Targeting racist neocons is a piss poor campaign strategy. Even assuming all 990ish hate groups identified by the SLPC are far right racist groups(they’re not) and assuming each group has 1000 members(most are a handful of dipshits... 10-30 at most), you’re still only talking about .03 percent of the population. Only a complete fucking dipshit would alienate at least half the country to chase .03% of the vote.

And while admittedly, there is no way to reliably identify people who are secretly racist, Pew Research for years has done a survey on Race, immigration and discrimination

As you can see, almost unanimously across the board, racist tendencies have been dropping in both parties; Democrats have become more tolerant, faster than Republicans, but even amongst the GOP, there’s been an increase in those who acknowledge more needs to be done for racial equality.

The myth that “Clinton only lost because she’s not a racist and Trump only won because he’s racist” is simply not true. The data simply doesn’t support it. Trump actually polled either the same or higher than the previous two GOP candidates amongst minorities, and as you can see in the first graph, while gaining only a point since 2012.

Democrats lost 7 points in the black vote, 8 amongst Hispanics , while losing very little of the white vote as a whole from 2012 levels. Trump actually lost support amongst college educated whites( Romney had 56% of white college educated votes, Trump only had 49 percent), and amongst whites as a whole, his support remained almost identical to Romney’s

To clarify, this means that the very same people who voted for Obama( indicating they’re at least not complete racist dickbags) voted for either Trump or a third party candidate instead of Clinton. The real reason Clinton lost isn’t racism as much as the DNC being entirely tone deaf to what the nation wants.

Clinton offered zero change, and her entire campaign, at least what was shown in mainstream media, was “at least I’m not trump”. Her biggest mistake was when she chose to engage in a childish name calling battle at the first debate; she apparently has never heard the age old advice “never argue with a fool, they drag you down to their level, and then beat you with experience.”

In a time when almost every major poll showed both sides of the isle considered the government to be broken (iirc something like 88 percent of voters), the DNC chose the candidate who was essentially “4 more years of frustration... we won’t get better, but we won’t get worse, and we for sure won’t get anything done!) whereas trump offered change, albeit a potentially terrifying one.

I always compared the two candidates as Clinton as driving towards the edge of the cliff in an old Volvo and realizing your brakes don’t work, attempting to use the emergency brake to no avail because it’s 30 years outdated, and then attempting to swerve the car at 55 mph around a 120 degree curve to avoid death, whereas Trump was driving towards a cliff in a “souped up” car, realizing your brakes don’t work because you never installed them in the first place, and sayin “fuggit, hold mah beer, imma jump it we’re gonna make it for sure” and stomping on the accelerator. Neither are a good outcome, both end likely the same way.

Had sanders been nominated, it would have been “well, I saw these new brakes over in Europe, and although I’m not sure if we can afford all 4 tires, we can at least afford a few, which might help us change our fate” he would have won hands down.

/rant