Peter Beinart: Why Hillary Lost

156 Comments Post your own or leave a trackback: Trackback URL

1. Tom Brown says:

   December 29, 2016 at 11:13 am

   I don’t hire the person with the best resume…I hire the one I feel will do the best job….all things considered. Among my “considerations” are, trustworthiness, actual accomplishments and honesty. Candidate Hillary failed all of these and 60+ million people agreed. Never once did gender come into consideration and drawing parallels from Austrailia and Brazil only cloud the obvious.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • dianeravitch says:

     December 29, 2016 at 11:16 am

     But Tom,

     Even more people said that Hillary was better qualified for the job than that blowhard braggart who got it.

     He got 62 million votes, she got 65 million votes.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • RaiseTheBarHigher says:

       December 29, 2016 at 11:22 am

       I bet Elizabeth Warren would have won.

       LikeLike

     • ponderosa says:

       December 29, 2016 at 11:27 am

       Trump has trustworthiness and honesty? Tell that to the contractors he stiffed, and the Trump U. students he defrauded. Plus most of what he says he just pulls out of his butt –he doesn’t care if it’s true or not.

       LikeLike

     • retired teacher says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:27 pm

       Trump just stated he may privatize parts of the VA in order to “improve performance.” Here it starts, a belief that the magic market will solve all our problems while it shrinks the federal government’s obligation to serve veterans. They have only to look at the privatized prisons to see what lies ahead. Our vets deserve better!

       LikeLike

     • Rudy Schellekens says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:13 pm

       Nothing new in this. That conversation has been going on since the problems with the VA became daily news.

       LikeLike

     • bpollock42 says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:41 pm

       Went to Atlantic City yesterday for Bass Pro Shop, not gambling. Couldn’t help noticing the closed casinos were Trump’s. Ponderosa is accurate. He cares about himself, period!

       LikeLike

     • Threatened Out West says:

       December 29, 2016 at 5:19 pm

       retired teacher: My husband works for the VA, and they are VERY concerned about this possible privatization. The VA will be even more of a mess if it gets privatized. And veterans are NOT a group for Trump to tick off.

       LikeLike

   • Beth says:

     December 29, 2016 at 11:44 am

     There was no misogyny says the GUY.

     As a woman I can tell you that misogyny played a huge part in this election and the 2008 election.

     Was Barack Obama really qualified to be President? Of course, he wasn’t. He ran on NO record and NO experience. It was a personality cult based on perceived personality traits (Trump is the same.). He was overrated and overhyped, especially when it comes to his vaunted speaking skills, but he is a MAN and somehow that made him Presidential.

     Bernie Sanders? An annoying Brooklynite who likes to be a thorn in people’s sides. Wagging his finger going on and on about free college, when anyone who knows anything knows that giving things away for free strips them of value. How did anyone take this guy seriously to be President of the United States? Of course, he is a MAN, so he is automatically Presidential.

     Donald Trump? A person who exploits the fears and prejudices of others for his own gain. How despicable! He is a threat to this country and our democracy, but he is a MAN and played a successful businessman on TV.

     As a woman I found the 2008 and 2016 campaigns devastating. The public mantra was “Anyone but a woman.”

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • Joe says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:26 pm

       Sorry Beth, I agree with just about everything you said except concerning Obama and Bernie. Both these men are pro women’s issues and support women’s rights. Free college tuition and real universal healthcare are realities in many of the countries of western Europe. They are not pie in the sky fantasies.

       LikeLike

     • GregB says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:34 pm

       Beth, as a male who was raised by his mother and grandmother, is happily married to an assertive woman, and whose fondest memory of working in Congress is getting my male boss to cosponsor the Violence Against Women Act when I sat down with him to explain the issue (he was against if for legal procedural issues, about which he turned out to be correct, but felt it was important to take a public stance to educate his constituents), I do regret the examples you picked. However, I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiment that men should not be the ones to decide what misogyny is–much like non-indigenous Americans should not be deciding the name of the NFL Washington Racial Slurs.

       But as an American who pays attention to politics, I did not vote for President Obama because he was a male. I made up my mind when his made is “race speech” and he addressed us as adults, not as a focus group.

       I voted for Sanders because, as a political junkie, I have been closely following his career since he was elected to serve in the House. I felt he was the better candidate. I used the same reasoning when I voted for other women in my life.

       I voted for Hillary Clinton because of the comments I read on this blog. The litany of reasons to oppose include misogyny and I’m sure it was THE reason for many of his supporters.

       Please don’t put us all in the same boat. The influence of feminism on me is that I judge every person, male or female, based on a wide range of criteria. But I acknowledge we, as a society, still have very far to go, so your first sentence is accurate.

       LikeLike

     • ciedie aech says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:39 pm

       Great first line: No misogyny here says the GUY.

       LikeLike

     • bpollock42 says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:43 pm

       As a person who is also a man, I also found this devastating.

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:01 pm

       Beth

       Sorry Beth but Obama won for the same reason Hillary won , in the Democratic primaries. It had nothing to do with sex .
       A lot to do with demographics of the Democratic party.

       “Bernie Sanders? An annoying Brooklynite who likes to be a thorn in people’s sides. Wagging his finger going on and on about free college, when anyone who knows anything knows that giving things away for free strips them of value. How did anyone take this guy seriously to be President of the United States? Of course, he is a MAN, so he is automatically Presidential.”

       Bernie Sanders is from Vermont the fact that you chose to describe him by where he spent the first quarter of his life says a lot . It also explains why he was defeated in the Primaries where he overwhelmingly won the White Working class vote. Make that the working peoples vote. For probably 90% of American families can best be described as working class. Hillary did not even win young Women. She won retirees and “BIGLY” and minorities because of BROOKLYN.

       As for giving things away . You are displaying a profound ignorance of history. There was a time that most State university systems if not free were low cost with the overwhelming burden falling on the state rather than the student. Your illiberal attitude on this can be expanded to everything from Universal Healthcare to Medicare and Social Security or Food Stamps . Where the wages of wealthier tax payers will always be used to subsidize the “undeserving ” 47%
       Soon to become 60% under Trump.

       Hillary lost this election in States she should have won not because she was a woman but because policy from her Husband and Obama
       decimated voters in these states . No matter how hard she tried she could not distance herself from them when her whole carrier was wrapped around them. Nobody believed that she would distance herself from these policies even those of us who voted for her as a lesser evil. Are voters in Wisconsin, Michigan , Pennsylvania, Ohio , more misogynist than voters in Nevada, New Jersey, Connecticut and Rhode Island.

       LikeLike

     • Mom2Twins says:

       December 29, 2016 at 4:49 pm

       Joel: Hillary lost this election in states she should have won because of Crosscheck. Period. When hundreds of thousands of your voters are thrown off the rolls, you’re going to lose by a bit, and that’s what happened.

       Beth: Amen, sister.

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 5:43 pm

       Mom2Twins

       Keep dreaming .

       Although voting should be made as simple as possible those same voter ID laws apply to all . If you have been told as in Michigan that you needed an ID a provisional ballad was available. If Clinton could have flipped it in court she would have I refuse to believe that the Clinton Machine did not have poll watchers available in industrial states.

       Before someone takes my right to vote they better have life insurance . Keep giving yourself a good time because it will be a long ride if we refuse to see the real problems.

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 5:45 pm

       Ballot

       LikeLike

     • Mom2Twins says:

       December 29, 2016 at 7:18 pm

       Joel: Interstate Crosscheck has nothing to do with not bringing the right I.D.

       With this program, developed by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, people are thrown off the voter rolls without their knowledge — people who have voted every election for years without incident and have no reason to believe they won’t be allowed to vote when they show up.

       Read about it here, in an August Rolling Stone article:
       http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-gops-stealth-war-against-voters-w435890

       They targeted names statistically most likely to be Asian, Latino, or black voters.

       I don’t know why Hillary and the DNC didn’t make more of it before the election, warning people to check to make sure their registration was still valid. But after the fact, what can you do?

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 11:37 pm

       Mom2Twins

       Again , wanting to be able to fly . I will not say my wishes for right wing Republicans . However POLL WATCHERS are part of the ground game, if someone arrives at the polls and has been scrubbed from the rolls provisional ballots are available. These could then be challenged in court.

       Too late now the courts are gone .

       LikeLike

     • NYC public school parent says:

       December 30, 2016 at 3:50 pm

       Mom2Twins,

       What you see by the responses is that the mostly white “progressives” despise Hillary so much that they are happy to look the other way at how many non-white voters were struck off the voting rolls. Notice how Joel wants to pretend it didn’t really make a difference so who cares! It’s all the fault of the voters struck off for not getting a proper ID, he says. No need to investigate any further because it’s all Hillary’s fault anyway. Thus do today’s so-called progressives allow corruption to occur. Because they are far more interested in attacking the losing Democratic candidate for not being progressive enough than to root out corruption. If anyone but their “anointed” preferred candidate wins the primary, they delight in tearing them down. Look at how they blame Hillary for her Wisconsin loss but excuse Russ Feingold who lost even BIGGER in his home state! Look at how they give Bernie a pass for losing every southern primary as if only white midwestern votes mattered — notice they don’t pull a “Hillary” on Bernie and say “it’s his fault he couldn’t appeal to any non-white voters in southern primaries”! If their favorite primary candidate loses, it is the fault of the other Democrat! If that other Democrat loses to a Republican, THEN they are happy to blame the candidate themselves. Even if the election was unprecedented in outside interference as this one was.

       If someone like Joel had been in charge of the Democratic Party during Watergate, he would insist that there is no reason to have any Watergate hearings or even investigate the crimes of the Nixon campaign. After all, it was all McGovern’s fault for being the worst Democratic candidate ever so why should anyone care about any illegal activities that the winning Republican did anyway. It was ALL McGovern’s fault for losing and that would be all that people like Joel would focus on because who cares about anything but how bad the Democrat candidate is when you are a Democrat throwing a fit because their own choice didn’t win the primary.

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 30, 2016 at 4:56 pm

       NYC public school parent.

       Not at all what I am saying . But what I am saying is with 1.4 billion in resources if nothing else every one of those disenfranchised votes should have received a provisional ballot. Or a notification from Hill
       Instead of the literature that I received daily to Stand Hill

       Back in April when progressives were getting arrested chaining themselves to the Capital and there was a demonstration in DC, a prime focus of which was voter disenfranchisement . The one group that was missing sadly was the disenfranchised voters..

       LikeLike

     • NYC public school parent says:

       December 30, 2016 at 6:41 pm

       Joel,

       What brings me the most despair is that because the Hillary haters need to blame her they refuse to acknowledge some of the terrible things that were done during this election that are beyond the pale. Just like Nixon’s CREEP committed actions that were beyond the pale. Dirty tricks work. They need to be brought to light, not ignored because you prefer to blame the candidate.

       You ignore them at your peril. Imagine if Nixon’s committee had been free to continue to undermine more elections with everyone continuing to blame the losing candidate? Imagine if the Republicans learned they could get away with anything as long as they won, because there’d always be those disaffected Dems whose candidate lost the primary happy to help cover them up.

       There is a special hubris among some Democrats on the left who somehow think their chosen candidate is so perfect that he can withstand any assault. Bernie’s supporters hate Israel and he is pro-terrorist! He paid his wife and stepdaughter with campaign funds! His wife stole taxpayer money and bankrupted a college because of Bernie’s connections. Elizabeth Warren lied about being Native American to promote her own career. I bet just as many people believe that as believe that Hillary Clinton broke the law by having a private server. Neither of them happens to be true.

       Instead of figuring out why Democrat candidates like Russ Feingold can’t break through the negative and nasty portrayals even when running against the most corrupt candidates, you just keep blaming them and blaming them. Russ Feingold lost. Do you blame him? Did he not spend enough time in Wisconsin? Did he only talk about transgender bathrooms? Is that why MORE Wisconsin voters wanted Hillary Clinton to be President than wanted Feingold to be Senator? He just had no message for them because he was a sell out?

       We are letting the far right define our candidates and the far left is helping them do it. Unless we stop, the Dems will keep losing as they have continued to do for the last 8 years in campaigns for Senate, Congress, and Governor. Every time you blame the candidate and insist that all it takes is a DIFFERENT more perfect Democrat you are enabling the right to continue its propaganda. It’s very successful propaganda. Until the left gets wise to how they are being played by the right, it will keep being successful.

       LikeLike

     • Rudy Schellekens says:

       December 30, 2016 at 7:21 pm

       MAke you a deal. I have been arguing with local republicans about changing ads. No longer negatives where most of the stuff is made up. You get democrats to do the same.
       Because I can guarantee that if the negativity does not stop, the next election will make this one seem like a picnic in the park.
       WE as party member, who cares which party, have to get the message across that we do not want those kinds of campaigns. It leads to more and more debasement of characters.

       LikeLike

   • NYC public school parent says:

     December 29, 2016 at 9:30 pm

     Until the right wing attacks got her Hillary was considered trustworthy and honest. She has a record number of times being named the most admired American woman in Gallup’s polls.

     The short reason she lost is that propaganda convinced voters that a woman doing what every politician has done and made speeches for money is “untrustworthy and dishonest”. There was not any actual quid pro quo granted, but merely the APPEARANCE that it someday could in the future affect a vote was enough to sink her.

     Just like the e-mail “scandal” that pretended that national security was at stake when it was clear that she took far more care with secure e-mails than Powell, Cheney, Rove, Rice, and Congressmen from both parties who all had on their insecure e-mail accounts those kind of “faux” classified e-mails that never bothered anyone until the FBI wanted to “get” Hillary.

     Notice that the FBI found a few classified e-mails in Powell’s computer but refused to issue a subpoena to look at Powell’s AOL account to see if, in fact, he had breaches that would have made Hillary look like the most careful Secy of State in history. (In fact, the reason she didn’t take Powell’s advice to use AOL for state dept. e-mail is because she knew her private server was safer. Somehow because she was Hillary is became a crime and if she had used AOL like Powell she would be accused of being even more “careless”).

     The trumped up charges against Hillary fooled mainly the uneducated people — which is why Trump won a huge majority of those voters. She was no more dishonest than Bernie Sanders when his wife’s college got government loans and went bankrupt. Or when Bernie “hired” his wife and stepdaughter to work for his campaign and paid them with campaign money. I think ALL those charges against Bernie were as trumped up as the charges against Hillary.

     No candidate is perfect. But anyone who claims that they chose not to vote for Hillary because they value trustworthiness and honesty and therefore didn’t mind a Trump Presidency is not being honest themselves. No one who voted for Trump, or voted for a third party candidate because they thought Trump was no worse than Hillary, cared at all about having an honest and trustworthy President.

     LikeLike

     Reply
   • R Jenkins says:

     December 30, 2016 at 1:04 pm

     Yeah I think you got it right, a dozen reasons that Hillary didn’t get there but the largest was lack of trust, and i think the vast majority of middle america would list trust as the top negative. Trump was a horrible candidate from the get go but when they torpedo’d Bernie there wasn’t much left. Johnson didn’t ever get traction either.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • dianeravitch says:

       December 30, 2016 at 1:20 pm

       Was Trump trustworthy? Ask the contractors, subcontractors and workers he stiffed? Ask the students at Trump University who paid tens of thousands of dollars and got a picture standing next to a cardboard cutout of the Great Liar.

       The GOP smear machine played the media and the public like a violin.

       LikeLike

     • NYC public school parent says:

       December 30, 2016 at 3:04 pm

       And Hillary’s “trust” issue was based entirely on innuendo. She wasn’t perfect, just like no person is. But they turned the everyday practices of politicians — like making speeches — into notions that made her “untrustworthy” and in doing so helped the right wing smear machine do their dirty work and elect Trump. She kept her e-mails private as did the two previous Secretaries of State but somehow using AOL (which if you recall the FBI could not access because Powell said I refuse to let you) became “good judgement” and using a secure server was bad judgement even though all the e-mails were eventually examined and showed no corruption. But there “could” have been, so let’s attack someone who didn’t make decisions for money because she “could” have done so.

       The trust issue could never have gotten hold without Democrats doing their usual circular firing squad along with the “fair and balanced” media who needed SOMETHING negative to balance out the actual crimes committed by Trump. They did the same thing to Al Gore. And John Kerry. And somehow there are people who think if only it was Bernie his little foibles of paying his wife and stepdaughter generous salaries from campaign funds, and every other trumped up “crimes” would have been given a pass.

       LikeLike

2. Rudy Schellekens says:

   December 29, 2016 at 11:21 am

   Interesting read but obviously incorrect. She lost because she assumed she would win no matter what.
   And by ignoring voters in three key states, those states went to the opponent – by the smallest of majorities.
   The article would have been correct had she lost by a landslide. But she did not. You keep reminding us that she won the popular vote by almost three million.
   So, unless the author is saying that those three key states she lost is filled with the kind of people he describes, he is just plain wrong.
   Her own key supporters told her she goofed by ignoring those three states. The voters in hose states told her why she lost those three states.
   The final results in those states told her why she lost. She ignored request after request to come visit, spend time in those states.
   It is beyond me why you (and others) refuse to place responsibility, ANY responsibility at clintons own feet.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • dianeravitch says:

     December 29, 2016 at 11:29 am

     Rudy,

     As usual I disagree with you. Anyone who thinks that misogyny didn’t play a role in the election wasn’t paying attention.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • dianeravitch says:

       December 29, 2016 at 11:32 am

       Which male candidate ever faced demands to “lock him up!”?

       LikeLike

     • Rudy Schellekens says:

       December 29, 2016 at 11:41 am

       Look at the numbers. It’s about three states. Three states she ignored.
       Those three states were won by trump with a bare majority of votes. Three states were not lost by a landslide.
       Those three states were what gave trump the presidency.
       She was begged to visit.
       She ignored.
       She lost.
       Her backers told her the reason for the loss.
       The pundits have said from the beginning it was her race to lose.
       She won the popular vote. But lost those three key states by the smallest of margins – because she ignored the requests from local democrats.

       I don’t understand why you refuse to accept the reality. You blame everyone else. Even Obama.
       But refuse to recognize the reality of clinton’s own mistake.

       LikeLike

     • The Real One says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:13 pm

       Which male candidate deliberately deleted over 30,000 emails to avoid being caught committing a crime? There’s your answer.

       LikeLike

     • dianeravitch says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:02 pm

       Which male candidate was on trial for cheating thousands of people of their life savings? Which candidate said he likes to grab women by their p——? Which candidate lied his way through the election and was called out for it by his primary opponents? Any of these would be disqualifying for anyone, except for a man opposing a woman, whose every action was not only scrutinized, as it should be, but called criminal, which it was not.

       LikeLike

     • NYC public school parent says:

       December 29, 2016 at 9:43 pm

       “Which male candidate deliberately deleted over 30,000 emails to avoid being caught committing a crime? There’s your answer.”

       That statement is typical of the double standard we saw in this campaign.

       Hillary deleted e-mails because they were PRIVATE. In fact, the FBI was able to view those 30,000 e-mails and guess what? No crime!

       Of course, it’s only when a hated Democrat does something that it becomes a crime. Powell wasn’t charged. Rove wasn’t charged. Rice wasn’t charged. Michael Flynn who we now know had classified material on insecure servers and LEAKED it wasn’t charged.

       Of course Trump HAS committed real crimes. He has used foundation money to shut down an investigation into Trump U. swindling of students in Florida.

       LikeLike

     • John Wund says:

       December 29, 2016 at 11:05 pm

       Misogyny may have been a very minor component. Some of us (males) strongly want to see women in a 50/50 role in government. However, Clinton was not all that appealing. I voted for Jill Stein. Warren would have been an excellent choice. Your assertion smacks of swallowing the Clinton campaign theme, “Vote For Me! I’m a Woman!” I know many women who didn’t swallow the bait. Stop with the battle of the sexes.

       The Clinton/Obama centrist, corporatist capitulation has driven the Democratic Party into the ditch. It has stolen the integrity of a Party that once sported FDR and JFK, and at least considered the needs of the 99% if not always fulfilling them. True, if Clinton were a man she might have squeaked by with another 0.1% of the vote, however that’s not a significant ‘reason’ for her weakness.

       But, this is supposed (I think) to be a site devoted to education policy. The Arne Duncan policy is not all that different from the Bush policy, so ….. let’s get back on topic.

       LikeLike

     • NYC public school parent says:

       December 29, 2016 at 11:28 pm

       John Wund,

       Hillary Clinton is neither Obama nor Bill Clinton. Back when the Republicans thought that they could smear her by calling her a left winger, you would have thought she was the second coming of Karl Marx.

       Her platform was the most progressive of any Democrat candidate in many elections. What a shame that people preferred to ignore that because they didn’t “trust” her. Voting for Stein only shows you were willing to vote for a woman who was guaranteed to lose. You ignored the progressive platform and Bernie Sanders’ pleas because you preferred voting for a woman who was definitely going to lose than one who could win.

       LikeLike

   • Beth says:

     December 29, 2016 at 11:58 am

     Once again, there is no misogyny says the GUY.

     As someone who reads Diane’s blog, how can you believe this to be true? You see how these “reformers” are going against teachers. Do you think that this is just happenstance? It isn’t. They are going after teachers, because they are mostly women at the grade school level.

     Has Governor Cuomo declared the policeman’s union as a monopoly? Of course, he hasn’t, because they are a group comprised mostly of men. Yet, if the teachers’ union is a monopoly, then the policemen and firemen’s unions should be called the same, because they are the same.

     What if a male union group was held to the same standard as a female union group? If policemen were actually doing their jobs, there should be no crime. Since there is crime, they clearly are failing and should be replaced by young, innocent, yet well-meaning, nonunion workers. They certainly could do a better job than the trained professional policemen. Don’t you agree? And if there wasn’t a policemen’s union, bad cops could be fired. Bad cops are harmful to communities and should not be protected by a union.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • Joe says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:12 pm

       Thank you Beth, a very perceptive comment. Misogyny plays a huge role in the demeaning and denigrating of teachers and to the profession in general. This has been going on for generations and continues into the 21st century. Christie went after the teachers’ union (NJEA) unrelentingly from day one. Not a peep against the police and firefighter unions.

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:41 pm

       Joe

       Joe not because they were male . If one wants to keep their heads attached to their fat Necks they do not attack police Unions .

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 5:07 pm

       Beth

       Perhaps Beth you better do some reading on the history of the labor movement. You can take that right up to the present.

       The overwhelming number of Union jobs crushed in this country have been male dominated . The police and the military have been used for this purpose FOREVER . That’s why police are exempt here as they are in other POLICE STATES got it.

       You might remember my fellow Union member who punched a horse in the nose here in NYC . He apologized but I doubt that was an accident. Years ago it used to be a tack in the ass. (figure it out)

       Only 5% percent of the private sector workforce is still Unionized it had been over 35 % at one time in my lifetime .

       The reason that 11% of the workforce is unionized is that public workers have had it easy and are 30% organized. Teachers in NY owe their Union to several male union leaders, the leader of them was a rough and tumble construction union “BOSS”, who threatened Robert Wagner and the Kennedy election when the the superintendent of NYC schools threatened to fire all those who walked out in a failed strike in 1960. Go to the UFT site and read the history.

       Well the easy times are over, public workers from the postal workers to the teachers are being fed to the wolves in state after state,. This is not because they are female it is because 1out of every 5 workers who carries a union card is a teacher plain and simple .

       Breaking the Air Traffic Controllers not enough Republicans are now seeking to privatize the FAA.

       This could only be considered an attack over a woman’s issue by someone who has had no participation in Labor issues. But I welcome you to the fight because we are in for the fight of our lives. Hillary lost not because Hillary was a women, but because she had zero credibility with working class Americans. The part that hurt her most was the men in her life Bill and Barrack .

       Further forget Jill Stein 1 out of 5 teachers in the AFT/NEA voted for Trump must have been all the men.

       LikeLike

     • Threatened Out West says:

       December 29, 2016 at 5:25 pm

       Right, because it’s a mostly MALE union, and the male union is expected to fight back. But the female-dominated teaching profession is called “selfish,” and “not in it for the kids” if teachers ask for the same things as the police. In Utah, police officers can retire in 20 years, firefighters in 25, and teachers in 35. I know, I know: police and fire are very demanding jobs. But so is teaching–more demanding in some ways. And yet we have to teach for 10-15 years longer to qualify for the pensions.

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 5:59 pm

       Threatened Out West

       My heart bleeds for the 35 year retirement . Mine is forty but who is complaining we are both fortunate to have what most American workers do not have . We gain nothing by looking with envy to the benefits that other workers have attained. Our best hope is in fighting for other workers to gain or keep those benefits that we have. Which is why blaming this defeat on Sexism or Racism instead of economic failures so infuriates me.

       LikeLike

     • bethree5 says:

       December 30, 2016 at 7:56 am

       Threatened at 5:25, perfect sketch of how sexism distorts attitudes about teachers’ vs other unions. But I also agree w/Joel’s response at 5:59. I think you both are right. The same thing goes for racism underlying a fair amount of the pushback against Obama. Both mainstream and TP wing of Republican party have cynically welcomed into political debate the lowest & most ignorant elements of ‘populism’ in their 35-yr effort to return us to a pre-New Deal US.

       LikeLike

   • Joe says:

     December 29, 2016 at 12:07 pm

     Whatever mistakes Hillary made pale in comparison to all the multitude of outrageous and jaw-dropping mistakes that Donald made. The difference is that Trump was given a pass (by enough voters) for whatever reasons. Misogyny cannot be discounted, Beinart is on to something.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • dianeravitch says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:10 pm

       Right, Joe.

       The emails consumed the media, and now we know that there was nothing there. The FBI had Huma’s computer since August, but Comey decided 10 days before the election that he had to get a court order to examine it. He never asked Huma. She would have said yes, and the FBI would have had no reason to intervene in the election and add to Trump’s lies about the emails.

       We have elected a man who is a pathological liar and who lives for greed. This King Midas (the “new King”) can never get enough.

       LikeLike

     • Rudy Schellekens says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:38 pm

       Blinded. That’s the only thing I can think of. The numbers show the article to be wrong. Pure and simple.
       The total unwillingness to put ANY accountability at Clinton’s decision to ignore visiting her supporters in EXACTLY those states she lost. They were not southern states where those attitudes might be more prevalent.
       The NUMBERS are clear. She lost (not HE won) those states by the smallest of margins.
       But if you want to live in a world of make belief…

       LikeLike

     • dianeravitch says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:57 pm

       The only state Clinton didn’t visit and should have won was Wisconsin. She campaigned in Michigan and Pennsylvania

       LikeLike

     • dianeravitch says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:11 pm

       Note:

       WordPress is holding in moderation comments made by almost everyone. If your email is in moderation, don’t take it personally!

       LikeLike

     • Rudy Schellekens says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:45 pm

       But trumps mistakes did not cost him an election. Clinton’s mistakes did.
       trumps mistakes should have cost him much more than an election.
       Clintons mistakes were preventable.

       LikeLike

     • dianeravitch says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:55 pm

       Trump lacks only a few things: a heart and a brain.

       He won because he is a demagogue who knew how to find what made people angry and to promise that he would fix everything that ailed them. As I said, a pathological liar.

       LikeLike

     • retired teacher says:

       December 29, 2016 at 12:39 pm

       Obama played a role because in an attempt to appear neutral, he did not release information the Russian hacking interference. Comey had no such scruples when he held a press conference right before the election stating there were more emails. The implication was more rumored impropriety. The reality was most of these emails were duplicates and of no concern. The conservatives today will fight as dirty as they please.

       I agree sexism played a part too. The press gave Trump a “pass” while they rarely covered Hillary. When they did, they were more critical. Trump was particularly creepy in the town hall debate, at some point, standing over Hillary.

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:24 pm

       dianeravitch

       “He won because he is a demagogue who knew how to find what made people angry and to promise that he would fix everything that ailed them. As I said, a pathological liar.”

       And way down on that list was the fact that she was a women . So far down i would say that for anybody who would not have been voting for him anyway , It was off the radar screens.

       She won the popular vote, but lost to the snake oil salesman in states that he promised to help. Nobody believed that she would not continue with neo liberal policy once she was elected. In fact she ran as a Republican far more concerned with winning over Republican woman and Neo cons than appealing to voters in the Mid West . Her whole advertising campaign was never aimed at workers and then we ask why she lost the states that were devastated by Trade . If she had, who would have believed her with Obama running around pushing the TPP.

       Most of those working class voters who voted for him would not know what a neo-liberal is. They knew that she did not stand with them. Pretty much they were right. Their alternative was what was wrong.

       LikeLike

     • NYC public school parent says:

       December 29, 2016 at 10:31 pm

       “Nobody believed that she would not continue with neo liberal policy once she was elected.”

       I believed it! And so did most people I spoke to. I happened to prefer Bernie and voted for him in the primary, but that didn’t mean that I believed Hillary was the ugly caricature that you and the right wing together managed to convince many voters she was.

       You nailed it right there. To YOU ‘nobody’ could ever believe a word Hillary said. If you don’t think there is misogyny in there, then I don’t know what is. How you look at her life’s work and decide that she is only in politics to help the rich is truly beyond my understanding. Maybe you don’t just hate women — maybe you are just looking for someone to blame for Obama and Hillary was a handy scapegoat. But your kind of thinking was so destructive and the worst part is that you were very likely wrong and America just lost its best shot at becoming a more progressive society, led by someone who has always been smart and committed and a do-gooder who is willing to WORK for the things she believes and not just talk.

       If I sound mad, it is because of the idiots who didn’t believe Hillary had the potential to do good in a way we have not seen for decades. A REAL workaholic who gets things done. What a huge loss for our country because even Warren or Bernie don’t have half the abilities in that regard as Clinton. Few politicians do and they only come around once a generation. FDR. LBJ. And we just lost our chance. I don’t see any of those politicians who you probably adore showing any signs of being a workaholic in the way that you need to be do really change things. It’s not fun. It’s politics. And she was GOOD at it. and she believed in the right things even though you obviously don’t believe that at all. What a true shame.

       LikeLike

3. ponderosa says:

   December 29, 2016 at 11:31 am

   Very interesting piece by Beinart. Supporting his thesis that many men are alarmed by ambitious women: my white, blue-collar Trump-supporting neighbor denigrated Hillary as “not the most maternal woman in the world”. This man happens not to be the prime breadwinner in his household: his wife works; he lives off disability.

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. GregB says:

   December 29, 2016 at 11:43 am

   I often thought of this article immediately after Nov. 8. Comic Patton Oswalt summed it up nicely in a tweet on the night of the election (you may want to delete this comment because of the profanity):

   “What I’ve learned so far tonight: America is WAAAAAAAAY more sexist than it is racist. And it’s pretty fucking racist.”

   LikeLike

   Reply
5. Jon Awbrey says:

   December 29, 2016 at 11:54 am

   Y-chromosome-related dysfunctions no doubt prevented HRC from winning bigly but Trump won his electoral college end-run around the popular majority the same way Ripofflicons always do — gerrymandering, voter suppression, and the art of the big lie.

   LikeLike

   Reply
6. Joe says:

   December 29, 2016 at 11:58 am

   All I know is that we would have been ten thousand times better off with HRC than with the current disaster and horror show. There is no equivalence, there is no comparison, we will be much worse off with Trump than with Clinton. Hillary made mistakes on the campaign trail? Gee, no kidding, who doesn’t make mistakes and faux pas. Trump made mistakes, gaffes and said horrible things 24/7. No problem, he wins the electoral college vote. He will continue to make mistakes, gaffes and say horrific things as president but with disastrous results for the nation. All his appointments and nominees for his administration alone represent a dire threat to ordinary working folks.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • retired teacher says:

     December 29, 2016 at 12:51 pm

     That’s for sure. Here’s an interesting link from Robert Reich which is called “his wish for Obama’s parting shots. https://egbertowillies.com/2016/12/28/obama-parting-shots-robert-reich/

     LikeLike

     Reply
7. NYSTEACHER says:

   December 29, 2016 at 12:11 pm

   It’s not a question of whether misogyny played a part (it did). It’s a question of whether that misogyny was a direct cause of her loss (I don’t think it was).

   It’s never a bad bet to bank of the presence and depth of racism, sexism, homophobia, and misogyny in our society. Same with anti-intellectualism.

   Whomever the Democrats put up, the most vile things would emerge from the once extreme, now mainstream elements of the right. Simply put, everything awful has been normalized on the right in a process that goes back to the 1970s at least. This is not news and should be a given, baked-in part of sane analysis.

   That said, people on our side do ignore the depths to which people disliked HRC as a person, even on the left. HRC represented to folks on the progressive left and the right that sort of opportunistic, ambitious (not in the positive sense), shifty, and untrustworthy political animal that marked the professional politician of the 1990s or so. Nobody wanted that, right or left! Really! Do we forget that this was the root of lukewarm acceptance of her candidacy on the left? And it was lukewarm.

   HRC did get near 3 million more votes than Trump. (This has been the root of the little hope I can muster for our nation). I would argue that this is not a reflection of enthusiasm for HRC but rather the absolutely obvious reality of the devastation of a Trump presidency.

   HRC lost the election. She lost the election through a combination of a lukewarm enthusiasm from the start, a team that relied much more on tech-y algorithms, a series of mid-reads and mis-steps, and a whole bunch of that hubris.

   That the right wing, in response to her candidacy, fell back on vile misogyny, sexism, etc. is not a news story, and was completely predictable to anybody who has even an elementary grasp on the arch of the American right wing since Nixon. Those who wish to place it at the center of HRC’s loss are clearly desperate to not fully confront the challenges with her, her candidacy, and the left in general.

   HRC was a bad candidate from the start.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Dienne says:

     December 29, 2016 at 1:04 pm

     Well said.

     LikeLike

     Reply
   • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

     December 29, 2016 at 1:29 pm

     As usual seconded .

     LikeLike

     Reply
   • NYC public school parent says:

     December 29, 2016 at 10:02 pm

     “Whomever the Democrats put up, the most vile things would emerge from the once extreme, now mainstream elements of the right.”

     This is true. We saw it happen to Al Gore, a very qualified candidate who lost to an outrageously incompetent and unqualified candidate. And then it happened to John Kerry.

     And I heard so many Democrats who said “Gore was a bad candidate from the start.” “Kerry was a bad candidate from the start”. They have amnesia each time and instead of looking at why very decent candidates are framed in the worst possible light, they blame them for their loss.

     And they are doing the same thing to Hillary. Who was not “universally hated” as the people with hindsight keep insisting. She was one of the most popular Secy of States and was a popular Senator.

     Hillary made mistakes but they were no different than mistakes that every campaign makes — both winners and losers.

     She lost because the left helped the right wing do their dirty work. Just like they did with Al Gore and Kerry. Instead of calling out the propaganda, they bought into the exaggerated portrayal of all those Democrats.

     Why did John Kerry lose to a very unpopular President? Everyone makes mistakes. If you believe in your candidate — as the Trump voters did — you overlook them.

     If you despise your candidate for not being perfect, as the Democrats are so good at doing, you lose and lose and lose.

     And until someone explains how Russ Feingold — who spent plenty of time campaigning in Wisconsin — got FEWER votes than Hillary in that state (and he didn’t even have a Jill Stein on the left) any attempt to blame ONLY Hillary for the Wisconsin loss is flawed. Those white Christian voters in Wisconsin liked Russ Feingold even LESS than they liked Hillary. Why?

     We need to acknowledge that there are white people in the midwest who were looking for convenient scapegoats for their problems. And neither Hillary nor Russ Feingold were giving it to them and Trump and Johnson were. If those white Wisconsin voters were rejecting Feingold, then it wasn’t about Hillary’s terrible campaign, it was about those candidates not pandering to that ugliness. Bernie would very likely been rejected as Feingold was.

     LikeLike

     Reply
   • Michael Fiorillo says:

     January 1, 2017 at 12:37 pm

     Hillary’s loss is kind of like the OJ Simpson case (on my mind since I just watched the impressive documentary, “OJ: Made In America”): yes, the LAPD was/is a racist institution that over decades systematically persecuted Black people (especially Black men), and yes, OJ murdered his wife Nicole and Ron Goldman. Both can be and are simultaneously true.

     Likewise, yes, Hillary has been subjected to despicable misogyny for years and, yes, she was a very weak and flawed candidate.

     Both are true, but just as some people deluded themselves into thinking that Simpson’s acquittal dealt a blow to a racist criminal justice system, so too are Democrats deluding themselves by thinking that Hillary’s loss was primarily the result of sexist (and/or racist) voters.

     The Democratic Party doubled down on her candidacy, despite people on both ends of the political spectrum seeing through the years of hype about her “accomplishments” and her “fighting for women and children.” Little or none of that was true, and many people saw through it, even people such as myself, who voted for her.

     LikeLike

     Reply
8. Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

   December 29, 2016 at 12:32 pm

   Patently absurd .

   Did some Trump voters not vote for Hillary because she was a woman yes, would they have voted for a Black a Jew or for that matter a LIBERAL ? . No they would not have.

   They, the deplorables were with Trump from the first time he rode down the escalator to demean Mexicans or Blacks. They did not swing the election. They have been voting Republican since they stopped being Dixiecrat’s a description that had no geographical boundary .

   For a much better analysis of why Clinton lost this one from the N.Y. Times is spot on .
   We do ourselves no favor by looking for a fake narrative . It takes away from the real reason and eliminates the need for change.

   If the coup against Dilma Rousseff was due to being a woman, than Nicolas Maduro must be either transgender or a cross dresser. Along with every other dead leader in Latin America who opposed US policy. I suppose Obama went running to Argentina because he was thrilled to see Cristina Fernández de Kirchner get her panties out of office. Time to get real.

   “Several weeks before the election, a Quinnipiac University poll found that 51 percent of white working-class voters did not believe that Mr. Trump had a “sense of decency” and ranked Mrs. Clinton slightly higher on that quality.

   But they were not voting on decency. Indeed, one-fifth of voters — more than 25 million Americans — said they “somewhat” disapproved of Mr. Trump’s treatment of women. Mr. Trump won three-quarters of these voters, despite their disapprobation.

   Bluntly put, much of the white working class decided that Mr. Trump could be a jerk. Absent any other champion, they supported the jerk they thought was more on their side — that is, on the issues that most concerned them.”

   That he duped them is another point.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Dienne says:

     December 29, 2016 at 1:02 pm

     Thank you, Joel. If we keep looking to anatomy to figure this out, we’re still going to be wondering why Candidate Biden or Candidate Booker or whoever loses in 2020.

     LikeLike

     Reply
   • GregB says:

     December 29, 2016 at 1:07 pm

     Many excellent letter to NYT editor responding to Kuhn’s article in today’s edition. Worth reading.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 4:14 pm

       Greg B

       The other night when I posted that op ed it was with the acknowledgement that every person I knew who voted for Trump was a deplorable for a slew of different reasons . What this article explains very well is how some of these same voters could have voted once if not twice for Obama.

       Flash for those who have not figured it out, Hillary won. But she lost in states devastated by trade losses. That ain’t misogyny or racism. That’s policy .

       LikeLike

     • dianeravitch says:

       December 29, 2016 at 4:32 pm

       Trump won’t do anything to reverse trade losses. The jobs list to summation don’t exist. The jobs outsourced to countries where workers are paid $1 an hour or a day aren’t coming back. He is a serial liar.

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 5:22 pm

       dianeravitch

       You are not telling me something that I do not know . . I assume you meant automation. Which had very little to do with the jobs lost from the late 90s till the present . The fact that Trump will do nothing to bring back jobs is not in dispute . The fact that there is nothing that can be done to create new jobs in manufacturing is very much in dispute.

       The EPI has a good article on why it is not the robots . But for a short take here is Baker today.

       http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/denialism-on-trade

       http://www.epi.org/publication/manufacturing-job-loss-trade-not-productivity-is-the-culprit/

       LikeLike

     • bethree5 says:

       December 30, 2016 at 8:34 am

       I liked the letter to ed comparing the election to a basketball game you lose 97-96. You cannot ascribe the loss to any single cause (“Did we lose because of that easy shot I missed in the first quarter? Or because our star player was injured? Or because of that blown call by the referee? Yes, yes, and yes.”)

       LikeLike

     • NYC public school parent says:

       December 30, 2016 at 3:14 pm

       bethree5,

       That’s an excellent point. And the unprecedented interference in the election by the FBI and Russia hacking is supposed to be unimportant in an election that was one of the closest in histories, which is why the popular vote winning margin by Hillary was so large.

       If Hillary wasn’t on her way to a victory, why was the FBI so desperate to take the unprecedented step of violating the Hatch Amendment to make sure she lost. Why the Russian hacking that ONLY released e-mails designed to make Hillary look bad as if every other politicians’ e-mails they had didn’t make them far worse?

       And the biggest question of all – why did Russ Feingold disgust even MORE white voters in Wisconsin than Hillary did when he was saying all the things that her critics claimed would have guaranteed her a victory despite the interference of the FBI and Russia? Just anti-Semitism? Or did white folks just not like anything that didn’t blame minorities and immigrants for their troubles?

       LikeLike

9. Duane Swacker says:

   December 29, 2016 at 1:02 pm

   Este “misogynist mansplainer” no va a decir nada.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • dianeravitch says:

     December 29, 2016 at 1:03 pm

     Duane, you voted for Jill Stein. If Stein were not in the race, Trump would not be president.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • Duane Swacker says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:06 pm

       God dang it, Diane, ahora tengo que responder a este trampa.

       I’ve not seen that thought explained anywhere. Please explain how that could have happened.

       LikeLike

     • The Real One says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:18 pm

       That is a false narrative as is the Nader theory. Votes have to be earned period. Just because a third party candidate runs and receives a decent amount of votes, does not mean that if that candidate had not run that his or her votes would automatically have gone to the Democrat. The last person I voted for was Ralph Nader and had he dropped out of the race, there is no way in hell that I would have voted for either Bush or Gore.

       LikeLike

     • Robert Rendo, NBCT says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:27 pm

       Really? Are you sure about that one? It’s just SO sad – this situation – no matter how you analyze it.

       LikeLike

     • dianeravitch says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:31 pm

       Robert,

       We have an ignorant egomaniac who will have the nuclear codes. I have lived through many presidents over my lifetime. Never one so frightening. He makes Huey Long look like a saint. It bothers me that the media calls him a populist. Populists care about the average person. Trump cares about Trump. He is a master demagogue. He is a nativist, a white nationalist.

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:35 pm

       But like wise if Johnson was not in the race it would have been a landslide for Trump . I’ll take that trade off today as I was happy to take it 92 .

       LikeLike

     • dianeravitch says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:39 pm

       Joel, no circumstances will reconcile me to the fact that this pathological liar, con man, and phony will be added to a list that includes Lincoln, FDR, and Washington.

       LikeLike

     • Rudy Schellekens says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:48 pm

       Denying reality does not change reality.
       I believe it was president Obama who made the statement, “you lost, deal with it.”
       Goose and gander.

       LikeLike

     • dianeravitch says:

       December 29, 2016 at 2:02 pm

       I am dealing with it, Rudy.
       I am enraged that the public–42% of voters–elected a lying demagogue. I will not be reconciled to the idea that the president is a serial groper, a racist, and a fraud. I will devote my energy to keeping democratic ideals alive during these dark days.

       LikeLike

     • tylermichaelhughes says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:43 pm

       I voted for Stein too, after meeting her in person twice and seeing her education views aligned with mine. Reminder: Gary Johnson received triple the votes Stein did.

       LikeLike

     • dianeravitch says:

       December 29, 2016 at 1:58 pm

       Why did Stein go to celebrate Russia Today with General Mike Tyler, Trump’s madman, and sit together at Putin’s table? Did you know that the leaders of the Russian Green Party denounced Stein for ignoring Putin’s human rights abuses? Putin is not an idealistic Communist. He is a brutal tyrant who leads a kleptocracy.

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman says:

       December 29, 2016 at 3:43 pm

       Nor me either yet to blame it on Stien or sexism is ridiculous. She lost because of where she lost. And these are states that. Democrats should never lose

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 4:22 pm

       dianeravitch

       The question is why was Flynn there not Stein . Recently retired National security officials should not be socializing with leaders of nations that we have santions on. As for Stein sad fact thr RT network is won of the few places that progressives have a Voice.

       Now the thought of Trump having anything to do with the Lincoln bedroom other than a massive coronary his first night in it is revolting to me as well . But that does not mean we can discount Johnson and not Stein

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 4:23 pm

       edit button the and one . Never fails

       LikeLike

     • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

       December 29, 2016 at 4:27 pm

       and add sanctions . There is an edit button for available for us typing impaired persons who all to frequently hit the post button before proof reading and are spoiled by sites that have them .

       LikeLike

10. Robert Rendo, NBCT says:

    December 29, 2016 at 1:30 pm

    There is no doubt that sexism has played a considerable role against Hillary, and it’s NOT acceptable. America is still sexist despite great strides and progress in equality.

    But Hilalry’s rotten political record and neoliberalism have not exactly helped her. What is so horrible about having to admit to that? I just don’t get it.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • dianeravitch says:

      December 29, 2016 at 1:50 pm

      Robert, I don’t think you listened to anything she said. She promised to raise the minimum wage; to raise taxes on the 1%; to make college free for those with family income less than $125,000; to fight for gun control; to strengthen federal environmental protection. Instead, we got a man who is a bigot, a demagogue, and an ignoramus who will do none of those things. I would have supported any Democratic against him. I wish that all Democrats had said the same. If so, we would not be facing four years with this orange Know-Nothing.

      LikeLike

      Reply
      • Robert Rendo, NBCT says:

        December 29, 2016 at 2:42 pm

        It’s just very sad. In all directions.

        LikeLike

      • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

        December 29, 2016 at 6:09 pm

        She was dragged tooth and nail on trade and on minimum wage on college tuition…. I was looking forward to 8years of fighting her tooth and nail. Now I am looking toward 8years of projectile vomiting. I do not expect most Democrats to put up a fight.

        Let me correct that I expect just enough Democrats to cross over and vote with Republicans to pass terrible legislation that hurts the working class, while giving cover to the rest of the party .

        LikeLike

      • NYC public school parent says:

        December 29, 2016 at 10:13 pm

        Hillary wasn’t “dragged tooth and nail”. Every other election since I have voted has seen the Democratic primary winner pivot to the right as soon as he won. Hillary was the FIRST Democrat to pivot to the left. Where she actually had started out long ago so it wasn’t as if she was some right wing ideologue lying as so many on the left made sure that the public believed.

        It’s those kinds of lies that helped her lose. It’s why I blame the people who claim they held their nose and voted for Hillary while at the same time making sure every American knew how corrupt and awful she was. No wonder by the time they heard those ugly mischaracterizations from people who “voted for her despite how truly awful, corrupt, money-hungry, etc. she was”, they decided Trump couldn’t be any worse. After all, you all keep implying Hillary couldn’t wait to sell out every working American!

        But it may be more than gender bias since the same kind of smears were used against Kerry and Gore. But then again, let’s blame them for being lousy candidates who deserved to lose, too. Let’s keep buying into the right wing attacks on our “lousy” candidates because we will never find that “perfect” candidate who can’t be smeared with some Democrats happily joining in on the smear because if they don’t get the candidate they want, they throw a hissy fit and help smear the one who wins.

        LikeLike

11. Yvonne Siu-Runyan says:

    December 29, 2016 at 1:58 pm

    Politics is a circus!

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Duane Swacker says:

      December 29, 2016 at 3:11 pm

      YEP!

      LikeLike

      Reply
12. Karen Adlum says:

    December 29, 2016 at 3:03 pm

    Inaccurate. His first paragraph says it all. Status Quo! People are sick of status quo. That’s why Trump won and people could NOT bring themselves to vote for Clinton. They are desperate for the hope and change promised by Obama which never came. The democrats and Hillary did not read Americans well this election or they would have realized that voters would not settle for someone who promised incremental change.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • dianeravitch says:

      December 29, 2016 at 3:11 pm

      Going forward one step at a time is far better than going backward in overdrive. Trump wants to roll back the New Deal and restore the world of Warren G. Harding.

      LikeLike

      Reply
    • Threatened Out West says:

      December 29, 2016 at 5:29 pm

      Trump will do nothing to change the status quo, because, as a supposed billionaire, he benefits from the status quo. Anyone who believed that he would change that was delusional.

      LikeLike

      Reply
    • NYC public school parent says:

      December 29, 2016 at 10:19 pm

      This kind of thinking is ridiculous. You are buying into Donald Trump’s LIE that he won by a LANDSLIDE!

      The only time you could claim this is with George McGovern, who WAS rejected entirely by nearly all Americans.

      A MAJORITY of Americans COULD “bring themselves” to vote for Hillary. Just because so many educated Americans have moved to be with other educated Americans on the coasts and that voter suppression and other slimy and possibly illegal suppress the votes methods were used does not mean that Hillary lost by a landslide. She did not. And with a much cleaner election, she very well may have won. Just like Al Gore.

      All those broken voting booths in places where mostly Democrats vote? Striking voters off rolls without telling them. Closing down voting places in Democratic areas?

      Some white voters in 3 states found Trump’s racism and xenophobia to be appealing. Not all, but enough to tilt the election, with help from the FBI, wikileaks, and Russian tampering. And even with that, she BARELY lost in 3 states while winning a significant majority of the popular vote.

      LikeLike

      Reply
13. Joe says:

    December 29, 2016 at 3:17 pm

    What does that say about Stein that she received a third of the votes of that clown Gary Johnson, a loon and an idiot (“What’s Aleppo?”). Seriously, she couldn’t even garner more votes than Johnson. Hedges and Cornel West supported Stein but Chomsky said to hold your nose and vote for Clinton. Robert Reich, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders just said to vote for Clinton, nothing about holding noses.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

      December 29, 2016 at 6:14 pm

      What it said is we progressive lefties knew that Stein was not going anywhere and read and posted Chomsky here. As we urged as many as we could to vote for her because the alternative was a disaster.

      That is why Johnson got so many more votes. Progressives are educated.

      LikeLike

      Reply
      • Duane Swacker says:

        December 29, 2016 at 7:32 pm

        And we free thought independent intelligent thinkers resisted your implorings, voting with a clear conscience for whom we wanted to vote.

        LikeLike

      • dianeravitch says:

        December 29, 2016 at 7:48 pm

        Duane,

        Are you pleased with the way the election turned out?

        LikeLike

      • Duane Swacker says:

        December 29, 2016 at 8:07 pm

        I’ve stated many times here that I find THETrumpster abhorrent, vile, a lowlife with money. He hasn’t gained a lick of my respect ever.

        So no I am not pleased but, at the same time, I would not have been pleased if Clinton had won either.

        None of the candidates for whom I have voted this century have won (and I’ve not voted for a Dim or Rethug in that time) so I am quite used to “not winning” in many different senses when it comes to presidential politics. And that is life in American presidential politics for me.

        I continue on living and doing what I believe can be done to help make my community a bit better. Not glamorous but at times it has been effective-ask the many kids I have devoted my free time to coach in many sports to name just one area of my involvement over the years (even before I had my own children).

        LikeLike

      • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

        December 29, 2016 at 11:50 pm

        Duane Swacker

        I wish I could sit back and enjoy the show. There is some satisfaction to be had in watching a show where the bad guys get what they deserve. I would love to see those working class voters including teachers who voted for Trump get their asses fried. Those in the social safety net who seek to deny help to others get royally screwed .

        Problem is too many good people get hurt and way to close to home.

        LikeLike

14. Yertle says:

    December 29, 2016 at 6:19 pm

    Anthony Bourdain weighs in on why Hillary lost
    Bisley: You’re a liberal. What should liberals be critiquing their own side for?

    Bourdain: There’s just so much. I hate the term political correctness, the way in which speech that is found to be unpleasant or offensive is often banned from universities. Which is exactly where speech that is potentially hurtful and offensive should be heard.

    The utter contempt with which privileged Eastern liberals such as myself discuss red-state, gun-country, working-class America as ridiculous and morons and rubes is largely responsible for the upswell of rage and contempt and desire to pull down the temple that we’re seeing now.

    I’ve spent a lot of time in gun-country, God-fearing America. There are a hell of a lot of nice people out there, who are doing what everyone else in this world is trying to do: the best they can to get by, and take care of themselves and the people they love. When we deny them their basic humanity and legitimacy of their views, however different they may be than ours, when we mock them at every turn, and treat them with contempt, we do no one any good. Nothing nauseates me more than preaching to the converted. The self-congratulatory tone of the privileged left—just repeating and repeating and repeating the outrages of the opposition—this does not win hearts and minds. It doesn’t change anyone’s opinions. It only solidifies them, and makes things worse for all of us. We should be breaking bread with each other, and finding common ground whenever possible. I fear that is not at all what we’ve done.

    http://reason.com/archives/2016/12/29/anthony-bourdain

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Duane Swacker says:

      December 29, 2016 at 7:41 pm

      As one who lives in the gun-toting (own my own guns-just made a leather holster for my .22 revolver the other day) Bible Belt (while being an atheist) flyover country I’ve been saying what Bourdain stated for years.

      LikeLike

      Reply
      • NYC public school parent says:

        December 30, 2016 at 4:21 pm

        “When we deny them their basic humanity and legitimacy of their views, however different they may be than ours…”

        Say what??

        We are supposed to agree that scapegoating minorities and immigrants for their own problems is “legitimate”?

        We are supposed to agree that yes, Obama really is a Kenyan whose Presidency was illegitimate?

        We are supposed to agree that having any kind of gun regulations and background checks and licensing requirements for guns is just an attempt to take away their guns and that saying Happy Holidays is an attempt to take away their religious freedom?

        As someone who grew up in one of those “red states”, I can tell you that many of the Republicans I knew found Trump to be reprehensible and unlike many so-called progressives were smart enough to not be fooled by the attempt to paint Clinton as dishonest and corrupt.

        And the other Republicans I knew — including relatives – who embraced Trump bought into those same racist and xenophobic views that I refuse to give the “legitimacy” to that you seem to be demanding.

        One of the fakest news stories of all is that lie that Hillary Clinton and all her nasty east and west coast supporters were ONLY talking about gay rights, and forcing transgendered bathrooms on everyone. Sorry, but Hillary Clinton talked far more about the economy and jobs every single day. But that wasn’t enough for the people whose “basic humanity” led them to believe that Obama was a Kenyan who ruled illegitimately. I guess we have different definitions of what “basic humanity” means but one definition should be to not believe every racist innuendo thrown because deep down you WANT to believe it.

        LikeLike

      • Duane Swacker says:

        December 31, 2016 at 4:44 pm

        “. . . because deep down you WANT to believe it.”

        Is that a new diagnosis coming out in the DSMVI-DDRBWVS-Deep Down Racist Believer White Variant Syndorome?

        LikeLike

15. retiredbutmissthekids says:

    December 29, 2016 at 6:49 pm

    Joel Herman: Yours is the best, most succinct comment summing up the outcome, “She lost because of where she lost.” IMO, no more need be said–or, to quote MY personal pick (&, sorry Beth, NOT “an annoying Brooklynite…going on & on about free college…”)– “enough is enough!”
    Let’s all stop agonizing, analyzing & start ORGANIZING. We have our work cut out for us.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:

      December 30, 2016 at 9:55 am

      Let us understand that what we see on the right is a long term project dating back as far as the early 70’s and some could argue the Goldwater loss. The force behind it is oligarchical, having a long term perspective. I am afraid the peasant class and make
      no mistake this is class warfare, has to rely on black swan events to be able to effect change. The Great Depression was one such event Roosevelt due to historical circumstance and personal conviction carried us forward. That progress was chipped at starting as early as 1947 and again in the seventies with the creation of the Business Round Table and a frame work for action, right wing think tanks and media outlets. , Progress went into a full scale retreat as Reagan attacked the very notions of fairness and compassion the New Deal and Great Society were built on. Replacing it with the philosophy of greed and depravity as expressed in the philosophy of Ayn Rand

      We had another Black Swan event with the Financial crises it so shook the Nation that they overcame their racial baggage electing a Black Man President . He unfortunately was not a Roosevelt and two years later the Oligarchy struck back. It went on a tear.created a faux populist movement with roots tracing back to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange as if that that could ever be populist.

      Trump may not have been their first choice but he will suffice in reversing all their losses from Roosevelt on.

      Yes I will be in Washington or NYC on the 21st

      ” to march in support of equality and promote civil rights for every human”
      and social and economic justice for all.

      https://www.eventbrite.com/e/womens-march-on-nyc-tickets-29464021682

      https://www.eventbrite.com/e/womens-march-on-washington-official-tickets-29428287801

      There as a start because I believe that mass movements shape public narratives, But I am afraid real change will have to wait for another Black Swan that so shakes the ethos of the nation that real change can occur.

      LikeLike

      Reply
16. Joanne Y. says:

    December 29, 2016 at 8:13 pm

    With all due respect, Ms. Ravitch, this Atlantic article in NO WAY explains why Hillary lost! Hillary lost because she was an exceptionally flawed candidate, pure and simple. The irony is that so many of the negative attributes that this blog so derisively applies to Trump, fit Hillary like a glove! I speak from the perspective of a FEMALE CONSERVATIVE FEMINIST who was a Trump VOTER as opposed to a Trump SUPPORTER. Quite honestly, I was astounded, but ecstatic, when Trump won, not because I am enthralled with HIM, but because I could not abide anyone who would continue and perhaps escalate our current president’s policies. There are innumerable reasons why Hillary will not become our 45th president, but gender is not one of them. Hillary has an enormous amount of baggage which will possibly be itemized in a later post — issues which explain why people fortunately woke up and rejected her on November 8.

    Shortly after this Atlantic article was published in October of 2016, a progressive friend and strong Hillary supporter sent it to me, noting that she was extremely upset that Hillary’s gender could impact the results of the election. The article infuriated me. Having been a female fifty years ago in a male-dominated field (engineering), I have always found it contemptible and non-constructive to play the victim card, whether it be related to gender, race, or whatever description differentiates one human being from another. This is what I responded to my progressive friend in October of 2016 regarding the article entitled “Fear of a Female President:”

    “I also find this article disturbing, but not for the same reasons that you do. I predicted years ago that if Hillary were to run, the Left would play the ‘woman card,’ just as they played the ‘race card’ with Obama. I find this despicable, very upsetting and, in a word…NONSENSE. Identity politics only serves to divide — not bring us together, and Obama has unfortunately done a very effective job of pulling us apart during his eight years in office. I believe that Obama (and also Hillary) are champions of identity politics, both overtly and subtly. Hillary in fact has indicated that she should win BECAUSE she’d be the first WOMAN president. I just want an effective and good president who works for ALL of the people; I don’t care about his/her gender or color. I’m sure you heard her ‘deplorables’ remark. Now THAT was DEPLORABLE!”

    Gender undoubtedly played a role both FOR and AGAINST Hillary; however, the more sensible pundits on both sides have noted that it is impossible to determine which had the greater impact on the final result.

    Hillary’s hypocrisy and self-serving actions in multiple situations are only two of the innumerable reasons that many of us have rejected her. Since this column relates to gender, I shall focus on her shameful hypocrisy relating to feminism. Most readers of this blog would undoubtedly describe Hillary as a “feminist,” but from empirical observations, any knowledgeable, fair-minded person would have to admit that the term “CAFETERIA FEMINIST” is a more apt description. (Note that a “cafeteria feminist” is one who picks and chooses to practice the aspects of feminism that benefit her personally.”)

    1.Even though Hillary has SAID that sexual assault victims need to be believed, she has done everything she could to demean and marginalize those women whom her husband has sexually assaulted over the years. She can’t be blamed for her husband’s appalling behavior, but she certainly should be held accountable for the egregious manner in which she blamed the victims in so many situations.

    2.Although Hillary espouses Women’s and LGBT rights, she hasn’t been adverse to accepting money for her Clinton Foundation from countries with horrendous behaviors towards women and gays such as Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Morocco, and Qatar, to name a few. The multi-million donations from Morocco that were paid to the Clinton Foundation during Hillary’s tenure at the State Department in quid-pro-quo actions are well-documented both in the Wiki leaks and also partly by other independent investigations. Even the Left-leaning “Atlantic” published an article entitled “She created this Mess and She knows It”) that discusses this. Hillary’s improprieties and probable illegal actions are clear-cut and hopefully still being investigated.

    Joanne Y., West Chester, PA

    P.S. And by the way, I can understand why Ms. Ravitch and most of those Left-leaning individuals posting on this educational blog would vote for Clinton as the lesser of two evils, but I will NEVER understand why Ms. Ravitch and so many of her followers can so lavishly sing the praises of this Democratic candidate who SUPPORTED Common Core, the educational initiative that you all supposedly oppose.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • dianeravitch says:

      December 29, 2016 at 9:11 pm

      Joanne,

      I didn’t want to see an ignorant, greedy megalomaniac as our president. It’s that simple.

      LikeLike

      Reply
    • NYC public school parent says:

      December 29, 2016 at 10:58 pm

      Joanne Y.,

      You bought into every alt – right news story. The Russian propaganda worked wonders on you. Although you sound like the type of voter who wouldn’t vote for a Democrat regardless.

      It’s hard to look beyond the propaganda to find the facts. However, I suspect that it is Hillary’s support for liberal ideals that you dislike the most.

      LikeLike

      Reply
17. Alan says:

    December 29, 2016 at 8:21 pm

    Thank god she’s gone! Goodbye to the House of Clinton!

    LikeLike

    Reply
18. Scisne says:

    December 29, 2016 at 8:38 pm

    Michael Tesler, a political-science professor at UC Irvine, has studied the effect of Obama’s race on the American electorate. “No other factor, in fact, came close to dividing the Democratic primary electorate as powerfully as their feelings about African Americans,” he and his co-author, David O. Sears, concluded in their book, Obama’s Race: The 2008 Election and the Dream of a Post-Racial America. “The impact of racial attitudes on individual vote decisions … was so strong that it appears to have even outstripped the substantive impact of racial attitudes on Jesse Jackson’s more racially charged campaign for the nomination in 1988.” When Tesler looked at the 2012 campaign in his second book, “Post-Racial or Most-Racial? Race and Politics in the Obama Era,” very little had improved since 2008, and a racial backlash had grown virulent.

    Same is true for women in politics and business: Only superficial improvement, and growth in virulent backlash.

    As Pogo noted: “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”

    LikeLike

    Reply
19. CE Boise says:

    December 29, 2016 at 8:46 pm

    Hillary being a woman is not why she did not get elected. Most of the individuals I personally know that voted against her did not trust her as a PERSON nor did they trust her lack of insight into new policies and direction. People on the left and right wanted change, and clearly she did not represent change or anything new. She was part of the well oiled establishment, and people are tired of that old guard. Literally the only person I heard who said anything about not voting for her, because she was a woman, was a long time Democrat who only usually votes for a person of that party. I think the Democratic party needs to look inwards, and get some new blood. Whatever happened to the Democratic party of JFK days who asked, “Asked not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country.” Where did that Democratic party go to? Politicians are people, and not Gods. If we think they will fix our lives then we are looking at this from the wrong perspective. What government can give us they can take away.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • dianeravitch says:

      December 29, 2016 at 9:07 pm

      What’s so bad about change for the worse?

      LikeLike

      Reply
      • CE Boise says:

        December 29, 2016 at 9:18 pm

        Whether someone is a Democrat or a Republican we need to give them time to see what changes they make. I went to a seminar once for my job, and the instructor placed the word, ” assume” across the white board. He said we cannot make assumptions until we get the facts about what people are actually doing or going to do.. I am not going to assume anything about what any politicians is going to do until I see action not words.I would hope all of you would work to make some positive changes in our education system. What has been happening through past Republican and Democratic administrations is not acceptable, and it is time to do what is right for the students.I hate it when people waste time complaining. The election is over, and now it is time to roll up our sleeves, and work to make changes on behalf of the children and their education.I am not going to ASSUME this is a time for changes for the worst. The glass can either be half full or half empty, and I prefer half full at this point.

        LikeLike

      • Joe says:

        December 29, 2016 at 10:41 pm

        CE Boise: You are not troubled that Trump contends that climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese?!?

        LikeLike

      • Abigail Shure says:

        December 30, 2016 at 6:34 am

        CE,

        What type of work do you do? I would like to offer some suggestions on changes we could make in your occupation. Oh, you say I know nothing about your line of work. Why would that matter?

        LikeLike

    • Joe says:

      December 29, 2016 at 9:51 pm

      At least Clinton was/is NOT a lying, demagogic neo-fascist. Trump and his gang of gargoyles will undo all of the great programs of FDR and LBJ. Hillary would have done none of those things. Get ready for a far right wing dominated SCOTUS. Hillary would NOT have stacked the SCOTUS with Scalia clones.

      LikeLike

      Reply
      • Rudy Schellekens says:

        December 29, 2016 at 10:31 pm

        No, she would have gone the other extreme. No matter who won, decisions made would be questioned and debated and second-guessed, from either side.
        It is one of the drawbacks of a two party system.

        I wonder if the 90 million voters who did not vote would have taken time to vote for a viable third party candidate.

        LikeLike

      • NYC public school parent says:

        December 29, 2016 at 11:23 pm

        Rudy says: “the other extreme”

        No doubt Ruth Bader Ginsburg is “extreme” to you.

        How would you characterize Justice Ginsburg? A terrorist-loving Commie left winger who wants to get rid of all private property?

        What exactly makes her so “extreme” in your eyes?

        LikeLike

      • Rudy Schellekens says:

        December 29, 2016 at 11:56 pm

        From wiki…

        “Clerks hired by each of the justices of the Supreme Court are often given considerable leeway in the opinions they draft. “Supreme Court clerkship appeared to be a nonpartisan institution from the 1940s into the 1980s”, according to a study published in 2009 by the law review of Vanderbilt University Law School. “As law has moved closer to mere politics, political affiliations have naturally and predictably become proxies for the different political agendas that have been pressed in and through the courts”, former federal court of appeals judge J. Michael Luttig said. David J. Garrow, professor of history at the University of Cambridge, stated that the Court had thus begun to mirror the political branches of government. “We are getting a composition of the clerk workforce that is getting to be like the House of Representatives”, Professor Garrow said. “Each side is putting forward only ideological purists.”

        According to the Vanderbilt Law Review study, this politicized hiring trend reinforces the impression that the Supreme Court is “a superlegislature responding to ideological arguments rather than a legal institution responding to concerns grounded in the rule of law.”

        A poll conducted in June 2012 by The New York Times and CBS News showed that just 44 percent of Americans approve of the job the Supreme Court is doing. Three-quarters said the justices’ decisions are sometimes influenced by their political or personal views.”

        And that is how the SCOTUS is losing it’s independence. Clinton will make different choices, with at least three having to be made in the next four years. Part of the country is as scared of those choices as another part is of trump’s choices.
        You would call his choices extreme, I would call Clinton choices extreme.
        Hope we will both be wrong…

        LikeLike

      • Abigail Shure says:

        December 30, 2016 at 6:29 am

        Rudy,

        Another option is a one party system.

        LikeLike

      • Rudy Schellekens says:

        December 30, 2016 at 12:28 pm

        There we go: 1984 just a couple of decades late!

        LikeLike

      • NYC public school parent says:

        December 30, 2016 at 3:20 pm

        Rudy,

        The fact that you believe Ruth Bader Ginsburg is EXTREME speaks volumes.

        The fact that you think Merrick Garland is too EXTREME speaks volumes.

        The fact that you want 3 more Scalia’s on the Supreme Court speaks volumes.

        Your definition of “middle of the road” is far to the right of Reagan. More like a Christian theocracy which I suspect would suit you just fine.

        LikeLike

      • Rudy Schellekens says:

        December 30, 2016 at 3:34 pm

        I did not list any names.

        What is clear is that “extreme” is in the mind of the user.

        What I also did was quote some of the research that shows why the SCOTUS is the way it is – far from the original intent, and far more political than it should be.

        By becoming political, extremes become more and more apparent.

        LikeLike

      • NYC public school parent says:

        December 30, 2016 at 4:27 pm

        You keep insisting that “your side” would call some members of the Supreme Court “extreme”. I am still waiting to hear which ones are extreme to you? No doubt you don’t want to admit you find Ginsburg “extreme” – why?

        LikeLike

      • Rudy Schellekens says:

        December 30, 2016 at 4:37 pm

        Once again, names were not the issue, but who was bending the SCOTUS into which direction. For either side, here would have been shouts of extremism. The ONLY reason there even can be such a thing is because the SCOTUS has been politicized over the past 100 years – as research shows.

        LikeLike

      • NYC public school parent says:

        December 30, 2016 at 5:48 pm

        If Merrick Garland is your definition of “extreme” — or anyone’s definition of “extreme” – then you are on the far far right and I cannot even imagine who you would consider an acceptable “moderate”. Nowadays a justice like Lewis Powell would be considered by the right to be out of the mainstream on the far left.

        LikeLike

20. CE Boise says:

    December 30, 2016 at 10:14 am

    Thank you John for reminding everyone on this blog we are supposed to be discussing education issues. I just read an article by the School Board Association written recently where they have suggested strongly that a review of mandates, regulations and programs take place. For too long we have seen one mandate after another placed on top of each other in the schools without an appropriate review of effectiveness. We also have to get over this idea that what will work in the New York City Schools will also work the same way in rural Kansas.I have personally spoken with experts in special education and many of these recent mandates through the Bush and also the Obama administrations have not addressed the needs of these children. We can’t have every child everywhere marching to the same drummer. To date I have not seen any Democratic or Republican administration get education right. Maybe it is time we put politics aside, and see what we can do come January no matter who is sitting at the helm. Our students deserve better than what they have been getting. We also have to get over the focus on just funding. There is an old saying , ” It is not about how much money you have but rather how it is spent.” My state has spent billions on the assessment system, and that is money that could have been better spent. Our students started in the fall working on test prep instead of actual learning, and I don’t see anything really changing with ESSA. Education should be one area that brings us all together.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • dianeravitch says:

      December 30, 2016 at 12:29 pm

      Boise,

      We just elected a president who wants to destroy public education. That is why he and his illegitimate election are core issues in education.

      Besides, it is my blog and I post whatever I want.

      LikeLike

      Reply
      • Rudy Schellekens says:

        December 30, 2016 at 12:49 pm

        The election was legitimate. You may not like the outcome, but there is question about the legitimacy of the election.

        LikeLike

      • dianeravitch says:

        December 30, 2016 at 1:23 pm

        You are right. There IS question about the legitimacy of an election hacked by Russia to favor Putin’s friend “Crooked Trump”

        LikeLike

21. Jonathan says:

    December 30, 2016 at 10:18 am

    Gender, and all the social issues associated with gender, was clearly a factor, but despite these constraints, What seems to have tipped the scales the most and likely defeated Hillary, was the FBI’s timely (for Trump) release of slander, and the Putin/Kremlin attack on Hillary and the Democrats.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Jonathan says:

      December 30, 2016 at 10:24 am

      These two events (see comment above) stole the power of my own vote, and undermined free elections in the U.S. to an extent that merits much more of a response than it’s actually getting.

      LikeLike

      Reply
      • CE Boise says:

        December 30, 2016 at 11:17 am

        I guess this blog is not going to get back into discussing education, so lets keep going down this political road for the next 4 years. Only one person I know ( a hardcore Democrat and union person) did not vote for Hillary based on her sex. Everyone I know that voted against her did so based on years of knowing who she was as a person, and the people over the years she has associated herself with. Most of the folks I work with are involved in education issues, and they did not see Hillary as someone that would fix the system. She was too much of the status quo, and old guard. As for all of the emails, and this whole business with the Russians for years the US government knew they had problems with hacking on multiple levels. During the course of the Obama administration a notice was sent out to folks who had applied for a government clearance. The system had been compromised. My daughter received one of the letters, and not only information about her had been hacked, but her information included information about our entire family. Anyone knowing anyone involved in security knows that data security has to be a priority today. That is why we have been extremely concerned with data security related to student data and information. If the federal government knew that Russia was hacking then why wait until now to do something? Who hacked into all those files where people were seeking a federal security clearance? This issue of security, emails and hacking transcends just the issues associated with Hillary.

        What fascinates me about this election is the fact I hear so many people talking about a Democracy. Clearly our education system is failing to explain to people what we are supposed to have and how it works. I believe someone asked Ben Franklin what type of system did you give us, and he replied ” A Republic if you can keep it.” Does anyone remember that statement?

        LikeLike

      • dianeravitch says:

        December 30, 2016 at 12:23 pm

        Boise,

        I have known her for years and I voted for her.

        I believe I would have been able to talk to her. She would have listened. She is intelligent and reasonable.

        Trump is not. He is a hard-right neo-fascist. I will never have the opportunity to meet him. If I did, he wouldn’t listen. He belongs to Falwell and Bannon and the KKK.

        LikeLike

      • Jonathan says:

        December 30, 2016 at 12:30 pm

        My guess, CE Boise, is that you are not an educator, because if you were you would realize that this election has everything to do with education. If Trump were not president, Betsy DeVose would not be our likely next Secretary of Ed. You honestly think this has no bearing on education? My profession is under attack, and the people attacking it just got into office.

        What would you confine a discussion on education to? New teaching methods for the classroom?

        LikeLike

      • Rudy Schellekens says:

        December 30, 2016 at 12:51 pm

        Clinton would have continued on the current path. Would that have been any less a destruction of education??

        LikeLike

      • dianeravitch says:

        December 30, 2016 at 1:22 pm

        Rudy,

        Clinton went to public school. The teachers unions were first to endorse her. She flat out opposed vouchers and she promised to ban federal funding of for-profit charters and colleges, as well as for-profit prisons.

        Since Trump won, the stock price of for-profits scammers has soared.

        Are you dumb or just pretending?

        LikeLike

      • CE Boise says:

        December 30, 2016 at 1:50 pm

        First of all , I worked in early learning for years. I have seen first hand what children need, and clearly many government programs are not giving the children what is necessary for their futures. We are wasting valuable time, energy and money. I worked in the trenches for many years, so don’t ever say I don’t get it. Secondly, I was raised by a father who was a public school educator, and a state delegate to the NEA conventions. Many teachers owe families like mine for what they have today. I was educated in public schools, as my children have been. My grandchildren will be educated in what was once called “public” schools. That is why I want to see things change. I have a long list of teachers in my family and I have also done educational research for decades. I can give you a list of teachers in my state that did not vote for Clinton, because of Common Core. I was raised to trust the teachers’ union, but I have seen how they have allowed the teachers to be thrown under the bus with all of this testing and Common Core. In addition, the new movement for 2017 ( established before this election) is the social and emotional standards. Schools are going to be held accountable based on these standards as well. Read the government documents to get a clue what direction we are moving in. There are three things I care about-protecting good teachers from this bureaucratic mess, the students, and protecting families and their rights.Don’t ever say I don’t get it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Start reading government documents and contracts, and you will get a totally different picture. My friend directed me to this blog. What a waste of my time. I am done with this endless circle of BS.

        LikeLike

      • Rudy Schellekens says:

        December 30, 2016 at 2:20 pm

        Never said you did not get anything.

        I asked about Clinton and her continuing the current path of education from a government perspective.

        LikeLike

      • dianeravitch says:

        December 30, 2016 at 2:50 pm

        Trump promised to get rid of Common Core, then appointed DeVos, a long-time supporter of Common Core. Rumor has it that her deputy will be Hanna Skandera, another fervent advocate of CCSS.

        Boise, this is a blog for truth tellers. No one is compelled to read or to agree.

        LikeLike

      • Robert Rendo, NBCT says:

        December 31, 2016 at 10:16 am

        Diane,

        How can you suggest that Rudy pretends to be dumb? He never needs to pretend . . .

        LikeLike

      • Rudy Schellekens says:

        December 31, 2016 at 11:00 am

        I try to blend in with the people I communicate with, Robert. That’s how I am able to teach kids, adults and teachers.

        LikeLike

    • Abigail Shure says:

      December 30, 2016 at 11:01 am

      How about if Clinton and the DNC were to take some responsibility for misreading the mood of the electorate?

      LikeLike

      Reply
      • dianeravitch says:

        December 30, 2016 at 12:26 pm

        Hillary made a huge mistake and she should take responsibility for it. She only promised what was possible. She didn’t lie to the public. She didn’t claim she would bring back jobs that no longer exist. She didn’t pretend she had all the answers. She didn’t pretend that “she alone” was the answer.

        Trump beat her in saying he would bring back Ozzie and Harriet, he would restore a Lost Eden.

        Her error.

        LikeLike

      • Rudy Schellekens says:

        December 30, 2016 at 12:47 pm

        This is the first time I hear you stating that she made mistakes. We are making progress!

        The mistakes were avoidable. Her voters in three states asked for attention and they did not get it.
        And that cost her – minimally, but just enough altogether at jus a tad over ONE percent.

        LikeLike

      • dianeravitch says:

        December 30, 2016 at 1:25 pm

        Yes, Rudy, Hillary made the one great mistake of telling the truth and promising only what was feasible.

        Her honesty was trumped by the false claims and lies of Trump.

        Now the whole nation is Frumped.

        LikeLike

      • NYC public school parent says:

        December 30, 2016 at 3:32 pm

        Yes, how dare Hillary tell the truth! How dare she not lie to the American public!

        How dare she adopt Bernie’s progressive platform! How dare she come out supporting public schools more than Bernie ever did during the campaign!

        We need a Democrat who will model themselves after the Republicans and lie to the American people!

        Or, as Rudy claims, we need Jesus Christ, the “perfect” candidate who will do what no candidate ever in world history has done and never made a single misstep. We need the candidate who has omniscience to see how her words will be twisted and omnipotence to control the FBI and press to make sure that her words cannot be misconstrued as a “terrible crime”!

        Look at her deplorables speech which turned out to be far kinder to Trump voters than they deserved! Poor Hillary was naive to believe that most Trump voters were actually hurting economically from a government who seemed to be ignoring their plight and she wanted to do something for them. How dare she not recognize that most of them were haters who only wanted a politician who provided handy scapegoats other than the rich and powerful who those voters could blame and think if they only round up all those non-white non-Christian “takers” all would be well.

        And how dare Hillary not realize that too many Bernie voters thought Bernie was a liar and were looking for a scapegoat to blame for Obama’s neoconservative policies that they didn’t like and decided the “nasty woman” was a good substitute.

        LikeLike

      • Rudy Schellekens says:

        December 30, 2016 at 3:44 pm

        “Or, as Rudy claims, we need Jesus Christ, the “perfect” candidate who will do what no candidate ever in world history has done and never made a single misstep.”

        I claimed that?
        Not to my recollection. So please, quote me.

        There is a difference between making mistakes (accidental, not intended actions/statements) and knowingly make incorrect statements, willingly commit wrong actions.

        Forgetting which department wants to eliminate is a mistake. Don’t worry about agreeing with eliminating or not, that’s not the point.

        Cheating students by knowingly making false promises or blaming staff for personal failures are not mistakes. Those are willful actions.

        I don’t care for either kind of person to be in charge of our government.

        LikeLike

      • dianeravitch says:

        December 30, 2016 at 3:49 pm

        Rudy,

        How can you defend Trump when he is the biggest liar ever elected to the presidency? Have you ever looked at his rating on politifact?

        LikeLike

      • Rudy Schellekens says:

        December 30, 2016 at 4:01 pm

        Where and when have I defended trump? Show me. Quote me.
        Just because I do not like Clinton does not mean I defend trump. But I don’t believe in ignoring the problems Clinton brings with her.

        As I have said many times before, I do not believe either is good for this country.

        LikeLike

      • NYC public school parent says:

        December 30, 2016 at 5:57 pm

        “I don’t believe either is good for the country”

        That’s the Republican cop out that legitimizes Trump. He’s no different than Hillary would have been. Both simply terrible for this country, so who cares if he is elected.

        I challenge Rudy to name a candidate he believes WOULD be good for the country unlike that terrible Hillary Clinton who is just like Trump.

        Maybe John Kasich, who not only sold out public schools to the highest bidders, but then decided even after for profit education had robbed Ohio taxpayers blind that he would make sure no regulations stopped them from doing it again.

        But “Hillary made a speech for money” so what’s robbing taxpayers blind and ruining the education for tens of thousands of Ohio school kids as long as big donors to the Republican party get rich, right?

        LikeLike