• ikidd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can’t say in the right words what a terrible choice Clinton was, and the party that let that nomination race play out as it did should be blamed for the result.

    • CoderKat@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’d greatly, greatly prefer an actually progressive candidate over Clinton. But I still disagree that Clinton ass a terrible choice from an objective viewpoint. The main way I can see her being terrible is largely simply in the “meta” for US elections, since she had been attacked so hard by Republicans and generally wasn’t very charismatic (not that Biden is either).

      In terms of experience, she was undeniably unbeatable and I’m convinced she would have simply been Obama v1.1 in terms of policy.

      IMO the strong, strong opposition to her was heavily influenced by sexism and people drinking the GOP’s propaganda. She was held to different standards than a male candidate with the same experience.

      And the whole complaints about the party favouring her? So what? Of course they favoured the strongest candidate. I personally love Sanders (and if I were American, he’d have my vote), but I know he’d have an even harder time winning the general. Nor do I think it makes sense to hate Clinton herself because her party favoured her so strongly. Some “Bernie bros” were utterly bizarre in their behavior and I can only assume were trolls, as no well informed person would vote for Trump or not vote at all simply because Sanders wasn’t on the general ballot. I mean, there’s a reason he endorsed Clinton at the end.

      • transientDCer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think a lot of opposition to her was that she was a war hawk. She was openly calling for the US to bomb Syria and establish no fly zones there, which would have also escalated a potential conflict with Russia. I don’t know a single person in my life who wanted the US to get involved in another useless war.

      • ikidd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not american either, but I followed it. During the nomination race, Trump had already been confirmed as the Republican nominee. There was various polling done while the Democrat race was still up, and Sanders polled quite a bit more likely to defeat Trump than Hillary. Which obviously turned out to be the case. So I don’t know how certain your “strongest candidate” statement is. Polls are not facts, but it seemed to indicate something there that the leadership of the Dems ignored.

    • LeadSoldier@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thank you! Other platforms are so astroturfed that this fact is often covered up with accusations of sexism. The fact is that ever poll at the time said that everyone could beat Trump except for her. She was political poison and her and the DNC cheated to make her the candidate which scared off even more voters. She is the reason we suffered as a country, not the supposed savior!

    • SpaceBar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree. I voted for Hillary, but we were all sick of the dynastic candidates back then. Two Bushes followed by two Clinton’s rubbed people the wrong way.

      Plus, the right had been demonizing Hillary for so long, people on both sides were tired of it.

      That’s all before actual policy issues.

      She was a poor candidate choice.

      • Tak
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        deleted by creator

        • SpaceBar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Agreed. It’s recency bias. Reagan caused horrible damage as well. I don’t remember much specific about Bush Srs fckery.

          9/11 was coopted into some seriously bad actions and policy. If it weren’t for the attack Bush 2 may have been a 1 term president.