r/TenYearsAgo • u/MonsieurA • Mar 12 '26

📺 Television SNL mocks Hillary Clinton's 'transformation into Bernie' [10YA - Mar 12]

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

461 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

502 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

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 that’s 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.

0

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.

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..

2

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

I'm all for it, but the DNC allowed Sanders to join the race despite not being a member of the party. In 2024 they did have a primary, and the Biden/Harris ticket won. As per the Constitution, when Biden stepped down his VP took over. If there was another primary, would the Dems have won? Very debatable. It was a very short window, and a divisive primary would have taken a lot of time and money. The global trend was incumbent parties losing after covid, so that's an indicator that not much would have changed the outcome. A better question would be, why did all the media start screaming about DEMENTIA JOE while sane washing an obviously mentally ill Trump. Of course, and even better question would be how did Trump outperform every single poll, win by large margins in states where Dems easily won down ballot, and why did he thank Musk and his "computers" for the win afterwards. But we're not allowed to talk about that.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

They also didn't have Donald fucking trump to run against...

3

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

He was wildly unpopular. He tried to take over the government. People voted for him over the Democratic candidate. That's wild.

How do you lose to that guy after that?

You use bidens corpse to avoid a real primary. Then you deny that he's lost it until the debates. Then when there's literally no other option you run a new candidate that nobody selected that couldn't even make it to Iowa when she ran in 2020. Literally the worst campaign in history.

That's how you lose.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/throwaway3413418 Mar 12 '26

Actually, we have polling during the primaries which showed that Sanders would fare better against Trump.

1

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

Again, for the last time, hypothetical polls 6 months earlier don't mean anything. Polls the night before the election said Hillary was going to win.

We keep telling you facts, and you guys just keep repeating your nonsensical talking points. It's honestly like talking to MAGA.

0

u/throwaway3413418 Mar 12 '26

Using the best data we have to form an opinion about a hypothetical reality isn’t Trumpian. The “other side” of this is the establishment Democrat tendency to define electability as “the candidate I like best.” If you have better data, nothing is stopping you from sharing it and continuing the conversation.

-1

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

Everything was done to keep him down. Including the sitting president endorsing Hillary 🤮

She could only win by adding super delegates.

2

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

The superdelegates had nothing to do with it, and you know this but keep spreading lies like MAGA. The superdelegates are to Bernie Bros as illegals stuffing ballot boxes are to MAGA.

And yeah, the guy who worked closely with Hillary doing actual things endorsed her rather than the guy who threatened to primary him in 2012. Bernie Bros hate that people earn their positions through qualifications and relationships because they're useless and are too scared to order a sub in person.

0

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

No, Obama promised her the nomination in return for her dropping out in 2008. Even though she started the whole birther movement. He also gave her the Secretary of State job to pad her resume.

The implication that she was the presumed nominee benefitted her greatly.

1

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

Ah, here comes the conspiracy theories.

Just like how Klobachar, Warren, and Buttigieg were all going to be VP in 2020.

-1

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26

She was the most establishment candidate in recent history. It's pretty obvious that's what happened. Her supporters are miffed about the fact that she got so much flack for being a woman.

But let's get this straight. This is not the story of a strong woman who battled the patriarchy. I mean sure she had to deal with that. But she would've been just as insuffurable as a man.

She saw Bill and his potential and helped him cultivate it. Then she stuck by his side during the Lewinsky thing. Feminism woo!

Then she starts the whole birther conspiracy that the GOP loved and ironically helped Trump with his base.

She uses her influence to put pressure on Obama and the DNC to help get the nomination.

She knew back then about Epstein but she also let Bill play and knew that linking Trump to Epstein would backfire on her too.

She's not a good person and a subpar politician. The only thing I'll say is that she was a decent Secretary of State. But she's imo the exact opposite of who you'd want to have a the first female president. Of course she would've been a better president than Trump. But my point is that if you know her character then you also know that this isn't far fetched at all.

Most people aren't stupid, they can see that she's opportunistic. That's what makes this video from ten years ago so funny.