Did enough Sanders supporters vote for Trump to cost Clinton the election?

You have that, but there is Hillary herself which in my opinion lacked the fire in the belly. There were times I would think she was sleep walking through the campaign. Things Hillary herself could control and blew it. Fire in the belly, did you know Hillary let Trump and let is the right word. She let Trump both out work her and out campaign her. From 1 Sep through 8 Nov 2016 Trump made 116 campaign stops/visits to Hillary's 71. Trump never took a day off, Hillary several. Can you name any other Democrat who ran for president or any other democrat other than Hillary that would let their opponent outwork and out campaign them by that huge margin.

I think that almost alone spelled defeat in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and probably Florida. Trump made five visits/stops in Wisconsin, Hillary none. Michigan it was six for Trump, one for Hillary. Pennsylvania was closer, 8 campaign stops/visits to Hillary's five. Even in electoral rich Florida, it was Trump 13, Hillary 8.

Her campaign strategy, she wanted to receive more electoral votes than Obama did. She put in a lot of time, energy, money into winning Arizona, Utah and Georgia. Maybe not a bad idea, but she also neglected her own backyard, the so called blue wall states. There was also a huge enthusiasm gap between Trump supporters and Hillary's. This led to Hillary doing worse among almost every voting group than Obama did in 2012. I called her campaign the ho hum campaign.

Hillary lack of fire in the belly, he inability or unwillingness to do what it took to win, to match or come close to Trump on the campaign trail let these other factors enter the fray. Sure, Sanders voters might have cost her the election, Comey's reopening the case might have cost her the election also. But they wouldn't have come into play in my opinion if she exuded more enthusiasm and energy into her campaign and came close to matching Trump on the trail.

CNN exit polls hows that 85% of all Americans made up their minds whom to vote for prior to the last week of the campaign. Hillary won those voters 49-46. 13% decided whom to vote for during the last week, Trump won those voters 45-42. In short, all these other factors might have come into play, anyone could have been a deciding factor from Comey to Sanders supporters to the Russians.

for me the deciding factor was letting Trump outwork and out campaign her by that 116-71 margin. I think Hillary would have won fairly easily if she had closed that gap to say 116-100. I think she lost Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania by letting Trump outwork/out campaign her in her own backyard.

there was no excuse for that. Trump didn't win it, Hillary by not hitting the campaign hard and lacking the fire in the belly lost it. My take anyway.

 

Odd question since I know you pay attention but that foreign government would be Russia. The fact that Trump won proves the success. Yesterday's showing by Trump just as well proves the point but you go ahead and believe what you want but everyday the US suffers for it.

 

Hillary believed Trump was not electable which reflected her own elite beliefs. She failed to understand that the country has been changing since she was first lady, to understand populism at all.

She was hardly alone. A lot of Republicans thought the same thing.

 

True, but not likely.

 

Hahahaha! That reply was precious. Thanks!

 

Well more like almost certain....

 

That's interesting about Sanders voters voting for Trump.

I had a hunch some of them might have done that, or that they may have voted third party, or deliberately not voted at all (the last two having the same effect).

I often described Hillary Clinton as being simply "toxic". It's easy to get conservatives and Republicans to agree with that, but apparently, some Democrats thought so too.

Interesting.

 

National data is immaterial in view of..........

https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-trump-2016-election-654320

 

If National data is immaterial then you have no proof at all.

 

Clearly you haven't read the article or you have no understanding of how the Sanders to Trump voters changed the election results.

 

How do you feel about all those Burn supporters who turned on a dime to become nationalist/populists and voted for Trump causing Hillary to lose?

Were they thinking that if I can't have what I want, Hillary ain't going to get nothing?

 

Butt still hurting?

 

Dude, it's over. Get a life.

 

Are you sure it was a foreign government and not the Illuminati or men from Mars?

 

Awe shucks, her dirty little secrets got out. Shame really.
Next time she should try not being dirty

 

In my opinion, the answer is absolutely 100% it cost her the election.

There were a multitude of factors that created the situation where she lost.

Some states she lost by less than 20,000 total votes or less. Were there 20,000 Bernie voters who switched to Trump out of several million? That is only a fraction of a percent and is in my opinion, very likely at one pivotal state somewhere around the nation.

Not sure if there would ever be a way to prove that, but again, look at some of the extremely close states.

Even a change of a quarter of a percent would have changed the electoral college in several places.

 

Hilary lost because she represented the tired old status quo in a change election cycle that she did as well as she did is large a function of the nuttiness that has become California, as represented by Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters.

 

how did russia change my vote exactly?

 

I am not surprised by this. Sanders and Trump appealed to the same demographic: disaffected white working class voters. They wanted somebody who wasn't Republican or Democrat.

 

Blame the victim.

At least you far right wingers are consistant about that!

 

I have always liked Bernie Sanders.

He has a long history of saying the obvious, and pointing out the consequences of the disasterous decision that are often taken in Congress, particularly by the Republicans.

But he has done little else. By isolating himself from the party apparatus, he is unable to move any significant goal of his own forward. He can't chair a committee, or play a role in either party's leadership.

He is a leading spokesman on issues, He is not a leader.

The Democratic party takes the idea that a President has to be a serious leader with real political leadership skills and experience seriously.

The Republicans do not.

Before 2008, it would have been inconceivable in politics for either political party to choose as their nominee anyone with no experience, no character, and no apparent serious judgement, outside of shrewd ability to sense what plays well to certain people on TV.

Sarah Palin was that candidate. And she begat Donald Trump.

Trump has no experience, no character, and no apparent serious judgement, outside of shrewd ability to sense what plays well to certain people on TV.

The consequences of that disasterously feckless failure to manage their own nomination process should be obvious to anyone who read a newspaper or blog or turned on a TV in the last ten days.

 

It's a good question. Because from an ideological standpoint Bernie and the Con Man-in-Chief are not in the same universe. It's very hard for me to imagine why anyone, let alone a supporter of Bernie, would vote for an ignorant demagogue like Trump. But as research shows, it happened. What do I think about those people? I think 99% of them regret their mistake.

 

You still are not putting two and two together. The outcome of the election could have turned on the votes from 3 states. Forget the national numbers. The Newsweek article shows enough Bernie to Trump voters in those states made the difference. As I stated earlier, the salient question then becomes.......was the motivation for the switch due to the release of stolen e-mails regarding the DNC's actions during the primaries, potentially perceived by Bernie primary supporters as being unfair to him?

But...........

The Election Came Down to 77,744 Votes in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan (Updated)

https://www.weeklystandard.com/john...n-pennsylvania-wisconsin-and-michigan-updated

Consider that in the context of the article from Newsweek.

 

Failing to make more people want to vote for her cost her the election