re: #498 InfidelOfFreedom

At some point, the responsibility has to be on the voters to inform themselves and take responsibility for our government of the people. This is a two-way street. Excusing their irrationality and ignorance doesn’t work and makes for bad policy. I don’t want Democrats to pander to that. There are enough decent, perhaps previously unactivated people out there who can be engaged in the political world. I find I have much better luck talking to the unaffiliated than trying to convert the Republican true believer. I think Democrats would be better served to focus on the 50% of non-voters in this country rather than waste time on the Limbaugh crowd.

Also, I don’t think my argument implies she was a bad candidate, I think it implies there was dishonest and unfair coverage of her from day 1, which was never her fault. Frankly, it was realizing the disparity with which she was treated that turned me from a Hillary skeptic in 2008 to a full on proud HillBot in 2016.

Well, relitigating the election certainly isn’t going to help. I was disenfranchised in 2008 (just got over being homeless and had not yet established residency in Oklahoma) so I could not vote. Mrs. Clinton was not the candidate in 2012. As the primaries this time wound up, I was a supporter of her candidacy (with time and money).

I agree focusing on the non-voters is useful. A few ten thousand of those in the right places and we’d be talking about Hillary Clinton’s first thirty days as President now, instead of my state governor’s billionaire relative becoming Deputy Commerce Secretary.