Trump 2016

[NovU]

Now you see why Vancouver needs borders walled.

[Cpt(K)]

With this semester's finals approaching I've been avoiding a lot of politic talk (distracting), but I recently heard Trump talk about John Kaisch eating, and how he takes a whole pancake in his mouth at once. I cracked up, my eyes were nearly shut closed with laughter-- I was driving, and heard it over the radio.

[[Q]]

phpBB [video]

phpBB [video]

[benji]

[benji]

phpBB [video]

[benji]

Javier Virgen13 hours ago
I kinda wish they all started to makeout after they all got covered in cheetos.

[benji]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/43 ... old-you-so

Remember, You Asked for This
by KEVIN D. WILLIAMSON May 3, 2016 10:20 PM @KEVINNR
I want to leave a note here, because I expect to have many occasions to link back to it in the next several months.

Americans and Republicans, remember: You asked for this. Given the choice between a dozen solid conservatives and one Clinton-supporting con artist and game-show host, you chose the con artist. You chose him freely. Nobody made you do it.

I will be reminding you all of that, from time to time.

[Axel]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/434906/pre-planning-my-i-told-you-so

Remember, You Asked for This
by KEVIN D. WILLIAMSON May 3, 2016 10:20 PM @KEVINNR
I want to leave a note here, because I expect to have many occasions to link back to it in the next several months.

Americans and Republicans, remember: You asked for this. Given the choice between a dozen solid conservatives and one Clinton-supporting con artist and game-show host, you chose the con artist. You chose him freely. Nobody made you do it.

I will be reminding you all of that, from time to time.

Get out of here with the National Review.

[[Q]]

So he's outlasted everyone in the race of the "lesser of all evils". Not too many great choices to begin with.

Love Bernie's ideas and stance on most things, but Hilary's got the best chance at taking down The Donald so I have to root for her.

[NovU]

You probably want to first look at Hilary's career and track record.

[[Q]]

You probably want to first look at Hilary's career and track record.

That doesn't matter. This country's proven time and again that your name is the biggest asset (if you're not a newcomer) in an election

Trump
Schwarzenegger
W. Bush
Reagan

[bigh0rt]

At this moment it's a tremendous uphill climb for Trump to beat Hilary in the general election. You won't find a single unbiased poll that suggests otherwise. Currently Trump lacks the support (comparatively speaking) of just about every large group that generally supports the eventual Presidential winner. Now, of course you'll see reports that suggest quite the contrary coming from his camp, but again, that's the fun you can have when you manipulate numbers. However, that being said, don't be surprised if he runs a very, very good campaign and swings many voters his way. He continues to use the same techniques and just steamrolled every other Republican candidate. You don't know a single person who doesn't know Ted Cruz as "Lyin' Ted", but can't name a single thing he's ever lied about. As I said initially, I think it is going to be very interesting.

[Axel]

You won't find a single unbiased poll that suggests otherwise.

Which ones are biased? The ones that don't support your assertion?

Currently Trump lacks the support (comparatively speaking) of just about every large group that generally supports the eventual Presidential winner.

Women? Blacks? Latinos? The same groups that never support Republicans?

You don't know a single person who doesn't know Ted Cruz as "Lyin' Ted", but can't name a single thing he's ever lied about. As I said initially, I think it is going to be very interesting.

Ben Carson dropping out of the race? Consistently misrepresenting his opponents views? His "forgetting" about the cushy loan from Goldman Sachs thanks to his wife?

[bigh0rt]

You won't find a single unbiased poll that suggests otherwise.

Which ones are biased? The ones that don't support your assertion?

I'd say anything that comes out of Trump or Clinton's individual camps would be largely biased, along with any blatant supporters of theirs, or polls conducted by individual news networks like MSNBC, CNN, or FOX News. I figured that was apparent and obvious, but the defensive approach is certainly another way to take my sentence... The Electoral Map is a very interesting thing, and often doesn't truly tell the tale of how an election goes. It's how we settle this thing, though, and I've yet to read a single news article that accurately paints a picture where Trump has anything other than a pretty good climb (currently; a ton can happen in six months) at the moment. Here's something from the New York Times just two days ago that suggests Donald would have to increase his polling margin by 10 points in each state to win. Of course that's one source only (here's one that has Trump leading in percentage points, but does not link to each state individually), but there's certainly a potential scenario where Trump wins the popular election but not the electoral map, if his popularity continues to soar among voters. It will also be interesting to see how many of the Sanders supports vote for Clinton, and how many of the Cruz/Kasich/etc. supporters vote for Trump. And if they don't, who they all ultimately vote for.

Currently Trump lacks the support (comparatively speaking) of just about every large group that generally supports the eventual Presidential winner.

Women? Blacks? Latinos? The same groups that never support Republicans?

This is just markedly untrue, based on everything I've come to understand about political races over the last few decades. The last Republican candidate to win the Presidency, George W. Bush, had strong support from all of the groups you mention, as I recall. A 5 second Google search tells me Bush took somewhere between 40-44% of the Latino vote in 2004, an even larger chunk than he took in 2000 (34%), and was a large reason for his victory. I'll leave the other two at my own speculation, and could definitely be wrong, but I'd bet not. In fact, and I certainly don't have the data to back it up, but I would imagine that every single Presidential winner in the last 30+ years, maybe substantially longer than that, has had at least a solid percentage of votes from these groups. Some of the largest expanding groups in the United States over that time period. You're welcome to pretend that their support is an afterthought in the race to the White House, though. I assure you Donald isn't. Otherwise, I wouldn't have seen him eating a taco bowl yesterday with the caption "I love Latinos!"; or had to have listened to Clinton say she puts hot sauce on everything (gut wrenching to even recall that garbage). Pandering is fun stuff. Both these know they need these voters in order to win. This isn't high level thinking here. It's not as easy as saying "We don't need no stinkin women, blacks, or latinos!!" You kind of do. It's a big reason why we didn't have President McCain or President Romney, and why we did have President George W. Bush.

You don't know a single person who doesn't know Ted Cruz as "Lyin' Ted", but can't name a single thing he's ever lied about. As I said initially, I think it is going to be very interesting.

Ben Carson dropping out of the race? Consistently misrepresenting his opponents views? His "forgetting" about the cushy loan from Goldman Sachs thanks to his wife?

95+% of the voting public would not have been able to name any of those things, if polled. Also, 75% of statistics are made up right on the spot, just like the last two I just used. I'd like to think you get the point here. I was actually complimenting Trump on how he has campaigned, and how it's been wildly successful with the name calling and branding, repetition, etc. It, while being laughable (and Clinton has been no better, albeit, while taking a different approach, but still unbearable to stomach), has been (obviously) incredibly effective, as he has, as I previously stated, steamrolled his competition thus far. Whether that's a product entirely of how well he's campaigned, the complete lack of competent competition, or some combination of the two, is uncertain. I'd hate to have you think I was being critical of your homey, though. I'm interested to see how the strategy holds up in the general election, though. We've got our name: Crooked Hilary, which should stick, and is largely deserving (looming indictment potential, and how she's slapped in the face with that should be must watch television, both in actuality and in parody). Will America latch on to it and carry him to the White House? Will they look passed (past?) it? I'm interested.

Here's another fun, and probably meaningless, yet still fun graph. These are the two least likable candidates we've seen in 35 years. It's Giant Douche vs. Turd Sandwich. Pretending that we'll truly be lucky to have either of these assholes in the White House is worth having a big laugh at. The fact that this is the best we can come up with is a shame. One of Donald Trump or Hilary Clinton is really going to be the next President of the United States. What a sentence.

[NovU]

phpBB [video]

[benji]

Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson has chosen former Massachusetts Gov. William Weld as his running mate,

Billionaire businessman and philanthropist David Koch has pledged “tens of millions of dollars” to help bankroll the campaign of Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson, according to a source within Johnson’s campaign.
...
But after publication, the spokesman told TheDC: “Reports that David Koch has pledged his support to Gary Johnson – or any candidate running for president for that matter – are untrue.”

Despite that denial, a source with a leadership position in the Libertarian Party told The Daily Caller Thursday afternoon that Johnson’s on track to receive the billionaire’s support.

“In the event that a Johnson/[Bill] Weld ticket emerges from the convention, a pathway is in place for significant funding from Koch, [Steve] Wynn and other large donors,” the source said.

Greatest VP pick in history, The Party's sugar daddy is back home, 1% here we come.

[benji]

[benji]

[Axel]

Republican establishment has taken over the Libertarian Party.

[bowdown]

Trump is disgusting. His protesters are full of hate. I dont like Bernie or Hillary but Trump in power can be downright destructive.

[Axel]

Trump is disgusting. His protesters are full of hate. I dont like Bernie or Hillary but Trump in power can be downright destructive.

No, your ignorance is disgusting.

"His protesters"

Did you happen to miss all the video of Trump supporters being egged and straight up assaulted?

phpBB [video]

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/06 ... ose-rally/

http://video.foxnews.com/v/492601013100 ... show-clips

Get your facts straight. The violence is coming from the left. It's not at all surprising that the most egregious violence is coming from California.

[bowdown]

A lot of these left wing attackers are thugs and low lives I never argued against that. My initial statement still stands.

[[Q]]

this argument is pointless. there are idiots and whackos on both sides.

[benji]

The Dream is Dead:

I’m Not Running for President

by DAVID FRENCH

I’m not the right person to challenge Trump and Hillary, but the path remains open for others.

Here is a sentence I never thought I’d type: After days of prayer, reflection, and serious study of the possibilities, I am not going to run as an independent candidate for president of the United States.

I gave it serious thought — as a pretty darn obscure lawyer, writer, and veteran — only because we live in historic times. Never before have both parties failed so spectacularly, producing two dishonest, deceitful candidates who should be disqualified from running for town council, much less leader of the free world.

Hillary Clinton lies habitually and changes position on virtually every public issue except for her pro-abortion extremism, and she has a suspicious record of making public decisions that favor donors to the Clinton Foundation. Her signal foreign-policy “achievement” was helping launch a war in Libya that not only cost American lives in Benghazi but also helped transform the nation into ISIS’s latest playpen.

To add to all that, she’s in the middle of an active FBI investigation. If I had handled classified information the way we know she handled classified information, my career would already be over, and the single goal of my life would be persuading the prosecutor to reach a lenient plea bargain.

Donald Trump also lies habitually (sometimes minute by minute), and changes position based on his moods. In one breath he claims to support working men and women, and then with the next breath he threatens to destroy our economy through trade wars or by playing games with the full faith and credit of the United States. He believes an American judge — a man born in Indiana who spent months hiding from drug cartels after they’d put a “hit” on him – can’t rule on a case involving Trump University because the judge’s parents emigrated from Mexico.

His supporters believe it demonstrates “strength” when he mocks the disabled and bullies women. He has attracted an online racist following that viciously attacks his opponents and their families — including my wife and youngest daughter.

Given this reality, it would be tempting to say that when it comes to confronting this national moment, “somebody” stepping up is better than nobody. But somebody is not always better than nobody. I’m on record saying that Mitt Romney could win. I believe others could run and win, and would make excellent presidents. Indeed, the path is there. I spent the last several days with some of the best minds in politics.

I learned that the ballot-access challenge can be met with modest effort (by an existing network ready to activate), that the polling for a true outsider independent was better than most people know, and that there are many, many Americans — including outstanding political talents — who are willing to quit their jobs — today — to help provide the American people with an alternative.

I believe with all my heart that there is an American movement ready to both resist the corruption, decadence, and dishonesty of the American elite and restore the promise of the American Dream. But that movement may not emerge for some time, and it might emerge only after further heartache and pain.

Let me also say that each person involved in the effort to recruit an independent candidate is a patriot. They are standing strong on principle when the GOP leadership — in lockstep — now marches to Trump’s beat. I admired them before this process began, and I admire them more even now.

And the fight is not over. Men such as my friend and colleague, Boston filmmaker and philanthropist John Kingston, stand ready to continue the effort — with substantial resources behind them. But we live in a time when patriots are mocked and demagogues celebrated. Even good men have reduced themselves to excusing the inexcusable and defending the indefensible.

To those who prayed for me and my family, I’m grateful beyond words. To those who defended my wife and kids from vicious attacks — engaging in a fight you didn’t seek — I’m forever in your debt. To those I’ve disappointed, I’m sorry. It is your devotion and integrity that help keep America great, and I believe you will ultimately prevail.

[bigh0rt]

No, your ignorance is disgusting.

Get your facts straight. The violence is coming from the left. It's not at all surprising that the most egregious violence is coming from California.

"The" violence? Like, all of it? What a statement. To pretend as if there's a group of innocents here, and that they're representative of an entire 'side' or party. This is lowest common denominator rationalization.

The silliest thing is to pretend this isn't happening on both sides. It's disgusting on both sides. A lot of the sentiment is good, and solid, and reasonable on both sides. But unfortunately, it isn't the best and brightest that are often taking to the streets on both sides. I saw many protesters, in person, both at Trump's rally at the Mid-Hudson Civic Center in Poughkeepsie, NY, and at Bernie Sanders', at Marist College; of which I attended both, to take in the scene, see what it was all about, etc. They're idiots. Both sides. I promise. One group's idiots are in no way superior to the other groups' idiots. They're equally ignorant and repulsive, shouting rhetorical nonsense that makes no sense. Yup, both sides. The thought that only one of them are is a large, sadly laughable part of the problem. "It's them, not us." Please. Unfortunately, instead of using protest as a means for actually urging change and highlighting issues, those protesting generally seem to be only wanting to incite incident/riff raff for the sake of it, and try to get in the next featured YouTube video that catches on. Trump supporters. Hillary supporters. Sanders supporters. There's violent, dangerous idiots among each camp, and they're out in full. The individual media outlets report whichever one supports their stance, and the others are just conveniently not reported. This happens on both sides. The violence is coming from everywhere, I assure you. I witnessed it, first hand. Watching only the media outlets who point at the other side, and plugging your ears about your own side of the aisle doesn't change that. You can't really think that it's a one sided thing, right? That's dangerous and divisive, at best.

[Axel]

No, your ignorance is disgusting.

Get your facts straight. The violence is coming from the left. It's not at all surprising that the most egregious violence is coming from California.

"The" violence? Like, all of it? What a statement. To pretend as if there's a group of innocents here, and that they're representative of an entire 'side' or party. This is lowest common denominator rationalization.

The silliest thing is to pretend this isn't happening on both sides. It's disgusting on both sides. A lot of the sentiment is good, and solid, and reasonable on both sides. But unfortunately, it isn't the best and brightest that are often taking to the streets on both sides. I saw many protesters, in person, both at Trump's rally at the Mid-Hudson Civic Center in Poughkeepsie, NY, and at Bernie Sanders', at Marist College; of which I attended both, to take in the scene, see what it was all about, etc. They're idiots. Both sides. I promise. One group's idiots are in no way superior to the other groups' idiots. They're equally ignorant and repulsive, shouting rhetorical nonsense that makes no sense. Yup, both sides. The thought that only one of them are is a large, sadly laughable part of the problem. "It's them, not us." Please. Unfortunately, instead of using protest as a means for actually urging change and highlighting issues, those protesting generally seem to be only wanting to incite incident/riff raff for the sake of it, and try to get in the next featured YouTube video that catches on. Trump supporters. Hillary supporters. Sanders supporters. There's violent, dangerous idiots among each camp, and they're out in full. The individual media outlets report whichever one supports their stance, and the others are just conveniently not reported. This happens on both sides. The violence is coming from everywhere, I assure you. I witnessed it, first hand. Watching only the media outlets who point at the other side, and plugging your ears about your own side of the aisle doesn't change that. You can't really think that it's a one sided thing, right? That's dangerous and divisive, at best.

I posted what I did because I haven't seen sufficient evidence to the contrary. Can you provide evidence of Trump supporters invading Hillary or Bernie's rallies, and assaulting them? The left has definitely instigated the violence and it's because they're aggrieved by Trump's presidential campaign. Sure there are idiots on all sides...lone wolves you could say. However there has been large scale violent protest only from the left.

[bigh0rt]

I posted what I did because I haven't seen sufficient evidence to the contrary. Can you provide evidence of Trump supporters invading Hillary or Bernie's rallies, and assaulting them?

Yes. I witnessed it, first hand. With my very eyes. Nothing got out of hand to the level that it did in California, and some other locations; but there were physical altercations spurred by protesters and supporters alike at both Trump's and Sanders' rallies. Largely, everybody behaved themselves, and the supporters acted in line, as did the protesters, who were generally respectful of everybody at both rallies. The idiots came out of the woodwork, screaming in faces, shoving, throwing things, etc. at both rallies though. All races, all genders, all parties. It was just garbage people behaving like garbage. Some in Trump shirts, some in Sanders shirts, at both events. The funny part was each side, afterwards, tried to claim that the other side had hired the protesters, citing Craigs List ads offering $15/hour to protest. You can't make this stuff up. Literally identical claims, down to the dollar amount, from both sides.

The left has definitely instigated the violence and it's because they're aggrieved by Trump's presidential campaign.

They absolutely have. And it's discouraging to watch as an American regardless of which candidate you support. And they're scum. That being said... So have the Trump supporters, who were urged by Trump himself, to violently remove protesters from rallies. Offering to pay the legal fees of those who violently remove protesters a few months ago, etc. Can't just pretend that didn't happen. It's on tape. It'd be convenient to, but ya can't. People being assaulted and sucker punched as they were escorted from arenas. They're also scum. So to say that the bulk of violence has been perpetrated by one side over the other is really just an unsubstantiated statement meant to support one's predisposition and 'side'; and it's not really accurate. It's a blanket statement meant to make one side look 'right' and the other side look 'wrong'. There's a whole lotta wrong happening everywhere, and everyone is at fault, and it's quickly going well beyond the laughable and into the concerning.


This woman is garbage.


This guy is also garbage.

Anybody taking a violent stance against somebody else because they have an opposing viewpoint is, objectively, an idiot. It's the lowest form of disagreement, reserved for the uneducated and mentally ill. Simpletons. I'd even extend that to say that anybody who can't even wrap their mind around why somebody with an opposing viewpoint may have said viewpoint, even if it is directly opposed to one's own beliefs, is also an idiot. I understand vehement disagreement. Being incapable of understanding why somebody may have a differing view, as radical as it may seem, is the sign of a moron. There's countless things I unbearably disagree with, but understand why somebody else may agree with, but at the same time does not bring me any closer to agreeing with. You don't need to be a rocket scientist; but with the way people are behaving... maybe you do.

The "omg you like Trump, you're a racist", and the "enjoy your socialism while you feel the bern" and the "enjoy voting for hilary just cause she's a woman"'s of the world. Anybody spewing any trite nonsense like that is a simpleton, plain and simple. Incapable of anything other than basement level thought and rationale. There's an obscene amount of it going on, and it doesn't look like it's slowing down any time soon.

[bowdown]

With these terrorist attacks adding up Trump is looking more and more likely to be elected.

[[Q]]

The attacks by the police? sUre, I would imagine a lot of Trump voters support that sort of thing.

[benji]

phpBB [video]

[benji]

http://www.vox.com/2016/7/21/12218136/d ... ion-afraid

by Ezra Klein on July 21, 2016, 1:20 p.m. ET @ezraklein

Tonight, Donald J. Trump will accept the Republican Party’s nomination for president of the United States. And I am, for the first time since I began covering American politics, genuinely afraid.

The simple fact of it is that Donald Trump should not be president of the United States. That is not because he is too conservative, as some Democrats would have it, or because he is not conservative enough, as many Republicans would have it. It’s because the presidency is a powerful job where mistakes can kill millions, and whoever holds it needs to take that power seriously and wield it responsibly. Trump has had ample opportunity to demonstrate his sense of seriousness and responsibility. He has failed.

It is said that the benefit of America’s long presidential campaigns is they offer the candidates time to show us who they really are. Trump has shown us who he really is. He is a person who should not be president. That he is being brought this close to the presidency — that he is one major mistake by Hillary Clinton away from winning it — should scare us all. It certainly scares me.

http://www.vox.com/2016/7/21/12253638/r ... ump-speech

Donald Trump doesn’t want to make America great. He wants to make it afraid.
Updated by Ezra Klein on July 21, 2016, 11:54 p.m. ET @ezraklein

Speech was a success before it was made!

[Lamrock]

I'm rooting for Crooked Hillary to win, but voting for Gary Johnson because if Washington goes Republican, Trump has already won in a landslide.

This election cycle I haven't really posted on here much at all because I tend to make a fool of myself when discussing politics, which is fine. I follow it the same way I follow sports - water cooler talk - celebrity gossip for men.

This is pretty bonkers though. I guess I should have seen it coming - in 2012 the Republicans were dying to choose someone silly but nobody quite had the staying power. If Herman Cain hadn't had his sex scandal it would have been something else. Now, the Republicans are kicking themselves for not having a system like the Democrats to prohibit primary voters from choosing someone other than the one of their choosing.

I was definitely rooting for Trump in the primaries - I certainly wouldn't in a million years want him to become president, but it was very entertaining to watch him roast the GOP establishment. I'd still prefer him to the Zodiac Killer, but it would be pretty bad if he actually won. Obviously he wouldn't be making any meaningful decisions, but as a lower middle class white male, I'd prefer things to keep going the way they're going. Hillary's gonna be pretty bad, but I'd still take her over a racist reality TV star.

In conclusion, I think we need to dispel with this fiction that Obama doesn't know what he's doing - he knows EXACTLY what he's doing!!!!!!!

[[Q]]

Lol I just saw a "losing" bumper sticker with Obama's logo in the word "gone" dated January 20, 2013

I wouldn't have the heart to leave a bumper sticker on if I lost

[Book_Gazette]

I'm rooting for Crooked Hillary to win, but voting for Gary Johnson because if Washington goes Republican, Trump has already won in a landslide.

This election cycle I haven't really posted on here much at all because I tend to make a fool of myself when discussing politics, which is fine. I follow it the same way I follow sports - water cooler talk - celebrity gossip for men.

This is pretty bonkers though. I guess I should have seen it coming - in 2012 the Republicans were dying to choose someone silly but nobody quite had the staying power. If Herman Cain hadn't had his sex scandal it would have been something else. Now, the Republicans are kicking themselves for not having a system like the Democrats to prohibit primary voters from choosing someone other than the one of their choosing.

I was definitely rooting for Trump in the primaries - I certainly wouldn't in a million years want him to become president, but it was very entertaining to watch him roast the GOP establishment. I'd still prefer him to the Zodiac Killer, but it would be pretty bad if he actually won. Obviously he wouldn't be making any meaningful decisions, but as a lower middle class white male, I'd prefer things to keep going the way they're going. Hillary's gonna be pretty bad, but I'd still take her over a racist reality TV star.

In conclusion, I think we need to dispel with this fiction that Obama doesn't know what he's doing - he knows EXACTLY what he's doing!!!!!!!

Hey heres what matters, the timing needs to matter. If you get the swinger states, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Vermont, North Carolina, Virginia, Florida, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Wyoming and Nevada need to be about filled, and Obama only lost one of these states, replenished it from California and other states.

If those states are fulfilled by the candidate, so check who's winning there to find a good prediction

[benji]

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/donald-trump-pepe-the-frog-and-white-supremacists-an-explainer/

[Axel]

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/donald-trump-pepe-the-frog-and-white-supremacists-an-explainer/

Lol. At the end it says... "This is Horrifying!"

At least they're admitting the fear mongering this time.

[benji]

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/31/trolls-for-trump

[Dommy73]

So the elections are around the corner and with all the crap both (major) sides did, we're apparently looking at pretty close result.

Any last comments? Should people decide enough his enough, end this social experiment and return under the rule of the Queen?

[benji]

Should people decide enough his enough, end this social experiment and return under the rule of the Queen?

Yes, Hillary is likely to win.

[Lamrock]

I'm pretty nervous. Hillary is terrible but Trump would be such a disaster.

[[Q]]

Hillary has the edge, but Trump is a couple of swing states away from making it a contest

[Axel]

I'm ready for this to be over with. I'm all in for Trump, but its difficult living in the most politically liberal city in NC. Even the businesses here are swearing allegiance to Hillary with no concern over losing customers. Can't even go into my favorite beer bar anymore because they've got Trump stickers lining the inside of the toilet and "Trump is a fascist" signs all over. I've been heckled by those "get out the vote" people walking up and down the street, given dirty looks and the finger by many a driver, countless hateful FB posts, and our local Republican HQ was firebombed and covered in graffiti...ugh. Just showing the same support for my candidate that others do for Hillary feels like walking down the street with a scarlet letter emblazoned on my forehead. I've met many people afraid of putting bumper stickers on their car for fear of vandalism.

Our country needs some serious help. I'm afraid it will only get worse after the election regardless who wins.

[bigh0rt]

Hillary has the edge, but Trump is a couple of swing states away from making it a contest

We should know once Florida reports whether it's a wrap, or if we need to keep watching. If Trump takes it, he's a few other swing states away from potentially getting to 270. If he loses it, it'd be next to impossible. Last I saw, Hilary was -250 or -300 to win, substantially down from the -450 she was prior to the last leak. Still, that's about a 65% chance to win. If you were going to put some money on Trump, the time to do so was a few weeks ago. Not nearly as much value to be had now; though you're getting much better odds on HRC than you would've gotten a few weeks ago, for those interested in trying to make a few bucks on this carnival.

[benji]

We'll know not long after 8 because all the states Trump needs close at the same time (and Ohio and NC will probably also be ready to be called):

[Lamrock]

Predicting a 307-231 win for Clinton, but we'll find out soon enough...

[benji]

That map seems alright, Hillary just over 300 seems about right. Nevada might be tricky. The key is that you tagged Ohio red, because I think people tagging it blue are being way overconfident.

[[Q]]

Even with OH & FL red, she still wins. She just needs to hold MI & PA

So I'll know the results by the time I clock out work? That's cool, no waiting for me.

Really interested in the local stuff for me. There's a plastic bag ban, requirement for condoms in porn, abolition of the death penalty, marijuana legalization, and background checks for ammo purchases all on the line tomorrow. Also rooting for the underdog to fill the House of Representatives spot in my district. Voted for Bao Nguyen, a Vietnamese Democrat who's gay, fluent in Spanish, and was the former mayor of my city after winning by 15 votes. He's the first politican who I think would actually vote the same way that I would if I were in Congress. It's a long shot, but I hope he wins.

[zzcoolj21]

I voted for Hilary in spite of Trump. I honestly dont agree with most of their agendas but Hillary seems like likes of a threat to my brothers and sisters. Don't want them to grow up in a world where you can openly be a bigot/racist and people are ok with it.

Also grab 'em by the pussy is a really bad campaign slogan.

[Cpt(K)]

I wrote in Evan McMullin (I wonder what sort of pejoratives the Clinton or Trump crowd would use for him and his supporters), while it certainly won't make a difference in Illinois, it was nice to exit the polling station knowing there actually was another option than those two (write-in's do count in this State). If only the rest of the nation would refuse to vote for either of the two loudest candidates.

If Clinton wins it, well, I think tighter restraints will be inflicted upon individuals to conflate themselves with a herd-mentality (the very type of constraints the fringe of the left has pulled over the Democrats already- toe the line or else). If Trump wins, I think it'll be more like Clinton (I believe they are semi-different candidates cut from the same cloth, but with their buddy-buddy relationship still intact), but with a little more individual liberty left alone than otherwise. Only because of the diverse arrays of influence involved though. What I can appreciate about the GOP, is that they contain many different subgroups that battle things out. Often times we hear how there's no unity in the GOP, it is actually a good thing to a degree. Intellectual diversity is as valuable if not more, than its counterpart.

If anything, I really would like everyone to have the epiphany that:

Trump is not a conservative
Clinton is not a liberal (in the classical sense)

They both have run similar lives, above everyone else, and do not possess the character to "represent" many of America's citizens. The constant pandering, and condescending lip-service is appalling. The way they try to appeal to minorities is especially disgusting. Alas, these appear to be the two choices we have. As the voting populace, again, decides to not chance a third-party candidate. Then again, the third-parties had a colossal failure of an effort to be as effective as they could have been.

I'm disappointed with all of the options, pretty much. McMullin received my vote only because, I hope by some miracle that something different happens this election (maybe, neither of the two main candidates reaching 270).

Don't want them to grow up in a world where you can openly be a bigot/racist and people are ok with it.

I do not understand the fear of America regressing in race-relations if Trump is elected, BLM has already accomplished that to a degree. Yeah, David Duke and other fellows will persist to exist, even under a second Clinton presidency.

If anything I'd be more worried about my relatives growing up in a world where anyone can hold contempt for someone, opposed to something, and be okay with it. We definitely don't like people harboring disdain for us, just because we disagree on something; so it should extend to those who are racist, sexist, or whatever. Not just because it is fair, but because it actually isn't detrimental to society. If people would vigorously make an effort to explain why someone's wrong, then it would be better. Some of us believe racism is in itself, stupid. The belief that your pigmentation (or lack thereof) gives you superiority over another, is absolutely false. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, in a world where there are bad ideas, perhaps showing why someone is wrong is better. Otherwise contempt boils over, and bad things happen. Eventually a certain group of individuals may get the reigns, and can run over anyone they deem as unfit. That isn't virtuous, it is actually what has lead to many atrocities in history (e.g. The Holocaust).

The concept is true for politics too, as we've witnessed (I myself no better than anyone else) a number of demonstrations of contempt for persons- opposed to bad ideas has taken place. Wouldn't it be strange if all the candidates talked about was how bad the other one was, and we never really got substantial information on their policy? Why, they could get away with a lot of things when given the chance to act once elected. The populace wouldn't know in great detail what the candidate actually intends and . . . yeah. That is kind of what has happened. Both of them conduct themselves in a deplorableway, and solely focusing on character as opposed to character and policy is not beneficial.

I wish someone would go back in time, remind everyone what we already knew about: "they're going to lure you into deciding which candidate is a worse person! They're going to turn disagreements into threats! "They're going to try to make you hate each others' guts!"

If you don't agree with me, you're obviously an unpatriotic, baby-eating, God-hating communist! Or maybe you're a homophobic, xenophobic, islamaphobic, item in a basket-of-deplorables!

I'm assuming this election will result in either a Trump or Clinton presidency.

[benji]

eastern kentucky sure loves them some trump wow at dem margins

phpBB [video]