The Forgotten Hillary Clinton Voter: A Profile Of The Not-So-Silent Majority

[Madam45for2923]

Ignored by the media and ignited by a Trump Presidency, Rantt News spoke to the 65.8 million who refused to be relegated to the shadows

SNIP/

In the aftermath, the media ran piece after piece on Trump voters casting them in a sympathetic light, favoring hot takes about so-called “economic anxiety” over the very real anxiety of the Clinton voters fearing for their future. Ignored by the media and bombarded by taunts from Republican family and friends, Clinton voters took refuge in online groups, looking for reassurance that the world they had help build hadn’t been destroyed.

The Resistance was born from this banding together, forged from the fire to fight back for the country they love. Instead of celebrating a broken glass ceiling, they had to pick up shattered dreams of equality and soldier on together. Who were they and what did they care about? These were the people Rantt News wanted to give a voice to.


Instead of seeking to shed light on the over-reported on Trump voter, we at Rantt News decided to spotlight the majority. We opened a survey soliciting Clinton voters who’d be willing to answer a few questions. Why did they vote for Hillary? How did they feel about living under a Trump Presidency? What did they think needed to be done to move forward as a country?

SNIP/

What Clinton Voters Believe
From college students to senior citizens, the Hillary Clinton voters we surveyed all have one thing in common: They believe in Hillary. She wasn’t the lesser of two evils, or the only choice left standing for the never-Trump crowd. She was their candidate. They saw Hillary as a hard-working, qualified, ambitious woman whose time had finally come. She’d fought her entire life on behalf of Americans for the issues that mattered: income inequality, healthcare, climate change, education, racial justice and equal opportunity for women.

SNIP/

We crunched the data and poured over the responses, picking out threads that were familiar refrains. Many of the Clinton voters we surveyed echoed similar ideas and beliefs that have been ignored by the media in favor of extremist voices on the fringes of the left and the right. What motivated the 65.8 million people who voted for Hillary Clinton? Here’s what they told us.

Hillary Was The Most Qualified Candidate For The Presidency In Modern History

When asked about how they viewed Clinton as a candidate, there was little equivocation. Those surveyed described Hillary as the most qualified candidate in their lifetime, citing not just her intelligence and experience but her progressive platform and long history of supporting the rights of women and minorities.

more in link:
https://rantt.com/the-forgotten-hillary-clinton-voter-a-profile-of-the-not-so-silent-majority-5e903b846643

Link to tweet

[Madam45for2923]

1. hear! hear!

[Hortensis]

2. Hey, I got remembered! Yes! How welcome just to read friendly descriptions,

though. Hillary is "hardworking." Wow. Such a mild, measured description, but so uncommon in its simple decent honesty.

[Madam45for2923]

4. I tried to paste one of the word diagrams in the article to my OP but it would not take.

All the words used to describe HRC by her voters!


Here:

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1600/1*tkVItA9unscQbg7z9UR06g.png

[Hortensis]

26. It's near the top of the article, under "Most Qualified" heading, but

I can't get it to copy either. The size of the terms reflect how often they are used to describe her, but choosing a favorite turned out to be impossible, agree with them all of course. As an issues person I loved that my favorite policy wonk had plans to tackle an incredible number of problems that were never mentioned by political media and for themselves, no mention of her, only covered in rare, arcane, nonpolitical pieces.

[ucrdem]

3. Yep, down the memory hole in record time.

Tuesday morning was all about record numbers of early voters turning out to support Clinton.

Wednesday CNN took over and it was all about how Democrats stayed home.

Funny how that worked.

[Madam45for2923]

6. Yep! Also funny how we were not able to compare notes on election day b/c DU got hacked!

[delisen]

5. "Disappearing" the majority of voters-

but we are still here.

[Madam45for2923]

7. They wished we disappeared. But we got lots of stamina.

[Me.]

8. An Excellent Slice Of Truth

“In Trump, they see the abusive spouse, the schoolyard bully, the rapist they’d hoped to leave behind.”

“The democracy voters trusted has elected a bully and given him power over their daily lives. This is not political but deeply personal for minorities and other oppressed groups facing racial profiling, deportation, and brutality at the hands of police and the justice system”

“I feel like it is extremely unfair and that he is a divisive figure on the left. He used us and his fans have harassed, stalked, and doxed me. Bernie allows this. An old white man who ignores the identity of anyone not white and male is not the future.” 

“Bernie helped start the narrative of “corrupt” Hillary that Trump seized on, and didn’t do nearly enough to unite the Democrats. That he gets to keep talking but she has to go away is insane.”

[pnwmom]

9. And the worst might have been hearing Democrats dismiss her popular vote victory,

saying that she "should have" won many more votes, and that she "should have" won all the swing states, and that it should never have been as "close" as an almost 3 million vote lead, and their candidate certainly would have beaten DT -- as if the Russians wouldn't have actively worked to help DT no matter who the Democrat was.

[Madam45for2923]

13. which was a form of gaslighting us.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

10. I mourn what could have been as a woman. But it also reminds me of Al Gore, John Kerry who also

were robbed. Will we continually be robbed of the presidency? I don't know how Obama ever won. There are just so many roadblocks us Democrats have to get through to win....

[Jim Beard]

11. Hillary is good.

[DesertRat]

12. k&r

[Scurrilous]

14. K&R

[lunamagica]

15. K&R.

[Jim Lane]

16. Let's just note that this was not a random survey of the 65.8 million

It's obvious from the link that Rantt simply solicited responses. Their survey results are from the self-selected universe of people who felt strongly enough to take the initiative to respond, and hence are unrepresentative. For example, 69.5% of those surveyed were women. In the election, Clinton obviously received much more than 30.5% of her votes from men.

She also received millions of votes from people who would not have "described Hillary as the most qualified candidate in their lifetime...."

[Control-Z]

18. What's the matter?

You don't like the message?
The majority of sane voters still prefer Hillary over the two white dudes. (And most are enthusiastic about it!)

It's good to be reminded.

[Jim Lane]

19. Important distinction: "like the message" and "credit the message" are two different concepts.

You write, "What's the matter? You don't like the message?"

If you habitually assess a proposition about the world according to whether you like it or not, you will not have an accurate picture. I don't like the message that more than 60 million people voted for the odious Trump, but that message is more credible than the view I'd get if I polled all my friends.

The OP was based on a self-selected sample. By contrast, scientific pollsters, striving for random samples, aren't perfect, but they get much closer to the truth. Here's one such result:

Significant majorities of registered voters now have an equally unfavorable opinion of both major party presidential candidates, according to a new survey released Wednesday, following a difficult stretch for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.

Fifty-nine percent of registered voters say their opinion of Clinton is unfavorable, while 39% say it's favorable, according to the new poll from the Washington Post/ABC News.

Those numbers put Clinton on equal footing with Donald Trump, who also faces a daunting favorability deficit. Trump is viewed unfavorably by 60% of registered voters, compared to 37% who say they have a favorable opinion of the GOP nominee, according to the poll.

That poll was from late August of 2016. The numbers were probably about the same by Election Day. In assessing enthusiasm of support, we have to bear in mind that each major-party candidate received a significant number of votes from people who were primarily voting against the other one. (This is actually a small ray of hope about those millions of Trump voters. Many of them disliked "their" candidate. They voted for him only because of the effects of a quarter of a century of right-wing attacks on Clinton.)

You point to the views of a "majority of sane voters" without elaboration. If "sane" is defined as "voted enthusiastically for Hillary Clinton", then your statement is correct, but it exemplifies the "No true Scotsman" fallacy.

[R B Garr]

20. But your "distinctions" aren't important.

You wrote, "Important distinction". Digging up a year old poll after a prolonged vile attack on her from both her opponents isn't accounted for. This is a current article, and you don't like it -- that's the distinction. Anyone who can continue to diss Hillary after what we've seen from the alternative is definitely not making important distinctions. They are just biases.

[Jim Lane]

21. My post was not dissing Hillary. Where'd you get that?

It doesn't do Hillary any favors to put blinders on when thinking about public attitudes toward her. You can't look at a poll of a self-selected group of enthusiastic supporters and conclude that they're representative of all 65,853,516 Hillary voters. The year-old random-sample poll is more likely to be accurate than a current self-selected poll.

To you, the distinction between "what one would like to be true" and "what one believes to be true" is not important. To me it is important. You make your choices and I make mine.

[R B Garr]

23. No, it looks like you picked that random 2016 poll as a way to promote the third party

lines about Democrats. It's always a dead giveaway when none of the so-called "analysis" is ever about the real life efforts of the Russian interference and attempts to divide Democrats. It's always about some randomly selected "whatabout" this or that -- definitely not important distinctions.

This was a positive article about Hillary and it ended with negative recollections of the Bernie affect. So your last sentence would actually be a projection of how *you* feel. You wrote:
"To you, the distinction between "what one would like to be true" and "what one believes to be true" is not important. To me it is important."

[Jim Lane]

24. I'm sorry, but I find your post essentially incomprehensible.

I see a reference to "third party" so let me assure you, as I think I have before, that I joined the vast majority of Bernie Sanders supporters in voting for Clinton in the general election.

For the rest of it, my best guess is that you're refuting some contention(s) I didn't make. Be that as it may, I'm just going to have to let you go on thinking whatever it is that you're thinking.

[R B Garr]

30. Luckily, I was able to read your incomprehensible wall of words enough to see

that you just put up an unrelated poll that promotes a popular attack on her seen often from the JPR types at that website. It had nothing to do with the article that was posted in the OP, but was your way of reminding people of third party type thinking about her.

Also, the JPR denigration of Hillary never, ever includes any of the facts about Russia and how they worked to bring her popularity down and cause division.

[Tavarious Jackson]

22. She was the most qualified candidate In my lifetime!

It's a FACT not an opinion.

[Jim Lane]

25. Oh, well, if it's a FACT not an opinion, then that settles that. (n/t)

[LanternWaste]

34. It's rather ironic that you of all people say that.

It's rather ironic that you of all people say that.

[Weekend Warrior]

32. "this was not a random survey of the 65.8 million"

You don't see it, do you?

[LanternWaste]

33. It's not merely obvious from the link, it's fucking written into the headline and the story

"It's obvious from the link that Rantt simply solicited responses..."

Who is arguing otherwise? You appear to be the only one throwing that bait out.

It's not merely obvious from the link, it's fucking written into the headline and the story.

[Control-Z]

17. Why isn't this at the top of the greatest threads page?

That's where it belongs. Excellent article.

[Madam45for2923]

27. It got lost because lots were happening at the same time.

[scarletlib]

28. Truer words were never spoken.

[treestar]

29. And in the majority too!

And the majority thanks to the EC has to worry about the minority and what they want.

[Gothmog]

31. K&R