Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "Are the Democrats essentially a regional party today?"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous]If the Clinton campaign wasn't run by people with their heads up their asses, she would have won and we wouldn't be having this conversation until 2020 when I believe she would have lost to any empty suit Republican due to the obstructionism the Republicans in congress would have certainly put in place like they did with Obama, except times 10. She lost by about 11,000 votes in MI, about 30,000 in WI, and about 70,000 in PA. So there was NO WAY the Democratic campaign could have campaigned harder, done more rallies, and more GOTV events, amongst their base? I don't buy that for one second. Clinton got 2.2 million votes, Obama got 2.5 million votes in 2012. Romney got 2.1 million votes in 2012, and Trump also got about 2.2 million votes. Trump did slightly improve on Romney's numbers, but Clinton plummeted from Obama's 2012 results. It was pure (lack of) voter turnout that cost the Democrats. I'm sure there were a few normally Democrats who voted Trump, just as I'm sure there were a few normally Republicans who voted Clinton, as well as people from both parties who voted for a 3rd party candidate. It seems like it all cancels out in the end. But because the Clinton campaign thought they had these states in the bag, they didn't bother to campaign as much there, and then they lost because they couldn't turn out their own voters. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics