Tweet
Plain and simple.....she was a poor candidate!
Biden Tells Us Why Hillary Lost (And It’s Not the Russians)
May 1, 2017
RUSH: Trump is also… (chuckles) You just have to marvel at this in its own way. What is the Democrat Party primary narrative since the election loss? It’s that they lost the election because the Russians hacked the election, hacked the Democrats. And, by the way, the Democrats — and I’ve always told you this. They know this is BS. They know it isn’t true. This is totally made up and manufactured, and we’ve documented this every which way but Sunday. They know it. The Hillary campaign never thought they were gonna lose.
They weren’t talking about the Russians hacking anything and tampering with the election — even the day before the election, a month before the election — because they thought they were gonna win. And they didn’t hatch the plan. The Clinton campaign hatched the plan along with people in the media 24 hours after her loss. Now there have been a couple of… Well, there’s been one book and a number of postmortems, and Joe Biden gave a speech up in New Hampshire. Biden said the reason why Hillary lost is because she’s a woman and this is a sexity country and that there were no issues discussed in the campaign.
That’s — and you know how wrong that is? All Trump did was talking about issues! It was Hillary who made it personal. It was Hillary whose whole campaign was, “Trump’s unfit, Trump is undesirable, Trump is not all there, Trump is a danger.†Trump was on issue after issue after issue. But Biden didn’t say anything about the Russians; the book doesn’t say anything about the Russians. Other postmortems… There’s a big one here that I’ll get to as I get through the Stack of Stuff here today, a serious examination of why Hillary lost.
It’s by somebody who wants the Democrats to stop all this excuse-making and learn from it because they can’t afford for this to happen again. And the reasons are all substantive, and they have to do with — in this particular analysis — the fact that Hillary was unable to convert enough Obama voters to stay with her. A tremendous number of Obama voters switched to Trump. Now, what the Democrats are lying to themselves about, is they’ve got these… In this story, they have all of these political and-poll-driven follow answers to that quandary.
(summarized) “I mean, why would people that voted for Obama not vote for Hillary? What did she do to lose those voters? Why would those voters…? How could an Obama voter ever vote for Trump?†What the Democrats don’t get into, what they don’t dare get into — and I guarantee you they know this, too; I will wager. I’m having to guess here because there’s no data in this story to support this. But the data that is used, I think, is erroneous. You can’t ignore the fact that a lot of people, particularly in 2008, voted for Barack Obama because of the racial component and a desire to end the racial divide in America.
There were people who believed that if the United States elected an African-American president, that it would forever end all of these allegations and discussions America is a racist nation. There were people — and that’s the only reason a lot of people voted for Obama. Now, you can throw in disgust with Bush, disgust with the Republicans after the media’s four years of destruction of both Bush and the Republicans. But you cannot deny the racial component here. I think it’s the big reason why so many Obama voters didn’t vote for Hillary.
They wouldn’t have voted for Obama, either, if he were white. I really believe it. I don’t know what the number is. I’m not saying it’s a majority of people. I’m saying it’s enough people who voted for Obama who didn’t vote for Hillary. This is what this latest analysis is pointing to as the real reason she lost. No mention of the Russians in this analysis. It’s strictly an analysis of voting patterns as best these people can come up with them. But the one thing that they’re honest with themselves about is the racial component. Of course, they don’t dare go there because this is now legacy-building time for Obama.
And you cannot build a serious, solid legacy if you include the fact that the only reason a lot of people voted for him was because they thought in doing so they could end this argument that America’s racist and they could end the racial strife. As I so adeptly pointed out, all it did was exacerbate it. It did not… And I predicted it the day after it happened, that it was not going to ameliorate the racial divide whatsoever. Well, Trump has come along now out of the blue and (laughing) “said China may have hacked the emails of Democratic officials to meddle with the 2016 presidential election, countering the view of U.S. intelligence officials who have said Moscow orchestrated the hacks.
“In an interview transcript published on Sunday, Trump gave no evidence backing his allegation, first made on the eve of the Nov. 8 presidential election, that†the ChiComs could have hacked the emails of his rivals. Why should Trump have to give evidence? (interruption) No, no, no! I’m serious. We are a year later, and there’s still zero evidence the Russians hacked the DNC’s emails. There isn’t any email evidence. There isn’t any evidence, period, that the Russians had anything to do with the outcome of the election. Zip, zero, nada. In fact, Pencil Neck was on TV. When was it I was watching? It was Friday here or sometime over the weekend.
Pencil Neck was on saying nothing go on and on and on about how they can’t get their questions answer, something they do not have further information. They don’t, because there isn’t any. The Russians didn’t have any impact on the outcome of the election. They know it. It’s just a narrative that they’ve constructed that they’re sticking with to continue to explain why Trump is illegitimate and so forth. So for Trump to come back now and throw right back in their face that the ChiComs could have done it is an example, I think, of how he keeps them off guard.
Biden Tells Us Why Hillary Lost (And It’s Not the Russians)
May 1, 2017
RUSH: Trump is also… (chuckles) You just have to marvel at this in its own way. What is the Democrat Party primary narrative since the election loss? It’s that they lost the election because the Russians hacked the election, hacked the Democrats. And, by the way, the Democrats — and I’ve always told you this. They know this is BS. They know it isn’t true. This is totally made up and manufactured, and we’ve documented this every which way but Sunday. They know it. The Hillary campaign never thought they were gonna lose.
They weren’t talking about the Russians hacking anything and tampering with the election — even the day before the election, a month before the election — because they thought they were gonna win. And they didn’t hatch the plan. The Clinton campaign hatched the plan along with people in the media 24 hours after her loss. Now there have been a couple of… Well, there’s been one book and a number of postmortems, and Joe Biden gave a speech up in New Hampshire. Biden said the reason why Hillary lost is because she’s a woman and this is a sexity country and that there were no issues discussed in the campaign.
That’s — and you know how wrong that is? All Trump did was talking about issues! It was Hillary who made it personal. It was Hillary whose whole campaign was, “Trump’s unfit, Trump is undesirable, Trump is not all there, Trump is a danger.†Trump was on issue after issue after issue. But Biden didn’t say anything about the Russians; the book doesn’t say anything about the Russians. Other postmortems… There’s a big one here that I’ll get to as I get through the Stack of Stuff here today, a serious examination of why Hillary lost.
It’s by somebody who wants the Democrats to stop all this excuse-making and learn from it because they can’t afford for this to happen again. And the reasons are all substantive, and they have to do with — in this particular analysis — the fact that Hillary was unable to convert enough Obama voters to stay with her. A tremendous number of Obama voters switched to Trump. Now, what the Democrats are lying to themselves about, is they’ve got these… In this story, they have all of these political and-poll-driven follow answers to that quandary.
(summarized) “I mean, why would people that voted for Obama not vote for Hillary? What did she do to lose those voters? Why would those voters…? How could an Obama voter ever vote for Trump?†What the Democrats don’t get into, what they don’t dare get into — and I guarantee you they know this, too; I will wager. I’m having to guess here because there’s no data in this story to support this. But the data that is used, I think, is erroneous. You can’t ignore the fact that a lot of people, particularly in 2008, voted for Barack Obama because of the racial component and a desire to end the racial divide in America.
There were people who believed that if the United States elected an African-American president, that it would forever end all of these allegations and discussions America is a racist nation. There were people — and that’s the only reason a lot of people voted for Obama. Now, you can throw in disgust with Bush, disgust with the Republicans after the media’s four years of destruction of both Bush and the Republicans. But you cannot deny the racial component here. I think it’s the big reason why so many Obama voters didn’t vote for Hillary.
They wouldn’t have voted for Obama, either, if he were white. I really believe it. I don’t know what the number is. I’m not saying it’s a majority of people. I’m saying it’s enough people who voted for Obama who didn’t vote for Hillary. This is what this latest analysis is pointing to as the real reason she lost. No mention of the Russians in this analysis. It’s strictly an analysis of voting patterns as best these people can come up with them. But the one thing that they’re honest with themselves about is the racial component. Of course, they don’t dare go there because this is now legacy-building time for Obama.
And you cannot build a serious, solid legacy if you include the fact that the only reason a lot of people voted for him was because they thought in doing so they could end this argument that America’s racist and they could end the racial strife. As I so adeptly pointed out, all it did was exacerbate it. It did not… And I predicted it the day after it happened, that it was not going to ameliorate the racial divide whatsoever. Well, Trump has come along now out of the blue and (laughing) “said China may have hacked the emails of Democratic officials to meddle with the 2016 presidential election, countering the view of U.S. intelligence officials who have said Moscow orchestrated the hacks.
“In an interview transcript published on Sunday, Trump gave no evidence backing his allegation, first made on the eve of the Nov. 8 presidential election, that†the ChiComs could have hacked the emails of his rivals. Why should Trump have to give evidence? (interruption) No, no, no! I’m serious. We are a year later, and there’s still zero evidence the Russians hacked the DNC’s emails. There isn’t any email evidence. There isn’t any evidence, period, that the Russians had anything to do with the outcome of the election. Zip, zero, nada. In fact, Pencil Neck was on TV. When was it I was watching? It was Friday here or sometime over the weekend.
Pencil Neck was on saying nothing go on and on and on about how they can’t get their questions answer, something they do not have further information. They don’t, because there isn’t any. The Russians didn’t have any impact on the outcome of the election. They know it. It’s just a narrative that they’ve constructed that they’re sticking with to continue to explain why Trump is illegitimate and so forth. So for Trump to come back now and throw right back in their face that the ChiComs could have done it is an example, I think, of how he keeps them off guard.
Comment