Hillary Clinton was not beaten by an upsurge in votes for Donald Trump. She was beaten because she lost votes, not because Trump gained votes.
I don’t believe the American public is satisfied with either the Democrats or the Republicans. That’s why we’ve been alternating Democrats and Republicans in power for the past 30 or 40 years.
We keep giving one party, then the other, an opportunity to prove its leaders can achieve peace and prosperity and, again and again, they fail the test.
As these charts indicate, Hillary Clinton’s loss in the Presidential election was caused by voters turning away from her, not the popularity of Donald Trump. The charts below show that in every demographic category except “people of color,” the “other / no vote” voters outnumbered Democrats or Republicans. And even support by “people of color” for Democrats dropped sharply.
In comparing the charts above and below, keep in mind the difference between percentages of the vote and total number of votes, and the differences between the percentage of a group’s voters versus the group’s total population.
In a close election, minor things can tip the balance. But the question for the Clinton campaign is why the falloff in support from groups that historically have supported Democratic candidates—including women.
The one thing the charts don’t show is how much the falling off in Democratic support is due to voter suppression. For what it’s worth, I think voter suppression can decide a close election, but it doesn’t explain the big drop in votes for Hillary Clinton and the Democrats compared to 2012. She lost ground—in some cases a little, in some a lot—among every demographic group.
2016 was the apathy election by Carl Bejier.
The myth of the reactionary white working class by Eric London for the World Socialist Web Site.
The 114,000 votes that cost Hillary Clinton the election by Patrick Scott for The Telegraph.
Note: I made many minor revisions yesterday and today for the sake of clarity [11/15/2016]