2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

jem

My sources have told me that Trump has a bear fetish and likes to have naked romps with bear skin coats.
They also tell me that he and a 3 y/o sheep are having a deep and meaningful relationship.

On the other hand other sources tell me that Clinton likes to pretend she is a 3 y/o sheep and dresses up as one- but dont tell trump.

Obviously the above aren't true but some "reporters" on particular websites are more than capable of reporting them as fact.
Part of the big problem in USA is the fact that so many would read these websites and actually think they are real.
Waterford Whispers on steroids

Zubeneschamali

Amerika wrote: »

And Hillary wants to continue this boondoggle of a mess?

The ACA’s major coverage provisions went into effect in January 2014 and have led to significant coverage gains. As of the end of 2015, the number of uninsured nonelderly Americans stood at 28.5 million, a decrease of nearly 13 million since 2013.

http://kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/

B0jangles

What the heck is going on in the FBI???

https://thinkprogress.org/fbi-launches-internal-investigation-into-its-own-twitter-account-8d5fc2a81fdc#.rw9drkyrm

The FBI has launched an internal investigation into one of its own Twitter accounts.

The account at issue, @FBIRecordsVault, had been dormant for more than a year. Then on October 30 at 4 a.m., the account released a flood of documents, including one describing Donald Trump’s father Fred Trump as a “philanthropist.”

But it wasn’t until two days later, when the account tweeted documents regarding President Clinton’s controversial pardon of Marc Rich that the account began to attract significant attention.

The account has not been active since that tweet.

ThinkProgress has learned that the FBI’s Inspection Division will undertake an investigation of the account.

Candice Will, Assistant Director for the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility, said she was referring the matter to the FBI’s Inspection Division for an “investigation.” Upon completion of the investigation, the Office of Professional Responsibility will be referred back to the Office of Professional Responsibility for “adjudication.”

Federal law and FBI policy prohibit employees from using the power of the department to attempt to influence elections.

Also the girl who is the alleged victim of Anthony Weiner's sexting has written an open letter which is highly critical of Comey's recent behaviour, she accuses him of using her and the crime committed against her as political tools.

Mr. James Comey

FBI Director

November 2, 2016

I am the 15-year-old (now 16) who was the victim of Anthony Weiner. I now add you to the list of people who have victimized me. I told my story originally to protect other young girls that might be a victim of online predators.

Your letter to Congress has now brought this whole matter back into the media spotlight. Not even 10 minutes after being forensically interviewed with the FBI for seven hours, I received a phone call from a REPORTER asking for a statement. Why didn’t you communicate with the local FBI agents that I had just spoken to? They could have scheduled our interview sooner or scheduled a time to interview me later, or change locations of the interview. My neighborhood has been canvassed by reporters asking for details about me.

In your letter, you chose to use a vague approach, meaning the media had to keep searching to try and find out what evidence you had uncovered and how. Every media outlet from local to national has contacted me and my family to get my “story.” Why couldn’t your letter have waited until after the election, so I would not have to be the center of attention the last week of the election cycle?

In his “cooperation” with you and with his love of the spotlight, Anthony Weiner has given information that led to the media finding me. You have assisted him in further victimizing me on every news outlet. I can only assume that you saw an opportunity for political propaganda.

I thought your job as FBI Director was to protect me. I thought if I cooperated with your investigation, my identity as a minor would be kept secret. That is no longer the case. My family and I are barraged by reporters’ phone calls and emails. I have been even been blamed in a newspaper for causing Donald Trump to now be leading in some polls and costing Hillary the election.

Anthony Weiner is the abuser. Your letter helped that abuse to continue. How can I rebuild my life when you have made finding out my “story” the goal of every reporter? When I meet with my therapist next time, she will already know what we are going to talk about before I get there by reading Friday, October 28th, 2016’s New York Times article.

I may have been Weiner’s victim, but the real story here is that I am a survivor. I am strong, intelligent, and certain that I will come out from under this nightmare, but it will not be as a result of your doing your job to protect me. I hope that by making my letter to you public, you will think about how your actions affect the victims of the crimes you are investigating. The election is important, yes, but what happened to me and how it makes me feel and how others see me, is much more important. It’s time that the FBI Director puts his victims’ rights above political views.

— Girl that lost her faith in America

P.S. To all reporters: AP, FOX, CBS, NBC, and all other media outlets, please respect my position and stop interrupting my life!

https://www.buzzfeed.com/davidmack/heres-an-open-letter-to-james-comey?utm_term=.ogVzPaNdx#.coOPEMLpx

Amerika

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The ACA’s major coverage provisions went into effect in January 2014 and have led to significant coverage gains. As of the end of 2015, the number of uninsured nonelderly Americans stood at 28.5 million, a decrease of nearly 13 million since 2013.

http://kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/

You can put lipstick on pig, but it’s still a pig.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2016/11/03/Obamacare-Being-Repealed-Consumers-Providers-and-Insurers

walshyn93

B0jangles wrote: »

What the heck is going on in the FBI???

https://thinkprogress.org/fbi-launches-internal-investigation-into-its-own-twitter-account-8d5fc2a81fdc#.rw9drkyrm



Also the girl who is the alleged victim of Anthony Weiner's sexting has written an open letter which is highly critical of Comey's recent behaviour, she accuses him of using her and the crime committed against her as political tools.



https://www.buzzfeed.com/davidmack/heres-an-open-letter-to-james-comey?utm_term=.ogVzPaNdx#.coOPEMLpx

Think progress is not a reputable source. I highly doubt FBI insiders see it as their first port of call when they want to leak info. Can't find anything to back that up elsewhere except other unknown sites like the verve.

B0jangles

walshyn93 wrote: »

Think progress is not a reputable source. I highly doubt FBI insiders see it as their first port of call when they want to leak info. Can't find anything to back that up elsewhere except other unknown sites like the verve.

If you don't like the source I linked, all you have to do is check the twitter account mentioned:

https://twitter.com/FBIRecordsVault

It is as described in the article, it was dormant for more than a year then popped back into action on the 30th october with a puff piece about Fred Trump (describes him in the tweet as a 'philanthropist' but leaves out his widely documented links with the KKK.)

Given everything else that has come from the FBI in the last month it is very hard to believe that that was just a coincidence.

Zubeneschamali

Amerika wrote: »

You can put lipstick on pig, but it’s still a pig.

That pig is starting to look mighty purty:

In the first quarter of 2016, there were 8.6 percent of Americans — or about 27.3 million people — who were uninsured, the first time in history that the nation's uninsured rate fell below 9 percent.

48.6 million down to 27.3, that's a 44% drop in the number uninsured.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

You can put lipstick on pig, but it’s still a pig.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2016/11/03/Obamacare-Being-Repealed-Consumers-Providers-and-Insurers

So what's your alternative plan?

mrkiscool2

New Hampshire is now the battle ground that may decide this election. 538 giving Trump a 35.5% chance now (polls and polls plus starting to converge too) and he has experienced a 133% jump in support in NH in the last week, with it being far and away the largest bar on the prediction model, meaning there is a lot of uncertainty even in their model. If Trump takes it, he most likely wins the election (assuming Nevada does go his way).

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

So what's your alternative plan?

My plan? You give me too much credit.

Here’s what I do know. Nothing Hillary Clinton is proposing will do diddly to bring down costs, and instead will only increase costs. She wants to add new regulations to the ACA exchanges like capping out-of-pocket limits and forcing insurers to offer more generous coverage. This will only further increase premiums, not decrease them. Hillary wants taxpayers to pay for more subsidies to help bail out Democrats for causing higher premiums. All this does is mask the problem with taxpayer money, more debt, more interest on the debt. And Clinton wants to add a “public option” to the exchanges. The only way this could possibly work without increasing costs is to incorporate strict price controls on hospitals and doctors... resulting in lesser quality care, longer wait times, and less doctors.

Healthcare is going to need a real bipartisan, patient-centered approach. With the collapse of ObamaCare that time is coming, and coming rather quickly. We have no other choice.

One thing we can do is open up competition across state lines. The only states that have been able to keep premiums down were the ones that had greater levels of competition.

Timberrrrrrrr

Trump live on sky now talking to a half empty auditorium and he just can't help himself with the lies :pac:

Zubeneschamali

Brian? wrote: »

So what's your alternative plan?

Since Obama took what was the Republican plan and ran with it, they are kind of snookered now.

mrkiscool2

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Trump live on sky now talking to a half empty auditorium and he just can't help himself with the lies :pac:

It's 12:30 on a Thursday in America, hardly going to be full like! But we know Trump is a liar, we know Hillary is a liar. Don't really need reminding of that fact :P

Amerika

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Trump live on sky now talking to a half empty auditorium and he just can't help himself with the lies :pac:

What lies?

Billy86

B0jangles wrote: »

What the heck is going on in the FBI???

https://thinkprogress.org/fbi-launches-internal-investigation-into-its-own-twitter-account-8d5fc2a81fdc#.rw9drkyrm

Looks like doing one candidate significant favours regarding their connections to Russia and hackers doesn't make you hack-proof.

Its pretty clear what's going on here.

Zubeneschamali

Amerika wrote: »

Healthcare is going to need a real bipartisan, patient-centered approach.

Obamacare is a bipartisan approach - it is basically Romneycare at the Federal level.

Amerika

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Since Obama took what was the Republican plan and ran with it, they are kind of snookered now.

No republican voted for it. Nice try, but no cigar. Democrats own ObamaCare, lock, stock and barrel. And I take it you are alluding to RommeyCare. The only chance that had to succeed was because Massachusetts was one of the most affluent states in the nation and because a very large percentage of the population already had employer provided insurance. And it failed anyway. Anyone with any common sense would have know it couldn’t work for the rest of the nation.

Billy86

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Amerika wrote: »

Healthcare is going to need a real bipartisan, patient-centered approach.

Obamacare is a bipartisan approach - it is basically Romneycare at the Federal level.

Maybe even more accurate would be to label it Gingrichcare.

Zubeneschamali

Amerika wrote: »

No republican voted for it.

No Republican could vote for any plan from a Democratic president, for fear of getting primaried by a Tea Party wingnut, even though the plan itself was lifted from republican proposals.

They had no issues blowing up the deficit with Dubya's unfunded health spending, because Dubya had an R beside his name.

The Republican party is completely broken as a political party. Trump is the result.

Amerika

B0jangles wrote: »

What the heck is going on in the FBI???

Not just the FBI. The whole damn system is broken. A redistributionist President who believes he can legislate by executive fiat and cares more about politics then the people he is sworn to represent. A Congress that cannot stop itself from spending us into oblivion, and cannot not legislate effectively. A shift in the court system to one that also ignores the US Constitution and believes they can legislate when they are prohibited from doing so. And impartiality on the part of the DOJ, the FBI, the IRS, and our press, no longer exists. The people are sick of it all. Hillary promises more of the same. Trump promises to blow the whole corrupt system up.

Iceboy

Obama delivers plea to America to reject Trump

http://uk.businessinsider.com/obama-donald-trump-north-carolina-2016-11?r=US&IR=T

Yeah, Obama, hope and change. Obama the Nobel Peace Prize winner that destroyed Libya, gave rise to ISIS, funded Iran with used bank notes. Obama who backs the corrupt Clinton Foundation. Obama who has sold the American people out to the Globalists.

mrkiscool2

Iceboy wrote: »

Obama delivers plea to America to reject Trump

http://uk.businessinsider.com/obama-donald-trump-north-carolina-2016-11?r=US&IR=T

Yeah, Obama, hope and change. Obama the Nobel Peace Prize winner that destroyed Libya, gave rise to ISIS, funded Iran with used bank notes. Obama who backs the corrupt Clinton Foundation. Obama who has sold the American people out to the Globalists.

Really don't get the hate for Obama. He was dealt an extremely crappy hand for his Presidency and he has done quite well with it. Don't think you'll find a single President who didn't fcuk something up like!

Amerika

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No Republican could vote for any plan from a Democratic president, for fear of getting primaried by a Tea Party wingnut, even though the plan itself was lifted from republican proposals.

They had no issues blowing up the deficit with Dubya's unfunded health spending, because Dubya had an R beside his name.

The Republican party is completely broken as a political party. Trump is the result.

If you believe this come over to my place and we can ride a multi-colored unicorn to Atlantis together.

Any effective president could get things done in a bipartisan manner. Heck, even GW Bush was able to do it, and he was hated by the Democrats. Obama will probably go down as the most ineffective president of modern times.

And GW Bush sucked when it came to spending. I think he gave in to all spending requests of the Democrats in order to get their support for the Iraq war.

I have been hearing about the demise of the Republican party since 2008, when Democrats had just won the presidency, had majority in the House, and majority in the Senate. In a few short years the GOP regained control of the House, then the Senate, and might take the Presidency. Methinks the reports of the GOP death are greatly exaggerated.

mrkiscool2

Amerika wrote: »

If you believe this come over to my place and we can ride a multi-colored unicorn to Atlantis together.

Any effective president could get things done in a bipartisan manner. Heck, even GW Bush was able to do it, and he was hated by the Democrats. Obama will probably go down as the most ineffective president of modern times.

And GW Bush sucked when it came to spending. I think he gave in to all spending requests of the Democrats in order to get their support for the Iraq war.

I have been hearing about the demise of the Republican party since 2008, when Democrats had the presidency, majority in the House, and majority in the Senate. In a few short years the GOP regained control of the House, then the Senate, and might take the Presidency. Methinks the reports of its death are greatly exaggerated.

They'll lose the Senate this time though, R need a miracle in that they would need to tie (their only real chance) and for Trump to win to get control of the Senate. As it stands will be a Republican House, Democratic Senate and, likely, a Democratic President.

marienbad

Amerika wrote: »

If you believe this come over to my place and we can ride a multi-colored unicorn to Atlantis together.

Any effective president could get things done in a bipartisan manner. Heck, even GW Bush was able to do it, and he was hated by the Democrats. Obama will probably go down as the most ineffective president of modern times.

And GW Bush sucked when it came to spending. I think he gave in to all spending requests of the Democrats in order to get their support for the Iraq war.

I have been hearing about the demise of the Republican party since 2008, when Democrats had just won the presidency, had majority in the House, and majority in the Senate. In a few short years the GOP regained control of the House, then the Senate, and might take the Presidency. Methinks the reports of the GOP death are greatly exaggerated.

with the help of a little bit of gerrymandering I believe .

Zubeneschamali

Amerika wrote: »

even GW Bush was able to do it

Yes - because his opposition were Democrats, who are still more interested in governing than in playing to their extreme wing.

Several republican Senators have already announced that they will block any appointment to the Supreme Court for the duration of a Hillary presidency.

Total obstructionism, declared upfront.

Amerika

marienbad wrote: »

with the help of a little bit of gerrymandering I believe .

How does gerrymandering affect the Senate or Presidential elections?

Lirange

Akrasia wrote: »

I wonder how high the turnout of minority voters would be if the race was between Sanders and Trump. We'll never know, but I suspect that a lot more minority voters would be motivated to vote for an inspirational candidate like Sanders than an establishment pro-corporate candidate like Clinton.

Sanders would definitely beat Trump soundly in my opinion. But certainly not because he outperforms her among minorities (he doesn't). Hilary Clinton just does relatively poorly among working class whites in general. Bill Clinton established a vast political apparatus in the 90s in the south and inner city areas that really tapped into the African American vote. Even when Obama first started his campaign in 2008 many black party activists initially continued to back Hilary. It wasn't so much that Sanders struggles among this demo it's that this is one demo where the Clinton's political brand remains popular. They prefer Clinton but would move to Sanders in the General without issue. The problem for Hilary is that in a General election the votes of African Americans in the south don't help since they are generally reliable red states.

Do you remember which state really kick started Obama's run to the Democratic nomination in 2008? It was the first one. Lily white Iowa. Hilary was expected to comfortably win the party nomination in a rout that year. If he doesn't win the first one he doesn't generate the buzz, publicity, and the media continue not to view him as a serious threat. Obama won Iowa in the general election too, both in 2008 and in 2012. Clinton will likely lose Iowa this year. So what happened? It is not because Trump polls inordinately well in Iowa. Ted Cruz won the Iowa Caucus. Whereas Clinton only narrowly defeated Sanders in a virtual dead heat.

The reason Clinton is going to lose Iowa this year is because she has always been unpopular there. She performs better among urban better educated whites on the coasts than among the middle-working class whites in the midwest. Even on the left coast where many of the more liberal leaning urban whites reside and where Sanders had some pull they have largely shifted to Hilary without issue. Obama also won Ohio twice. Clinton is expected to lose there. Obama was competitive in Indiana. Narrowly winning in 2008 and narrowly losing in 2012. Clinton is not competitive at all in Indiana. Minnesota votes more consistently for Democrats than just about any other state and although Hilary should win there that it is even considered by some to be a battleground state underscores her weakness in this region. Clinton struggled against Sanders most in the midwest during the run for the Dem nomination. But it's not like this was Trump's core powerhouse region during the Republican nomination run either. In other words it's not DT's appeal in the midwest as much as her lack of it here. In contrast she actually polls as well if not better in North Carolina and Virginia than Obama did.

Clearly, Trump's anti-immigration stance is one of his platforms that has aided his campaign. But likewise obviously to view his supporters as just a monolithic mass of racists is too simplistic. Like Brexit those voters can tip the balance but they certainly don't make up any where near the whole. The southwest and the sunbelt states as well as the big cities receive the most immigrants not these rural and semi-rural areas and medium sized towns that predominate in the midwest of America. Hilary is viewed as part of the establishment obviously, but she's seen as more cozy with big business than Obama, less appealing to unions, less appealing to farmers, etc. In fact Obama and Clinton are closer than these groups realise on many of these issues but that's not the perception. Of course, why Trump is perceived as an answer is baffling given his background but he's singing from the right hymn sheet. It's not just that Trump is sounding off a populist note that resonates it's that Hilary is viewed as the antithesis. As hard as it is to believe Sanders is viewed quite favourably among many of those that will vote for Trump even though obviously some of his positions would be an anathema to Bernie. During the nomination process Sanders was very popular in this region.

Amerika

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

They'll lose the Senate this time though, R need a miracle in that they would need to tie (their only real chance) and for Trump to win to get control of the Senate. As it stands will be a Republican House, Democratic Senate and, likely, a Democratic President.

They might get control of the Senate, but I wouldn’t be counting my chickens as of yet. Right now it is forecasted at being 46 Republicans and 46 Democrats with 8 spots a toss up. Of those 8 spots, I think Republicans will get 5 and Democrats will get 3.

Lirange

Right now worst case scenario has Clinton winning 273-265. In that event she loses Florida, North Carolina, and Nevada but still wins. If she loses one of Pennsylvania, Colorado, or Virginia all bets are off. But she's consistently been ahead in these states and there is a little more of a cushion to withstand the Donald's ComeyClown bump.

marienbad

Amerika wrote: »

They might get control of the Senate, but I wouldn’t be counting my chickens as of yet. Right now it is forecasted at being 46 Republicans and 46 Democrats with 8 spots a toss up. Of those 8 spots, I think Republicans will get 5 and Democrats will get 3.

I notice you omit the House elections ?

mrkiscool2

Lirange wrote: »

Right now worst case scenario has Clinton winning 273-265. In that event she loses Florida, North Carolina, and Nevada but still wins. If she loses one of Pennsylvania, Colorado, or Virginia all bets are off. But she's consistently been ahead in these states and there is a little more of a cushion to withstand the Donald's ComeyClown bump.

New Hampshire is getting closer. Again, in the last week Trump has gone from around 15% to around 35%. It could be too little too late for him to win, but if he takes NH, along with Nevada (he is going to take Florida and North Carolina) he wins the election.

Sofa Spud

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

New Hampshire is getting closer. Again, in the last week Trump has gone from around 15% to around 35%. It could be too little too late for him to win, but if he takes NH, along with Nevada (he is going to take Florida and North Carolina) he wins the election.

Agreed - and the scary bit is that if you look at the polls that are being released, quite a few of them were taken in a time period that spans before and after last Friday's intervention by Comey, so the latest email stuff is not fully baked into the numbers coming out yesterday and today - it's gonna be tense...

Amerika

marienbad wrote: »

I notice you omit the House elections ?

You are correct. Give the lady a cigar. The Republicans will keep control of the House. And the House is affected by gerrymandering. But the House is only 1/2 of Congress, and effectively 1/6 of the power of the three branches of government. And gerrymandering is limited to populations, and all the population does get balanced representation. Doesn’t it make sense to draw a map where a representative’s views supports the majority of the population he/she represents? My district is not gerrymandered well, and we unfortunately have almost a 50/50 split between D’s and R’s. We are represented by a RINO. Ineffective, IMO, because he seems to want to legislate by popularity and who he can get the most votes from in a divided area. Nobody is happy with him from either party, but he just keeps winning. I didn't vote for him in the primary, but will in the general election. I might have voted for the Democrat this time because of what he claims he'll do, but after looking at his track record all too often show his actions run 180 degrees from his current words.

mrkiscool2

Sofa Spud wrote: »

Agreed - and the scary bit is that if you look at the polls that are being released, quite a few of them were taken in a time period that spans before and after last Friday's intervention by Comey, so the latest email stuff is not fully baked into the numbers coming out yesterday and today - it's gonna be tense...

Yeah, it's the reason that the band is so large on the fivethirtyeight swing state bit. Larger the bar, the more uncertain they are. NH has such poor polling (something they acknowledge on the site) that they can't even make an accurate call. It's mad that Trump was dead and buried two weeks ago and he might win it now. Either way, the American public lose!

Amerika

Sofa Spud wrote: »

Agreed - and the scary bit is that if you look at the polls that are being released, quite a few of them were taken in a time period that spans before and after last Friday's intervention by Comey, so the latest email stuff is not fully baked into the numbers coming out yesterday and today - it's gonna be tense...

Even though Trump might win the popular vote, I still don't see a path for him getting over 265 of the EC. It would take a miracle to do so, and I don't think there is enough time before the election to change it.

B0jangles

I've been hearing from a couple of people who work in polling that very few decent ones are coming out at this point because a good one costs in the hundreds of thousands to conduct and noone wants to drop that kind of money this late in the game.

mrkiscool2

Amerika wrote: »

Even though Trump might win the popular vote, I still don't see a path for him getting over 265 of the EC. It would take a miracle to do so, and I don't think there is enough time before the election to change it.

He is currently projected for 266 if he takes Nevada (which is still a toss-up to be honest). NH would push him to 270 and hence the win.

Sofa Spud

B0jangles wrote: »

I've been hearing from a couple of people who work in polling that very few decent ones are coming out at this point because a good one costs in the hundreds of thousands to conduct and noone wants to drop that kind of money this late in the game.

Interesting point - if you click on a state on 538 map (http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/florida/ ) and then scroll down and sort the polls by date at look at the grade rating Nate Silver has given each poll, your point is clearly backed up - the latest tend to be more C's than A's....

blackcard

Melania Trump is not the best at public speaking

RobertKK

I think Trump will win this barring any more scandal.

I can see him winning Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Nevada, Utah and Arizona. Then flip somewhere like New Hampshire which would give a tie, or somewhere like Colorado or as recent activity has shown with both the Clinton and Trump camps campaigning in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan, and with Clinton having started TV ads there again, they are also back in play.
States the Clintons thought they had wrapped up are showing trends to Trump, the thing is will the momentum be halted or will it continue.

Kelly Ayotte looks like winning the senate seat in New Hampshire and while she doesn't like either Trump or Clinton, I think she could drag Trump to a win New Hampshire.
That would put Trump and Clinton at 269 each, if Trump wins Florida, North Carolina, Ohio and Nevada, think Trump wins Arizona relatively easily in the end.

The signs are not good for Clinton, and election day cannot come soon enough for her.

BoJack Horseman

RobertKK wrote: »

I can see him winning Florida....

Based on what Robert?

The latest 4-way poll in Fl today gives Hillary a 4pt lead.

Christy42

Amerika wrote: »

Even though Trump might win the popular vote, I still don't see a path for him getting over 265 of the EC. It would take a miracle to do so, and I don't think there is enough time before the election to change it.

Trump seems more likely to win without getting the popular vote than Clinton right now (obviously Clinton is more likely to win and get the popular vote but you get the point). This is largely because of Clinton's gains in currently pointless states like Texas. Running Texas closer than Democrats have tended to in recent years is useless to her (might help Democrats in future years though) in terms of winning the presidency but increases the amount of the popular vote she gains.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-trump-could-win-the-white-house-while-losing-the-popular-vote/

Slightly out of date but I think it still applies.

alastair

Amerika wrote: »

You're wrong about the anger. I'm in a small group plan and it went up over 30%. Reality sucks! So you say 75% of ObamaCare purchasers were subsidised. The ObamaCare plans here are cost prohibited even with being subsidised. The extremely high deductibles and out-of-pocket costs are causing people not to go doctors unless something it is a minor doctors visit or something extremely costly. Here's what people remember... ObamaCare was guaranteed to drive down insurance costs and not cost the taxpayer one thin dime. Both lies. And Hillary wants to continue this boondoggle of a mess?

Is your group plan under the auspices of the AMA marketplace? Are you in receipt of a subsidy? Because if so, with an average increase of 7% on small group schemes in PA, you would appear to be paying an increase well over the norm, and should lobby your scheme to move policy.

alastair

Amerika wrote: »

No republican voted for it. Nice try, but no cigar. Democrats own ObamaCare, lock, stock and barrel. And I take it you are alluding to RommeyCare. The only chance that had to succeed was because Massachusetts was one of the most affluent states in the nation and because a very large percentage of the population already had employer provided insurance. And it failed anyway. Anyone with any common sense would have know it couldn’t work for the rest of the nation.

Except it is working. On many measures it's very successful.
https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/212721/2017MarketplaceLandscapeBrief.pdf

Iceboy

We have witnessed the largest, most elaborate political coverup in history. Obama's Department of Justice, the mass media, the DNC and Hillary Clinton have almost succeeded, by attacking Trump. Their defense, was to go on offense and they flooded the media, with claims of violence, found to be planned and instigated by paid Team Hillary goons, who even rehearsed before hand. Their offense was all staged and fake. Hillary is the most corrupt, dishonest politician to ever run for office.

Overheal

5 more days of this ****...

walshyn93

B0jangles wrote: »

If you don't like the source I linked, all you have to do is check the twitter account mentioned:

https://twitter.com/FBIRecordsVault

It is as described in the article, it was dormant for more than a year then popped back into action on the 30th october with a puff piece about Fred Trump (describes him in the tweet as a 'philanthropist' but leaves out his widely documented links with the KKK.)

Given everything else that has come from the FBI in the last month it is very hard to believe that that was just a coincidence.

I know the story around the twitter account but that's no proof of an investigation. The reason the twitter account released the info online is because FBI policy is to release online after 3 FOI act request have been made.

The same thing happened with Trumps father discrimination suit a few weeks ago and no investigation was launched then.

alastair

Amerika wrote: »

You are correct. Give the lady a cigar. The Republicans will keep control of the House. And the House is affected by gerrymandering. But the House is only 1/2 of Congress, and effectively 1/6 of the power of the three branches of government. And gerrymandering is limited to populations, and all the population does get balanced representation. Doesn’t it make sense to draw a map where a representative’s views supports the majority of the population he/she represents? My district is not gerrymandered well, and we unfortunately have almost a 50/50 split between D’s and R’s. We are represented by a RINO. Ineffective, IMO, because he seems to want to legislate by popularity and who he can get the most votes from in a divided area. Nobody is happy with him from either party, but he just keeps winning. I didn't vote for him in the primary, but will in the general election. I might have voted for the Democrat this time because of what he claims he'll do, but after looking at his track record all too often show his actions run 180 degrees from his current words.

Sounds like your district is producing the sort of pragmatic bipartisan repesentatives that are so needed to break the party-first logjam that inhibits your country.

Iceboy

Overheal wrote: »

5 more days of this ****...