Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (376849)	7/13/2018 12:05:12 PM
From: zzpat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542214

The polls also hurt Clinton. She was going to win so a lot of people didn't bother to vote. Without bad polling (was it done on purpose) Clinton would have won also.

To: JohnM who wrote (376849)	7/13/2018 12:14:42 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542214

>> Two rather obvious reasons. The first is that the socialist/communist tag I know that most of the older crowd thinks so, but that is part of the sea change I am talking about. That label is no longer what it used to be. The Soviet Union has been dead longer than many voters even remember. Furthermore, even a casual review of pop-culture will show you that many younger people have a highly negative view of Capitalism and believe in the need for some socialistic balance. >> The second is that Bernie had much less support among African American women than Clinton. But with the right party support, more women and Africans would come to vote for him than the pussy grabbing white supremacist. This could not have been a hard nut to crack. Ironically, your doubts about Bernie would have forced more Dems to come out and vote than they did for Hillary, leading to an easier win. ...but we are just speculating. Like I said, it is impossible to pin it on any single factor.