Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Clinton’s lead had largely evaporate

The error is in thinking that at some point prior to the election, Clinton would have won.

In all the states that counted, both CO and PA, NV and MI, AZ and WI, Clinton plateaued early at a certain number and could not attract more undecideds after that plateau.

The swing voters were choosing the lesser of two evils. They were not going to make the final decision until they had to. But if they had had to make that decision Sep 8 or Oct 8 or Nov 8, when it came time to make the decision, they chose Trump.

The Clinton (and Sanders) voters who were not going to vote for Trump, lacked enthusiasm. They lacked enthusiasm Sep 8, and Oct 8, and Nov 8. There was nothing Clinton was saying or doing to generate enthusiasm.

The Trump voters who often skip elections were enthused this time. Trump gave them things to be enthusiastic about for a vote on Sep 8, and on Oct 8, and on Nov 8.

Swing voters and enthusiasm were the most important factors. Hillary is solely responsible for her role with those factors. Nothing anyone else did impacted those factors like Hillary herself did.

21 posted on 05/09/2017 4:08:31 AM PDT by spintreebob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: spintreebob
The Clinton (and Sanders) voters who were not going to vote for Trump, lacked enthusiasm.

I'd like to think that Deplorable Alt Media such as FreeRepublic were helpful in stopping Hillary voters from being enthusiastic.

Maybe this proves something. You don't have to change a voter's mind. You just have to unenthusiastic.

23 posted on 05/09/2017 5:46:30 AM PDT by poconopundit (FR: Self-Reliant Lovers of Liberty who can't stop the Chatter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson