Yea, but Obama was running against John McCain and Mitt Romney ferchrissakes. Those guys were the Establishment candidates against Obama, who was just trying to run it better.

Trump was playing the anti-Establisment candidate cos the elite have never done any good for the working men. Yes, of course it was ridiculous, but as an outsider non-politician salesman-on-TV hecould make it stick.

So, Hillary went out of her way to be the Establisment candidate in campaign where the Establishment were seen to be failing the American people.

She could speak to and for Wall St anytime she likes and nobody will fault her for it, but not then, not when being the Establishment candidate is the last thing you want to be.

keep to the Fen Causeway

Very little here that wasn't to be expected from anyone who knows Hillary the person - and yet insightful to see the arrogance on display.

How do you lose the presidency to a man like Donald Trump? He was the most unpopular presidential candidate of all time, compounding blunder with blunder and heaping gaffe upon gaffe. Keeping him from the Oval Office should have been the single-minded mission of the Democratic party. And it should have been easy for them.

Instead they lost, and now their 2016 candidate Hillary Clinton comes before us to account for this monumental failure, to tell us What Happened. Unfortunately, her new book is less an effort to explain than it is to explain away.

No real blame ever settles anywhere near Clinton's person. And while she wrestles gamely with the larger historical question of why the party of the people has withered as inequality grows, she never offers a satisfying answer. Instead, most of the blame is directed outward, at familiar suspects like James Comey, the Russians and the media.

Still, by exercising a little discernment, readers can find clues to the mystery of 2016 here and there among the clouds of blame-evasion and positive thinking.

The Comey Letter Probably Cost Clinton The Election

So you could postulate that the Comey letter had only about a 1-point impact. Perhaps Clinton's lead would have been whittled down to around 4.5 points anyway by Election Day because of mean-reversion. And she led in the final polls by about 3.5 points. Yes, she also underperformed her final polls on Election Day, but that could reflect pollster error or undecideds breaking against her for other reasons, this case would say -- there was no particular reason to attribute it to Comey.

Nonetheless, Clinton lost Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by less than 1 percentage point, and those states were enough to cost her the election. She lost Florida by just slightly more than 1 point. If the Comey letter had a net impact of only a point or so, we'd have been in recount territory in several of these states -- but Clinton would probably have come out ahead. I call this the "Little Comey" case -- sure, the Comey letter mattered, but only because the election was so close.

(...)

The Comey letter wasn't necessarily the most important factor in Clinton's defeat, although it's probably the one we can be most certain about. To explain the distinction, consider Clinton's decision to run a highly negative campaign that focused on branding Trump as an unacceptable choice. One can imagine this being a huge, election-losing mistake: Trump's negatives didn't need any reinforcing, whereas Clinton should have used her resources to improve her own image. But one could also argue that Clinton's strategy worked, up to a point: Trump was exceptionally unpopular and needed a lot of things to break his way to win the election despite that. The range of possible impacts from this strategic choice is wide; perhaps it cost Clinton several percentage points, or perhaps it helped her instead. The range from the Comey letter is narrower, by contrast, and easier to measure. It was a discrete event that came late in the campaign and had a direct effect on the polls.

(...)

If I were advising a future candidate on what to learn from 2016, I'd tell him or her to mostly forget about the Comey letter and focus on the factors that were within the control of Clinton and Trump. That's not my purpose here. Instead, it's to get at the truth -- to figure out the real story of the election. The real story is that the Comey letter had a fairly large and measurable impact, probably enough to cost Clinton the election. It wasn't the only thing that mattered, and it might not have been the most important. But the media is still largely in denial about how much of an effect it had.

THERE IS ONE ECONOMY.
THE ECONOMY IS THE TRUE MESSIAH.

Like punctuation, a comma certainly.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

To authorize the cancellation of removal and adjustment of status of certain individuals who are long-term United States residents and who entered the United States as children, and for other purposes.