In 2008 and 2012, President Obama won in PA, WI, OH and MI. Yet Hillary Clinton lost in all these states. This post is an outside observer’s attempt to explore some of the important reasons why she lost in the Rust Belt states and what the Democratic Party can learn from it. Below are some of the factors:

Economy

Although more people are employed today than in 2009, many are struggling with stagnant wages and an increased cost of living resulting in larger income inequality between the rich and everyone else.

Statistically, the economy in these four states did much better under a Democratic President than under a Republican one. Yet the people of OH, MI, PA and WI rejected the progressive ideas of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party, and instead chose Trump. Let’s examine why.

From the chart above, we can observe these four states did significantly better since Obama took office, whereas their unemployment rose under the Bush administration.

Despite improved unemployment rates since Obama came into office, a lot of people are still hurting when it comes to well paying jobs. The labor force shrunk over the years. Many people gave up looking for jobs resulting in these people no longer being part of the unemployment statistics. Although more people are employed today than in 2009, many are struggling with stagnant wages and an increased cost of living resulting in larger income inequality between the rich and everyone else. Many voters in the Rust Belt states don’t have the good manufacturing jobs that built those states. But are Democratic policies to be blamed for the decrease in manufacturing jobs? Let’s look:

Manufacturing Jobs

This graph shows a common trend – the manufacturing industry was actually losing jobs before Bill Clinton came to office. During his Presidency, manufacturing jobs stabilized between 1992 and 2000. Then under the Bush Administration, layoffs started, reaching an all time high in 2009 when Obama took office. And in the last 6-7 years, it seems states like MI, OH and even WI benefitted from a growth in manufacturing jobs, while in PA they stayed almost the same without any major layoffs.

Trade

Bernie Sanders and Republicans perpetuated a claim that policies under Bill Clinton or Obama led to a decline in manufacturing jobs. Given the data, that’s simply not true…

A common theme during the election was trade. Candidates from both parties campaigned that trade deals such as NAFTA destroyed the manufacturing industry in the U.S. Trade deals did have an impact on the manufacturing industry in certain states. There have been cases where manufacturing jobs were lost to Mexico and China where cheap labor and the cost of manufacturing resulted in workers in the US being laid off. Trade deals also had benefits. In fact, many small & medium businesses in the U.S. depend on trade deals like NAFTA to expand their business overseas where they export goods and resources to other nations. One may argue that if NAFTA were so bad, why did trade deals ONLY affect manufacturing jobs during Bush’s term between 2000 and 2008 and not during Clinton or Obama’s term? Theoretically, we should still be bleeding jobs every year like we did during the Bush years. The answer is – I’m not sure. Now, while any family experiencing job loss is not insignificant to that family and that community. However, I do think Bernie Sanders and Republicans perpetuated a claim (even a myth?) that policies under Bill Clinton or Obama led to a decline in manufacturing jobs. Given the data, that’s simply not true – and these politicians are either too lazy to do their own research or they have no problem using the suffering of the working class voters to further their own personal agenda. History will show, many industries and factories lost more jobs to automation and technology. This is not a trend that will go away any time soon. This is something inevitable which makes it even more important for our workforce to be better trained to work on advanced manufacturing jobs giving them a competitive edge in the world of manufacturing and industry.

Looking at the policies and platforms, Hillary Clinton outlined many policies on her website addressing a host of problems faced by people, especially those in the Rust Belt states. Yet, I’m not sure how many even heard about her policies and plans. Which, brings us to the next topic – messaging.

Messaging

Before I proceed, I want to let everyone know that it’s easy for someone like me to sit at home and point out the flaws – anything I say here shouldn’t take anything away from the countless hours given by volunteers, campaign workers, surrogates and the candidate in the field. My criticisms here are something we need to take into consideration in the future if we want to run a perfect campaign.

You need at least two things to spread your message.

The right message and The right messenger

Although during the campaign, the Democrats felt they had a great message and they actualy had a fleet of incredible messengers. But hindsight is 2020. And given the opportunity for a post-election reflection, there are many little things they could have done better to possibly change the outcome of the election.

Right Message

Tell them you are going to talk about the economy, talk about the economy, then tell them what you said about the economy!

One of the takeaways from this campaign is that no matter how good the economy is, appeals to economic fear & anxiety will win over everything else, every time. Like Bill Clinton said, “It’s the economy, stupid”. Democrats should have focused way more on that. Also, “are you better than you were 4 years ago?” Remember that? The same tip for any good speech goes for this message: tell them you are going to talk about the economy, talk about the economy, then tell them what you said about the economy!

As an observer, I felt the message from the Democrats was “Trump is unhinged and he doesn’t have the right temperament”. There were several effective ads on that theme e.g. “Our Children are watching”, about our daughters, Nuclear weapons, etc. However, I do not remember any ads that addressed working class voters’ economic anxiety. So, if someone – let’s say Bob, from Lancaster, PA, having recently lost his manufacturing job to Mexico, having no advanced technical training to pursue a better paying job – what was Hillary’s message for him? Hillary did have a message for everyone – including Bob, however Bob never got to hear that message. He never got a chance to know what Hillary was going to do to improve his life. Instead, all he heard from Trump was “Mexico & China are stealing our jobs and I will make America great again” – and that incoherent but simple message somehow resonated with him.

Right Messenger

Trump mastered how to dominate the morning news as well as the prime-time segment. In contrast, Hillary would give an important policy speech which would be forgotten by the media’s short attention span before sundown.

Hillary had many surrogates – Bill Clinton, The Obamas, Biden, Elizabeth Warren and more. However, I felt, especially in August and September that Hillary, herself, could have done more campaigning. She emerged from the conventions in July with a healthy 7-8-point lead over Trump. However, on the eve of the first debate, her poll numbers dropped significantly to cancel out any lead. There may be the flu factor but I sincerely felt her campaign slowed down a lot in August.

Every morning before heading to work, I would hear Trump dialing into Fox News. His conversations may not be meaningful, but he dominated the morning news with whatever he said to Fox and Friends anchors. In the evening, after work, I would return home and turn on CNN, and there he would be again at a live Trump rally from some rural location. The rural voters were wowed by his stardom – yet, I feel they weren’t exposed to Hillary as much. This happened every evening throughout the whole year. Trump would hold 3-4 rallies almost every single day, especially one in the evening that would be broadcast live during prime-time hours between 8 to 10 PM when people are back home from work and watching TV. Trump mastered how to dominate the morning news as well as the prime-time segment. In contrast, Hillary would hold a rally in the afternoon or give an important policy speech which would be forgotten by the media’s short attention span before sundown. When she held rallies during the day time, the efficiency of her message was lost – because so much news was being generated by Trump’s evening rallies that everything that happened just 2 hours ago was old news. I sincerely believed that Hillary should have had evening rallies right around 8-10 PM. She should have used her evening rallies to talk about her policy speeches. The first major evening rally she did was in OSU around the time of the debates, and she got a massive crowd for that rally – and she dominated the news that day for a considerable amount of time.

Another part of having the right messenger is the main stream media. She needed some close friends in CNN, NBC News, and MSNBC to counter some of full time coverage of Trump. When CEOs and executives such as Jeff Zucker, Mark Burnett, Andy Lack and the entire fleet of Fox News are some of the closest friends of Trump, it was very difficult for any other candidate, even for Hillary, to get any amount of fair coverage from these so called “News” media. A tip for future Democratic candidates – make some close friends in CNN and NBC, if you want to win. Like we learned this year, qualifications and ideas don’t matter – friends, money and connections do.

Russian Hacking, Emails and WikiLeaks

Within an hour of Trump’s Access Hollywood tape hitting the news, WikiLeaks started dumping John Podesta’s emails – John Podesta is a private US citizen – which were previously hacked by the Russians.

For an average person, the whole email and Russian hacking may seem very complex and confusing. Let me try to break it down:

Emails

What was the emails scandal about? Hillary used her private email server to send and receive emails as Secretary of State.

Hillary used her private email server to send and receive emails as Secretary of State. Is it legal? It’s not illegal. Besides Colin Powell somewhat asked her to do it.

It’s not illegal. Besides Colin Powell somewhat asked her to do it. Were her emails hacked? No. There’s no proof.

No. There’s no proof. Is it punishable by Jail? No. To suggest that she should be jailed, you must provide evidence supporting that she had intent to share confidential emails and information with others. There was a huge FBI investigation about this including congressional hearings, and lots of scrutiny – and the verdict is that this was sloppy work but not illegal.

No. To suggest that she should be jailed, you must provide evidence supporting that she had intent to share confidential emails and information with others. There was a huge FBI investigation about this including congressional hearings, and lots of scrutiny – and the verdict is that this was sloppy work but not illegal. Who else has private email servers? Pretty much everyone. Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Reince Priebus, even probably Trump – they all have that. But there won’t be any investigation about that because Republicans only wanted to target Hillary alone. It was simply a partisan farce.

Russian Hacking

Russia hacked a few things:

John Podesta’s email account – Russia hacked his email account and gave all his private emails to WikiLeaks.

– Russia hacked his email account and gave all his private emails to WikiLeaks. DNC – Russia released the documents to WikiLeaks (they also doctored some documents).

– Russia released the documents to WikiLeaks (they also doctored some documents). RNC – Russia did not release any of the documents anywhere. For all we know, they are blackmailing GOP leaders right now.

– Russia did not release any of the documents anywhere. For all we know, they are blackmailing GOP leaders right now. Tried to hack some voting machines – many states requested DHS help regarding this. Did Russia hack the voting machines? By most accounts it seems like there was no impact on the voting machines however, that doesn’t mean Russia did not try.

WikiLeaks

After Russia hacked DNC it provided all the documents to WikiLeaks. For months, WikiLeaks was releasing (and sometimes doctored) documents that seemed to be most damaging to Hillary and her allies. Chilling example: Within an hour of Trump’s Access Hollywood tape hitting the news, WikiLeaks started dumping John Podesta’s emails – John Podesta is a private US citizen – which were previously hacked by the Russians. That was a remarkable coordination between Trump campaign, Russia and WikiLeaks to get that done in such a timely manner.

Impact of all this

I think emails clearly had an impact. The media primarily focused on her handling of the emails while neglecting her policies and message to the voters. Meanwhile, the media also hypocritically ignored the fact that the practice of a private email service is common and that many other senior GOP leaders such as Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, who handle nation’s security, also have private email servers. Media also ignored the fact that Trump’s surrogate Gen. Flynn was basically fired from DIA for repeatedly sharing the nation’s sensitive secrets with his Russian friends. Now Gen. Flynn is going to be the head of NSA. Ironic, isn’t it?

Comey’s Letter

His political stunt was the single most important blow to her campaign. And she couldn’t recover from it.

I believe despite the Russian hacking, media bias, and the lack of objective coverage, she still would have won. Except Comey’s baseless letter presented just 12 days before the election just kneecapped her. His political stunt was the single most important blow to her campaign. And she couldn’t recover from it. I have nothing to say about Comey or the FBI’s behavior about this – people have already written numerous articles about it. But I will leave you with the following statistics below and encourage you all to read the article here from FiveThirtyEight to understand how damaging Comey’s letter was. What the statistic means is that 0.9% of voters switched from Hillary to Trump right before the election – 0.9% is a little more than 1 million voters. The statistic also mentions that 3.1% of undecided voters voted for Trump, vs 2.3% for Hillary. Just putting this into context – she lost the election in those Rust Belt states (not including OH) by about 70,000 votes.

What’s Next for Democrats?

Democrats only fought hard for 3 out of 8 years. Yet the Republicans have been fighting for every single day since January, 2009.

I think for any candidate who is looking to run for public office in the future needs to secure their emails and social media accounts with two-factor authentication. Google it.

On a more substantial note, I have outlined a strategy in F.I.G.H.T. in my previous post. In summary, I think the Democrats need to go back to the grassroots to focus on their message delivery and find a way to build at the base (representatives, senators, governors) and to speak to the common person and to the issues affecting them. This will not only groom a future president but also reconnect the general public with the issues Democrats care about — equality, justice, and freedom for all. A president is powerless without the House and the Senate. This is the voice of the people. In the last 8 years, Democrats have lost way too many elections and seats indicating they’ve not been listening to this groundswell for some time.

We all have just witnessed that the much vaunted “Obama coalition” isn’t necessarily transferrable. But what works is grassroots messaging, appealing to rural voters and focusing on the economy. People are hurting economically – and that’s something may become worse under Trump administration. It’s important for Democrats to have a 50-states strategy to have a presence in every county. Democrats need to make it easier and transparent for young people as well as older and rural voters to join the party, volunteer, learn about important issues, and share their ideas with the leaders. Democrats only fought hard for 3 out of 8 years – 2008 and 2012 to help Obama win, and in 2016 where they lost. Yet the Republicans have been fighting for every single day since January, 2009. There’s a bit of catching up to do. Democrats simply cannot take states such as Wisconsin for granted which has elected GOP leaders such as Scott Walker, Paul Ryan and Reince Priebus. The good thing is that the overwhelming majority of this nation voted for Hillary and believe in the party’s message. What I worry is that if voters in rural areas of these Rust Belt states ever get to hear the Democratic Party’s message and how the party can help them with their jobs, minimum wage, social security and health care. Informing and engaging them will be the key.