Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Hillis
Topic Author
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Sun Sep 04, 2016 9:46 pm

The race seems to be tightening in the polls a bit, although with the exception of one poll I can think of, Hillary Clinton still leads Donald Trump. Now we're heading into the home stretch.

While Trump has closed the gap on the polls, if you look at the electoral college map, you can see he still almost no chance to win the electoral vote. He could, but it would be a task that few POTUS nominees, if any, have been able to do. Let's break it down.

Let's start with states that I have put down as either "Likely" or "Safe" for each candidate. Not including "leans" or "tossup" states.

Hillary Clinton, "Safe" or "Likely: 326 Electoral Votes
California
Hawaii
Oregon
Washington
Colorado (Likley)
New Mexico
Neveda (Likely)
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Michigan
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Virginia (Likely)
New York
New Jersey
Maryland
D.C.
Conneticut
Massachusettes
Rhode Island
Vermont
New Hampshire
Maine
Deleware

Donald Trump, "Safe" or "Likely" 175 Electoral Votes
Alaska
Idaho
Wyoming
Nebraska
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Texas
Nebraska
Kansas
Oklahoma
Indiana
West Virginia
Kentucky
Tennessee
Arkansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Alabama
South Carolina (Likely)

"Tossup" or "Leans" States 47 Leaning Clinton, 21 Leaning Trump, 37 Toss-Up

Arizona (Leans Trump)
Neveda (Leans Clinton)
Colorado (Leans Clinton)
Iowa (Toss-Up)
Missouri (Leans Trump)
Georgia (Toss-Up)
Florida (Leans Clinton)
North Carolina (Toss-Up)
Ohio (Toss-Up)

Now, some of us will differ on some of these, but in general, this is a pretty sober, dispassionate look at the electoral race.

So, based on what I have on here, even if Trump wins all the states that "lean" to him, and all the Toss-Up's, he still falls short. So he can win Ohio, Florida, Arizona, Georgia, etc, and still fall well short. He has to turn more than a few traditionally Democratic states, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and take states like Colorado, Neveda and Iowa-and he STILL falls short in electoral votes.

Impossible? No. Almost impossible? Yes. He might win some of those states, but I don't see him winning them all. I still see Hillary Clinton garnering more than 320 Electoral Votes.

Open the floor for debate.
 
User avatar
PacificBeach88
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:42 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Sun Sep 04, 2016 10:24 pm

I think the results are pretty much baked in at this point unless a terrorist attack happens, or some bizarre behavior at the debates. Hillary Clinton will be our next President, and the Senate will turn to blue. Is that 51? 52? or 54? seats at most, who knows. But that said, the Dems won't have a filibuster proof option in the Senate.

I highly doubt the House will flip to Democrats, unless of course "the Donald" does something very similar to what he has been doing.

Sadly, anymore a newly elected / reelected President only gets about 100 to 120 legislative days to get everything they want done for the next 4 years. If it's not set into motion in these first 4 months, forget about it. Frankly, one of Hillary's most important jobs is to fill all 91 judgeships that aren't a SCOTUS appointment and can be rammed thru with just 50 votes. The 92nd opening (SCOTUS) needs all of the political capital the White House can push behind it. My guess is HRC will let Obama push thru his selection in his lame duck session, so as not to have to spend any capital to get a slightly left of center judge appointed to replace radical whack job, now worm food, Scalia.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24070
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Sun Sep 04, 2016 10:54 pm

I have seen polls that say Hillary is ahead. I have seen polls that say Trump is ahead. I have seen polls that say Johnson is siphoning votes from Hillary. I have seen polls that say Johnson is siphoning votes from Trump. What it all boils down to is the party who loses will be screaming bloody murder and the party who wins will be screaming that they can not get any work done.

Pacific: Obama will not be able to fill Scalia's seat. McConnell still refuses to do his job. And he is proud of it. The leader of the same party who wants everyone to work refuses to work.
 
910A
Posts: 1930
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2015 2:11 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 12:56 am

Hillary can lose this race, by continuing her wait out the clock strategy. She really needs to get out to the public and release a positive message. I don't even know if the DNC has charter planes for her and Kaine yet, do anyone know?
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24070
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 1:17 am

910A wrote:
Hillary can lose this race, by continuing her wait out the clock strategy. She really needs to get out to the public and release a positive message. I don't even know if the DNC has charter planes for her and Kaine yet, do anyone know?


It is also a good strategy for the DNC for midterms and 2020. The less they spend now, the more they can spend for those two elections. But, I agree that she needs to start campaigning. But, with Republicans insisting there is smoke where there is no fire and constantly asking for her records, she has less time for campaigning trying to defend her already public record.
 
Hillis
Topic Author
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 1:30 am

910A wrote:
Hillary can lose this race, by continuing her wait out the clock strategy. She really needs to get out to the public and release a positive message. I don't even know if the DNC has charter planes for her and Kaine yet, do anyone know?


Perhaps, against a more conventional opponent. But even with Trump's "pivot", it's only a matter of time and he'll go off the deep end again, and say or do something completely idiiotic.

Clinton has been more consistent in her attack about Trump and the "Alt-Right", and is hammering him on that point. But when the other guy is determined to sabotage his own campaign time and time again, and write the material for you, you let him. The Clinton camp has a leg up on Trump when it comes to media, especially TV, advertising, and all the stuff Trump has said and done over the last year that have been so unpresidential will be seen and heard over and over and over.

Many people are wary of Hillary Clinton. Many don't trust her. Many have grabbed on to the constant, right-wing obsession with the Clintons, but despite all their claims, it has never been shown that Hillary Clinton has ever done anything illegal. And that hunt by the GOP has been going on for 30 years.

At the end of the day, "BENGHAZI!" and the email flap will make the race closer, but it won't turn the tide for Trump. Americans may be pretty boneheaded at times, but they're not as ignorant as the average Trump supporter.
 
User avatar
pu
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:08 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 2:48 am

Prepare for Trump going nuclear.

He's not the type to just go into election night knowing he will lose. It's too much like asking a cheap concubine to marry you have her say no - it's life crushing.

So maybe he hopes the debates put him comfortably ahead. If not, why not try anything he can think of? Resigning from the ticket a few weeks before the election.... or disappearing entirely from the face of the earth ... or staging a false assassination attempt only to miraculously recover after a stay in a private clinic....whatever....anything's possible.



Pu.
 
Hillis
Topic Author
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 3:52 am

pu wrote:
Prepare for Trump going nuclear.

He's not the type to just go into election night knowing he will lose. It's too much like asking a cheap concubine to marry you have her say no - it's life crushing.

So maybe he hopes the debates put him comfortably ahead. If not, why not try anything he can think of? Resigning from the ticket a few weeks before the election.... or disappearing entirely from the face of the earth ... or staging a false assassination attempt only to miraculously recover after a stay in a private clinic....whatever....anything's possible.



Pu.


I think he has a meltdown in the debates. This won't be like the GOP Primary season, full of a bunch of wimp-asses. Hillary will prod him and goad him unmercilessly, and Trump will lose it. If he can't keep it togther when dealing with Megyn Kelly, or Chuck Todd, or any other talking head, he won't be able to do so against Hillary Clinton. You can call Hillary anything you want, but she's as saavy a politician as there is in this country, and Trump won't be a match for her.
 
User avatar
piedmont762
Posts: 456
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 9:14 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 5:58 am

I live In probably one of the most liberal neighborhoods in Denver and I haven't seen one trump or Hillary sign on a car, apartment, house or business. The media is lying about this election hardcore - you go to a bar in Denver and everyone says they are doing write in or voting for Trump because they can't stand Hillary.

And btw before I get slammed, I like some of Hillarys views more than Obama by a huge margin. I hate how we have a black president that has checked out, and we didn't have this bizarre police / minority gun racism under Bush. And I also hate the Bush family as much as everyone thinks Bill is a rapist.

You'll be surprised what happens post debates - FL, VA, OH, CO will go Trump but PA is a toss up.

I think Trump has run a ridiculous campaign but I don't care - let's live and let live. Trump might and could be president and it could be good and equally could be horrible. Stay tuned.

Finally I donated to Kasich - before any of you lib bloggers dare to bash me
 
Hillis
Topic Author
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 6:32 am

piedmont762 wrote:
I live In probably one of the most liberal neighborhoods in Denver and I haven't seen one trump or Hillary sign on a car, apartment, house or business. The media is lying about this election hardcore - you go to a bar in Denver and everyone says they are doing write in or voting for Trump because they can't stand Hillary.

And btw before I get slammed, I like some of Hillarys views more than Obama by a huge margin. I hate how we have a black president that has checked out, and we didn't have this bizarre police / minority gun racism under Bush. And I also hate the Bush family as much as everyone thinks Bill is a rapist.

You'll be surprised what happens post debates - FL, VA, OH, CO will go Trump but PA is a toss up.

I think Trump has run a ridiculous campaign but I don't care - let's live and let live. Trump might and could be president and it could be good and equally could be horrible. Stay tuned.

Finally I donated to Kasich - before any of you lib bloggers dare to bash me


Oh, where to start on this one.

How has Obama "checked out"? He's done more for his legacy in the last year of his presidency than any other president in history. He made a nuclear agreement with China; he's opened ties with Cuba; he's just signed the Paris Climate accords. "Checking Out" is what George W. Bush did, when he basically let President-elect Obama orchestrate the plan to save the Auto, Housing and Banking industries during the Great Recession. So, I don't understand this "checked out" nonsense.

Maybe the reason we didn't have this racism under Bush and have had it under Obama has something to do with the latter's skin color? We've come a long way on race relations, but take off your shades. There's been a meteoric rise in white supremacist hate groups since Obama got elected; you see a large chunk of the Republican base, which is mostly older white, rural and less educated people, in a backlash against minorities, we've seen the rise of the Tea Party, which really didn't get going til after Obama was elected. And the only thing Obama did to "cause" that was his skin color. Put the blame where it belongs, on a large portion of white America, and not on a man who has been the victim of character assassination since he won in 2008. Electing an African-American President was a double-edged sword: it shows that most Americans have gotten beyond skin color, but it also showed that there's still deep, visceral, unrelenting racism among still too many whites in this nation towards people of color.

As for Kasich, he's just as bad, if nor worse, policy-wise, than Trump. His only saving grace is he isn't a loudmouth buffoon. Oh, and how is Bill Clinton a rapist? That should be good, especially since there are rape allegations being circulated right now about Mr. Trump?
 
Hillis
Topic Author
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 6:33 am

piedmont762 wrote:
I live In probably one of the most liberal neighborhoods in Denver and I haven't seen one trump or Hillary sign on a car, apartment, house or business. The media is lying about this election hardcore - you go to a bar in Denver and everyone says they are doing write in or voting for Trump because they can't stand Hillary.

And btw before I get slammed, I like some of Hillarys views more than Obama by a huge margin. I hate how we have a black president that has checked out, and we didn't have this bizarre police / minority gun racism under Bush. And I also hate the Bush family as much as everyone thinks Bill is a rapist.

You'll be surprised what happens post debates - FL, VA, OH, CO will go Trump but PA is a toss up.

I think Trump has run a ridiculous campaign but I don't care - let's live and let live. Trump might and could be president and it could be good and equally could be horrible. Stay tuned.

Finally I donated to Kasich - before any of you lib bloggers dare to bash me



By the way, speaking of the debates and swing states, try this read from a publication that is certainly not a friend of liberals or Democrats. It very much contradicts your views on those states.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... bly-narrow
 
User avatar
PacificBeach88
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:42 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 6:45 am

piedmont762 wrote:
I hate how we have a black president that has checked out, and we didn't have this bizarre police / minority gun racism under Bush.


Do you really think Bush did anything for race relations? Guess why minorities are so upset at the police? Guess how many hundreds of millions of cell phones with cameras have been sold in the past 8 years in the USA? (Remember, the iPhone was introduced later part of 2007.)

Police have been committing atrocities forever, now they are getting busted for it given everyone has a phone with a camera. Police version of events now get contradicted weekly if not daily. Watching police slaughter people for tail lights and selling loose cigarette has pushed various communities to their wits end.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 14315
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:00 am

piedmont762 wrote:
I live In probably one of the most liberal neighborhoods in Denver and I haven't seen one trump or Hillary sign on a car, apartment, house or business. The media is lying about this election hardcore - you go to a bar in Denver and everyone says they are doing write in or voting for Trump because they can't stand Hillary.

Ah yes, because anecdotally-derived observations within the prism of your laughably limited sphere of acquaintance--- is a farrrr better gauge of the country's leaning, than scientifically conducted randomized pollings of large samples in varied regions.

...seems legit. :roll:


piedmont762 wrote:
I hate how we have a black president that has checked out.

Not that anyone really cares how you arrived at that ridiculous conclusion... but you should probably know that the majority of the country doesn't agree with you.

With a 54% approval (Gallup, August 2016) in his 31st quarter, Obama is tied with Ronald Reagan and exceeded by only Dwight Eisenhower, for job performance approval rating at this point in time for any President since nationwide polling began.

But you knew that, right?


piedmont762 wrote:
Finally I donated to Kasich - before any of you lib bloggers dare to bash me

So you either 1) don't know how to pick a winning horse or 2) enjoy throwing money at losing causes.... how is either worth boasting about? :-P
 
ltbewr
Posts: 15862
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 1:42 pm

Modern US Presidential and really all political November general election campaigns really get going in early September/Labor Day, about 60 days before the election, the 'home stretch' of a process over the last year. The Electoral College process is how we truly chose our President, demographics, winner take all as to who gets elector's votes form the states, are in favor of HRC.

This Presidential campaign has and the 2 major candidates have to be the worst I can ever think of, even worse than 1968 (I was 14 then). Both HRC and Trump are about the most flawed candidates since Nixon in 1972 (the first election I could vote as 18 - I voted for D's McGovern) and George Wallace in 1968. Even many traditional R's cannot support Trump. I cannot vote for Trump, but have deep problems as to HRC. Even if HRC wins and the D's get a narrow majority in the Senate, I suspect many R's will put up gridlock on legislation and approving nominations that will make the past look like child's play, denying HRC the ability to really do her job. Meanwhile we will continue to have no real management of immigration, likely more terrible trade deals that will hurt jobs for millions of Americans, no way out of our wars in the ME, nothing done about unaffordable health care, housing and other costs of living, no reasonable regulations on our financial sectors as well as on taxes and spending.

Sure, HRC being the 1st woman as our President will be a big thing, but beyond that, I really don't see any real long term good by her in office. I further suspect she will only last 1 term as disappointment in her, R's gridlock and desperation of voters will seen a new leader from the R's if they can push a moderate-right one without Trump's baggage, reasoned as to critical issues.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 14841
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 2:46 pm

HRC is already a moderate Republican. I don't see what a moderate Republican could achieve that she can't.
 
Hillis
Topic Author
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:48 pm

Aesma wrote:
HRC is already a moderate Republican. I don't see what a moderate Republican could achieve that she can't.


There is no "moderate Republican" anymore. The base of the party has moved, and is continuing to move, so far to the right that the party rejects any moderate. Why do you think Trump won the nomination? There were moderates to be picked (at least to a degree): Jeb Bush, John Kasich, Lindsey Graham, George Pataki come to mind. (Let's be clear about one thing, with MAYBE the exception of Pataki, none of those that ran are true "moderates", but are considered "moderate" by the base of the party. The rest, like Cruz, Huckabee, Jindal, Kasich, Carson and Santorum are as frightening in some of their ideology as Trump is).

But the rank-and-file in the GOP has long since abandoned moderation. The gridlock in the Senate is testament to that. You have a GOP majority that does not believe in the one thing that makes Democracy work-and that's compromise, or, in another word, moderation. They believe in low-ball, vengeful politics, creating artifical crises, like on the debt ceiling, the abortion debate, the nuclear talks with Iran, in not even considering a SCOTUS nominee. It is borne out of a deep hatred for liberalism, and has been fueled the last 8 years by that hatred combined with an African-American residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

The GOP base wants no compromise; they want no working across the aisle; they are willing to hurt the nation if it means getting their way.

In fact, if you look beyond this election, and if everything holds, and Hillary Clinton does win, just think of who you could be looking at as the GOP candidates in 2020: Cruz, Paul, Giulani perhaps, and a guy named Tom Cotton, who is more frightening than even Donald Trump. Even after they get a spanking this fall, the won't learn their lesson. They'll continue to drift further and further to the right, as their base gets smaller and smaller. The base of the GOP, namely the mostly older, rural, white, under-educated, are becoming like a cornered animal that is being attacked. It will hold it's ground stubbornly, and if need be, it will strike out violently when it sees there's no other real option for it.
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:54 pm

Trump needs to sweep the rust belt, including Pennsylvania. There is a chance he will do this once he starts hammering Hillary on NAFTA and jobs.

Another key is who will actually go vote. The only poll with Trump in front, the USC poll takes this into consideration, saying Trump supporters are much more motivated (but Hillary has the Machine to actually get voters to polls). Johnson is polling at 8-10% but most polls don't even include this. From whom will he take votes?
Too close to call at this point.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24070
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:59 pm

I keep hearing people say "yes Trump is bad but Hillary is as bad or worse." How? Which of her policies are that bad? We all know about the so-called "scandals" that Clinton is connected to and that they are not scandals at all. In fact, she has been cleared. It is Republicans who keep insisting there is something there.
 
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 22270
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 7:35 pm

727LOVER wrote:


More precisely, God's sole conduit of information to the people of Earth, Michelle Bachmann, has weighed in.

Hillis wrote:
In fact, if you look beyond this election, and if everything holds, and Hillary Clinton does win, just think of who you could be looking at as the GOP candidates in 2020: Cruz, Paul, Giulani perhaps, and a guy named Tom Cotton, who is more frightening than even Donald Trump.


I find Mr. Cruz to be the most horrifying candidate. Mr. Trump is a malevolent idiot. They make a lot of noise, but can't cause much harm because...well...they're idiots. But Mr. Cruz is something quite different. Mr. Cruz is an evil genius. Evil geniuses can cause vast amounts of damage because...well...they're geniuses.
 
User avatar
PacificBeach88
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:42 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:40 pm

DocLightning wrote:
More precisely, God's sole conduit of information to the people of Earth, Michelle Bachmann, has weighed in.


Did you see that ignorant c**t's awful reply? The end of the world is coming if Christians don't elect the 3 times married, draft dodging, non-church going, billionaire who will never get thru the eye of a needle, is mankind's savior. Sick! I wish Michelle Bachmann's jet would crash mid-sky into Sarah Palin's jet on their way to a CPAC meeting, and I'd laugh so hard it wouldn't be funny, except to me. LOL!

The only reason Michelle Bachmann had to drop out of politics was because the FEC was going to charge her with fraud and fundraising crimes. But she still has the nerve to pretend she's the voice of god. Ugh. What a pig. As if "GOD" needed Donald Trump to do his will. It's amazing how stupid and hypocritical today's evangelicals and bible beaters are.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/31/politics/ ... raised-up/
 
Hillis
Topic Author
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:12 pm

mham001 wrote:
Trump needs to sweep the rust belt, including Pennsylvania. There is a chance he will do this once he starts hammering Hillary on NAFTA and jobs.

Another key is who will actually go vote. The only poll with Trump in front, the USC poll takes this into consideration, saying Trump supporters are much more motivated (but Hillary has the Machine to actually get voters to polls). Johnson is polling at 8-10% but most polls don't even include this. From whom will he take votes?
Too close to call at this point.


One problem for Trump with the "Rust Belt", i.e, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Indiana (to a lesser degree), Illinois and Wisconsin; his target group, rural, less-educated whites are, like everywhere else, dwindling.

If you read the article I've linked in an earlier post, you'll see that problem. Fair-use excerpt: "The white vote-share nationwide was 77 percent in 2004, 74 percent in 2008, and 72 percent in 2012. The same trend manifested itself in Wisconsin (90, 89, 86), Michigan (82, 82, 77), Ohio (86, 83, 79), and Pennsylvania (82, 81, 78.)

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439466/

Break that down further:

Ohio: in 2012, Romney won white voters in Ohio by 16 percent, but still lost the state to President Obama. In the article linked above, it mentions that to realistically win Ohio, Trump needs to win the white vote by around 20% (remember, the number of those voters keeps shrinking), but his best number in any major poll shows him with a 12% lead over Hillary with whites. If he's going to poll 4% worse than Romeny did in 2012, and with a smaller base of white voters, it won't be near enough to offset the landslides that Clinton will get in Cleveland, Akron-Canton, Youngstown, Columbus, Toledo, and, to a lesser degree, Dayton and Cincinnati.

Pennsylvania: Whites still make up 78% of the voters in Pennsylvania. In 2012, Romney won the white vote by 15%, but still lost the state by 5 points. Right now, most major polls show Trump and Clinton statistically even with the white vote, and again, the share of white voters has fallen since 2012. Now, you do the math: if Romney lost the state by 5% in 2012, and won the white vote by 15%, how do you think Trump will do if he wins the white vote by, say, 3 or 4%, from a smaller pool of voters? The math says he loses by close to 10%, if not more.

Michigan: Same story there, while whites are still the majority, that majority is shrinking, and you can bet that while he'll probably win the rural white vote in that state, there's no way he takes any of the larger cities, what with Gov Rick Snyder's ghastly handling of the Flint water crisis-Detroit, Grand Rapids, Lansing, Kalamazoo, Flint, are all going to go big for Clinton. And in every Michigan poll since the convention, Trump hasn't even broken into the 40% support range. And, again, he's polling well behind Romney's 2012 percentages among white voters.

Wisconsin: A broken record here. In 2012, Romney won the white vote by 3%, but, as almost evewhere else in the nation, the percentage of white voters keeps dropping about 3 or 4% every 4 years. National Review says the one consistent polling firm in the state, from Marquette University, is one of the best ones in the nation, and if you think Trump has a chance there, read this fair use excerpt from that National Review article:

"The cross tabs of that poll reveal just how bleak things are for Trump in Wisconsin. Clinton leads him by ten points among white voters. (Romney won them by three.) She leads him by 18 points among college-educated voters. (Romney won them by one.) She leads him by 16 points among suburban voters. (Romney won them by five.) And she leads him by 33 points among self-described moderates. (Obama won them by 24.)

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439466/"


As for your question of who is going to vote? Good question. YOu know the hard-core, Tea-Party base of the GOP will vote,but, again, their overall numbers are declining. Despite his laughable "pivots" he's tried to make towards Hispanics and African-Americans, he's going to lose those votes by wide margin's, especilly in "rust belt" cities like Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Toledo, Detroit and Chicago. Those two groups are highly motivated simply by Trumps bigoted rhetoric, and from attacks his rhetoric has spawned against groups like Hispanics and Muslims.

One group the GOP has done well with in years past is the highly-educated white vote, but this time around, he's losing that vote almost everywhere in the nation. Those people either won't vote, or will vote for Hillary Clinton. It's that simple.

The National Review article is a very dispassionate look at the race, from a very staunch right-wing publication. It shows that absolutely everything would have to fall Trump's way on election day for him to even get close. Sorry, but he's not going to even get close.
 
727LOVER
Posts: 8633
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 12:22 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:18 pm

seb146 wrote:
I keep hearing people say "yes Trump is bad but Hillary is as bad or worse.".


Check out this quote...and see who it is from:
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/glenn-b ... id/746159/
 
Hillis
Topic Author
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:19 pm

PacificBeach88 wrote:
Did you see that ignorant c**t's awful reply? The end of the world is coming if Christians don't elect the 3 times married, draft dodging, non-church going, billionaire who will never get thru the eye of a needle, is mankind's savior. Sick! I wish Michelle Bachmann's jet would crash mid-sky into Sarah Palin's jet on their way to a CPAC meeting, and I'd laugh so hard it wouldn't be funny, except to me. LOL!

The only reason Michelle Bachmann had to drop out of politics was because the FEC was going to charge her with fraud and fundraising crimes. But she still has the nerve to pretend she's the voice of god. Ugh. What a pig. As if "GOD" needed Donald Trump to do his will. It's amazing how stupid and hypocritical today's evangelicals and bible beaters are.
's
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/31/politics/ ... raised-up/
;

But those End Times idiots have been saying that for years. They said it when Bill Clinton was elected. They said it when Barack Obama was elected. They said it when the SCOTUS gave LGBTQ's the right to marry; they said it if abortion is upheld. they said if if we made a nuclear deal with Iran. I'm surprised they don't say it if Obama so much as mentions that the sky is blue.

When fear is all you have to peddle, and at this juncture in American History, and that is, precisely, ALL they do have to offer, over time they are like the Boy who cried "Wolf!". People start to tune them out, and realize they're just out of their minds. The Republican Party has offered no new ideas, because by their own ideological constraints, all they want is in the past, and they don't look to the future. They have no plan on jobs, on security, on the environment, on equal rights, on improving infrastructure, on health care. They offer fear: fear of the Black Man; fear of the Mexican: fear of the Fags and Dykes; fear of Muslims; fear of anyone who doesn't look, sound or pray as they do.

When you've gotten to that point, you might as well not exist. And, if the GOP keeps moving further to the right, as I believe they will, they probably won't exist as a major party within a decade. They'd have to change to do that-and they don't want to change.
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 10:08 pm

Hillis wrote:
mham001 wrote:
Trump needs to sweep the rust belt, including Pennsylvania. There is a chance he will do this once he starts hammering Hillary on NAFTA and jobs.

Another key is who will actually go vote. The only poll with Trump in front, the USC poll takes this into consideration, saying Trump supporters are much more motivated (but Hillary has the Machine to actually get voters to polls). Johnson is polling at 8-10% but most polls don't even include this. From whom will he take votes?
Too close to call at this point.


One problem for Trump with the "Rust Belt", i.e, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Indiana (to a lesser degree), Illinois and Wisconsin; his target group, rural, less-educated whites are, like everywhere else, dwindling.

If you read the article I've linked in an earlier post, you'll see that problem. Fair-use excerpt: "The white vote-share nationwide was 77 percent in 2004, 74 percent in 2008, and 72 percent in 2012. The same trend manifested itself in Wisconsin (90, 89, 86), Michigan (82, 82, 77), Ohio (86, 83, 79), and Pennsylvania (82, 81, 78.)

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439466/

Break that down further:

Ohio: in 2012, Romney won white voters in Ohio by 16 percent, but still lost the state to President Obama. In the article linked above, it mentions that to realistically win Ohio, Trump needs to win the white vote by around 20% (remember, the number of those voters keeps shrinking), but his best number in any major poll shows him with a 12% lead over Hillary with whites. If he's going to poll 4% worse than Romeny did in 2012, and with a smaller base of white voters, it won't be near enough to offset the landslides that Clinton will get in Cleveland, Akron-Canton, Youngstown, Columbus, Toledo, and, to a lesser degree, Dayton and Cincinnati.

Pennsylvania: Whites still make up 78% of the voters in Pennsylvania. In 2012, Romney won the white vote by 15%, but still lost the state by 5 points. Right now, most major polls show Trump and Clinton statistically even with the white vote, and again, the share of white voters has fallen since 2012. Now, you do the math: if Romney lost the state by 5% in 2012, and won the white vote by 15%, how do you think Trump will do if he wins the white vote by, say, 3 or 4%, from a smaller pool of voters? The math says he loses by close to 10%, if not more.

Michigan: Same story there, while whites are still the majority, that majority is shrinking, and you can bet that while he'll probably win the rural white vote in that state, there's no way he takes any of the larger cities, what with Gov Rick Snyder's ghastly handling of the Flint water crisis-Detroit, Grand Rapids, Lansing, Kalamazoo, Flint, are all going to go big for Clinton. And in every Michigan poll since the convention, Trump hasn't even broken into the 40% support range. And, again, he's polling well behind Romney's 2012 percentages among white voters.

Wisconsin: A broken record here. In 2012, Romney won the white vote by 3%, but, as almost evewhere else in the nation, the percentage of white voters keeps dropping about 3 or 4% every 4 years. National Review says the one consistent polling firm in the state, from Marquette University, is one of the best ones in the nation, and if you think Trump has a chance there, read this fair use excerpt from that National Review article:

"The cross tabs of that poll reveal just how bleak things are for Trump in Wisconsin. Clinton leads him by ten points among white voters. (Romney won them by three.) She leads him by 18 points among college-educated voters. (Romney won them by one.) She leads him by 16 points among suburban voters. (Romney won them by five.) And she leads him by 33 points among self-described moderates. (Obama won them by 24.)

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439466/"


As for your question of who is going to vote? Good question. YOu know the hard-core, Tea-Party base of the GOP will vote,but, again, their overall numbers are declining. Despite his laughable "pivots" he's tried to make towards Hispanics and African-Americans, he's going to lose those votes by wide margin's, especilly in "rust belt" cities like Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Toledo, Detroit and Chicago. Those two groups are highly motivated simply by Trumps bigoted rhetoric, and from attacks his rhetoric has spawned against groups like Hispanics and Muslims.

One group the GOP has done well with in years past is the highly-educated white vote, but this time around, he's losing that vote almost everywhere in the nation. Those people either won't vote, or will vote for Hillary Clinton. It's that simple.

The National Review article is a very dispassionate look at the race, from a very staunch right-wing publication. It shows that absolutely everything would have to fall Trump's way on election day for him to even get close. Sorry, but he's not going to even get close.


All of that is irrelevant without also a closer examination of black votes. Blacks are not the least bit excited by Hillary, in fact, the New Black Panthers is recommending blacks "listen to Trump". Young blacks are expected to be largely a no-show.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24070
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 10:26 pm

mham001 wrote:
Hillis wrote:
mham001 wrote:
Trump needs to sweep the rust belt, including Pennsylvania. There is a chance he will do this once he starts hammering Hillary on NAFTA and jobs.

Another key is who will actually go vote. The only poll with Trump in front, the USC poll takes this into consideration, saying Trump supporters are much more motivated (but Hillary has the Machine to actually get voters to polls). Johnson is polling at 8-10% but most polls don't even include this. From whom will he take votes?
Too close to call at this point.


One problem for Trump with the "Rust Belt", i.e, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Indiana (to a lesser degree), Illinois and Wisconsin; his target group, rural, less-educated whites are, like everywhere else, dwindling.

If you read the article I've linked in an earlier post, you'll see that problem. Fair-use excerpt: "The white vote-share nationwide was 77 percent in 2004, 74 percent in 2008, and 72 percent in 2012. The same trend manifested itself in Wisconsin (90, 89, 86), Michigan (82, 82, 77), Ohio (86, 83, 79), and Pennsylvania (82, 81, 78.)

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439466/

Break that down further:

Ohio: in 2012, Romney won white voters in Ohio by 16 percent, but still lost the state to President Obama. In the article linked above, it mentions that to realistically win Ohio, Trump needs to win the white vote by around 20% (remember, the number of those voters keeps shrinking), but his best number in any major poll shows him with a 12% lead over Hillary with whites. If he's going to poll 4% worse than Romeny did in 2012, and with a smaller base of white voters, it won't be near enough to offset the landslides that Clinton will get in Cleveland, Akron-Canton, Youngstown, Columbus, Toledo, and, to a lesser degree, Dayton and Cincinnati.

Pennsylvania: Whites still make up 78% of the voters in Pennsylvania. In 2012, Romney won the white vote by 15%, but still lost the state by 5 points. Right now, most major polls show Trump and Clinton statistically even with the white vote, and again, the share of white voters has fallen since 2012. Now, you do the math: if Romney lost the state by 5% in 2012, and won the white vote by 15%, how do you think Trump will do if he wins the white vote by, say, 3 or 4%, from a smaller pool of voters? The math says he loses by close to 10%, if not more.

Michigan: Same story there, while whites are still the majority, that majority is shrinking, and you can bet that while he'll probably win the rural white vote in that state, there's no way he takes any of the larger cities, what with Gov Rick Snyder's ghastly handling of the Flint water crisis-Detroit, Grand Rapids, Lansing, Kalamazoo, Flint, are all going to go big for Clinton. And in every Michigan poll since the convention, Trump hasn't even broken into the 40% support range. And, again, he's polling well behind Romney's 2012 percentages among white voters.

Wisconsin: A broken record here. In 2012, Romney won the white vote by 3%, but, as almost evewhere else in the nation, the percentage of white voters keeps dropping about 3 or 4% every 4 years. National Review says the one consistent polling firm in the state, from Marquette University, is one of the best ones in the nation, and if you think Trump has a chance there, read this fair use excerpt from that National Review article:

"The cross tabs of that poll reveal just how bleak things are for Trump in Wisconsin. Clinton leads him by ten points among white voters. (Romney won them by three.) She leads him by 18 points among college-educated voters. (Romney won them by one.) She leads him by 16 points among suburban voters. (Romney won them by five.) And she leads him by 33 points among self-described moderates. (Obama won them by 24.)

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439466/"


As for your question of who is going to vote? Good question. YOu know the hard-core, Tea-Party base of the GOP will vote,but, again, their overall numbers are declining. Despite his laughable "pivots" he's tried to make towards Hispanics and African-Americans, he's going to lose those votes by wide margin's, especilly in "rust belt" cities like Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Toledo, Detroit and Chicago. Those two groups are highly motivated simply by Trumps bigoted rhetoric, and from attacks his rhetoric has spawned against groups like Hispanics and Muslims.

One group the GOP has done well with in years past is the highly-educated white vote, but this time around, he's losing that vote almost everywhere in the nation. Those people either won't vote, or will vote for Hillary Clinton. It's that simple.

The National Review article is a very dispassionate look at the race, from a very staunch right-wing publication. It shows that absolutely everything would have to fall Trump's way on election day for him to even get close. Sorry, but he's not going to even get close.


All of that is irrelevant without also a closer examination of black votes. Blacks are not the least bit excited by Hillary, in fact, the New Black Panthers is recommending blacks "listen to Trump". Young blacks are expected to be largely a no-show.


I don't know what topsy-turvy site you are looking at, but every major poll shows Trumps support among Blacks at between 0 and 5%

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... lack-vote/
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24070
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 10:30 pm

727LOVER wrote:
seb146 wrote:
I keep hearing people say "yes Trump is bad but Hillary is as bad or worse.".


Check out this quote...and see who it is from:
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/glenn-b ... id/746159/


Isn't that interesting.

The right keeps saying they want a business man with little or no political background. When they get one, they back peddle fast.
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 10:38 pm

seb146 wrote:

I don't know what topsy-turvy site you are looking at, but every major poll shows Trumps support among Blacks at between 0 and 5%

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... lack-vote/


I see the point flew right over your head. My topsy-turvy site today is the New York Times.

Young Blacks Voice Skepticism on Hillary Clinton, Worrying Democrats
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/05/us/po ... ws&hp&_r=1
 
Hillis
Topic Author
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Mon Sep 05, 2016 11:51 pm

seb146 wrote:
]

I don't know what topsy-turvy site you are looking at, but every major poll shows Trumps support among Blacks at between 0 and 5%

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... lack-vote/


Where the hell did you get from my post that I posted anything about AFrican-Americans? This was all about the white vote. In fact, I just re-read it, so I don't know where you're getting that from, Seb.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24070
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:27 am

Hillis wrote:
seb146 wrote:
]

I don't know what topsy-turvy site you are looking at, but every major poll shows Trumps support among Blacks at between 0 and 5%

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... lack-vote/


Where the hell did you get from my post that I posted anything about AFrican-Americans? This was all about the white vote. In fact, I just re-read it, so I don't know where you're getting that from, Seb.


You didn't. Mham did. And I pointed out that one article does not jibe with nation wide polling.
 
luckyone
Posts: 4075
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:29 am

mham001 wrote:
Trump needs to sweep the rust belt, including Pennsylvania. There is a chance he will do this once he starts hammering Hillary on NAFTA and jobs.

At which point Hillary Clinton will bring up the fact that Trump's running mate has praised NAFTA. She'll also bring up the fact that Donald Trump benefits extensively from NAFTA-type deals. And she'll also bring up the fact that Donald Trump has been on record as saying that "wages are too high" (regardless of his weak attempt to later reframe it). So while he may try, he'll likely face a lot of pushback. And the millions of us who are the net beneficiaries of NAFTA will have a reason to vote for Mrs. Clinton.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18742
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:41 am

727LOVER wrote:
seb146 wrote:
I keep hearing people say "yes Trump is bad but Hillary is as bad or worse.".


Check out this quote...and see who it is from:
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/glenn-b ... id/746159/

Isn't the Trump campaign run by Beck's arch nemesis? Would Beck support Trump if it was his alt right shit show behind it rather than breitbart-whitepower?
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:59 am

seb146 wrote:
You didn't. Mham did. And I pointed out that one article does not jibe with nation wide polling.


The polls don't know if they will actually vote...

Quanell X, New Black Panther activist, Houston, Texas,

“Donald Trump decided to go to Milwaukee and speak about the conditions in American and why he thought black people should vote for him. He even went on to lay out reasons why we should. Let me say this to the brothers and sisters who listened and watched that speech. We may not like the vessel that said what he said, but I ask us to truly examine what he said.”

“Because it is a fact that for 54 years we have been voting for the Democratic Party like no other race in America. And they have not given us the same loyalty and love that we have given them. We, as black people, have to reexamine the relationship. We’re being pimped like prostitutes and they’re the big pimps pimping us politically, promising us everything and we get nothing in return. We gotta step back now as black people and we gotta look at all the parties and vote our best interests.”

“I want to say and encourage the brothers and sisters, Barack Obama, our president, served two terms. [He was] the first black president ever, but did our condition get better? Did financially, politically, academically with education in our community — did things get better? … The condition got worse.”

http://thegrio.com/2016/09/03/new-black ... ald-trump/
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 14149
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 1:14 am

mham001 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
You didn't. Mham did. And I pointed out that one article does not jibe with nation wide polling.


The polls don't know if they will actually vote...
/


If the GOP was in charge of the whole thing. They wouldn't. At least not in any meaningful way. the GOP has worked so hard to create Gerrymandered districts and restrict access to voting. Along with that, the GOP engages with and supports the rhetoric of racist candidates and stereotyping .

The GOP is losing the electoral college while working hard at purifying their districts and votes. In about 4-8 years, the GOP will find out that it has lost Georgia and possibly Texas as well in national races. Despite what was said above, Colorado is not even close to in play this election. North Carolina where I live is a battleground state. The fact that NC is a battleground state, which Romney won in 2012, is extremely telling at what is going to happen to Trump.
 
luckyone
Posts: 4075
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 1:39 am

casinterest wrote:
The GOP is losing the electoral college while working hard at purifying their districts and votes. In about 4-8 years, the GOP will find out that it has lost Georgia and possibly Texas as well in national races. Despite what was said above, Colorado is not even close to in play this election. North Carolina where I live is a battleground state. The fact that NC is a battleground state, which Romney won in 2012, is extremely telling at what is going to happen to Trump.

North Carolina being a battleground isn't that surprising. Neither is Georgia. Of the states that Obama lost to Romney, his smallest margins of loss were in North Carolina (1) , and Georgia (2)
 
stratosphere
Posts: 2053
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:45 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 1:42 am

seb146 wrote:
I keep hearing people say "yes Trump is bad but Hillary is as bad or worse." How? Which of her policies are that bad? We all know about the so-called "scandals" that Clinton is connected to and that they are not scandals at all. In fact, she has been cleared. It is Republicans who keep insisting there is something there.


Oh boy can I have what you're smoking. She has been cleared? Did I hear you right? The only reason they let her off is because she is Clinton and the top democratic candidate running for president and Obama and his DOJ and FBI were not going to let it happen. The scandals of both her and her husband run deep. I stopped counting the body bags of people who wound up dead who have been associated with the Clintons. Her E mail server oh yeah they were just boring E mails to Chelsea talking about the grandkid that's why she had them smash her devices with a hammer and scrub her server with a bleach bit. She ran a server from home because she did not want anyone knowing the slick crap she was up to. The Clinton foundation? from where I sit it looks a lot like their own slush fund ask the Haitians how much they appreciate the Clintons and their foundation if you can find any Clinton lovers there. I don't like Trump he is a narcissist and self serving much like all politicians but at least he doesn't sugar coat it and other than offending people with his rhetoric what has he done to hurt anyone? Has his actions caused loss of life like Clinton did with Bengazi? I have to admit I wish it was someone else other than Trump because really Clinton is so beatable by any standards she is not trusted by most Americans and its pretty sad that after all this time and money spent that it comes down to these two this says a lot about how F'd up our political system really is.
 
Hillis
Topic Author
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 1:56 am

stratosphere wrote:
seb146 wrote:
I keep hearing people say "yes Trump is bad but Hillary is as bad or worse." How? Which of her policies are that bad? We all know about the so-called "scandals" that Clinton is connected to and that they are not scandals at all. In fact, she has been cleared. It is Republicans who keep insisting there is something there.


Oh boy can I have what you're smoking. She has been cleared? Did I hear you right? The only reason they let her off is because she is Clinton and the top democratic candidate running for president and Obama and his DOJ and FBI were not going to let it happen. The scandals of both her and her husband run deep. I stopped counting the body bags of people who wound up dead who have been associated with the Clintons. Her E mail server oh yeah they were just boring E mails to Chelsea talking about the grandkid that's why she had them smash her devices with a hammer and scrub her server with a bleach bit. She ran a server from home because she did not want anyone knowing the slick crap she was up to. The Clinton foundation? from where I sit it looks a lot like their own slush fund ask the Haitians how much they appreciate the Clintons and their foundation if you can find any Clinton lovers there. I don't like Trump he is a narcissist and self serving much like all politicians but at least he doesn't sugar coat it and other than offending people with his rhetoric what has he done to hurt anyone? Has his actions caused loss of life like Clinton did with Bengazi? I have to admit I wish it was someone else other than Trump because really Clinton is so beatable by any standards she is not trusted by most Americans and its pretty sad that after all this time and money spent that it comes down to these two this says a lot about how F'd up our political system really is.


Sounds like a rant right out of the GOP platform. Nothing you said can be verifed or proved; nothing you said jives with every official finding; you're portayal of the Clinton Foundation is so far out of reality that it really doesn't deserve a rebuttal, so kooky that is. Let's just say that while Trump doesn't do anything for the world but take what he can, The Clinton Foundation has helped MILLIONS of people around the world try to live a better life. Yeah, that's really terrible.

I think someone either very ignorant, or maybe too young to understand what the hell they're talking about But that was nothing but empty rhetoric.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 6374
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 2:22 am

stratosphere wrote:
FBI were not going to let it happen.


I'm constantly amazed at how the right wing will throw their own people under the bus.

The FBI is run by one of the most hardcore, but extremely honest and principled, Republican right wingers in government. He was a hardcore leader of President George W. Bush's DOJ.

He was among the most successful and hardest federal prosecutors prior to that. Then he took the Dick Cheney revolving door to make a few million He was confirmed by the Senate by a vote of 93 to 1 with 2 senators voting Present.

His possible appointment to the US Supreme Court was hailed by the conservative media and senators as an excellent choice. His appointment was stopped by liberals who generally oppose him.

----------------------------------------------

Here the conservatives have one of their brightest, and best. Someone everyone says would eventually be a great Supreme Court Justice - being trashed - because he upholds the law to the letter and the practice. He knows when a case is winnable or not. He also knows that it is stupid to spend millions of dollars prosecuting a case that will be lost - only for a political purpose.

-------------------------------------------------

In my opinion, people who complain about the FBI letting Hillary off - simply want to ignore the facts of the investigation.

Because they know in their heart that Donald Trump is a disaster this country cannot afford. Stuck with a horrible choice, their only option is to cry foul.

Yes, there is a major foul. The Republicans didn't stop Trump and nominate a real conservative.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 22270
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 2:46 am

rfields5421 wrote:
Yes, there is a major foul. The Republicans didn't stop Trump and nominate a real conservative.


And which true Scotsman is that?
 
FreequentFlier
Posts: 1111
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 4:30 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 2:50 am

rfields5421 wrote:
stratosphere wrote:
FBI were not going to let it happen.


I'm constantly amazed at how the right wing will throw their own people under the bus.

The FBI is run by one of the most hardcore, but extremely honest and principled, Republican right wingers in government. He was a hardcore leader of President George W. Bush's DOJ.

He was among the most successful and hardest federal prosecutors prior to that. Then he took the Dick Cheney revolving door to make a few million He was confirmed by the Senate by a vote of 93 to 1 with 2 senators voting Present.

His possible appointment to the US Supreme Court was hailed by the conservative media and senators as an excellent choice. His appointment was stopped by liberals who generally oppose him.

----------------------------------------------

Here the conservatives have one of their brightest, and best. Someone everyone says would eventually be a great Supreme Court Justice - being trashed - because he upholds the law to the letter and the practice. He knows when a case is winnable or not. He also knows that it is stupid to spend millions of dollars prosecuting a case that will be lost - only for a political purpose.

-------------------------------------------------

In my opinion, people who complain about the FBI letting Hillary off - simply want to ignore the facts of the investigation.

Because they know in their heart that Donald Trump is a disaster this country cannot afford. Stuck with a horrible choice, their only option is to cry foul.

Yes, there is a major foul. The Republicans didn't stop Trump and nominate a real conservative.


Oh please, spare us. If Hillary were just an average Joe (or Jane), and not a major Presidential candidate, there is no question she'd be going to prison at this point for obstruction of justice. The FBI admitted on the Friday before a major holiday weekend that it was aware that her aides had destroyed evidence with hammers and yet still chose not to release that information to the public during the actual investigation.

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-hill ... nes-2016-9

Additionally, the FBI has now acknowledged that it was aware Clinton's team had used the internet program "BleachBit" to wipe her personal clean despite a subpoena of the emails delivered just prior.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-0 ... hit-moment

"Which brings us to the "Oh Shit" moment.

On March 25, 2015, the Undisclosed PRN Staff Member had a "conference call with President Clinton's staff." Apparently, in the days following that call, the Undisclosed PRN Staff Member had an "'oh shit' moment" when he realized he had forgotten to wipe the PRN server clean as he had been instructed to do back in December by Cheryl Mills.

Therefore, sometime within the 6 days after a call with "President Clinton's Staff," that PRN server was wiped clean using BleachBit despite the subpoena from the House Select Committee on Benghazi received weeks earlier on March 4, 2016. "

Trump is terrible, and no one should be voting for him. But while I initially bought the contention that Hillary is (slightly) better, I no longer do. She's a liar and a criminal by any reasonable definition, as demonstrated above, and the only ones defending her at this point are partisan hacks. The fact of the matter is that her disapproval ratings are basically now equivalent to Trump's awful numbers.

I strongly advocate voting third party this year, but given that the likelihood is that one of the awful two leading candidates will win, it seems likely that either will ultimately be fired and replaced in 2020. Call it a do-over if you will.
 
User avatar
pu
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:08 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 3:15 am

mham001 wrote:
Young blacks are expected to be largely a no-show.


Pfffft....this is what we heard in 2012, President Romney. The 2008 election was explained by once-in-a-lifetime black/youth/Hispanic/whatever turnout.

Here's Pu's advice for winning an election: believe what the facts tell you instead of what you want to believe. Your side is down. Losing in every state that matters according to the RCP poll of polls....so...what's your answer? Address things swing voters are interested in? No!

....Let's instead live in the alt-right universe where polls are wrong and where turnout isn't already baked into polling methodology. Really, I want a viable conservative party in the US, so don't take this personally, but you're living in an echo chamber that serves to confirm what you want to believe yet isolates you from winning elections.

The polls have always been right for the last 30 years.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/110548/gallu ... rends.aspx


Pu.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24070
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 4:38 am

FreequentFlier wrote:
rfields5421 wrote:
stratosphere wrote:
FBI were not going to let it happen.


I'm constantly amazed at how the right wing will throw their own people under the bus.

The FBI is run by one of the most hardcore, but extremely honest and principled, Republican right wingers in government. He was a hardcore leader of President George W. Bush's DOJ.

He was among the most successful and hardest federal prosecutors prior to that. Then he took the Dick Cheney revolving door to make a few million He was confirmed by the Senate by a vote of 93 to 1 with 2 senators voting Present.

His possible appointment to the US Supreme Court was hailed by the conservative media and senators as an excellent choice. His appointment was stopped by liberals who generally oppose him.

----------------------------------------------

Here the conservatives have one of their brightest, and best. Someone everyone says would eventually be a great Supreme Court Justice - being trashed - because he upholds the law to the letter and the practice. He knows when a case is winnable or not. He also knows that it is stupid to spend millions of dollars prosecuting a case that will be lost - only for a political purpose.

-------------------------------------------------

In my opinion, people who complain about the FBI letting Hillary off - simply want to ignore the facts of the investigation.

Because they know in their heart that Donald Trump is a disaster this country cannot afford. Stuck with a horrible choice, their only option is to cry foul.

Yes, there is a major foul. The Republicans didn't stop Trump and nominate a real conservative.


Oh please, spare us. If Hillary were just an average Joe (or Jane), and not a major Presidential candidate, there is no question she'd be going to prison at this point for obstruction of justice. The FBI admitted on the Friday before a major holiday weekend that it was aware that her aides had destroyed evidence with hammers and yet still chose not to release that information to the public during the actual investigation.

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-hill ... nes-2016-9

Additionally, the FBI has now acknowledged that it was aware Clinton's team had used the internet program "BleachBit" to wipe her personal clean despite a subpoena of the emails delivered just prior.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-0 ... hit-moment

"Which brings us to the "Oh Shit" moment.

On March 25, 2015, the Undisclosed PRN Staff Member had a "conference call with President Clinton's staff." Apparently, in the days following that call, the Undisclosed PRN Staff Member had an "'oh shit' moment" when he realized he had forgotten to wipe the PRN server clean as he had been instructed to do back in December by Cheryl Mills.

Therefore, sometime within the 6 days after a call with "President Clinton's Staff," that PRN server was wiped clean using BleachBit despite the subpoena from the House Select Committee on Benghazi received weeks earlier on March 4, 2016. "

Trump is terrible, and no one should be voting for him. But while I initially bought the contention that Hillary is (slightly) better, I no longer do. She's a liar and a criminal by any reasonable definition, as demonstrated above, and the only ones defending her at this point are partisan hacks. The fact of the matter is that her disapproval ratings are basically now equivalent to Trump's awful numbers.

I strongly advocate voting third party this year, but given that the likelihood is that one of the awful two leading candidates will win, it seems likely that either will ultimately be fired and replaced in 2020. Call it a do-over if you will.


The interesting thing I hear is that the right keeps saying "Clinton's staff" and just assumes that Clinton gave the orders. No evidence of that, just "Clinton's staff..."

Also, when Clinton was under oath, she said that she regarded ALL state emails as classified. Which is why she largely ignored the markers.

I found this article helpful:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2 ... tons-email

And with quotes and citiations.

"But it's Mother Jones" the right whines.....
 
User avatar
einsteinboricua
Posts: 8716
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 11:48 am

I'm actually looking forward to the debates. That's when everything will get settled. It's easy to say "I'll make the country great and provide jobs"; it's another to expose the fine print of how you'll do that.

I want to see fiscal hawks who complain about government spending supporting a candidate that promises tax cuts galore but also plans to increase spending in all areas. Basic math tells you it won't give you a balanced budget.

"Oh, but the economic input from tax cuts can offset that"...except if people decide to stash that money away for savings, it's money that's not being circulated and does not contribute to the economy or revenue for the government.
 
bmacleod
Posts: 2990
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 3:10 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:32 pm

einsteinboricua wrote:
I'm actually looking forward to the debates. That's when everything will get settled. It's easy to say "I'll make the country great and provide jobs"; it's another to expose the fine print of how you'll do that.



Two years 1980 and 1988 where debates were critical in big landslides.

1980 - Reagan famously responds to Carter's accusations - "There you go again" and "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

1988 - Gov Dukakis says he would not support death penalty even if his wife were raped and murdered.

Don't forget George H W Bush looking at his watch in 1992.


Anyone's guess what slip-ups Trump will make?
 
User avatar
einsteinboricua
Posts: 8716
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:46 pm

bmacleod wrote:

Two years 1980 and 1988 where debates were critical in big landslides.

Even 2012 was a year where debates were critical. Remember how Romney got a better performance in the first one and polls started tightening? Grandpa Biden stole the spotlight in his debate against Paul Ryan and allowed Obama some cover before the 2nd debate where he performed way better.

Having seen Clinton testify time and time again before Congress and knowing how she debates, this should be a cakewalk for her and if she actually fumbles in the debates and allows Trump to take a lead, then she deserves to lose.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 14149
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 3:18 pm

luckyone wrote:

North Carolina being a battleground isn't that surprising. Neither is Georgia. Of the states that Obama lost to Romney, his smallest margins of loss were in North Carolina (1) , and Georgia (2)

.
Of course it isn't too surprising, but the fact that NC is a battleground is bad for Trump. The demographics of NC portend bad things for GOP presidential candidates. As do Georgia's.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24070
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 4:02 pm

bmacleod wrote:
Anyone's guess what slip-ups Trump will make?


He will open his mouth.

The debate will be the same "I will make America great again" and "I will build the wall and make Mexico pay for it" schtick we have heard from him.

What is really starting to get people to notice is that Chris Wallace will not call out either candidate (read: Trump) on lies. "That's not my job" he explains.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/09/fox-new ... e-debates/
 
bmacleod
Posts: 2990
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 3:10 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 4:03 pm

casinterest wrote:
luckyone wrote:

North Carolina being a battleground isn't that surprising. Neither is Georgia. Of the states that Obama lost to Romney, his smallest margins of loss were in North Carolina (1) , and Georgia (2)

.
Of course it isn't too surprising, but the fact that NC is a battleground is bad for Trump. The demographics of NC portend bad things for GOP presidential candidates. As do Georgia's.



More bad news for Trump - Real Clear Politics has once solid red TX now in the leaning GOP column.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map.html
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 4:16 pm

And yet this morning, the NYT headline says the latest national poll has Trump and Hillary TIED. Where are all those people if not in swing states too?

Some here should also look into the 'Bradley Effect'.
 
User avatar
einsteinboricua
Posts: 8716
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

Re: U.S. Election Two Months Out: Looking At The Electoral College

Tue Sep 06, 2016 4:17 pm

bmacleod wrote:
More bad news for Trump - Real Clear Politics has once solid red TX now in the leaning GOP column.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map.html

Texas has been leaning red for quite some time in the RCP average. The lack of polls coupled with the tight race in the few polls that have been conducted puts Texas in the lean column. But Texas, at most, is "Likely" GOP. It would take Trump a catastrophic meltdown or attack against "Texas values" for Texas to become purple.

Besides, the big margin used by RCP to denote a Lean/Likely/Tossup state is unusual. A candidate has to average over 5% over their opponent to land the state in a Lean column; make it 10% for Likely...and polls have to be churning out constantly. Otherwise, like Kansas, you'll end up with a tightening of a race (the latest KS poll showed Trump's lead shrinking significantly). Any average below 5% or polls that show a race tightening means the state moves back to Tossup which is why Clinton's 272 edge was reduced to 229 after WI, PA and VA moved back to Tossup.

I wouldn't put too much emphasis in the RCP average if polls are not coming out of all states. It doesn't take into account past voting patterns either (MS, UT, and TX leaning GOP is unheard of when they're solidly red states).

That said, WaPo published a list of state by state polls and found Clinton leading in Texas by 1. Again, a fluke most likely.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: scbriml and 30 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos