Posted: 9/15/16 at 3:07pm
So this is pretty terrifying...
WAKE-UP CALL: RACE GETTING TIGHT
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/clinton-trump-polls_us_57da8cdbe4b08cb14093e578
Posted: 9/15/16 at 4:09pm
As it did in the primaries, my confidence comes from doing the math. In this case, the math is in the Electoral College and the state-by-state votes.
RealClearPolitics has an interactive map where you can make the states red or blue as you choose.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/create_your_own_president_map.html
If you start with the map prepopulated with the states that are shoo-ins for each candidate, and then you give Trump 3 of the currently discussed states--Florida, Ohio and Texas--Clinton still wins. (As long as she gets Pennsylvania and Virginia.)
Here's the worst-case scenario I came up with:
Again, if she loses Ohio, Florida and Texas, she can still win. And if she gets one of those--or Georgia or North Carolina, she wins in a landslide.
Posted: 9/15/16 at 4:40pm
Easy, she'll snap out of it and cooler heads will prevail. I hope.
Posted: 9/15/16 at 11:57pm
Clinton's troubles with millennials are nothing compared to Trump's.
Clinton beats Trump 56 to 20 among voters under 35.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/08/14/donald-trump-historic-trouncing-among-younger-voters-hillary-clinton-president-poll/88666746/
Posted: 9/16/16 at 7:01am
While her numbers are better than Trump's, she's still leaving votes on the table. That leaves almost a quarter of millennials looking at 3rd parties, undecided, etc. There's also a perceived enthusiasm gap there that may need to be addressed; millennials may not turnout at the numbers needed.
Posted: 9/16/16 at 7:11am
You're right, they won't. Because they DETEST both Clinton and Trump. Out of 300 million possible people, how did we end up with old, white, corrupted cronies (one via the public sector; the other via the private) as our only choices????
Posted: 9/16/16 at 9:00am
Scary stuff.
Trump cracks the Electoral College lock
A new round of state polls shows Donald Trump suddenly has a path to 270 electoral votes.
Just six weeks ago, Hillary Clinton's advantage in the Electoral College looked insurmountable. Now, based on the latest round of public polls, it's a different story.
If the election were held today, Donald Trump would apparently win roughly as many electoral votes as Hillary Clinton — who held a commanding lead in early August and seemed to be closing off all possible Trump routes to 270 electoral votes.
But state polling averages, which can be lagging indicators, are beginning to show Trump in the lead. According to POLITICO’s Battleground States polling average, Trump is now ahead in Iowa and Ohio — and he’s tied with Clinton in vote-rich Florida.
A slightly more aggressive estimate could add Nevada, North Carolina and one electoral vote in Maine to Trump’s tally: The New York real-estate magnate is ahead in the most recent polls in Nevada and North Carolina, and in Maine’s Second Congressional District.
That, plus all the other states Mitt Romney won four years ago, would get Trump to 266 electoral votes — just four shy of the 270 needed to win. Clinton’s once-comfortable cushion has been deflated to such an extent that if Trump wins those states and the electoral vote in Maine, he only needs one more state to win — with Colorado, Michigan, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Virginia the most likely targets. And there’s recent polling evidence suggesting he is in striking distance in some of those states.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/donald-trump-electoral-college-polls-228249#ixzz4KQJLOuqD
Posted: 9/16/16 at 9:16am
The only difference between that article and the map I just posted is Nevada.
Updated On: 9/16/16 at 09:16 AM
Posted: 9/16/16 at 11:09am
PalJoey said: "The only difference between that artiocle and the map I just posted is Nevada.
"
Must you obnoxiously respond to every single legitimate article posted in this thread warning others of a possible Trump election? We get it. You're super confident and sure of your numbers (even though they mean literally nothing...). Great. Go pat yourself on the back and sit back on Election Day. If you're so comfortable with this, you have nothing to worry about it. Get the hell out of here or contribute something new, rather than just trying to refute or downplay the legitimate concerns of other posters. Jesus.
Posted: 9/16/16 at 11:43am
Liza's Headband said: Must you obnoxiously respond....
OH THE FUCKING IRONY....
Delete your account or your life...whichever hurts the most.
Updated On: 9/16/16 at 11:43 AM
Posted: 9/16/16 at 11:46am
Okay, Mr. Bipolar. And I'm guessing you'll be back in about 20 minutes to suddenly apologize?
Posted: 9/16/16 at 11:55am
Must you respond to every single legitimate article posted in this thread warning others of a possible Trump election?
Simple answer: Yes!
Posted: 9/16/16 at 12:02pm
Except that you respond with no substance. Unless the article is something you posted, you always have a problem with it or need to refute it. We get it. You believe, deep down in your heart, that many of these analysts and pollsters are wrong; Trump will be defeated in November. Others, however, do not feel the same way. They worry your hubris and confidence will actually be a detriment to the outcome, and that Trump may very well win this election. So cut it out and allow the freedom of expression and discussion... STOP TRYING TO LIMIT OR HINDER IT. Thank you.
Posted: 9/16/16 at 12:13pm
I remember when folks were laughing at the absurdity of the possibility that Trump would be the nominee. And again, like then, Trump's numbers are moving. He has momentum.
Posted: 9/16/16 at 12:35pm
I think Trump's election could lead to unprecedented upheaval in our political system. Admittedly, that's based mainly on my own reaction to him, and my assumption that I can't be the only one.
Here's what I mean, without putting too fine a point on it: I will not just sit back and tolerate this piece of garbage becoming president, regardless of the outcome of the election. It simply cannot be allowed to happen - period. I don't know exactly what that means - I certainly disavow the use of force, just to be clear - but the means will necessarily be extrapolitical and therefore destabilizing.
I've detested other presidents before, but not like this. I suspect others will feel the same.
Posted: 9/16/16 at 12:49pm
My goodness, Headband, you can be such a drama queen! (FYI, using boldface reduces your credibility; it does not increase it. It communicates hysteria, as does using all caps.)
You have never been interested in discussion here. All you have been doing, since the primaries, is dehumanize Hillary Clinton and name-call her and lob insults as if they were facts, when in reality, the woman who (goddess willing!) will be our next president has a platform that, if enacted, will make her the most progressive president of our lifetimes. When read in detail, that platform probably satisfies 95% of the reforms you claim to desire. (But you won't read it, because you're a ninny and a kvetch.)
Meanwhile, her reality-show opponent is someone you ought to be spending 100% of your time defeating, but instead you join in with our shamefully ratings-driven media and ignore his lapses as "antics" while continuing to treat the false accusations against her as if they are fact. They are not. She is not a liar. She is not untrustworthy. She is a not a warmonger. She is not a neocon. She is not a neoliberal. All those are fictions that a sad number of Americans have been brainwashed into believing.
She is not a bitch or the C word. (Well, maybe she is a bitch, but only in the way that the best of us are.)
Elections ebb and flow. She had an 80% chance of winning two weeks ago, then she had some flu-like symptoms that turned into pneumonia, and her numbers went down. Next week are the debates, and she'll be up again. That's just show-biz. I mean, politics.
But goodness, gracious, Mrs. Anna! I do not have the power to "limit or hinder" anyone's freedom of expression. No one does. Not even you, Miss Breathless Gal-Reporter-with-the-Inside-Scoop-That-Invariably-Turns-Out-to-Be-Poop.
Winning entails Staying the Course. Winning entails not responding to every ebb with Chicken Little-ish hysteria. Winning is what we do. Whining is what you do.
#I'mWithHer #IGuessYou'reWithHim
Updated On: 9/16/16 at 12:49 PM
Posted: 9/16/16 at 1:56pm
"our next president has a platform that, if enacted, will make her the most progressive president of our lifetimes. When read in detail, that platform probably satisfies 95% of the reforms you claim to desire."
It would be nice if our free press started covering THAT.
Posted: 9/16/16 at 2:07pm
The cogressional black caucus is GOING IN on Trump right now and it is gloriouos!
Posted: 9/16/16 at 2:17pm
They are going ALL IN on him and yes, it is quite glorious! Can't wait for the after discussion.
Posted: 9/16/16 at 3:05pm
Bakari Seller just shut down the two Trump supporters on the panel with Brooke Baldwin.
Posted: 9/16/16 at 9:20pm
In 2012, Obama and Romney were much closer in the polls, and Obama ended up beating Romney handily in the Electoral College and by 4 percentage points in the popular vote.
That election was seen as a toss up until the actual results. The current election, even with the new Trump "surge" (until he says something else stupid) is still seen as leans Clinton.
Posted: 9/16/16 at 9:59pm
I think that Hillary will completely destroy Trump in the debates. It will be hard for even the most ardent Trump supporters to not see this. Can't wait for the polls after the first debate.
Posted: 9/16/16 at 10:34pm
Today was a disastrous day for Trump, and I think it will reverse the polling trend back to Clinton.
Posted: 9/17/16 at 12:00am
So cut it out and allow the freedom of expression and discussion... STOP TRYING TO LIMIT OR HINDER IT.
I think that wins the prize for the most hilariously hypocritical post in BWW history.
You've always been free to express yourself in the most ludicrous manner and you always have. What is being hindered precisely? And how is attempting to silence another's voice allowing freedom of expression and discussion, especially when posting a dissenting opinion is an example of such freedoms? You sound like Sarah Palin.
Updated On: 9/17/16 at 12:00 AM
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
