2016 US Presidential Election Thread XIII

[deep]

I think that map is pretty good, it has Trump at 245
but I think he wins North Carolina also, that's 15 more to put him at 260
Three somewhat small but competitive states are; Nevada, New Hampshire, Colorado if he wins any two of those states, which if there Is a late search he could,
Then he wins the whole thing

Of course if PA moved his way, it gets a lot easier, but I,m thinking that N C is more likely,

Also Trump only needs 269 to become President while Clinton needs 270.

 

[Irvine511]

Got busy at work.

I feel that Hillary is incredibly dangerous to the country.

Oh PLEASE.

The most cautious politician ever is dangerous to the country? That's absolute nonsense and you know it. "Incredibly" dangerous? You can't believe that. She's not so far from mainstream conservative thought. She understands how government works. She's a defender of the status quo. She's reasonable and informed and hard working.

You can't in any serious way believe she's *dangerous* to the country, or the world.

You may prefer the politics of the maybe-billionaire Donald Trump. You may be a racist. You may not like her. But you cannot think in any way, shape, or form, that she's somehow a danger to life on earth as we know it.

 

[deep]

Incompetence is dangerous, W proved that
Hillary 2016 has proven to be incompetent.

 

[BVS]

Incompetence is dangerous, W proved that
Hillary 2016 has proven to be incompetent.

Ok, let's play this game: So Trump has proven himself competent?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[namkcuR]

I'm not counting on North Carolina, which means she basically can't lose any other states. Which is why that poll where Drumpf led in Colorado legitimately worried me, for the first time in the campaign, that he could win.

Also, if that map holds true, Hillary would be the first president since JFK to be elected without Ohio.

I'm an Ohioan and I will be humiliated if he wins the state, and I expect him to.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

Also Trump only needs 269 to become President while Clinton needs 270.

Forgot all about that. Certainly helps.

Don't you think there'd be at least one Republican in the House that views Trump as too dangerous and votes the other way, especially if Clinton won the popular vote? Very possible it would not be a slam dunk.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

Ok, let's play this game: So Trump has proven himself competent?

And that's exactly why this election is close. It always reverts back to Trump's awfulness and never to Clinton's positives. Contrasts are important and Democrats really dropped the ball.

 

[deep]

Forgot all about that. Certainly helps.

Don't you think there'd be at least one Republican in the House that views Trump as too dangerous and votes the other way, especially if Clinton won the popular vote? Very possible it would not be a slam dunk.

Each one of the 50 states get one vote I think, and the GOP control enough small states, he wins, easy.

it is kind of funny looking at the states
And the electoral votes there are a few ways he can hit 269

I kind of hope that happens, and the popular vote ???

The Brexit vote will look like kindergarten


And to think if they had good ol' Joe Biden, this truly would be over, just like 96 or 88, instead the elitists, gobalists put the fix in for crooked Hillary.

 

[deep]

Also, if that map holds true, Hillary would be the first president since JFK to be elected without Ohio.

I'm an Ohioan and I will be humiliated if he wins the state, and I expect him to.

We certainly don't want Ohio to lose its status as the state that always goes with the winner
and if Hillary cannot win Ohio with the most popular governor ever crapping all over trump,
does she really deserve to be president?

 

[BVS]

And that's exactly why this election is close. It always reverts back to Trump's awfulness and never to Clinton's positives. Contrasts are important and Democrats really dropped the ball.

Man, you will drive 100 miles away to avoid the point won't you?!


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[deep]

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

I think that map is pretty good, it has Trump at 245
but I think he wins North Carolina also, that's 15 more to put him at 260
Three somewhat small but competitive states are; Nevada, New Hampshire, Colorado if he wins any two of those states, which if there Is a late search he could,
Then he wins the whole thing

Of course if PA moved his way, it gets a lot easier, but I,m thinking that N C is more likely,

Also Trump only needs 269 to become President while Clinton needs 270.

Just, remember that the point of the "no tossup" map is to assume that current tossup states aren't tossups but instead are the average of today's going rate. I don't think Trump will win Florida, personally, but I could be wrong. But that's when this thing is a landslide... if he can't win Florida and Ohio both.

 

[BVS]

.

So this is what it comes down to when you can't answer?

Trump's America : |


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[deep]

Just, remember that the point of the "no tossup" map is to assume that current tossup states aren't tossups but instead are the average of today's going rate. I don't think Trump will win Florida, personally, but I could be wrong. But that's when this thing is a landslide... if he can't win Florida and Ohio both.

I do realize that you llve in Florida and have an opinion based upon that
but I just believe it's going to trend his way, like he did better in the primary then all of the predictions,

I still think Hillary probably wins but it's at maybe 280 - 285 which is at most one or two states, and that really is an embarrassing win, looking at the resumes, experience and where everybody said this would end up a year ago .

It speaks volumes about the quality and the character of the candidate.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

I do realize that Live in Florida and have an opinion based upon that

but I just believe it's going to trend his way, like he did better in the primary then all of the predictions,



I still think Hillary probably wins but it's at maybe 280 - 285 which is at most one or two states, and that really is an embarrassing win, looking at the resumes, experience and where everybody said this would end up our year ago .



It speaks volumes about the quality and the character of the candidate.

I don't live in Florida anymore. I live in England.

But Florida is classical for being whatever is cliche/most popular. Trump was most popular, so they showed up for him. So was Clinton.

1992 aside, where Perot stole the show from Bush, Florida has always mirrored the will of the nation. That's just how Floridians are. Politically uninformed, and politically careless. Why did Florida shift currently to Trump? Because that's what other places are doing. Florida responds to the national media, and almost never to the state or local affairs. Clinton got sick, and her numbers in Florida predictably fell.

So, if the election were legitimately today, yes, I believe those polls. But, otherwise, so long as Clinton maintains her popular lead, I'll say that's around the ultimate result you'll see in Florida.

 

[deep]

Nate Silver, which most of the people on the left seem to believe is credible
has his poll totals, the one that includes the economy and history, has Fl, OH, NV and NC projected Trump

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#plus

I think his map puts it at 272 - 266

So Trump only needs to win one more state, than what 538 says is most likely????

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Your critical mistake is assuming that everything minus that one state is set. In the world of probability, all of those states are still up for grabs. One singular projection is just one possible combination. The particular odds of that exact map happening, but with one state flipped for a Trump win, is very small. He doesn't need just one state...

 

[deep]

That's not my map it's Nate Silver's map and again I said I expect Clinton to win, somewhere in the 280 vote range, she could go over 300 but I don't think go past 330

 

[U2girl]

Incompetence is dangerous, W proved that
Hillary 2016 has proven to be incompetent.

Former is true. Latter is debatable.

That's okay, Trump still has to prove to be remotely competent.

Unless you consider that bigoted, racist, woman hating, military insulting idiot to be fit for the White House. And now the latest nugget about Hillary's bodyguards dropping guns in gun crazy country...I don't even wanna know what BVS is getting at "nuking Europe" idea he had.

But hey, US did give the world a gift of 8 years of Dubya...so maybe this clown will get in too.

 

[Caleb8844]

Oh PLEASE.

The most cautious politician ever is dangerous to the country? That's absolute nonsense and you know it. "Incredibly" dangerous? You can't believe that. She's not so far from mainstream conservative thought. She understands how government works. She's a defender of the status quo. She's reasonable and informed and hard working.

You can't in any serious way believe she's *dangerous* to the country, or the world.

You may prefer the politics of the maybe-billionaire Donald Trump. You may be a racist. You may not like her. But you cannot think in any way, shape, or form, that she's somehow a danger to life on earth as we know it.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/09/14/us/100000004650786.mobile.html?_r=0

According to the New York Times, 47% of people believe electing Clinton is a safe choice, while 51% believe it to be a risky choice.

You may not think it, but people certainly can think it. And do. In rather large numbers.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Pearl]

For anyone keeping an eye on the third-party candidates...

With extremely high unfavorable ratings (Clinton at 59 percent, Trump at 60 percent), the popularity of third-party candidates has been the topic of a lot of debate this election cycle. Johnson, who has enjoyed around 11 percent support in the past few weeks, claims is he the answer to voters' dissatisfaction with both major party candidates. Stein—who has consistently held on to about 4 percent of the vote—has tried to woo over progressive Bernie Sanders supporters after his defeat in the Democratic primaries. The open question is how much support they will actually receive on Election Day.

While the data show that the third-party candidates are hurting Clinton more than Trump, we know very little about the supporters of Johnson and Stein mainly because most traditional polls do not have large enough samples sizes to analyze these groups. The large number of respondents in the NBC News|SurveyMonkey Weekly Tracking poll allows for a closer look at where Johnson and Stein seem to be making headway with voters; they may also show where Clinton and Trump have vulnerabilities with certain groups of voters.

Poll: How Third-Party Candidates Could Affect the 2016 Race - NBC News

If what I bolded is true, then this country is screwed.

 

[Pearl]

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/09/14/us/100000004650786.mobile.html?_r=0

According to the New York Times, 47% of people believe electing Clinton is a safe choice, while 51% believe it to be a risky choice.

You may not think it, but people certainly can think it. And do. In rather large numbers.

Right, but how many of them would rather have Clinton over Trump?

I think Clinton is untrustworthy and corrupt to some degree, but she is far better than Trump. At least she isn't getting, or trying to get, cozy with Putin.

 

[Diemen]

I think everyone here is speaking a little too definitively about where this election is headed. We haven't even had any presidential or vice presidential debates. At this point in the election cycle both McCain and Romney were tied with Obama. Everyone was falling all over themselves to declare Romney the next President after Obama's dismal first debate.

I think it's a little premature to assume that current trends will only continue on in Trump's favor until November.

 

[Vlad n U 2]

I think Clinton is untrustworthy and corrupt to some degree, but she is far better than Trump. At least she isn't getting, or trying to get, cozy with Putin.

Both candidates get comfortable/matey with unsavoury-slash-dangerous world leaders/figures. It's a nil-all draw in that respect.

 

[Caleb8844]

Right, but how many of them would rather have Clinton over Trump?



I think Clinton is untrustworthy and corrupt to some degree, but she is far better than Trump. At least she isn't getting, or trying to get, cozy with Putin.

I'm not really arguing against that. Maybe 50-60% of the time, I agree with that.

However, just to play devil's advocate, one could make the argument that the democrat's attempts to rekindle a Cold War-esque tone toward Russia is at least equally as dangerous as Trump's fanboying


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Vlad n U 2]

I'm not really arguing against that. Maybe 50-60% of the time, I agree with that.

However, just to play devil's advocate, one could make the argument that the democrat's attempts to rekindle a Cold War-esque tone toward Russia is at least equally as dangerous as Trump's fanboying


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

This is something that is particularly evident to me, given my perspective and also the plethora of silly to downright ridiculous thinkpieces on Russia that seemed to get churned out at the rate of knots.

I want to reiterate that I despise and strongly oppose Putin, but Western coverage of Russia is - for the most part - poor and often bordering on the cartoonish.

 

[DaveC]

But hey, US did give the world a gift of 8 years of Dubya...so maybe this clown will get in too.

if trump wins he will make gwb look like john fucking kennedy.

 

[DaveC]

Pneumonia Virus Terrified After Remembering What Clintons Capable Of - The Onion - America's Finest News Source

 

[Pearl]

if trump wins he will make gwb look like john fucking kennedy.

Indeed.

Pneumonia Virus Terrified After Remembering What Clintons Capable Of - The Onion - America's Finest News Source

 

[deep]

Right, but how many of them would rather have Clinton over Trump?

I think Clinton is untrustworthy and corrupt to some degree, but she is far better than Trump. At least she isn't getting, or trying to get, cozy with Putin.

I find this to be a somewhat reasonable post, Anybody that is all in for either of the two candidates is seriously overlooking issues they both have.
It seems like a lot of people on here have no problem pointing out the flaws with Trump and quite a few of them think Clinton is going to be a fabulous president. Sure, they say she has a couple of minor issues. I see them both being poor candidates and likely not good presidents. I am very certain Clinton will be a very bad president, that said I'm not enthused about Trump but I just can't sit back with everybody and agree that Clinton will be a good president.