Who thinks Trump will win?

OS_Head

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

wow, the election might come down to a few states deciding it? Please share us more of your great insights.

Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida. Get those and it's done.

ohnonotgmail

OS_Head wrote: »

Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida. Get those and it's done.

WOW! that is amazing information that nobody else thought of.

OS_Head

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

wow, the election might come down to a few states deciding it? Please share us more of your great insights.

You think it's gonna be a walk in the park then.

ohnonotgmail

OS_Head wrote: »

You think it's gonna be a walk in the park then.

If you could win arguments by stating the bleeding obvious you would be well ahead.

Tell me how

OS_Head wrote: »

You think it's gonna be a walk in the park then.

Everyone knows its gonna come down to swing states.

That's why they get such attention.

OS_Head

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

WOW! that is amazing information that nobody else thought of.

You're tone doesn't suit you. :P Pennsylvania will be the key, Ohio next up. I think Florida is in the bag and Wisconsin will support law and order.

partyguinness

duploelabs wrote: »

11 out of 45 is 75.4%.

Again ill ask the same question. Has an incumbent being doing this badly in the polls at this stage and turned it around?

I left it at 10 rather 11 as JFK was...well... he was dead and not best placed to run anywhere let alone for reelection. Again, the sentence clearly states that when incumbent was able to run. Even 75% is still a massive majority.

That's the difference here which I said from the very outset. I do not read too much into polls or read too much into them. It may very well turn out that the polls are spot on. We will just have to wait and see.

8-10

Electoral college is such a dumb system.

If Trump does win the White House, it's again going to be a winner with less votes than his opponent.

#Democracy

OS_Head

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

If you could win arguments by stating the bleeding obvious you would be well ahead.

Besides it being bleeding obvious, what other reason do you want to ask.

ohnonotgmail

OS_Head wrote: »

Besides it being bleeding obvious, what other reason do you want to ask.

I wasn't asking you anything. why would I do that????

duploelabs

partyguinness wrote: »

I left it at 10 rather 11 as JFK was...well... he was dead and not best placed to run anywhere let alone for reelection. Again, the sentence clearly states that when incumbent was able to run. Even 75% is still a massive majority.

That's the difference here which I said from the very outset. I do not read too much into polls or read too much into them. It may very well turn out that the polls are spot on. We will just have to wait and see.

There's 11 names in my list, it doesn't include Kennedy.
Can you not answer the question I've asked you three times already

Bass Reeves

All tge talk about 2016 fails to factor in the Bernie factor. In 2016 many of Bernie younger supporters considered that the Democratic party and Clinton conspired to deny Bernie the nomination. Many were so disillusioned that they failed to turn out to vote or didn't vote for Hillary in the election.

That is not a factor this time if there is one thing that Bernie supporters hate more than the top table of the DP is Trump after the last four years especially because of his attack on Obamacare and his nomination of Barrett who could well row back Roe/Wade legal precedences.

OS_Head

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I wasn't asking you anything. why would I do that????

Cos you probably felt you got schooled earlier on. My bad.

ohnonotgmail

OS_Head wrote: »

Cos you probably felt you got schooled earlier on. My bad.

is that the post where you described me as a leftie? LOL

OS_Head

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

is that the post where you described me as a leftie? LOL

Nope, just in general.

Call Me Jimmy

8-10 wrote: »

Electoral college is such a dumb system.

If Trump does win the White House, it's again going to be a winner with less votes than his opponent.

#Democracy

I think it's well designed and strikes a balance that is proved in the pudding that conservatism and liberalism get roughly half the time in charge and that a lot of elections are close. If you really don't want it to be possible for less populated or rural states to be meaningful in the elections then do you really want a united states?

ohnonotgmail

OS_Head wrote: »

Nope, just in general.

you seem to share trumps trait of massive overconfidence in your own ability.

Igotadose

OS_Head wrote: »

Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida. Get those and it's done.

Still leaves 38 undecided - that's 260 Biden, 240 Trump. Take a look at the map and decide all the undecideds.

OS_Head

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you seem to share trumps trait of massive overconfidence in your own ability.

It doesn't take much ability to school you though, does it?

ohnonotgmail

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

I think it's well designed and strikes a balance that is proved in the pudding that conservatism and liberalism get roughly half the time in charge and that a lot of elections are close. If you really don't want it to be possible for less populated or rural states to be meaningful in the elections then do you really want a united states?

you describe a system where a handful of votes relatively speaking in a very small number of states decides the presidency as balanced?

ohnonotgmail

OS_Head wrote: »

It doesn't take much ability to school you though, does it?

Blimey, it is worse than I thought.

OS_Head

Igotadose wrote: »

Not enough. Still leaves 38 undecided - that's 260 Biden, 240 Trump.

We must have different in the bag assessments.

OS_Head

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Blimey, it is worse than I thought.

The TDS is strong in this one.

is_that_so

Igotadose wrote: »

Still leaves 38 undecided - that's 260 Biden, 240 Trump. Take a look at the map and decide all the undecideds.

You can't really because of all the postal votes, perhaps a good portion of them are heading to Biden.

Call Me Jimmy

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you describe a system where a handful of votes relatively speaking in a very small number of states decides the presidency as balanced?

What I mean is it balances the two ends of the political spectrum, the two most relevant differences between populations in the country imo. If it wasn't balanced you'd have democrats with power over all the states almost all the time, which you can say is more directly representative but would not be great for the union and would sow a lot more resentment than the current system.

Overheal

duploelabs wrote: »

Adams
Burren
Polk
Pierce
Buchanan
Hayes
Harrison
Taft
Hoover
Carter
GHW Bush

All would like a word

Ah here, that's 11 out of 45.

Too bad Trump wont be lucky 13, he will settle for 12th, what an Apostle.

ohnonotgmail

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

What I mean is it balances the two ends of the political spectrum, the two most relevant differences between populations in the country imo. If it wasn't balanced you'd have democrats with power over all the states almost all the time, which you can say is more directly representative but would not be great for the union and would sow a lot more resentment than the current system.

it is not the purpose of democracy to give an advantage to one side. The US system is not democratic.

partyguinness

duploelabs wrote: »

There's 11 names in my list, it doesn't include Kennedy.
Can you not answer the question I've asked you three times already

But we can at least agree that the vast majority of incumbents who stand for reelection get reelected. Whether it is a 75% or 78% is really neither here nor there- it is still statistical fact. Agreed?

Your charge that I should acquaint myself with the "facts" was really a load of bollocks on your part. Agreed?

Apology accepted.

I have answersed you. I will do so again with a little more colour- I don't care about what polls may or may not indicate. Polls had Clinton and Gore in the lead (I don't care by how much) and look how that worked out so I am loathe to get too hung up on them.

Bascially your point is nobody has overturned such a deficit in the past. I'll take your word for it. Ok. Fine. Big deal. So what. As I have already said they may well be spot on but I wouldnt start jerking off just yet.

Potatoeman

Whoever wins I hope there’s a cleaner election in four year’s. Tired of the constant mud slinging from both sides.

Outlaw Pete

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Birthergate was going on long before Trump largely helped put the matter to bed

That's gotta be post of the year across the site. Bravo sir, fantastic stuff. Tremendous.