Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

In reply to the discussion: So the children have won [View all]
 

Uponthegears

(1,499 posts)
25. No, let's be honest
Wed Dec 7, 2016, 05:08 PM
Dec 2016

that you simply refuse to accept that Bernie was speaking for her.

Just like the Bernie haters who want to blame him and his working class supporters for flocking to Trump's (non-existent) "economic message" instead of sticking with the nominee (when statistically they did stick with Hillary), you want to deny Hillary credit for adopting Bernie's "economic message" because you want to believe that, if only we'd only nominated Bernie, he could have brought in those voters who were concerned about economic issues (which did stick with Hillary), and he would have won.

Bernie's people came through for Hillary. That may not give either the "still Bernie" crowd or the "Bernie's fault" crowd the fodder they want to blame the candidate they opposed in the primary for what is by my estimation a national tragedy, but it's the truth.

Recommendations

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

So the children have won [View all] Uponthegears Dec 2016 OP
Recommended. With reservations. guillaumeb Dec 2016 #1
So, you set up a false equivalence and demand that everyone meet in the middle... TwilightZone Dec 2016 #2
Thank you for pointing out the typo Uponthegears Dec 2016 #4
Hmmmm... many, many words. What was that you were saying about "little blaming fits?" Squinch Dec 2016 #3
Yea, it does require some reading Uponthegears Dec 2016 #6
Even if I agree with your interpretation, you are at odds with yourself here. JCanete Dec 2016 #5
It has nothing to do with the Clintons Uponthegears Dec 2016 #7
It is a good history lesson, and again I'm in agreement with your argument. JCanete Dec 2016 #9
I think you have a point Uponthegears Dec 2016 #11
What was Hillary's economic message? Exilednight Dec 2016 #8
It is true. Clinton and the DNC thought they could pull this out without JCanete Dec 2016 #10
It's tempting to look at the last three weeks Uponthegears Dec 2016 #12
That is why russ feingold, and Zyper Teachout lost. Feingold lost by a larger percentage than still_one Dec 2016 #14
You know that Uponthegears Dec 2016 #20
I didn't ask about her plan, I asked about her message. Exilednight Dec 2016 #15
In the GE, it was Bernie's message Uponthegears Dec 2016 #16
No it wasn't. What was her 3 to 5 word message? Exilednight Dec 2016 #22
No, let's be honest Uponthegears Dec 2016 #25
There's a difference between a message and a plan. Exilednight Dec 2016 #27
Great point Uponthegears Dec 2016 #28
Just for arguments sake, let's say she didn't have a good message. That does not account for the still_one Dec 2016 #17
A lot of it was her ability to convey her plans I'm a manner Exilednight Dec 2016 #23
Post removed Post removed Dec 2016 #13
Maybe you should read all the posts Uponthegears Dec 2016 #18
While I was stroking my ego" The last month before the election I did full time phone banking into still_one Dec 2016 #21
See what happens when we assume? (Including myself) Uponthegears Dec 2016 #24
Good analysis. Thanks! nt jalan48 Dec 2016 #19
You are my new favorite poster! hueymahl Dec 2016 #26
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»So the children have won»Reply #25