Could we be in for a shock come November 8th?

a reply to: Sillyolme

Interesting - I hadn't even thought about it, but I live in North Texas and I haven't really seen any presidential campaign signs in yards for either candidate.

ETA: The general conversations I'm hearing is that a lot of people around here (anecdotal so take it for what its worth) and family / friends I have all around the country are mostly fed up with this election and likely voting 3rd party or 'not voting'.

I think voter turnout will be strong early indicators of what, if any, 'silent majority' shows up...

It doesn't matter if Trump were to win the popular vote by even 80 million. Bush lost the popular vote in 2000 by more than 500,000 which isn't a great amount but nevertheless, it was a loss.

It will cause a great upset though inre the system we have in place. So the shock will be that Trump wins the popular vote by my guess of around 3-5 million but HRC will be the elected POTUS.

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: Sillyolme

Interesting - I hadn't even thought about it, but I live in North Texas and I haven't really seen any presidential campaign signs in yards for either candidate.

Eh, just drive around the Dallas suburbs. As is usual, you will see Republican signs. The Democrats aren't really putting up signs (as they didn't drive around with Obama stickers on their cars because it could get your car damaged) but if signage is any indication, there is LESS signage for Trump than there was for Mitt Romney in 2012.

And the Republican signage I see is all about local races.

Are you saying it would be a "surprise" if Trump was elected?

LOLOLOLOL.

Please stop listening to the main stream media.

A surprise would be a 3rd party candidate winning.

a reply to: jjkenobi

A bigger surprise would be a trump win. Latest numbers show Hillary would get 304 electoral votes if the election were held today.

originally posted by: Sigrun
a reply to: Bloodydagger

The real shock would be if Clinton won, the most unpopular and discredited politician ever...

I'm an outsider in all this, I only became politically aware back in 2014 and, living in Scotland this is the first Presidential Election I've really paid attention to. I remember when Clinton was announced as a candidate all the talk was of her being the Elite's Candidate which I believe she could be, the world (apart from Russian) MSM are rallying behind her and failing to report on the substantial amount of info released by wikileaks recently.

If Trump wins I see it being above all odds...

The Poll %'s usually always end up being different in the end, because of the silent majority.

a reply to: Bloodydagger

Its like reruns. Remember the racist sexist homophobic George Bush? There was no way he was going to win, not against such a cool guy like gore! Oh that idiot against Kerry? Forget about it! Georgebush brought us into a stupid war that is killing our troops, there is no way anyone would elect him again.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I've always had my suspicions about that comeback.On topic I don't think there will be any last second surges.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: ColeYounger

It's being said that there are up to 10 million 'closet' Trump voters. We'll find out soon.

I am still in the closet as a Trump supporter, except around ATS.

Why is that ???

I boldly talk louder than I do here, and on a good many topics including this one WHEREVER it presents itself, and enjoy doing so.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

science of statistics

now that is a laugh. I remember my statistics prof in collage. He taught us how to spin them anyway we wanted.

THAT is the science of statistics, making them spin to your whim.

They can be great tools, but when it comes to MSM and politics. NEVER trust them.

originally posted by: Bloodydagger
a reply to: Sremmos80

Its why you see a lot of people say that if the Right had a traditional candidate, that this thing would have been over during the summer months.

A traditional candidate would not have been able to survive being the target of a Clinton campaign. A traditional candidate would not been able to get down in the dirt and fight with Clinton.

He may or may not make a good President, but he makes a damn good candidate. Anyone "traditional" would have been steamrollered by the Clinton machine.

Has anyone watched the clips of the speeches and debates that track the Dems, IND, Repubs with the red, blue, yellow lines?

The Ind and Rep are pretty much neck and neck while the Dem blue line goes the opposite way.

Trump is way ahead with Independent voters.

I'd be shocked if he doesn't win by a landslide.

originally posted by: dismanrc
a reply to: Krazysh0t

science of statistics

now that is a laugh. I remember my statistics prof in collage. He taught us how to spin them anyway we wanted.

THAT is the science of statistics, making them spin to your whim.

They can be great tools, but when it comes to MSM and politics. NEVER trust them.

Yes statistics are spinnable, but if you know how to interpret and READ statistics you can also unspin the data rather easily. Stop letting people tell you what statistics say and read the info yourself. It's not hard. But dismissing statistics just because they are "spinnable" is a laughable excuse. I mean you said it yourself, Science of Statistics. So that means you can peer review the data presented right? But it's always easier for you types to just invent excuses not to look at the data and just ignore it altogether as not real.

a reply to: EvillerBob

I don't think so, because a traditional candidate would have stayed on message and these Wikileaks scandals among many others would be stained in the minds of Americans by now.

In the past few elections who had the crowds, Obama and not Romney or McCain.
Now who has the crowds, Trump, Clinton's crowds are bused in and tiny.

And remember with a volatile electorate polls can be off by as much a 20%, and when the media is saying Clinton could take Texas from poll data you now something isn't right, Texas hasn't been blue for 40 years.
Trump could take the entire rust belt as Americans that want a better job don't care about some locker room talk a decade ago.

a reply to: jjkenobi

Betting odds are over 80% against Trump. The CO candidates are given better odds than third party candidates.

Whatever happens, I'm staying home that week. Both sides are nuts. That means no matter who wins someone is guaranteed to flip somewhere. It's official Netflix and catch up on reading week in this house.

originally posted by: MisterSpock
Don't forget about the Democrats silent majority. They are out there, in every town, lurking. You never hear from them, but come election day, they will rise from their graves and vote Democrat.

Well I can tell you I'm a Democrat and I will not be voting for Hillary, but rather voting my conscience.

originally posted by: SisterDelirium
Whatever happens, I'm staying home that week. Both sides are nuts. That means no matter who wins someone is guaranteed to flip somewhere. It's official Netflix and catch up on reading week in this house.

At least you're not voting emotionally on uninformed or misinformed nonsense.

I vote the direction I want to go.