2016 Postmortem

Exilednight

(9,359 posts)

9. You don't win the Super Bowl by having more fans.

Reply to baldguy (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 27, 2016, 07:38 PM

Dec 2016

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

117 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If you don't have the support of the base, you won't be the nominee. [View all] Garrett78 Dec 2016 OP

And if you offend a large kcdoug1 Dec 2016 #1

Really? Trump did just fine with that strategy mythology Dec 2016 #2

And yet SHE LOST kcdoug1 Dec 2016 #5

Oh, right. She lost by having 2,864,974 more votes than the cheeto-faced shitgibbon. baldguy Dec 2016 #7

You don't win the Super Bowl by having more fans. Exilednight Dec 2016 #9

No, but you do win elections by having MORE VOTES baldguy Dec 2016 #11

You don't win the presidency that way. It takes 270 EVs. Popular vote doesn't matter. Exilednight Dec 2016 #19

So, you admit that you're a Clinton hater. baldguy Dec 2016 #21

No, I never said I hated Hillary. You said I did when you responded to my post. Exilednight Dec 2016 #23

And now you're trying to deflect & walk it back. baldguy Dec 2016 #25

If you're going to make accusations, then post links where I said such a thing. Exilednight Dec 2016 #26

I can't get over all these liberal EC fans that continue to sprout up all over the place. kcr Dec 2016 #34

Just because I understand how something works does not mean Exilednight Dec 2016 #35

There is meaning to it. Which you choose to ignore. boston bean Dec 2016 #38

Who is being g sworn in Jan 20th? Exilednight Dec 2016 #44

He won because of a corrupt system that disenfranchised millions of black voters boston bean Dec 2016 #46

This is the EXACT same argument that RWers on Twitter tweet me. I never thought I'd see BlueCaliDem Dec 2016 #51

bullshit. Exilednight Dec 2016 #54

You're not on Twitter, are you? Or maybe you are, but under a different disguise? BlueCaliDem Dec 2016 #56

Twitter is for people with no retention skills and need their news broken Exilednight Dec 2016 #57

Not necessarily true. It takes real skill to get your point across in 140 characters or less. BlueCaliDem Dec 2016 #58

I agree, but no one is making a point on Twitter. It's just people Exilednight Dec 2016 #60

How would you know? You're not on Twitter, are you? BlueCaliDem Dec 2016 #61

I've been on Twitter, and discovered it was cestpool. Exilednight Dec 2016 #63

When? Five years ago? I'm on Twitter and BLOCK asswipes who come in with BlueCaliDem Dec 2016 #65

If she was so terrible, what does that say about mythology Dec 2016 #17

There's an argument to be made that Hillary didn't tap into anything. Exilednight Dec 2016 #22

He gave her those states... Wow.. boston bean Dec 2016 #39

+1 oasis Dec 2016 #78

+1 uponit7771 Jan 2017 #103

So she didn't win because she was a good candidate but because Sanders screwed up? uponit7771 Jan 2017 #102

If she were such a good candidate, then why did she lose the GE? Exilednight Jan 2017 #107

BULL FUCKIN SHIT !!! Comey, Voter suppression and Russia all the rest of the postmortems are guessin uponit7771 Jan 2017 #101

I could counter your premise, but that's been done in plenty of threads already. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #4

Not much you can do when a "large part" (lol no) of the party is offended... SaschaHM Dec 2016 #6

Who did that? mcar Dec 2016 #45

I agree. The DLC takes progressives AND people of color for granted except at election time yurbud Dec 2016 #92

And the so called base that does not vote for the nominee will endure Demsrule86 Jan 2017 #108

Well, it all depends on how you define the "base," The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2016 #3

Unions have been decimated and membership has declined immensely. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #8

You mean the "white working class"? seeing there are plenty of working class folk (I dare say most uponit7771 Dec 2016 #13

The "base" fluctuates from decade to decade. The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2016 #14

No, the base doesn't... the peripherals do but black women, single women, Hispanics and other... uponit7771 Jan 2017 #104

We need to broaden the base MadCrow Dec 2016 #10

Bernie's ideas broadened the base and Schumer has as much as said so. JudyM Dec 2016 #15

Broadened the base with votes for third parties. boston bean Dec 2016 #40

Do you have any numbers at all to support that claim? The Green Party got its typical % of votes, JudyM Dec 2016 #43

Surely you haven't forgotten the Bernie or Bust "movement" and the R B Garr Dec 2016 #91

The problem is, many states turned away new Dem supporters by preventing late registration. TheBlackAdder Dec 2016 #41

So true! 6month advance registration requirement! Let's hope that's one of the improvements JudyM Dec 2016 #42

Big +1 nt riderinthestorm Jan 2017 #116

Who votes in a primary if not "the base", generally speaking? TCJ70 Dec 2016 #12

I think the big corporate donors are more important than "The Base" in determining the nominee. jalan48 Dec 2016 #16

Money's influence on election results has been vastly overstated. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #29

We're Bernie supporters not Democratic base, too? aikoaiko Dec 2016 #18

Not necessarily SharonClark Dec 2016 #47

Sure, some. But most were party supporters. aikoaiko Dec 2016 #48

Maybe radical noodle Dec 2016 #55

"Some Sanders supporters have no use for the Democratic Party except to exploit it." TonyPDX Dec 2016 #52

this, plus 1000 Grey Lemercier Jan 2017 #99

The base is solid. NCTraveler Dec 2016 #20

No one here can define "the base". It's fluid. Exilednight Dec 2016 #24

The Obama coalition is, for the most part, what got Clinton nominated. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #28

Exit polling says otherwise. Exilednight Dec 2016 #30

First, we're talking about the primary and not the general election. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #31

Actually, those slim margins are the Obama coalition. Exilednight Dec 2016 #32

The base of the party is predominantly POC, women and urbanites. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #33

The base is whomever the next leader of the party draws Exilednight Dec 2016 #62

The base isn't nearly as fluid as you claim. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #64

Sanders got less than 43% of the vote in the primaries Gothmog Dec 2016 #27

how much of her support was because of "elictability"? BuddyCa Dec 2016 #36

I think it played a role. Those who are most oppressed can't take a chance on someone like Sanders. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #66

Had Sanders won the nomination, we'd be living on a different planet... Orsino Dec 2016 #37

Sanders would have lost the popular vote by a huge margin Gothmog Dec 2016 #49

No one can know that... TCJ70 Dec 2016 #50

Sanders was on the ballot in 2016 and under performed Clinton Gothmog Dec 2016 #59

Not to mention the delegate count wouldn't have been remotely close without caucuses. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #67

There was so much good material to use on Sanders that it was not even funny Gothmog Dec 2016 #70

Faulty premise. Orsino Dec 2016 #68

First Sanders never had a chance of being the nominee and second, the oppo would have killed him Gothmog Dec 2016 #69

Of course he had a chance. So did primary voters. Orsino Dec 2016 #71

Sanders was rejected by Jewish, African American and Latino voters Gothmog Dec 2016 #73

You're still addressing a different question. Orsino Dec 2016 #74

I live in the real world where facts are important Gothmog Dec 2016 #75

They were busy supporting a different candidate... Orsino Dec 2016 #76

A significant portion of the Democratic base rejected Sanders for some valid reasons Gothmog Dec 2016 #77

"Rejected"? That's a silly-ass framing. Orsino Dec 2016 #79

So in your world, people who support President Obama would have ignored Sanders attacks on the POTUS Gothmog Dec 2016 #80

The cold hard fact is that neither Sanders nor O'Malley DID get nominated..... George II Dec 2016 #82

I don't see anyone denying that. n/t Orsino Dec 2016 #83

Some of the more hardcore Hillary supporters need to rub in the fact... TCJ70 Dec 2016 #84

You're claiming that someone rejected the possibility that either.... George II Dec 2016 #86

You are claiming a position that no one is disputing. n/t Orsino Dec 2016 #87

It seems few want to actually address the issue at hand. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #53

Apparently, it's gonna take a celebrity. Orsino Dec 2016 #72

Sanders ran not to win but for the media coverage Gothmog Dec 2016 #81

A celebrity? That's silly. Orsino Dec 2016 #85

Denial is not just a river in Africa Gothmog Dec 2016 #88

Uh-huh. Orsino Dec 2016 #89

You are totally wrong yet again Gothmog Dec 2016 #90

Nope. You've cherry-picked Sanders' statements... Orsino Dec 2016 #94

Just because you disagree with facts do not mean that these facts are false Gothmog Jan 2017 #98

Every candidate ran for media coverage. Orsino Jan 2017 #100

No every normal candidate were members of the party and cared about the party Gothmog Jan 2017 #105

You're claiming to read minds... Orsino Jan 2017 #106

Sanders tops list for most appearances on 2016 Sunday shows Gothmog Jan 2017 #95

This does not make him a celebrity. Orsino Jan 2017 #96

Sanders had more than double the appearances on the Sunday talk shows compared to the next person Gothmog Jan 2017 #97

That's a fantasy. n/t Orsino Jan 2017 #111

Again, it is called math Gothmog Jan 2017 #112

Minus the rest of the math, it's just cherry-picking. Orsino Jan 2017 #113

The math is the math Gothmog Jan 2017 #114

I'm not the one ignoring math. Orsino Jan 2017 #115

You are wrong yet again Gothmog Jan 2017 #117

Clinton had more of the 'base' than Bernie but she certainly didn't have all of it... Kuhl Dec 2016 #93

Text book Kennedyesque election...had Bernie behaved in a civil fashion Demsrule86 Jan 2017 #109

They both got plenty of support, get off it Wabbajack_ Jan 2017 #110