“They all had johnsons”

[supergee]

In 2008 the Democrats did a brave thing (like many brave things, it was done because they had no choice): They wrote off the millions of American voters for whom Barack Obama is the wrong color to be president, and they won anyway.

In 2016 they made a similar gamble: In the eyes of a comparable number of voters Hillary Clinton lacks essential equipment for any responsible job, and just to be on the safe side, they voted for someone who not only has one but is one. Together with voter suppression and FBI & Russian meddling, that cost them the election. Bernie might have won enough more votes in the swing states, but the difference would have been less political than anatomical.

Comments

[arlie]

I remain uncertain that the difference was primarily anatomical, though I'm sure there was some of that on both sides. Bernie was the first American presidential candidate in my memory who seemed to come from the same political universe as I do. I figured that was due to me being an immigrant, with some beliefs set in childhood outside the US. But then I saw the young American "Bernie or bust" people. It seems Bernie was inspiring to some in a way that Hilary was not. Maybe because he talked about things that mattered to them directly? I have no idea whether that would have translated into electoral success. If this last election proved one thing to me, it's that Americans are fundamentally foreign to me in ways that are unlikely to ever change, given how long I've already lived here. So I'm not qualified to speculate on what works for their elections... and no longer speaking in terms of "us".