No shit?
A flawless campaign would have won.
Not necessarily, you can do everything right and still lose.
That said, the reason she was initially lauded as running a great campaign was picking up Biden's campaign from a cold start and making it much closer than map coloring makes it appear. She definitely did make mistakes in there too though, so not flawless at all.
That's not true.
A perfect campaign would address the issuers voters have, and not insist everything is fine and voters facing homeless or food insecurity are just "leftists insisting on purity".
That's why I said she made some mistakes, and it wasn't a flawless campaign.
How could they try to gaslight people who refused to compromise their ethics into believing that it's their fault without pretending to have run a flawless campaign?
Some of the stuff that's come out has been metaphorically criminal in it's negligence.
Biden had internal polls showing Trump would take 400 Electoral votes after his disastrous debate. Then it took a month for him to hand the race over to Harris. Outsiders figured this was a managed hand over with Harris being prepped and staffers reconfiguring the campaign behind the scenes. It turns out that's not true. There was no prep, it was a complete cold start. The sheer hubris of that is insane. A responsible leader would have had a team working on that the second they saw that data.
Then her advisors, Biden's advisors, turned out to be a who's who of the corporate country club. Which is why the campaign seemed so at odds with itself. Walz was picked and then sidelined. Progressive issues were bandied about until suddenly Liz Cheney is on board and nothing will change, everything was fine the last 4 years. Again outsiders thought they must have internal polling that showed already high support among all likely voters who lean left, and they had to bring in Republicans to get enough voters in key areas. Again, the outsiders were wrong because who would do that if they weren't forced to?
People worth millions of dollars who stand to benefit from a Trump presidency. I'm not saying this was a designated hit, I'm saying they seemed like Mitt Romney Republicans because it was run by people comfortable with those economic and justice policies.
And I haven't touched Gaza. Well I guess I just did, but we were all there for that discussion so I'm not going back over it more than to mention it.
The DNC hasn't had a real primary since 2008. That's the real problem.
Well of course they didn't, they got their asses kicked. From what I saw they ran the Hillary Clinton 2.0 campaign.
"No primaries until you vote for the candidate on your plate"
I don't care who does the electing as long as I get to do the nominating.
There's so much cope out there. Sure she "only" lost by 2 million-ish votes, but when you disaggregate the data and see these votes came from almost exclusively the most embattled counties in the country, 2 million suddenly becomes a much more meaningful number.
Although, I am worried about Republican strategies moving forward. Frankly, Trump's policies will have some very strong negative consequences if he follows through on them. It will be interesting to see Republicans try to win using the "down with the system!" strategy of the past 8 years when Trump is gone and they have the incumbency advantage. If the Dems put someone good up, they'll win handily again.
Every single staffer took their money and failed at delivering what was expected of them. In companies, board of directors would demand clawbacks
Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.
If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.
Rules
Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.
Post anything related to the United States.