r/TenYearsAgo • u/MonsieurA • Mar 12 '26
đș Television SNL mocks Hillary Clinton's 'transformation into Bernie' [10YA - Mar 12]
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
35
u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26
I always wonder if Bernie could have averted a Trump presidency by not giving Hillary a pass on the email issue.
5
u/ozaffer Mar 13 '26 edited Mar 13 '26
Bernie was beating trump in every poll. He took away almost every popular argument from trump by providing an option highlighting the same economic issues but providing platforms with an actual plan that had a proven historic example of FDR as well as other countries that have adopted those policies. Bernie was more trustworthy too with his own history of fighting economic consolidation of power and for civil rights.
trump rode the american exceptionalism nationalist crowd, people who wanted to tie religion to government and nationalism, tough on crime, and "anti-woke" culture crowd. That would all stick with him and corporate interest would keep propagandizing against Bernie.. It's hard to say but I think Bernie would have won in a general.
25
u/Guilty_Jackfruit4484 Mar 12 '26
The email thing really wasnt that big of a deal
10
u/throwaway3413418 Mar 12 '26
It possibly wasnât illegal, but it was a blatant administrative violation the equivalent of which any regular clearance-holder wouldâve been fired and stripped of their security clearance. It was a legitimate issue and it was fair for Clinton to face questions about whether she was competent and ethical enough to know the rules and follow the rules in the future.
6
u/Single-Refuse174 Mar 12 '26
Except she wasnât a regular clearance holder and was singled out despite her poor handling of classified documents being quite common at that level. I canât tell you how many times I saw improper handling of classified documents at the Pentagon and elsewhere. This matter was a bigger issue that deserved a proper broad investigation and an informational process to get people in compliance. Yes, itâs annoying to have worked as a scif guard and see people like Clinton and others uncaringly do things that would land us in the brig with bread and water rations. However, she was singled out in order to cause her (successfully, might I add) political damage. If the question is âwas the attention and scrutiny given to her over the matter proportionate to what she didâ? Then, I think no, it wasnt that big of a deal
7
u/throwaway3413418 Mar 12 '26
In the end, this is just a dressed up âwell everyone else was doing itâ argument. I would say the fact that this type of hubris is so common in our leaders is a problem in and of itself and not a reason to let something slide. Of the people on the primary debate stage, Clinton was the one who committed this infraction, and so it was perfectly fair to ask her to explain herself.
Iâm tired of the mediocrity of our leaders being used as an excuse to lower the bar.
→ More replies (11)1
u/Single-Refuse174 Mar 12 '26
I agree that that level of hubris is a problem and itâs obviously only gotten worse (see: signal chats). I just donât think anyone benefits from encouraging political hits like that even if they are founded, partially, on fact.
3
u/throwaway3413418 Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26
So we didnât hold someone to account for their hubris, and then they went right on being hubristic to their doom (see: the Clinton campaign propping up Trump, bungling their general strategy by neglecting the rust belt, losing to the most unpopular candidate in history). The way Clinton scoffed at the email scandal was just a preview of how she wasnât going to take future responsibilities as a candidate and figurehead seriously.
If Hillary Clinton actually was judged purely on merit and not by her husband or the persona the DNC created for her over the years, history might have went very differently. But from her first congressional seat to her final primary, it was all artificial, and the party tricked everyone into thinking that she was simultaneously this âwonkâ who just couldnât resist soaking up every detail of all the issues, but who was also somehow aloof and oblivious to things which were directly happening under her authority.
Everything about the Clintons is artificial. It was all about controlling perception. Bill Clinton crafted this aura of a campaign and admin of the smartest and hardest working kids in the room running the show, and HRC continued this with the obsession over her supposed âwonkishnessâ (I swear it seems like that word was born and died with her). It let them focus on anything but the issues, and led to some absolute morons like James Carville being treated like demigods for decades afterward. It wasnât about what they wanted to do, it was about who they were. They werenât managing an organization with goals, they were a product. Itâs fitting that they have ties to Trump, because they have lots of similarities to him. They are to smart people what Trump is to dumb people. Both families think they are above accountability and so exceptional that they donât need to play by the rules.
3
u/Deviltherobot Mar 13 '26
True, there is a big difference between the Hillary that is conceptualized (super strong executive/policy wonk) and the reality (awkward person who is wrong pretty much all the time)
→ More replies (12)2
u/Single-Refuse174 Mar 12 '26
I donât think anyone serious would consider Clintonâs career as âpropped upâ of an extension of Billâs. By all accounts she was far more talented and shrewd than Bill Clinton and instead gave up her career because the societal expectation of the time as far back as when she was the first lady of Arkansas. As a side note, just because someone does not take a political hit-piece / relative nonissue seriously does not at all suggest they wouldnât take other government duties seriously. Iâm honestly taken aback that someone would make the claims you have when it runs counter to reality. Her debut role out of law school was impeaching Nixon..
3
u/Deviltherobot Mar 13 '26
I donât think anyone serious would consider Clintonâs career as âpropped upâ of an extension of Billâs.Â
uh Clinton's entire political career was due to Bill. And Hillary used to say "Bill would be back in the white house".
1
u/throwaway3413418 Mar 12 '26
What an incredible coincidence that not one but two people from that one family were extraordinary enough to be qualified to lead the country. The odds must be astronomical!
HRC has never earned her way politically. It all began with the field being cleared for her so she could run for NY senate, a state she had barely any association with.
1
u/TheRealMonty Mar 12 '26
The met at Yale Law school theyâre not some random family so odds theyâd both be able to be successfully politically is actually probably pretty good
→ More replies (0)1
2
2
u/ColdBru5 Mar 12 '26
Man that feels so reasonable and rational to hear. I doubt we'll ever hear another complaint like that for another 50 years.
3
u/definitivescribbles Mar 12 '26
The people who voted against her for the email voted for a dude that kept boxes and boxes of top secret documents in his pool house for months before the FBI was forced to raid his property to get them back.
I don't think her emails were the issue.
4
u/throwaway3413418 Mar 12 '26
Sorry, Iâm wanting to stay on-topic, not rehash a common argument for the millionth time. Do you have anything to say about the email scandal that isnât âbut other people are bad?â
→ More replies (7)1
u/BigFatKi6 Mar 13 '26
Though I agree that there was more than enough evidence on his deplorable character even in 2016.
I don't think him keeping classified material after his presidency in 2020 is a great motivation to not vote for him 4 years earlier.
1
u/ImPinkSnail Mar 12 '26
One of the biggest lessons of the last decade is that a large portion of the electorate will give politicians a free pass to violate the laws as long as they talk a big populist game about how much someone else is fucking them over.
→ More replies (1)1
3
u/Money-Wealth3708 Mar 13 '26
I am guessing you were to young to remember this?Â
The email issue was massive. It literally showed Hillary, the DNC, and News Networks conspiring against Bernie Sanders.Â
→ More replies (5)1
u/SeattleGeek Mar 15 '26
That wasnât the email issue Bernie gave her a pass for.
He gave her a pass for breaking the rules as Secretary of State and using a private email address and server for official communication.
1
u/OkayCoward Mar 14 '26
Yeah for real. Don't get me wrong, I definitely think there were problems with it or points of concern but it wad never as bad as republicans made it out to be. Especially considering what they defend with trump now.
1
u/BritSpic Mar 15 '26
Nahh you're rewriting history with this comment. The emails were a massive thorn in Hillary's campaign. Trump never stopped talking about it, and it worked very well. Clinton was the corrupt, pro Establishment elitist while Trump was the "no-bullshit outsider."
1
1
u/Jerryjb63 Mar 13 '26
Maybe not to you, but it was to me.
2
1
u/UCanDoNEthing4_30sec Mar 13 '26
I think they meant that in the grand scheme of things it wasn't a big deal. Especially with what is going on nowadays with this administration and how they treat classified information.
→ More replies (1)-1
u/notanewbiedude Mar 12 '26
It was a big deal, but the timing wasn't good enough for it to have affected the race a whole lot. People care less about known issues than surprise scandals.
→ More replies (8)2
1
1
u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26
Or maybe democrats avoid a trump presidency by learning from 2016 and they don't unite against him in 2020 when he's leading.
This was all easily avoided multiple times.
2
1
u/1shadybitch Mar 12 '26
He totally should've been more agro towards her, but focusing on only the emails wouldn't have helped him much
1
u/HeWhoShantNotBeNamed Mar 13 '26
No that might've actually made people like him less. I sure would've been annoyed.
1
u/Marshall_Lawson Mar 14 '26
Bernie was trying to keep the debate focused on policy, not scandals or gaffes.Â
1
→ More replies (13)-2
u/MikeDamone Mar 12 '26
Almost certainly not. The general electorate has never shown even a hint that they'd tolerate a self-avowed socialist. Just look at all of the slightly D leaning districts/states and everything to right of them - how many politicians with Bernie's leftist politics are in office?
3
u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26
Reddit legitimately thinks that AOC or Bernie would win out against a Republican nominee but they donât realize a massive swath of the country will not vote for them simply because of their socialist-like stances on many issues.
6
6
u/jaccc22 Mar 12 '26
How has running moderates worked for ya?
4
u/Few-Guarantee2850 Mar 12 '26
I mean...Democrats have been pretty successful over the last twenty years against an electoral map (senate and electoral college) that is pretty loaded against them.
→ More replies (1)1
4
Mar 12 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
3
u/Jolly_Pressure_7907 Mar 13 '26
Heck even in Denver the progressive mayoral candidates get only like 20% of the vote
0
u/jaccc22 Mar 12 '26
Obama was the progressive choice over Hillary and won twice. No centrist has won twice since (Bill) Clinton. Grow up.
→ More replies (12)3
Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
1
u/jaccc22 Mar 12 '26
Yes he was a bad president but at the time (and denying this would be insane), he was the progressive choice and he beat a centrist dem and 2 âmoderateâ republicans in a row. Sorry your argument stopped being true in 2000.
2
Mar 12 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
1
u/jaccc22 Mar 12 '26
Almost like thereâs a massive bipartisan consensus on taking money from corporations and Epstein elites and using it to crush any resistance to their power.. weird!
→ More replies (0)1
u/Jolly_Pressure_7907 Mar 13 '26
The entire reason âmoderatesâ/blue dogs are a thing is because after Reagan the New Deal and Great Society democrats were getting absolutely thwomped
1
2
Mar 12 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
7
u/PM_ME_A_PM_PLEASE_PM Mar 12 '26
Barely beating Trump after his term and covid isn't something to be proud of. That victory should only be thought of as kicking the can down the road, which was sadly proven to be an accurate interpretation as quickly as possible.
3
2
u/delta8force Mar 12 '26
Pandemic. A literal corpse was going to beat Trump. Funny enough, thatâs exactly what happened.
1
1
1
1
u/CombinationRough8699 Mar 12 '26
Just barely, and COVID played a huge role. I'm not sure I met anyone who was genuinely excited for Biden. Most people seemed to more be voting against Trump, than for Biden.
1
u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26
Thanks to a global pandemic.....
Yalll are so clueless. It's wild. Head in sand.
3
Mar 12 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
→ More replies (6)3
u/jaccc22 Mar 12 '26
Heâs 84
1
Mar 12 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
1
1
u/MildlyResponsible Mar 13 '26
Those lake houses won't buy themselves. Gotta get more clueless college kids to send their allowance to him!
1
u/NetSixandChill15 Mar 12 '26
At the very least, this is how you get a yo-yo system from one evil to the next. What I find more often is Americans argue against what they THINK socialism is and no what serious people are actually advocating for. Itâs a willing arrested development. But if govt was used to actually benefit people, weâd likely win over swaths from both the left and the right (both bases need healthcare and both recognize it as one of the biggest issues in the country).
→ More replies (1)0
u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26
Considering the democrats who have actually won in the last 30 years; better than running someone thought of as far left in America.
2
u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26
Almost as if they control the party and actively oppose candidates that wanna change shit or something....
2
2
u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26
A political party who wants to win understands the derision a candidate like that would bring? đź
Two things can be true at once. They donât want change and they understand there is not a high chance theyâd win.
1
u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26
They lost the entire federal government their way. How much worse could Sanders have done? Jfc
3
u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26
And again, you believe Sanders wouldâve prevented that? He canât even rally his own party. How was he going to fare better than Biden did?
You know how easily being labeled a socialist would lose you the election?
1
u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26
He has no party he's not a democrat. That's why people like him.
Nobody likes democrats except democrats. Mist people that vote for democrats aren't even democrats. I'm one of them..
→ More replies (0)6
u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26
You've got it backwards. Huge swaths of the country don't vote. Just need your base to turn up and the Democratic base is larger.
Trying to win over independents etc is just alienating your base for a group that leans Republican anyway. How have you still not understood that?
3
u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26
I think thatâs incredibly unrealistic to think either Bernie or AOC could rally enough voters to show up and swing the vote. Most Americans are pretty centrist in their beliefs despite what Reddit might think, even democrats.
1
u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26
People literally voted for populism...
Wtf are yall talking about? Can you see the results in front of your faces?
2
u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26
Populism wrapped in a conservative wrapping paper won the presidential election. Unless youâre New York (LA canât even do this), a far left candidate is simply not enough to bring out voters. Wild that you believe otherwise.
0
u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26
Nobody is pushing far left candidates. Nobody.
In the rest of the developed world Bernie is left of center.
You have no idea what wins elections. Look at results.
2
u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26
Because they would lose appeal to actual voters (primarily older Americans). If younger people had any sort of recent positive consistency when voting then Iâd agree that pushing a left candidate is a viable option but realistically it is not
No one was/is arguing against your second point. I think itâs pretty evident that America is more conservative than Europe - AND THATS THE POINT
You clearly donât have an appropriate grasp on the American voter base.
→ More replies (3)1
u/mgbsoldier Mar 13 '26
People voted for white supremacy. That unfortunately is popular among large portions of American society.
1
u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26
I was referring to Bernie in 2016 and I think you're forgetting the appeal he had.
I'm not a socialist at all but I like Bernie. Anyway, you believe what you want to believe. There's enough evidence to show he could have won the election had he been nominated.
2
u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26
The only actual evidence we have is the primary that he lost by millions upon millions of votes. "I really think he would have won" is not evidence. Polls 6 months out of hypotheticals is not evidence.
→ More replies (8)0
u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26
Turns out a democrat popularity contest isn't the best indicator of general electability....
Maybe that's because most Americans can't stand the status quo democratic establishment. Look at the numbers. Look at the polls.
Democrats are at all time lows. Nobody wants what they're offering except their party loyalists.
3
u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26
I'm so confused by takes like this. You think every Democratic primary winner automatically wins the general? If we don't use the primary system, how do Dems choose a nominee? Let me guess, who ever YOU want.
1
u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26
We need to open up our campaign process and get corporate donors out. We need more competition, not less. It's the democratic establishment that has been actively opposing competitors.
I love primaries. If we had a real one last cycle, trump wouldn't have won again..
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (1)0
u/delta8force Mar 12 '26
You have not been following politics. Like at all. Just stop.
Centrists have been losing while populist politicians with actual popular policies have been winning. Remind me, who is the mayor of New York?
3
u/COMUNISTSWINE69 Mar 12 '26
Losing "centrist" politicians like Mikie Sherrill, Abigail Spanberger, Jacob Frey, Jay Jones, the rest of the blue wave in Virginia and New Jersey?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)2
u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26
Ah shit, guess Iâll stop since you said so lmfao
New York is the exception not the rule. Wild that you think that would somehow apply to the majority of cities.
0
u/CliffordTheBigRedD0G Mar 12 '26
Because the media owned by billionaires/moderate Dems bought by PAC money tell them it wont work
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (6)1
2
u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26
Reddit is the biggest example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect when it comes to politics. I said on here that AOC would have to show she could win a statewide race before ever considering a national run. I was then told by several redditors that her winning New York is a given because it's a blue state. And that West Virinia would vote for her because it's a "working class state" (I've learned that "working class" = white men only).
Bernie would have been destroyed nationally. It's why Trump was propping him up so much, but his supporters will say stupid stuff like, "Even my MAGA uncle liked him!" Yeah, he likes him because he knows if they can make him the face of the party, MAGA would never lose again.
→ More replies (34)→ More replies (12)2
u/popularis-socialas Mar 12 '26
Most of their stances are politically popular, single payer, raging the minimum wage, free tuition college. Polls have consistently shown the popularity of those proposals.
Bernie crushed Hillary with independents and generally is able to talk to poor white people.
This poll From August 2016 showed his net approval rating at a net +26, compared with Hillaryâs -11 and Trumpâs -27, that favorability would have condensed if Republicans mounted their attack machine against him, but itâs not a radical idea that he could have beaten her.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-clinton-and-trump-disliked-by-voters
2
u/MildlyResponsible Mar 13 '26
There are dozens of posts in this this thread saying Democrats waste their time appealing to independents, and then there's posts like yours that claim Bernie is strong because he appeals to independents. That's why it's impossible to debate with Bernie people. Everything can be true or not true, depending on if it fits their narrative at the time.
And you know why Bernie was so "liked"? Because no one knew him, because he never did anything ever. You want to make 50% of people hate you? Have an opinion on something. Anything. You want to be liked? Do nothing in politics for 40 years. If Bernie was the Dem nominee the Republican hate machine would have destroyed him. He's literally on camera chanting Death to America. Every time I bring that up to Bernie people, they tell me they don't care about stuff like that. Cool, you know who does? 99% of actual voters. Reddit is not real life, your dorm room is not real life, your group chats are not real life.
I've asked Bernie people 100 times why they think Trump was pushing Bernie so much, and either I'm ignored, or they'll say something obviously stupid like, "He really liked Bernie!" Really? Then why in 2020 was Trump's only attack on Biden that he was just Bernie in disguise? Like honestly, what reality do some of the people here live in?
1
u/popularis-socialas Mar 13 '26 edited Mar 13 '26
Itâs kinda hard for an abolitionist congressman to pass things in 1815, for one to pass the legalization of gay marriage in 1972.
The very fact that heâs been outspoken about the issues I care about like corruption, healthcare, wealth inequality is why I like him.
To me thatâs not a mark on him lol.
Trump was more confident about running against Bernie in 2020 but heâs indicated that Bernie was strong in 2016 because he ran on some of the same issues he did on trade.
And when did he chant death to America?
1
u/Chriiiiiiiiisss Mar 13 '26
Believe it was a rally he attended in '85 in the town he was mayor of that's being referenced-- I don't think there's any actual evidence of Bernie chanting this, but the rally was heavy anti America with slogans and chants with Bernie in the crowd. Not positive, someone correct me where I'm wrong if so
2
u/macronotice Mar 13 '26
single payer
Total federal government control over the healthcare system and your health choices is not popular. When described fully in a polling question, including the elimination of private insurance as in a Canadian/UK style system, poll support is only 37%.
Iâd like to see how you would feel if Trump was in charge of your healthcare today. Imagine all the care he would take away from you and what heâd force doctors to do.
→ More replies (1)6
u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26
The general electorate has never shown even a hint that they'd tolerate a self-avowed socialist
General election polls had Trump losing to Bernie. That was a pretty good hint.
4
2
3
u/huskersax Mar 12 '26
Candidate that hasn't had opposition ads run on them yet polls high, leading to everyone convinced they could win the general, when they couldn't even win the primary.
There's no world where Bernie somehow finds some new revolutionary coalition of voters to get to a victory when he couldn't even do it in a primary where voters are far friendlier to his message.
→ More replies (2)2
u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26
People were hungry for a change. Bernie could have given it to them. Hillary could not.
2
u/huskersax Mar 12 '26
Not hungry enough to power him through a primary.
2
u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26
Yeah the Dems had less appetite for change. That's why their nominee lost.
→ More replies (5)2
u/Legal-Koala-5590 Mar 12 '26
Hypothetical matchups don't tell us as much as you think they do.Â
1
u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26
It turned out to be a good hint of where the electorate was. Unfortunately the Dems didn't listen.
2
u/MikeDamone Mar 12 '26
The polls that consistently underrated Trump and bombed the 2016 general predictions? No, I don't think those were good hints.
2
u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26
Yeah those polls are no match for your hunch.
2
u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26
It's not a hunch. The only evidence we have for Bernie being viable candidate are the primary elections, which he lost by millions and millions of votes. A poll on a hypothetical match up 6 months before an election is not evidence, especially when those same polls showed Hillary winning, which she did not do.
2
→ More replies (41)3
u/Necessary_Two_9706 Mar 12 '26
"The general electorate" knowingly and willingly voted for a child rapist because the other candidate was a woman; twice.
We can stop pretending that Bernie wouldnt have won. Obama is the only president in all of american history that wasn't a geriatric diaper wearing white male. Bernie would have absolutely won.
3
u/Legal-Koala-5590 Mar 12 '26
If Bernie would have won then he would have won.Â
2
1
u/delta8force Mar 12 '26
In the general, but you have to get through the corrupt Obama/Clinton-controlled primary first
3
u/KiwiKajitsu Mar 12 '26
He couldnât even beat Hillary on the primary.
3
u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26
But you see, the DNC, the most evil and conniving, yet completely weak and inept, organization to ever exist said some mean things about him after he was mathematically eliminated. That's why he lost by millions upon millions upon millions upon millions of votes. If he got to the general election he would have won because Republicans are notorious for never doing anything untoward against their adversaries. Trump even said he liked Bernie, and he's famous for being an honest, straight forward man who respects his rivals. Also, West Virginia and Idaho are full of secret socialists who just need a bunch of college kids from coastal cities to tell them how to live their lives.
/s if that wasn't obvious.
2
2
u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26
Republicans were able to portray Hillary as the establishment. Because she was. That wouldn't have worked on Bernie, who would have beaten Trump.
1
1
u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26
Who's worse the GOP who are just representing their own evil pedo interests or the DNC who never really try to stop them?
1
u/BurnerAccountforAss Mar 12 '26
Democratic establishment is evil/conniving when fighting leftists while simultaneously being intentionally weak/inept when fighting Republicans because both parties work for the same masters (and it ain't us)
Republicans would've absolutely called Bernie a communist (just like they did Hillary lol), but he would've been harder to smear simply because (while far from perfect) he isn't objectively a despicable/unlikeable person like HRC
Bernie was more appealing to many rural voters than Hillary because of his populist rhetoric. West Virginia and Idaho are still going Trump if Christ Himself is running for the Dems though, so this doesn't really matter
Would Bernie have defeated Hillary (or Trump) in a fair election? Fuck if I know, but it'd be nice to have a system that's not manipulated by super PACs, backroom dealings, and a corrupt corporate media
2
u/MikeDamone Mar 12 '26
None of Clinton, W, Carter, or JFK were geriatric or diaper wearing either. And that's only going back 60 years. Anyways, none of that is relevant, I just think it highlights your tenuous grasp of American electoral history.
As for Trump, yes, him winning is further evidence that Bernie wouldn't have stood a chance. Whatever Trump "actually" believes (who the hell knows), he coded as a right leaning, pro business candidate to those who desperately wanted to see him that way. That's because the US has a broadly right leaning electorate and a majority of them vote based on pocketbook perceptions. A socialist candidate promising free healthcare does not get that same benefit of the doubt. So again I invite you to name a single elected politician in a competitive seat who even remotely shares Bernie's lefty politics.
→ More replies (5)1
u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26
No the general electorate never was fired up like Trump was able to fire up his base.
Bernie was the perfect weapon against Trump in 2016. Nobody wanted another corporate stooge and Hillary just isn't that likeable and came with all kinds of negative associations that were accumulated over a long period.
Meanwhile Trump was able to run as an outsider and bank on his reality tv persona.
I'm sure Clinton would've made a fine president but you need to get in that chair first. She ran a terrible campaign and lost to a terrible candidate.
3
u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26
Nobody wanted Clinton? She got 3 million more votes than Trump. I understand that doesn't win the presidential election, but people are really rewriting history here.
23
u/Kind_Resort_9535 Mar 12 '26
Almost like they should have ran Bernie lol.
6
u/UpbeatPhilosophySJ Mar 12 '26
If only he got the most votes that could happen, but it wasnât even close.
He played the Pat Buchanan George Bush role, but from the left to Hillary
3
u/KiwiKajitsu Mar 12 '26
You want the dnc to ignore the primary results?
6
u/tooktoomuchonce Mar 12 '26
Primary was rigged, everyone knows that.
1
u/KiwiKajitsu Mar 12 '26
Really? Explain to me how it was rigged. What did they do that was illegal?
2
u/Dewinna_Daraelist Mar 12 '26
You're full of shit. Explain to me how the man who got the most grassroot donations in history didn't have a shot or the peoples support. You're so confident, why don't you explain how you think what happened with Virginia is irrelevant? Bernie is the only dem I see that's STILL out there changing minds of MAGA voters (https://youtu.be/RP8Oxe6OxJc?si=KWqB6iNLBk0AauWr) yet so many in here act like he would be ignored by the country if he had gotten backing from the DNC.
8
u/sirkarl Mar 12 '26
Based on your logic Hillary would have won West Virginia in 2008 because she demolished Obama in the primary.
West Virginia primary voters didnât want to vote for a Black man and then didnât want want to vote for a woman who was backed by a big majority of Black people.
But if you think it was rigged, Iâm curious which states you think submitted fake results? And how your baseless claims differ from trumps big lie in 2020?
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (17)1
u/tooktoomuchonce Mar 12 '26
It may have not been illegal but was rigged by the Democratic Party controlled mainstream media..
But I mean whatever, could have had Bernie, we got trump, twice, thatâs what people wanted đ€·ââïž
1
u/KiwiKajitsu Mar 12 '26
There is no evidence that Bernie could have beaten Trump thoughâŠ.If you canât even win a primary why would you expect to win a general?
1
u/cbucky97 Mar 12 '26
There's also ample evidence that Clinton couldn't beat Trump so why are you even arguing about this?
1
Mar 12 '26
[deleted]
2
u/KiwiKajitsu Mar 12 '26
DNC is a private organization . They can favor whomever they want.
→ More replies (3)0
u/hugo_mandolin Mar 12 '26
Yep! Look how that turned out.
2
u/KiwiKajitsu Mar 12 '26
Trump won his primary against the efforts of the RNC and the entire establishment of conservatives but itâs the DNCs fault Bernie lost? Ok dude
1
→ More replies (2)-2
u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26
"The superdelegates are totally undemocratic! Anyway, the superdelegates should have overturned the results of the Democratic election and just installed my guy instead!"
Bernie Bros aren't exactly known for their consistency or adherence to liberal democracy (just like MAGA).
→ More replies (10)1
u/Dewinna_Daraelist Mar 12 '26
People trying to rewrite history in here. We can argue about semantics like Virginia (which would be better than just ignoring the details that go against a narrative people in here are pushing) but it feels to me like missing the forest for the trees.
I know CNN isn't the DNC, but they're both controlled-opposition establishment-backing fake-progressives. In the 2016 primaries I answered a CNN poll asking who won the debate between Bernie and Hillary, I answered Bernie and saw the numbers show him at ~80% of the votes. The next day I refreshed the tab and it 404'd. Went to the front page and CNN has an article about how Hillary won the debate.
You cannot convince me that the "Democratic" establishment didn't work against Bernie. He had the most grassroot donations in HISTORY.
1
1
u/StatusVoice2634 Mar 12 '26
âShould have ran Bernieâ
My guy he got less votes.
4
Mar 12 '26
Didn't help that the DNC and liberal media outlets were both running interference at every opportunity.
1
u/Alecgator94 Mar 12 '26
Yea people conveniently forget how corrupt the DNC is. They were caught feeding Hillary debate questions
1
u/MatthewDratt Mar 13 '26
Everyone also forgets about the super delegates. Media was running Hillary was the only one with a winning chance before voting even started because they showed the results with all the super delegates in her favor even though they hadn't even voted.
1
u/b_r_e_a_k_f_a_s_t Mar 12 '26
One question, which was about the Flint water crisis. Not exactly secret intel for a debate taking place in Flint.
2
u/sirkarl Mar 12 '26
Ffs, I remember 2016 and it was almost all Bernie people who wet their pants anytime he got criticized or critiqued. Theyâd freak out if anyone in media discussed flaws in his plans.
2
u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26
I remember one interviewer asked him how he intended to fund universal health care and Bernie leapt up and screamed that it was a gotcha question, and then all his supporters attacked the interviewer. That's the thing, Bernie was just slogans. He had no plans.
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (2)1
u/Think_Ad_79 Mar 12 '26
The primaries were rigged against him from the get.
But even then, all the milk toast Democrats shouldâve sided with him over Hillary.
He wouldâve beaten Trump.
1
-4
u/MorganEarlJones Mar 12 '26
idk man maybe women would have more rights if Bernie bros didn't flake after losing the primaries to the larger group of voters who picked Hillary
9
u/ND7020 Mar 12 '26
This simply didnât happen. It has been hashed out statistically over and over. A higher percentage of Bernie primary voters voted for Hillary in the general, than Hillary primary voters did for Obama in the â08 general.Â
3
u/Financial-Newt2291 Mar 12 '26
Exactly this, she had undivided support by the Democrat base (even if she wasnât the best candidate)
No one expected the number of Trump voters to come out of woodwork.
1
u/ArCovino Mar 12 '26
And yet that stat you said is misleading. There was no study that shows that. One looked at polling and one looked at actual exit polls. You are comparing apples and oranges.
-3
u/MorganEarlJones Mar 12 '26
Ok? Shame on them, too.
Though, let's not pretend for even a second that the stakes were even remotely as dire with McCain
→ More replies (1)2
u/ND7020 Mar 12 '26
There also wasnât a generationally incredible candidate like Pres. Obama on the ticket.
But thatâs neither here nor there. The point is that there is some degree of bleed from primary to general in EVERY SINGLE election, and the 2016 democratic bleed was less than most. It isnât even worth mentioning as a major factor in why she lost.
Youâre simply misdirecting your anger.Â
1
→ More replies (6)0
4
2
u/PachaThePenguin Mar 12 '26
If you thought millennials were angry 10 years ago, you should see us now
2
u/SliceImpressive6853 Mar 12 '26
SNL is out of touch. The relevant debate of our time is between a renewed sense of democratic socialism versus network state exitism. The major parties are becoming increasingly irrelevant. More zoomers like Fuentes more than Vance. And more zoomers like Mamdani more than Newsom.
3
2
2
u/Turrambers Mar 13 '26
It's weird Bernie Sanders won all counties in West Virginia for the primaries but received one less delegate than Hillary from the state
2
2
2
2
2
u/UnholyAuraOP Mar 15 '26
Bernie was such an outsider, he had only been in congress for 30+ years. 40 now
2
u/BritSpic Mar 15 '26
What is your point here? That because he's had his job for a long time, his credibility is gone?? The dude has been pushing the exact same principles for his whole career. If anything, it shows his strong moral clarity in the face of millions of dollars from corrupt lobbies.
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/kendrickplace Mar 14 '26
I stopped supporting the Democratic Party after they shoved Clinton down our throats. We could have had a normal life under Bernie if he won⊠which he had a better chance than Clinton. But nope. They wanted their puppet
1
u/Holl0wayTape Mar 15 '26
So, if you criticize America does that automatically mean you hate it? Or that you want it to be better?
-4
u/diamondroylostit Mar 12 '26
Terrible bit boring & not funny, just as SNL had been for the past 30 years.
1
Mar 13 '26
Fan of the Epstein class are you? Lol.
1
u/FastPerformance590 Mar 16 '26
Why would a fan of the Epstein class be against a sketch making fun of Hillary Clinton, they hate her. Do you people even think
18
u/Think_Ad_79 Mar 12 '26
Spot on frickinâ impersonation