Collapse

[whell]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...nton-5491.html

Wasn't it a month ago that we were lead to believe that this was an 8 point Clinton lead, and she had the election wrapped up?

Poof!

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...nton-5491.html

Wasn't it a month ago that we were lead to believe that this was an 8 point Clinton lead, and she had the election wrapped up?

Poof!

Heh, if RCP is your touchstone? You're going to disappointed on Tuesday, bro.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Heh, if RCP is your touchstone? You're going to disappointed on Tuesday, bro.

Right now your boy Nate Silver has it 2-1 in favor of Hillary.

That's represents a significant move towards Trump in the past week to ten days.

To look at it another way, you are now playing Russian roulette with 2 bullets in a six shot revolver.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...tion-forecast/


Then there's the expectations game.

You Hillaybots have set yourself up for a huge landslide win for Hillary.

Even if Trump loses, if he can keep it close, it will be a major embarrassment for her.

And then there's the Senate.

The Republicans have to defend 24 seats this time around.

The Democrats only 10.

24-10.

With those kind of odds in their favor, if the Democrats don't take back the Senate it will be a testament to the weakness of their candidate.

[icenine]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

Right now your boy Nate Silver has it 2-1 in favor of Hillary.

That's represents a significant move towards Trump in the past week to ten days.

To look at it another way, you are now playing Russian roulette with 2 bullets in a six shot revolver.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...tion-forecast/


Then there's the expectations game.

You Hillaybots have set yourself up for a huge landslide win for Hillary.

Even if Trump loses, if he can keep it close, it will be a major embarrassment for her.

And then there's the Senate.

The Republicans have to defend 24 seats this time around.

The Democrats only 10.

24-10.

With those kind of odds in their favor, if the Democrats don't take back the Senate it will be a testament to the weakness of their candidate.

I don't think winning the Presidency, by whatever margin, has ever been a major embarrassment for any candidate.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Heh, if RCP is your touchstone? You're going to disappointed on Tuesday, bro.

This is like shooting fish in a barrel.

[Pio1980]

An empty suit channeling P.T. Barnum and every demagogue that drew a crowd won't release tax documents that would prove he is a fraud, yet he has a rabid fan base of gullible fools.
Nothing that happens around Hillz is going to change him into a Presidential intellect, and as unlikely as Hillz could be redeemed by the office, it is far more likely with her than him.
I'll take that chance.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[whell]

Originally Posted by Pio1980

An empty suit channeling P.T. Barnum and every demagogue that drew a crowd won't release tax documents that would prove he is a fraud, yet he has a rabid fan base of gullible fools.
Nothing that happens around Hillz is going to change him into a Presidential intellect, and as unlikely as Hillz could be redeemed by the office, it is far more likely with her than him.
I'll take that chance.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

I'm definitely heading in the opposite direction, choosing the "unknown versus the known". The last couple months has been an appropriate reminder of what 8 years of "Clinton 1" was like, and what "Clinton 2" would likely bring.

Still undecided between P.T. Barnum and the "geographically - challenged" candidate, but IMHO either are better than the likely constant barrage of ethical and judgement lapses that would accompany another Clinton administration.

[nailer]

Originally Posted by whell

I'm definitely heading in the opposite direction, choosing the "unknown versus the known". The last couple months has been an appropriate reminder of what 8 years of "Clinton 1" was like, and what "Clinton 2" would likely bring.

Still undecided between P.T. Barnum and the "geographically - challenged" candidate, but IMHO either are better than the likely constant barrage of ethical and judgement lapses that would accompany another Clinton administration.

Economically Clinton 1 was pretty good.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by nailer

Economically Clinton 1 was pretty good.

Clinton benefited from several things.

One was that the baby boomers were hitting their peak earning years and wre pumping plenty of money into the economy.

Then there was the stock market boom during his second term where the Nasdaq stocks were trading at anywhere from 100 to infinity times earnings.

Everyone thought they were going to be millionaires.

But it was all funny money.

I remember one young Dude where I worked that was bragging about how he had made 50 grand in the market in the last year and how he was going to retire in five years.

Last I heard he's now in his 50's and still working at the same place trying to hold on for his thirty years so he can get his pension.

[nailer]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

Clinton benefited from several things.

One was that the baby boomers were hitting their peak earning years and wre pumping plenty of money into the economy.

Then there was the stock market boom during his second term where the Nasdaq stocks were trading at anywhere from 100 to infinity times earnings.

Everyone thought they were going to be millionaires.

But it was all funny money.

I remember one young Dude where I worked that was bragging about how he had made 50 grand in the market in the last year and how he was going to retire in five years.

Last I heard he's now in his 50's and still working at the same place trying to hold on for his thirty years so he can get his pension.

Being a millionaire isn't all that special.