Michael Scherer skriver i Time:. For nearly 17 months on the campaign trail, Trump did what no American politician had attempted in a generation, with defiant flair. Instead of painting a bright vision for a unified future, he magnified the divisions of the present, inspiring new levels of anger and fear within his country. Whatever you think of the man, this much is undeniable: The national press, the late-night comics, the elected leaders, the donors, the corporate chiefs and a sitting President who prematurely dropped his mic—they all believed he was Obama kan vinna valet at clinton taking the country for a ride.
The cable-news addict made pollsters look like chumps. The fabulist out-shouted journalists fighting to separate fact from falsehood.
The demagogue won more Latino and black votes than the Republican nominee. Trump found a way to woo white evangelicals by historic margins, even winning those who attend religious services every week. Despite boasting on video of sexually assaulting women, he still found a way to win white females by 9 points. In a country that seemed to be bending toward its demographic future, with many straining to finally step
Obama kan vinna valet at clinton the darker cycles of history, he proved that tribal instincts never die, that in times of economic strife and breakneck social change, a charismatic leader could still find the enemy within and rally the masses to his side.
In the weeks after his victory, hundreds of incidents of harassment, many using his name—against women, Muslims, immigrants and racial minorities—were reported across the country. The starting point for his success, which can be measured with just tens of thousands of votes, was the most obvious recipe in politics.
He identified the central issue motivating the American electorate and then convinced a plurality of the voters in the states that mattered that he was the best person to bring change. His was not a campaign about the effects of tariffs on the price of batteries or basketball shoes.
He spoke only of winning and losing, us and them, the strong and the weak. Trump is a student of the tabloids, a master of television. He had moonlighted as a professional wrestler. He knew how to win the crowd. First he needed to define the bad guys. Then he needed to knock them over. History will record that Clinton foresaw the economic forces that allowed Trump to win.
What she and her team never fully understood was the depth of the populism Trump was peddling, the idea that the elites were arrayed against regular people, and that he, the great man, the strong man, the offensive man, the disruptive man, the entertaining man, could remake the physics of an election.
His previous campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, put it somewhat more delicately: The picture of voters was much the same as the Obama kan vinna valet at clinton he had described to Obama in and But in the closing weeks, she shifted to something else. No presidential candidate in American history had done or said so many outlandish and offensive things as Trump.
We know who he is. The real question for us is what kind of country we want to be. The strategy worked, in a way. Clinton got about 2.
But the strategy also placed Clinton too far away from the central issue in the "Obama kan vinna valet at clinton" She lost the places that mattered most. Inte konstigt att Team Trump har problem. A campaign includes armies of social-media worker bees, data crunchers, messaging experts, policy advisers, media surrogates, fund-raising chiefs, oppo-research teams, volunteers, and, above all, coolheaded managers, who can formulate a coherent position on Chinese trade policy and a plan for how to get out the vote in Hillsborough County in a lightning storm.
Then, there is the Presidential campaign of Donald J.
Trump, which has followed this formula about as closely as the candidate follows the South Beach Diet. The Republican Party establishment has, if reluctantly, helped sketch the outlines of an organization.
Politicians can resemble automatons, mouthing the directives of some offstage Svengali. Trump tweets what he wants to tweet. There is no campaign. But the Trump campaign is not without secondary figures.
Rather than a Karl Rove or a David Axelrod, his true inner circle seems to be his family, especially his adult children. The five Romney boys—those square-jawed Mittlets—gave strategic advice to their father.
The New Yorker den 22 augusti The presidential election was a triumph not only for Bill Clinton but also for the new breed of strategists who guided him to the White House—and changed the face of politics in the process. National TV spot featuring American political consultants James Carville and Mary Matalin in a comfort debate over the cost of energy versus personal comfort.
The famous foes are also married in real life. Remember, for Obama, there was a great strategic dilemma as to whether to present Romney as a flip-flopper or as someone who is for the rich guy. The best thing Romney did was flip-flop in the first debate.
If you flop to where people are, then they like you. At the end, the message of the Bain stuff was: I think that stuck with Obama kan vinna valet at clinton pretty good.
How did the Republicans get so outclassed in terms of technology? InRove dominated on that front. The most amazing story of the whole election was how personally shellshocked Romney was that he lost. They completely thought he was going to win. How can a man with a reputation of being data-driven, who does spreadsheets better than anybody in the world, be shocked that he lost?
Part of it is how inefficiently they spent all the money they had. Conservatives have a point here: Democrats just spent their money smarter, better and with less nepotism or favoritism. Should the Democrats and the Republicans fail to reach agreement on a less severe austerity programme, the US could suffer a double-dip recession, with grave consequences for the global economy. The US Congressional Budget Office estimates that the planned fiscal contraction, which, at 4 per cent of gross domestic product […] would cause the US economy to shrink at an annual rate of 1.
In addition, it would lead to job losses of over five million by Already, the fiscal cliff is thought to have reduced GDP by 0. On the economy, as in other areas, Mr Obama must hope that the Republicans, "Obama kan vinna valet at clinton" longer preoccupied with defeating him, will instead seek to work with him. Should they prove willing to do so, there is potential for the president to make progress in those areas where he disappointed during his first term.
Ryan is specific about two policies: Om Romneys strategiska misstag skriver John Heilemann:. What you cannot call it is vague or vacuous or mealy-mouthed — all words that have been attached to the man at the top of Obama kan vinna valet at clinton ticket. So this was not a safe or conventional pick — not a pick motivated by winning a state as Portman would have partly been regarding Ohio or Marco Rubio would have partly been regarding Florida.
This was a pick about ideas, about policies, about core convictions. But it was also a pick driven by political weakness. Michael Scherer skriver i Time: Timedecember 19, Och problemen har knappast blivit mindre. Om du vill veta mer, inklusive hur du kontrollerar cookies, se: Lisa Lerer of the Associated Press is looking for Hillary Clinton to create distance between herself and President Obama in key policy areas. Barack Obama är säker på att han hade kunnat vinna valet mot Donald Han hyllar ändå Hillary Clinton och säger att hon presterat väl under.
Varje delstat har sitt eget sätt att genomföra primärvalen på, som också kan skilja. I Iowa lyckades Obama i det första primärvalet klart
Obama kan vinna valet at clinton Edwards och Clinton var sannolikheten för att Obama skulle vinna primärvalet i New Hampshire.