For the Very Last Time: Hillary Clinton Lost Because She Was a Bad Candidate

There’s a new book out called, ‘Shattered.’ It’s about Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, and Hillary people are livid at those who leaked the information to Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes. Why? Because the book shows the campaign of Hillary Clinton for what it was: A poorly run campaign that relied heavily on arrogance and less on a strategy to win.


Just from reading excerpts and reviews, it’s easy to see the book is a devastating look behind the scenes of the Clinton campaign and it has Hillary supporters howling. For the last five and half months, they’ve been reiterating different versions of “WE WUZ ROBBED!” to anybody who will listen. In their minds, Hillary didn’t lose. Outside forces took it from her.

1. The Russians – Hillary’s supporters are convinced the Trump campaign colluded with Russian government officials to hack voter data and use that information to engage in micro-targeting potential Trump voters to get out and vote for him.

2. F.B.I. Director James Comey – Hillary’s supporters are also blaming James Comey, saying the release of his infamous letter in the closing days of the campaign shifted votes from Hillary to Trump. There is no evidence to support the allegation. Nate Silver of 538 says Hillary was “up by a lot” when Comey released his letter but as you’ll see, that’s not the case at all.

First on the Russian front. The FBI is conducting an investigation into Russian meddling and whether or not the collusion between Trump and the Russians described above, exists. Despite the efforts of some crackpots on the internet to make conclusions on their own, the FBI is well equipped to determine what happened and if any crimes were committed.

That said, there’s no indication it helped flip the election to Donald Trump. The three states that ultimately cost Hillary Clinton the election are Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. All Hillary Clinton had to do was get the same amount of votes as Barack Obama did in 2012, and we’d be hearing people say, “Madame President,” even with Donald Trump mildly outperforming Mitt Romney in the same states. Here are the numbers (vote totals):


Wisconsin 2012

Barack Obama:  1,620,985 / Mitt Romney: 1,407,966

Wisconsin 2016

Hillary Clinton: 1,382,201 / Donald Trump:  1,409,467

Difference: Hillary -238,784 / Donald Trump: +1,501

Michigan 2012 

Barack Obama:  2,564,569 / Mitt Romney:  2,115,256

Michigan 2016

Hillary Clinton: 2,268,193 / Donald Trump: 2,279,805

Difference: Hillary -296,376 / Donald Trump +164,549

Pennsylvania 2012 

Barack Obama:  2,990,974 / Mitt Romney:  2,680,434

Pennsylvania 2016

Hillary Clinton: 2,844,705 / Donald Trump: 2,912,941

Difference: Hillary -145,671 / Donald Trump +232,507

Total vote difference between Obama and Clinton from 2012 to 2016: -680,831

Total vote difference between Romney and Trump from 2012 to 2016: +398,557

Hillary Clinton received nearly 700,000 fewer votes in those three states in 2016 than Barack Obama did in 2012. The change was not a case of Hillary Clinton having the same amount of votes with Donald Trump getting more. Yes, Trump did improve upon Romney’s numbers, and that says some of those voters shifted from the Democrat to the Republican. Where did the gaps exist? Largely among white working-class voters. The very same voters, Bill Clinton, implored Hillary’s campaign to secure:

Early on, Mr. Clinton had pleaded with Robby Mook, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign manager, to do more outreach with working-class white and rural voters. But his advice fell on deaf ears.

It wasn’t just Bill Clinton:


Former Gov. Edward G. Rendell of Pennsylvania also said he had encouraged campaign aides at Mrs. Clinton’s Brooklyn headquarters to spread their vast resources outside Philadelphia and Pittsburgh and focus on rural white pockets of the state. “We had the resources to do both,” Mr. Rendell said Wednesday. “The campaign — and this was coming from Brooklyn — didn’t want to do it.”

The warning signs existed. Google Salena Zito and read the articles she wrote. She talked to people who vote Democrat all the time but considered voting for Trump. Obviously, many of them did, and Bill Clinton knew it was an issue. But Robby Mook didn’t care.

As for James Comey, there is not a single shred of evidence to show any causation of lost support for Clinton due to his infamous letter. Thankfully, Josh Jordan (aka NumbersMuncher on Twitter) has the details:


Whatever “effect” Comey’s letter might have had; it was momentary. Trump’s numbers were collapsing going into election day and Clinton’s numbers recovered.

All the whining in the world is not going to change a thing. Hillary Clinton and her team ran a lousy campaign against a beatable opponent. That is why she lost. Not because of some grand conspiracy involving the Russians and not because some letter most Americans likely didn’t know existed.

She lost. It was not taken from her.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos