Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Yo_Mama

(8,303 posts)

25. Dark money? The Clinton campaign spent a lot more than the Trump campaign.

Reply to Orsino (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 16, 2016, 09:39 PM

Dec 2016

Maybe after next week, but at some time we are going to have to sit down and deal with things.

Part of this may just be a natural political flux - after all, in 2008 we had the House, Senate and Presidency, and we got the House in 2006. So it may be partly a cycle, but looking at the state returns convinces me that we should not take this for granted.

Also, in 2018 the Democratic party has to defend many seats in the Senate compared to the Republicans, so it is time to get serious.

Conspiracy theories won't help us at all.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

36 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

We have to explain ALL the losses [View all] zipplewrath Dec 2016 OP

Yes hueymahl Dec 2016 #1

Not without all the data, we don't. Orsino Dec 2016 #2

Evidence of their effect? zipplewrath Dec 2016 #3

The evidence is in the roster of usual suspects who conspire to keep this information secret. Orsino Dec 2016 #4

Where is the effect zipplewrath Dec 2016 #5

The effect is as stated. Orsino Dec 2016 #8

So you have nothing but suspicions zipplewrath Dec 2016 #9

No one will ever be able to... Orsino Dec 2016 #13

So instead zipplewrath Dec 2016 #14

The key word is work. Orsino Dec 2016 #16

I'd start with turn out data zipplewrath Dec 2016 #17

But the Republicans had less and spent less this cycle, at least on a national level. Yo_Mama Dec 2016 #28

(If we don't count the billions in free airtime for Trump.) Orsino Dec 2016 #29

Yeah, he was good at getting publicity, but Hillary had awesome name recognition. Yo_Mama Dec 2016 #30

(If we don't count the billions in free airtime for Trump.) Orsino Dec 2016 #32

It can't be counted. If Hillary wanted to go out on those shows Yo_Mama Dec 2016 #33

It was counted. It was over US$ 3 bn. Orsino Dec 2016 #36

I dislike myself for reading your post and thinking conspiracy theory. NCTraveler Dec 2016 #20

Dark money? The Clinton campaign spent a lot more than the Trump campaign. Yo_Mama Dec 2016 #25

It's okay to count swings of the pendulum... Orsino Dec 2016 #31

I agree utterly with your points here, and I think this was one of the main issues in 2016 Yo_Mama Dec 2016 #35

I think the loses at the state level are in some ways even more worrying than the presidential loss. Willie Pep Dec 2016 #6

Yes. Time to panic early so we can turn this around - not since 1920 have we seen this. Yo_Mama Dec 2016 #27

The losses can almost entirely be attributed to rigging elections philosslayer Dec 2016 #7

Evidence? zipplewrath Dec 2016 #10

Read the original post philosslayer Dec 2016 #11

But not the presidential or senate zipplewrath Dec 2016 #18

DOWN BALLOT philosslayer Dec 2016 #19

yes, but zipplewrath Dec 2016 #23

Gerrymandering may have an effect, but first the Republicans have to gain state control. Yo_Mama Dec 2016 #26

I wouldn't argue it is meaningless mythology Dec 2016 #24

It would seem any rational discussion that does not include Russian hacking is letting LaydeeBug Dec 2016 #12

You're spot on. Captain Stern Dec 2016 #15

Agreed 100%. Kick and rec Arazi Dec 2016 #21

Collate the data as you instruct others to do, analyze it and please let us know what you find out.. LanternWaste Dec 2016 #22

Starting with Russ Feingold oberliner Dec 2016 #34