2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Massive Voter Apathy - The Undiscussed Factor in 2016 [View all]TheBlackAdder
(29,095 posts).
While HRC and the Democratic institution primarily secured the Democratic voter, Sanders appealed to Change oriented Democrats, Independents by a huge margin and attracted many cross-over Republicans who were left-leaning or Never Trumpers.
If the ticket was Clinton-Sanders, they would have probably secured close to a 60-40 electorate.
But Clinton failed to follow the lesson of Reagan-Bush. Instead of joining forces, she placed too much faith in people going binary and either selecting Trump or herself. Since Trump is a vile creature, that seemed to have merit to some degree. Also, too much pwas placed on the woman vote, when the past 40 years always showed a frm 45% evengalical/orthodox paternalistic vote.
Reagan and GHWB literally hated each other, and there was a schism forming in the Republican party. I mean, they detested each other. But, they came together and won three straight presidential elections from that. If that schism endured, Carter wold have been re-elected.
Clinton's choice of Tim Kaine ensured a close election. While she gained popular votes, divisions in a lot of states or regions that fall under Republican control were mainly affected. There was an audible national gasp when Kaine was selected over Sanders. While the Democratic Party folks accepted it, many outside of it walked or just gave up. There is a strong hatred outside of the Democratic Party for Clinton, and Sanders would have brought balance to her ticket. But, she chose someone with no Independent or Cross-over appeal. Most of the Sanders folks voted for Clinton, and the ones that didn't were negated by the Never Trump folks.
People gave a shit until it looked like it was business as usual.
.