How does it make sense to have “no possible chance” in an election she lost extremely narrowly? Again, without the Comey letter, she’d have been president. You can dislike her (as I do), but that’s no reason to deny reality and/or ignore post-election analyses. Clinton was polling 10 points better than Trump before the e-mail “scandal” broke. Obviously Clinton had every chance to capture those voters that at some point did say they intended to vote for her, but later changed their mind.
Was that the last republican that didn’t have rape allegations?
That’s not the point. There’s a double standard. Obviously actual rapist Trump is worse than rape essay-writing Sanders (and Sanders disowned the essay anyway). The question is: how would voters respond, given the fact that the overwhelming majority of them consists of easily manipulated imbeciles?
[Sanders] was infinitely more popular than Clinton and had a better chance.
But what is this assessment based on? Seemingly not actual polling of real voters.
How does it make sense to have “no possible chance” in an election she lost extremely narrowly? Again, without the Comey letter, she’d have been president. You can dislike her (as I do), but that’s no reason to deny reality and/or ignore post-election analyses. Clinton was polling 10 points better than Trump before the e-mail “scandal” broke. Obviously Clinton had every chance to capture those voters that at some point did say they intended to vote for her, but later changed their mind.
That’s not the point. There’s a double standard. Obviously actual rapist Trump is worse than rape essay-writing Sanders (and Sanders disowned the essay anyway). The question is: how would voters respond, given the fact that the overwhelming majority of them consists of easily manipulated imbeciles?
But what is this assessment based on? Seemingly not actual polling of real voters.