hillary was a poor candidate and the perfectly wrong candidate to battle trump and here's what i don't get about the left... prospective polls showed not only that bernie would beat trump... but that trump would beat hillary so why then did the dems sabotage bernie?
I actually hadn't heard that before. Link? Personally, I think Hillary was a better candidate than both as far as being best suited for the position. I thought Bernie was too far left to make serious waves in a general election, but maybe if there was ever a time for a person like Bernie to compete it was against a candidate like Trump?
Any chance that the dems used fake news, illegals, and computers to attempt to rig the election and Trumps support was always being severely downplayed?
I'm not sure if downplaying Trump support in regards to polls would really be of help to the Dems. I recall the general polls showing Clinton comfortably ahead. Given that those are national polls and she won the popular vote, they may not have been that far off. Mix in the final Comey investigation right before the election, and that likely explains a % of the vote shifting -- the pre-election expectations and what happened aren't necessarily far off. In the end, Trump won by a fairly small margin. His EC votes were good, but he won a grip of states by thin margins. I don't think we really need conspiracy theories to explain what happened. That's not to say fact-finding investigations shouldn't be made if there is a possibility of wrong doing, but to report theories as facts when they are still theories is what fake news is.
edit: here's one (there are many) still looking for the one i saw... http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/why-does-sanders-do-better-clinton-against-trump
here's the one i remembered also heard it on both msnbc and fox fwiw... http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...s/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-5565.html edit: uno mas... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-pakman2/hillary-now-loses-to-trum_b_10115974.html
Stupid scumbag assholes? Wasserman Schultz not the slick cunt Hillary thought she was? Death threats? Femme power gone mad? God hates Hillary, too?
How would this help at all? There's a difference between fake news and incorrect polling data right? How does it benefit independent pollsters like Nate Silver to be that incorrect? So much of what the right is saying in the past few months is so devoid of any factual basis. How does having so much information make us more vulnerable to lying, I do not understand.
I find the death tax particularly unfair because it's money that has already been taxed. Hillary Clinton talked about "dynastic" wealth, and there's an interesting argument that if you don't redistribute wealth it all eventually ends up in the hands of a few families and you have feudal system where most are beholden to a few. But I find that argument doesn't take into account the fact that even though successful people are able to amass outrageous sums of wealth (Bill Gates, Andrew Carnegie, JP Morgan, etc.), but their descendants are usually much less savvy and wind up redistributing their family's wealth in 2 or 3 generations anyway. Regression to the mean is a thing, and wildly successful people usually don't have wildly successful offspring.
