2016 Postmortem

retrowire

(10,345 posts) Tue May 24, 2016, 02:37 PM May 2016

Simple Question for Everyone here. [View all]

A democracy is a system in which all citizens are given the voice to choose who they trust to be their next leader.

So why is it, that the two leading nominees of both parties have the highest unfavorability and highest untrustworthy ratings?

Why would the least trusted and disliked candidates come out on top in a system that is supposedly designed so that candidates people trust are given the keys to the White House?

This is not opinion or rumor. This is fact. Hillary is not trusted. Trump is not trusted. Neither are liked by the majority.

To those of you who will surely run in and comment about the millions of votes Hillary is getting, I'll go ahead and remind you of these facts...

1. No matter how many voters want Hillary, there are still independents, Bernie supporters, Trump supporters and plain old Republicans that do NOT want Hillary. With that, it is easy to see the majority is not leaning towards Hillary. That's super easy math.

2. You could even compare primary votes right now to see that Hillary would not "annihilate" Trump as some of you are terrifyingly comfortable with believing. Who has been breaking voter turnout records this primary season? Republicans. Not Democrats. Republicans. They feel they are SO CLOSE to getting a Republican controlled Congress and Senate, all that's left is the presidency! And if they have to vote Trump just to finally get a TOTALLY RED government, then they'll do it.

Meanwhile, Republicans hate Hillary, Independents dislike her and Democrats as a whole have mixed feelings.

So again! The question...

Why is it, that the two leading nominees of both parties have the highest unfavorability and highest untrustworthy ratings, in a system where the most liked and trusted should be succeeding?

122 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Simple Question for Everyone here. [View all] retrowire May 2016 OP

It will not be an easy race but Hillary has come in first place and has earned the nomination. hrmjustin May 2016 #1

But in a system where a candidate like her should be faltering retrowire May 2016 #5

Maybe because people trust her to be president. hrmjustin May 2016 #7

im sure some do. retrowire May 2016 #11

So we should just give up because it will be hard? hrmjustin May 2016 #15

no giving up retrowire May 2016 #23

Hillary is the most intelligent of the 3 running metroins May 2016 #103

"candidate like her should be faltering" asuhornets May 2016 #24

it didnt happen as well as it could have because retrowire May 2016 #31

You are making excuses.....nt asuhornets May 2016 #34

these are truths and history will say as much. sorry. nt retrowire May 2016 #43

Bwhahahahhahahha - "Jimmy Who?" jberryhill May 2016 #99

mocking me for something i didn't say? hilarious. retrowire May 2016 #100

Again, the fact that the line does not resonate with you is demonstrative... jberryhill May 2016 #105

This reply is so tired angrychair May 2016 #69

Compromise..it's not a dirty word.. asuhornets May 2016 #70

It is angrychair May 2016 #72

Uncompromising means metroins May 2016 #104

Amendments are not always compromises angrychair May 2016 #108

Ummmm. They both won more votes and delegates. boston bean May 2016 #2

But they are the least trusted and liked. retrowire May 2016 #3

People voted. That is the system they won under. hrmjustin May 2016 #4

its not as simple as that. retrowire May 2016 #6

Hillary has won more votes and delegates. hrmjustin May 2016 #10

i hear you, i really do. retrowire May 2016 #12

She wins more votes. hrmjustin May 2016 #17

okay retrowire May 2016 #21

How come Sanders could not get a higher voter turnout? hrmjustin May 2016 #22

there were times when he did and it didnt matter retrowire May 2016 #25

You are making excuses. hrmjustin May 2016 #27

you asked my opinion, i answered retrowire May 2016 #33

Sanders lost fair and square. hrmjustin May 2016 #36

we're not talking about that though retrowire May 2016 #42

No i spent 5 weeks everyday canvassing for Hillary for my health. hrmjustin May 2016 #44

that has nothing retrowire May 2016 #45

You said; hrmjustin May 2016 #47

your 5 weeks of canvassing retrowire May 2016 #48

OK Andy823 May 2016 #95

It really depends on what you believe. retrowire May 2016 #96

you are contradicting your self and your own OP...you say that msongs May 2016 #8

again, its not that simple retrowire May 2016 #20

The simple answer jberryhill May 2016 #9

so are you saying the majority would vote for the least trusted candidates? retrowire May 2016 #14

No, I am not saying either of those things jberryhill May 2016 #29

im not just talking about primaries though retrowire May 2016 #35

Well I guess I need to figure out what you are talking about jberryhill May 2016 #64

new question and its for you. retrowire May 2016 #66

Pretty obvious jberryhill May 2016 #73

but considering that voter outcome has been unprecedented this year retrowire May 2016 #74

IMHO Trump phenomenon caused GE voters to come out for the Primary. emulatorloo May 2016 #79

i think Bernie has done the same on our side. retrowire May 2016 #80

Yes indeed! emulatorloo May 2016 #81

No, I don't think things are different this year jberryhill May 2016 #82

you really cant see anything different about 2016? retrowire May 2016 #84

Things are "different" pretty much every time through jberryhill May 2016 #85

It is my first rodeo actually. retrowire May 2016 #88

Yes, and that's why this November is going to be weird & unpredictable. eggman67 May 2016 #76

very well said. retrowire May 2016 #77

A somewhat related question - why is it that a few favored groups of people are allowed to dictate djean111 May 2016 #13

You talking about superdelegates? nt retrowire May 2016 #18

No. the superdelegate thing reeks, though. And it was invented to keep out candidates like djean111 May 2016 #32

Why do you think that is a simple question? eom yawnmaster May 2016 #16

it is retrowire May 2016 #19

It isn't a simple question. You have defined the contest as one of favor and trust; is that the ... yawnmaster May 2016 #30

The answer IS simple... potone May 2016 #39

The political system in the USA and it is hard to be a representitive democracy when PufPuf23 May 2016 #26

Simple answer - BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY! highprincipleswork May 2016 #28

bingo and a high five. nt retrowire May 2016 #37

BINGO PDittie May 2016 #38

ding. ding. nt restorefreedom May 2016 #58

This. PowerToThePeople May 2016 #122

Most people don't vote in the primaries, even those registered with the respective parties TheKentuckian May 2016 #40

Neither are on the ballot - unfavorable nor untrustworthy, and both are highly subjective.... George II May 2016 #41

Because the system is rigged against "upstarts" dana_b May 2016 #46

exactly. nt retrowire May 2016 #50

A career politician is, by definition, not an upstart. TwilightZone May 2016 #62

Independents aren't who you think they are. Garrett78 May 2016 #49

still have no way of knowing which way they lean retrowire May 2016 #54

Did you read the article? Garrett78 May 2016 #57

and yet, this election is like none other before. retrowire May 2016 #60

So why is it, that the two leading nominees of both parties Zorra May 2016 #51

You don't get to tell me it's because more people showed up for her!!! NCTraveler May 2016 #52

Revealed preference counts for more than declared preference. N.T. Donald Ian Rankin May 2016 #53

I find it curious that supporters of a candidate who has spent most of the campaign insisting that TwilightZone May 2016 #55

curious? this is the will of the people. no confusion needed. nt retrowire May 2016 #56

It was also the will of the people to elect Hitler jberryhill May 2016 #91

Can you fully accept the idea that Superdelegates are a democratic thing though? nt retrowire May 2016 #92

Moreso than the convention that nominated Humphrey, yes jberryhill May 2016 #98

Thank you for being thorough and communicative with me. retrowire May 2016 #116

Eight years from now, no matter what jberryhill May 2016 #121

Before the first vote was cast in Iowa, Hillary had over a 500 super delegate lead. She was crammed B Calm May 2016 #59

How anyone can sit there and think this is not corrupt or odd at all retrowire May 2016 #61

I hear you! This whole primary has been a sham B Calm May 2016 #63

This message was self-deleted by its author guyton May 2016 #65

"trust" is not the same as "trust to be their next leader." alc May 2016 #67

then what about "favorability" ratings? nt retrowire May 2016 #68

Favorabilty ratings = Who would you like to have a beer with? emulatorloo May 2016 #83

I agree. The process has been completely rigged. yolla331 May 2016 #71

The day we nominate based solely on that criterion BootinUp May 2016 #75

There's disinformation on all sides. ALL SIDES. retrowire May 2016 #89

He may look immune in May but he's not. BootinUp May 2016 #93

I hope this is right if she wins the primary. retrowire May 2016 #94

I think the reason has a lot to do with the huge increase in people getting information from the anotherproletariat May 2016 #78

Wrong, there are three candidates not two. B Calm May 2016 #87

You do realize that Sanders already conceded, right? anotherproletariat May 2016 #97

We also, in this day and age, have the ability to do instantaneous fact checking. retrowire May 2016 #90

It's what closed primaries get you AgingAmerican May 2016 #86

She got more votes and we will not let you nullify ours just because you think you know better bravenak May 2016 #101

It's an important question. I believe that an important part of the answer is that Tal Vez May 2016 #102

Perhaps the best political question that I have ever seen. virtualobserver May 2016 #106

Because jpmonk91 May 2016 #107

Obviously Demsrule86 May 2016 #109

not that simple. nt retrowire May 2016 #110

Abandonment of the commons. Chan790 May 2016 #111

I hope we're moving in the right direction. nt retrowire May 2016 #112

Corporate influence has convinced us we have no choice larkrake May 2016 #113

Thucydides wrote about this, as did Plato (it's hardly a new problem for democracies) Recursion May 2016 #114

smoke filled rooms? educate me! nt retrowire May 2016 #115

Back in the day the nominee was selected by the party apparatus Recursion May 2016 #117

Oh, I was expecting something about rooms actually being filled with smoke lol retrowire May 2016 #118

Oh, like the papal enclave? That would be kind of awesome Recursion May 2016 #119

HAHAHAHA good one. XD nt retrowire May 2016 #120