no special investigator has been appointed. The Office of the Inspector General has investigated some of Comey's actions, but no report has been released, although expected for months now.
TDale313
(7,820 posts)Thought she would win. It was a perfect storm. I do also believe there was Russian interference. Absolutely in targeting voters in swing states- possibly actually changing votes. It didnt take much to change this.
Freddie
(9,232 posts)70000 votes in just exactly the right states to tip the EC?
I think the OP is 100% correct in the assessment of how this clusterfuck happened. The issue now is to make sure it never happens again.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)Kirk Lover
(3,608 posts)one thing that did it.
ananda
(28,783 posts)nt
Jake Stern
(3,145 posts)For the publicity it would generate for him and his brand.
TDale313
(7,820 posts)Were a big part of it as well. He was humiliated- as deserved as it was. Most people wouldve laughed it off, but Trump is incredibly thin skinned. I think he decided then and there that he was going to run and would make it his mission in life to undo everything single thing Obama had done as President.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)the first time, and Al Gore lost by 500K. Why did we accept it so easily with Hillary?
The Constitution guarantees us equality under the law, and yet the Electoral College means that the votes of some of us don't count in the Presidential election -- millions of us, and largely brown, urban, and female.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)And we formed a website (this very one) to denounce the injustice.
IronLionZion
(45,261 posts)so Gore won the electoral vote also. There were similar issues with minorities being taken off the voter rolls and the notorious butterfly ballot where people had a hard time seeing which candidate they were voting for.
For Hillary it was several rust belt states that flipped to red, not just one perennial swing state.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)Yeah, right.
IronLionZion
(45,261 posts)Make the case for it. We are sure they did it but what can we do about it without evidence?
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)Hillary won.
But because we have an Electoral College set up to support the system of slavery, Hillary lost.
And even some Democrats aren't OUTRAGED. They apparently think it's fine that votes in Montana or Vermont matter a lot more than votes in California or New York.
IronLionZion
(45,261 posts)it would be much better if they were from Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania. I'm sure GOP would like to stop me from voting if they could.
Don't blame me for the electoral college. The founders deliberately wanted candidates to campaign in more states.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)matter less than votes from rural states and "swing" states. We're supposed to be equal under the law and the Electoral College is an incredibly unequal system.
You are wrong about why we have the EC. It's not so candidates would have to campaign in more states. It's so they could encourage the slave-holding states to join the union.
Response to pnwmom (Reply #22)
Hassin Bin Sober This message was self-deleted by its author.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)all votes will be distributed among state electors on a proportionate basis, not winner-take all
Two states already do that and it's perfectly constitutional. If we pass a Federal law requiring all states to do it the problem will be solved.
Tell me again why voters in swing states should have their votes count for more than others?
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,272 posts)That would take a Constitutional Amendment. Which aint gonna happen.
I dont agree the Electoral College but I know it is a fact of life.
There are not two states that allocate their electoral votes "proportionately." Maine and Nebraska do it by Congressional district, with the statewide winner getting the two votes allocated for the Senators of those states. We DO NOT want that model for the entire country, due to the extreme gerrymandering of Congressional districts.
Now, if there were a system that would allow for the percentage of electoral votes in each state, that would be fine. But we don't have that.
dansolo
(5,376 posts)Do you realize that Maine and Nebraska uses a system that ties the electoral college votes to congressional districts? This means that they would be susceptible to gerrymandering. How is that a better solution? Electoral votes could be divided by the popular vote in the state, but that is not the approach that is currently done.
IronLionZion
(45,261 posts)joshcryer
(62,265 posts)That Gore won the EV was academic and wasn't learned for quite some time after.
IronLionZion
(45,261 posts)joshcryer
(62,265 posts)And they ran the clock out. Looking at the timeline he could not have achieved his goal, just logistically, if they didn't immediately do a statewide recount.
IronLionZion
(45,261 posts)poboy2
(2,078 posts)Yes they did, but did they? Key electoral college state stealing. I have suspicions on how that happened.
JHB
(37,132 posts)Both the Greens and the Libertarians got about 3x what they normally do, but the Libertarian vote tally was 3x the size of the Greens. What boosted that side? Republicans who wouldn't vote for Trump but absolutely refused to vote for "that woman", thanks to a quarter century of conservative harangues boosted during the election by Russian bots.
They, even more than the Green Goobers, handed the election to Kremlin Don. Not as "reasonable" as they imagined themselves to be, and they should not be let off the hook.
louis c
(8,652 posts)tonyt53
(5,737 posts)If Hillary had won MI, she would be prez. It really is as simple as that.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)Proud Liberal Dem
(24,355 posts)In fact, it's a sorry-a** excuse as politics/poll numbers should NEVER have been a consideration in the first place. He was even ADVISED AGAINST doing it but did it any way. I don't think that what Trump did was right for firing him because he obviously wasn't willing to be Trump's toady but that's all the sympathy I have for him.
honest.abe
(8,556 posts)Very well stated. +1
elocs
(22,474 posts)to either vote for a 3rd party or not vote at all. That's fine in any unquestionable red or blue state (but choosing to not vote at all in never fine) but for any on the Left to not vote for Clinton in any swing state is one of the things that helped give us Trump.
Freddie
(9,232 posts)From Ralph Nader, but no.
Just like we're stuck with the EC for the foreseeable future, we're also stuck with a 2-party system. One of the 2 major candidates will win. Do you vote for the one you agree with 90% of the time, or the one you agree with 0% of the time?
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)I understand the whole "make a point" vote. It does have an effect on future races. However, I cautioned folks at the time, be careful about believing you know how your state will go. Yes, there are states that are almost certain to go one way or another, but it's not as many as you might think. The few Stein voters I knew fell into this category. I strongly suspect that they thought it was "safe" to vote Stein because "Hillary had it all wrapped up". Truth is we saw a post around here something to the effect of "liberals we don't need you" or something like that. "Protest votes" are very dangerous unless you truly don't care. And over confidence usually means you're missing something.
DiverDave
(4,876 posts)Yep, it was inconceivable.
Count me as one that is still shocked.
Wwcd
(6,288 posts)That is a lame reason for why Comey did what he did in the final days.
He needs to tell the truth.
Because that reason doesn't match the intellect nor knowledge as head of the FBI that Comey posesses.
"Duh, well I thought she'd win! Really!"
That is a bull shitter's answer.
He stayed quiet about Trump's criminal actions, who had been under the FBI's watch for years, yet chose to make a Breaking News statement about an issue with Clinton that had so far proved nothing.
There is a reason why Comey made a big public stink about an issue that had barely seen the light of day, a last minute hail mary pass manufactured by the RW to stop Clinton.
He'd have done this country a big favor by telling the world via Breaking TV News, about the ongoing, yrs long investigation of Trump's foreign mob related money laundering, etc.
Why one & not the other?
"Duh, I thought she'd win anyway" is certainly NOT the truth.
What is it Mr Comey?
Doodley
(8,976 posts)because they were so sure Hillary would beat him by a landslide. The cries of racism and bigotry, and any analysis of his business skills were subdued at best. Even Obama gave Trump a pass, because everyone assumed he could not win. You cannot lay the blame on any one man.
Wwcd
(6,288 posts)Doodley
(8,976 posts)Wwcd
(6,288 posts)gerrymandering, vote tallies meddling, and saw the vocal rise of Tea Party mantras & White Supremacy. We watched as the final days approached & knew we had a good chance but also were well aware of all that was pushing back against the Dem Party, Clinton & the shennagins of the sanders affiliates. (Sarandonistas)
It was well know to most insiders that we were up against a full on repeat of Bush/Gore.
I knew of no one who took the Nov 2016 win for granted.
Then Comey stepped up to deliver the final blow.
Why?
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)CTyankee
(63,771 posts)But more and more I see "shoe in". I think some people think "shoe in" means a "foot in the door" not an easy win.
jalan48
(13,798 posts)Let's not make the same mistake next time.
The ones who'd shout 'concern troll' at anyone who even hinted that it wasn't a sure thing.
Paladin
(28,204 posts)I never dreamed there were enough stupid, gullible people to put trump in office.