Should Hilary Be Looking A Bit Closer To Home For Why She Lost The Us Election?

[ToraToraTora]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-41244474
Seems to want to blame anyone but herself!

[Spicerack]

She's a gift. The only book I know that asks the question and supplies the answer on the front cover.

[Khandro]

and we thought the remoaners were the worst bad losers!

[Kromovaracun]

I really wish this woman would go away. She rigged the Democratic primary against Sanders and managed to "lose" the US election to an utterly incompetent conman. She needs to step aside and release her grip on the Democrats, let some new blood in.

[jim360]

She does that as well. But to take full, 100%, no-other-factors-had-any-impact-at-all-it-was-all-me responsibility seems a bit self-centred to be honest.

She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes, after all. That wasn't enough to win her the election but then that's already at least one other major factor right there -- without the electoral college (or with a more proportional version of it, as Maine and Nebraska but no other states have), it would have been a crushing victory and we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Even aside from the large margin, Trump won some key states only very narrowly -- I did the maths already somewhere, but I think it comes down to something like 100,000 votes (out of almost 140 million) to swing in the right states and Clinton would have come out on top with not only the popular vote but also the Electoral College. That's a tiny swing of less than 0.1%, albeit in only perfect circumstances.

There have been better candidates than Hillary Clinton, but she was certainly electable. Yes, as the candidate she has to stand up and take responsibility, and she's done so, but that doesn't preclude her from considering other factors. With such fine margins at play, even the apparently mundane can play a part.

I guess the problem is that it does look rather like she's being a "sore loser", but still, she has a point: it wasn't all her fault.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Hillary is like 'O.J. looking for real killers':

[Spicerack]

^Love Steyn. Could listen to him all day.

Hey Jim; https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CwrD0QoXAAE2ryH.jpg

[jim360]

I'm assuming that was some website's attempt to predict the election probabilities, spicerack?

Yeah... I was never convinced it was so high. I tracked the polls and election trends a lot in the run-up to the election proper, and it wasn't difficult to see that, especially in the last few months, Trump gathered some momentum in the polls and Clinton was stalling rather. That wasn't enough for me to confidently predict a Trump victory -- he was still behind, after all, and as I mentioned above it came down to a comparative handful of votes in a few states. I tended to prefer the fivethirtyeight.com model, which in the end called the election prediction as 2:1 in Clinton's favour, which seemed fairly reasonable.

But if it's not directed at me directly then for sure it's a picture worth pointing out: sadly, a lot of people didn't really seem to take Trump's chances at all seriously, and may have paid for that hubris.