Skip to main content

The #1 real reason Hillary Clinton lost

Written By | Mar 31, 2017

LOS ANGELES, March 31, 2017 — The blood-curdling scream began in New York City and reverberated throughout liberal America. On November 8, 2016, Hillary Clinton lost the presidential election to a man she considered her inferior. Donald J. Trump became the 45th President of the United States.

Rather than conduct an honest election autopsy like Republicans did in 2012, Democrats began searching for scapegoats.

FBI Director James Comey faced some blame, as did the American voters for their supposed sexism. When those laughable excuses fell apart, the new, scarier bogeyman became Russia. The liberal election narrative is that Russian President Vladimir Putin deliberately influenced the election enough to fix it for Trump and against Clinton.

There are plenty of reasons why the Russia theory collapses when the slightest amount of logical reasoning is applied. Putin is not like the wild-eyed Iranian mullahs. He makes rational moves, and would therefore absolutely have wanted Clinton to win the election. He successfully rolled her on the Russian reset, obtaining massive amounts of uranium from her at the same time.

Russia hacks everything except Clinton’s server

If he did successfully hack into her email server—an unproved charge—he would have valuable blackmail information on her. He would own and control a compromised president. Clinton is a methodical, predictable woman. Putin would prefer dealing with her than with the wildly unpredictable, uncontrollable Trump.

Clinton lost the election for one reason and one only. Until Democrats come to terms with that, they will never grow as a party. For those who are used to hour-long Powerpoint presentations, this one can shave off 59 and 3/4 minutes.

Hillary Clinton lost the election because she looked, acted and sounded like Hillary Clinton.

She was the wrong candidate at the wrong time in every possible, conceivable way.

Voters looked at her and felt she was like Lady MacBeth, only less ethical. Her anger often made her come across as Joan Crawford in “Mommie, Dearest,” only less pleasant. Men, in particular, could picture her chasing them while she screamed, “No wire hangers!”

Her supporters can bleat on about the popular vote, but that was due to her racking up huge margins in California and New York. Coastal America supported her. Middle America soundly rejected her.

Her arrogance caused her to skip campaigning in Wisconsin for the entire campaign and skip Michigan until it was too late.

Seven reasons Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election

Her rich white liberal elitism caused her to focus on climate change rather than on job-killing environmental regulations. Most Americans have zero interest in climate change. Coal miners struggling to feed their families see climate change activism as antithetical to their very survival. Trump vowed to put people back to work. Clinton vowed to put them out of work.

Voters made it clear before the primaries even started that they did not want any more Clintons or Bushes. Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush was qualified to be president. The voters did not care. They wanted the establishment burned to the ground. Republicans got the message, pushing Bush aside. Democrats in their zeal to follow a black president with a woman president ignored their own anti-establishment rumblings.

Voters were looking for any excuse to reject Clinton. Even with Democrat National Committee top brass leaking debate questions to CNN, Clinton still struggled to defeat 75-year-old avowed Socialist Bernie Sanders. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Donna Brazile carried her, and the base devoured them as well.

Hillary Clinton also failed to address her 2008 shortcoming, that she stood for nothing except getting elected. She wanted the job because she wanted the job. As trained psychiatrist and columnist Dr. Charles Krauthammer opined, “Hillary Clinton lost the election because she had nothing to say.”

Voters understood that Trump’s vow to “Make America Great Again” involved putting Americans back to work. Clinton’s slogan of “Stronger Together” was vapid, hollow nonsense. She never said how or what that meant.

Clinton’s plan to win the election was to be the uninspired default choice once Trump imploded. The first presidential debate gave her that opportunity. However, Trump was able to do what Hillary Clinton never could. With significant help from pollster Kelly Anne Conway, Trump changed his behavior. He was coachable.

While Trump rolled out policy speeches, Clinton screamed about how awful Trump was. In the final week of the campaign, when most voters were paying attention, Trump was speaking in a calm voice. He stuck to his script, pointed out severe problems in America, and asked Americans who had felt marginalized by Barack Obama to give Trump a chance. “What do you have to lose?” was a reasonable question.

Clinton stood next to Liz Warren and went on a “nasty woman” tour. They wore the label like a badge of honor rather than the pejorative it was. Clinton and Warren thundered about how Trump would destroy the world. They set the bar so low for Trump, allowing him to barely be acceptable enough to crawl over it. He was likable. Clinton and Warren were not. He spoke to Normal America. They spoke to Basket Case America. They coddled Occupy, Black Lives Matter and Code Pink protesters. Trump spoke to American workers. Trump stated what he was for. Clinton never did.

Clinton tried to replicate the Bill Clinton “triangulation” strategy, but by trying to be all things to all people she came across as craven. She was for everything Obama did that was popular and against everything Obama did that was unpopular. She was against gay marriage due to her Christian values. Then only after a majority of the public embraced gay marriage did she learn that she did as well. On issue after issue, she was a poll-tested, focus-group approved robot who failed to convey human emotion and connect with voters emotionally.

Hillary and Huma: Distressed damsels of modern feminism

Hillary Clinton was a terrible candidate even without the decades of scandal surrounding her. Her book “Hard Choices” should be renamed “Bad Choices.” She chose to blame Benghazi on a You-Tube video rather than an Islamist terrorist attack. By playing politics with national security, she also undercut her main asset, her supposed competence. She had a record as Secretary of State, and it was one of failure. Many people needlessly died due to her decisions and indecisions.

She also chose to operate an illegal secret government server, in keeping with her lifelong habit of operating in secrecy. Her original healthcare task force was criticized for a lack of transparency. So was the global slush fund known as the Clinton Global Foundation that enriched her while giving only 10% of the funds raised to charitable causes. When she piously declared in a subsequent presidential debate that nobody was “too big to jail,” the country laughed at her hypocrisy. Chants of “lock her up” were harsh, but valid.

By the time Hillary Clinton self-righteously declared herself “prepared to be president,” she was ridiculed for having a plan for everything without any results. She was Preparation Hillary, or Preparation H for short.

Hillary Clinton was corrupt. Hillary Clinton was boring. Hillary Clinton was in politics for four decades without a meaningful accomplishment. Hillary Clinton was nasty. Hillary Clinton was too normal for the Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders supporters and too crazed for Middle America. Hillary Clinton vowed more government control of an electorate that just wanted their government to leave them alone and get out of the way.

Hillary Clinton was awful on the stump, making her a terrible politician as a candidate. She was awful on the job, making her a terrible policy person while in government. She was terrible ethically. She was terrible strategically. Her proposed solutions were considered terrible because her prior results had been terrible. As a bland, status quo establishment candidate, she was a terrible choice for an angry electorate wanting change.

Hillary Clinton lost because she was terrible.

Comey could not help her. Her gender could not help her. Russia could not help her.

Most importantly, she could not help herself. Her only chance was to be something else, anything else, someone else, and anyone else but who she really was.

She was herself.

She was Hillary Clinton.

That and that alone cost her the 2016 election.


Eric Golub

Brooklyn born, Long Island raised and now living in Los Angeles, Eric Golub is a politically conservative columnist, blogger, author, public speaker, satirist and comedian. Read more from Eric at his TYGRRRR EXPRESS blog. Eric is the author of the book trilogy “Ideological Bigotry, “Ideological Violence,” and “Ideological Idiocy.”