Who/What bare the most responsibility for the loss of Hillary Clinton?

[All Along The Watchtower]

Update: Everyone - meaning no one.

[SWE]

Voter suppression

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Kremlin Bernie is what it did!

[King Cobra]

I voted Hillary, Bill, Bernie, Trump, DNC and Kaine.

[Free Bird]

I've read Shattered. Mook is absolutely awful. His data-focused approach had no soul to it and drove them to make really stupid decisions.

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

I'm going to give a politically incorrect answer here.

The public - voters and non-voters alike - bear ultimate responsibility for the outcome of the 2016 election. The contrast between the candidates in terms of basic competence and ability to do the job could not have been clearer, and if the public refused to see that, that is on them.

Lots of other stuff mattered too - campaigning decisions, the decisions of the press on which issues to ignore and which to focus on, Russian meddling, the Comey letter, etc - but all of that stuff was of secondary or tertiary importance. It is on the public for even entertaining the possibility that Trump was anything other than a manifestly absurd candidate. The 2016 election should never have been close. The only reason it got close enough for any of the other stuff to matter was that the public failed to take the responsibility of self-government seriously.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I'm going to give a politically incorrect answer here.

The public - voters and non-voters alike - bear ultimate responsibility for the outcome of the 2016 election. The contrast between the candidates in terms of basic competence and ability to do the job could not have been clearer, and if the public refused to see that, that is on them.

Lots of other stuff mattered too - campaigning decisions, the decisions of the press on which issues to ignore and which to focus on, Russian meddling, the Comey letter, etc - but all of that stuff was of secondary or tertiary importance. It is on the public for even entertaining the possibility that Trump was anything other than a manifestly absurd candidate. The 2016 election should never have been close. The only reason it got close enough for any of the other stuff to matter was that the public failed to take the responsibility of self-government seriously.

Amen.

We can talk about not visiting Wisconsin or a muddled message all we want, and sure... maybe the campaign could have made better decisions. But the fact that it was just so manifestly obvious  she knew what she was doing and Trump had no f-cking clue speaks, I think, to how irrationally people hated her. And maybe some of it was earned, but I think the degree of hatred she's faced is unprecedented and surely can be chalked up at least in part to the way people think about high-profile women candidates.

[mencken]

I'm going to give a politically incorrect answer here.

The public - voters and non-voters alike - bear ultimate responsibility for the outcome of the 2016 election. The contrast between the candidates in terms of basic competence and ability to do the job could not have been clearer, and if the public refused to see that, that is on them.

Lots of other stuff mattered too - campaigning decisions, the decisions of the press on which issues to ignore and which to focus on, Russian meddling, the Comey letter, etc - but all of that stuff was of secondary or tertiary importance. It is on the public for even entertaining the possibility that Trump was anything other than a manifestly absurd candidate. The 2016 election should never have been close. The only reason it got close enough for any of the other stuff to matter was that the public failed to take the responsibility of self-government seriously.

Amen.

We can talk about not visiting Wisconsin or a muddled message all we want, and sure... maybe the campaign could have made better decisions. But the fact that it was just so manifestly obvious  she knew what she was doing and Trump had no f-cking clue speaks, I think, to how irrationally people hated her. And maybe some of it was earned, but I think the degree of hatred she's faced is unprecedented and surely can be chalked up at least in part to the way people think about high-profile women candidates.

If Hillary had even an ounce of humility within her she would be President today. Maybe if she had acknowledged that she did not do a spectacular job keeping the Benghazi consulate safe, or that she made a collosal error in judgement in keeping a private email server, or that being caught admitting lying to the public on trade policy did not make her comparable to Abraham Lincoln, voters may have been a bit more forgiving of her perceived transgressions. I mean, even Donald Trump apologized every once in a while.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

“Culturally conservative.” She apologized many times. But that monicker you use in your signature says a lot about how open you were to actually hearing it.

Cheers.

[mencken]

“Culturally conservative.” She apologized many times. But that monicker you use in your signature says a lot about how open you were to actually hearing it.

Cheers.

Hillary Clinton "apologies" generally seem to involve a justification for her behavior and avoid accepting responsibility for her actions (i.e. not an actual apology). Here is one such "apology". Here is another montage of several non-apologies in between the one she should have given in the first place. It is hard to hold the voter accountable for remembering the fifteen or so "apologies" rather than the one she gave six months later.

[fluffypanther19]

Hillary herself, followed by Robbie Mook.