What Hillary Clinton should of done differently (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 18, 2024, 02:43:12 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  What Hillary Clinton should of done differently (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: What Hillary Clinton should of done differently  (Read 4212 times)
Annatar
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 983
Australia


« on: February 13, 2018, 07:41:50 AM »

In retrospect she should obviously have listened more to what Biden and Bill Clinton were saying, but I disagree with the consensus view which claims she ran a bad campaign if I was the head of her campaign I would have done exactly what her campaign did, if you look at the 3 big states which decided this election, Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, her campaign did everything right.

Ohio was going to be difficult to hold in any scenario and her campaign realized that, let's focus on the two states which really the Clinton campaign believed they were going to win, Florida and Pennsylvania.

In Florida, she got 267k more vote then Obama, an increase of 6.3%, a huge improvement, in Miami Dade, her margin was 5.6% better and 81,000 votes more, 290k vs 208k, in Orange County, her margin was 6.2% better and 50k more in raw votes. Her campaign did exactly what they wanted to in Florida, the fact that Trump got a monster increase of 460k votes or 11% over Romney was something her campaign was not responsible for.


The story in Pennsylvania is similar, out of Philly, its suburbs and the urban core of Pittsburgh which is Allegheny County, Obama's margin was 706k, Clinton not only matched that but exceeded it by 65k, getting a margin of 771k, exactly what her campaign wanted, again she did exactly what she wanted to in Pennsylvania.

In short, I think the Clinton campaign was well run at least in Florida and Pennsylvania, in both states she substantially outperformed what Obama was able to do, I do think her campaign does not get enough credit for this, even by the media, the reason she lost was because of deeper trends which her campaign cannot be held responsible for in my opinion.

In retrospect it is easy to criticize her decision making processes, but with the information that was available leading up to the election, her campaign behaved in the correct way, her campaign thought big margins out of Miami and Orange were what was needed, as well as matching or exceeding Obama's margins in the Democratic areas of Pennsylvania, they achieved both.

To put it bluntly she lost the election because Trump was able to energize the Republican base in a way Romney failed to, turnout in small town Pennsylvania was up 8% from 2012 to 2016 for example, Romney it should be noted was a disaster in regards to turnout, he somehow miraculously manged to get fewer votes in Ohio then John McCain for example and Trump was also able to get voters who had voted for Obama at the top of the ticket but were voting GOP down-ballot to vote for him, thus allowing him to flip a state like Pennsylvania. Just to illustrate the point, in 2012 in Pennsylvania, House Dems won the vote by 80k, Obama won by 310k.




Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 12 queries.