Time to get on the TRUMP train

[big dick]

Right but the fact that it's even that close in AZ and GA just proves what a shitty candidate Trump is

[big dick]

Obama was -190 or so on this date 2012.
She is -380
He's fucked latinos early voting is up 100%+

[Dan Druff]

Obama was -190 or so on this date 2012.
She is -380
He's fucked latinos early voting is up 100%+

Romney didn't get many people excited. Trump has.

Hillary hasn't either, but she benefits from the hatred/fear many have for Trump.

Voting overall will be way up, so quoting early Latino voting numbers isn't as significant as you think it is.

[snake_in_the_ass]

Tradesports is closed, no?

I think they were ultimately bought out by some other outfit several years ago, but right now i cant remember who. If my memory serves me, I tried researching who bought them/what happened to them several years ago, and i think i had figured out what happened, but for the life of me at this moment I cannot remember the results I came up with. Shit was changing around so much between poker sites/betting sites at the time, I just didn't keep up. I do remember that Tradesports was based in Ireland (At least that's what I think i remember)

They had some type of merger with intrade, but I think they went broke. I believe they stiffed me for a few bucks when it came crashing down. Been a while.

[Dan Druff]

Predictit still alive and well

I have like $2500 on there at the moment

Fees suck balls though

[snake_in_the_ass]

Obama was -190 or so on this date 2012.
She is -380
He's fucked latinos early voting is up 100%+

Romney didn't get many people excited. Trump has.

Hillary hasn't either, but she benefits from the hatred/fear many have for Trump.

Voting overall will be way up, so quoting early Latino voting numbers isn't as significant as you think it is.

What about the n-wordS? I don't expect to see many n-wordS wearing "I Voted" stickers this election cycle.

[Krypt]

Trump is in for a rude awakening if he thinks financial professionals all along the east coast are voting for him. He's going to get his shit pushed in.

[limitles]

This thread has now entered the coffee talk stage making it even more awful.
I'd be stocking up on canned goods and getting all the ammunition and fuel possible not to mention the best Mad Max ride available

[big dick]

Obama was -190 or so on this date 2012.
She is -380
He's fucked latinos early voting is up 100%+

Romney didn't get many people excited. Trump has.

Hillary hasn't either, but she benefits from the hatred/fear many have for Trump.

Voting overall will be way up, so quoting early Latino voting numbers isn't as significant as you think it is.

Is voting going to be up by 100% ?

[snake_in_the_ass]

Trump is in for a rude awakening if he thinks financial professionals all along the east coast are voting for him. He's going to get his shit pushed in.

Typical Persian who thinks he knows everything. Start saving up for the $200,000 weddings and hairy wife. The only thing worse than an Armenian scumbag in Los Angeles is a fucking Persian. I have fucked a few Persian women and they sure do love to suck cock but why do they insist to get fucked in the ass? To preserve their virginity ?

[JohnCommode]

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/...no-longer-over
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...r-clinton.html
I have to go with Charlie Cook. Basically, he says that Clinton is the favorite in any state that is polling within the margin of error because of the mighty Democratic ground game. The Republicans are possibly better at this than they were four years ago, but that's not saying much. This is pretty much what happened to Romney, though I like Trump in Iowa and maybe Ohio, but that's it for real battleground states (Arizona and Georgia are about two presidential cycles away from real battleground status). It's interesting that there is one American Indian Democratic elector in Washington state who will not vote for Clinton, but probably not decisive.

[thesidedish]

One more note:

Trump has suddenly moved ahead in New Hampshire, as I mentioned above.

This is significant because Bernie was REALLY popular there, due to the state's proximity to Vermont.

There is some talk that Trump's recent bump was due to the Wikileaks exposing the various shady ways Hillary achieved unfair edges over Bernie, such as obtaining debate questions in advance from CNN's Donna Brazile. It's said that some Bernie bots, who had conceded the necessity of voting for Hillary, are angry again and are refusing to support her now.

If Trump wins, and if NH's 4 electoral votes prove key to that win, it will be notable in a few ways:

1) Bernie Sanders will have done exactly what he was trying NOT to do -- cause Hillary to lose the general election, albeit indirectly.

2) Russia (provided they were the ones guilty) really will have swayed the Presidential election.

3) NH will have once again been key to a Republican winning, for the 2nd time in 5 election cycles. In 2000, Bush beat Gore in part due to Gore's fooilsh neglect of NH as a campaign stop. It is unclear why Gore ignored New Hampshire. Even fellow Democrats were irritated with him late in the campaign season when he refused to visit there. He ended up losing by just 7,211 votes, and that cost him the election. Hillary is attempting to make nice over in NH and avoid Al Gore's mistakes, but it looks like her unfair treatment of Bernie will burn her -- at least in that state.

It wasn't russia who did the leaks, should be common knowledge by now. Assange even had to go out of his way and finally say it wasnt cuz it was such stupid political propaganda by the Democrats. EVERY country hacked us cuz hillary is an incompetent boob, but couldve easily been a 400 lber sitting in his bed as well who actually turned in the leaks.

[MumblesBadly]

You misspelled FBI.

FBI swayed it in Hillary's favor when they chose not to charge her and closed the investigation in July, despite a ton of chargeable offenses.

They swayed it back just recently.

I say that's breaking even.

FFS, Druff! The FBI does NOT have the authority to charge people with crimes. It is like a national police force, not a prosecutor's office.

http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2...ts-prosecuted/

But the public may not always understand that the FBI does not have the job of deciding who should, or should not, be prosecuted for crime. It was created to do investigations – period. When it finishes one of its probes, it can and usually does make recommendations, but someone else has the job of deciding what to do with the results of those investigations – an actual prosecutor.

[sonatine]

Back to -400 because people still think Russia did not do the leaks and literally cant distinguish fact from fiction.

[JohnCommode]

One more note:

Trump has suddenly moved ahead in New Hampshire, as I mentioned above.

This is significant because Bernie was REALLY popular there, due to the state's proximity to Vermont.

There is some talk that Trump's recent bump was due to the Wikileaks exposing the various shady ways Hillary achieved unfair edges over Bernie, such as obtaining debate questions in advance from CNN's Donna Brazile. It's said that some Bernie bots, who had conceded the necessity of voting for Hillary, are angry again and are refusing to support her now.

If Trump wins, and if NH's 4 electoral votes prove key to that win, it will be notable in a few ways:

1) Bernie Sanders will have done exactly what he was trying NOT to do -- cause Hillary to lose the general election, albeit indirectly.

2) Russia (provided they were the ones guilty) really will have swayed the Presidential election.

3) NH will have once again been key to a Republican winning, for the 2nd time in 5 election cycles. In 2000, Bush beat Gore in part due to Gore's fooilsh neglect of NH as a campaign stop. It is unclear why Gore ignored New Hampshire. Even fellow Democrats were irritated with him late in the campaign season when he refused to visit there. He ended up losing by just 7,211 votes, and that cost him the election. Hillary is attempting to make nice over in NH and avoid Al Gore's mistakes, but it looks like her unfair treatment of Bernie will burn her -- at least in that state.

I think that New Hampshire has become a new Republican "fools gold" state like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. They've won only once in NH since 1992 when Nader siphoned off 22K liberal votes and Gore lost by 7K in 2000.

[hongkonger]

One more note:

Trump has suddenly moved ahead in New Hampshire, as I mentioned above.

This is significant because Bernie was REALLY popular there, due to the state's proximity to Vermont.

There is some talk that Trump's recent bump was due to the Wikileaks exposing the various shady ways Hillary achieved unfair edges over Bernie, such as obtaining debate questions in advance from CNN's Donna Brazile. It's said that some Bernie bots, who had conceded the necessity of voting for Hillary, are angry again and are refusing to support her now.

If Trump wins, and if NH's 4 electoral votes prove key to that win, it will be notable in a few ways:

1) Bernie Sanders will have done exactly what he was trying NOT to do -- cause Hillary to lose the general election, albeit indirectly.

2) Russia (provided they were the ones guilty) really will have swayed the Presidential election.

3) NH will have once again been key to a Republican winning, for the 2nd time in 5 election cycles. In 2000, Bush beat Gore in part due to Gore's fooilsh neglect of NH as a campaign stop. It is unclear why Gore ignored New Hampshire. Even fellow Democrats were irritated with him late in the campaign season when he refused to visit there. He ended up losing by just 7,211 votes, and that cost him the election. Hillary is attempting to make nice over in NH and avoid Al Gore's mistakes, but it looks like her unfair treatment of Bernie will burn her -- at least in that state.

I think that New Hampshire has become a new Republican "fools gold" state like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. They've won only once in NH since 1992 when Nader siphoned off 22K liberal votes and Gore lost by 7K in 2000.

New Hampshire Republicans are moderate Eisenhower type Republicans and are comfortable with women in power--their incumbent Repiblican senator and her Democratic challenger are both women. Although its demographics aren't typical Clinton demographics, New Englanders are also not Trump people. No way Trump wins NH.

[FPS_Russia]

[Dan Druff]

I think that New Hampshire has become a new Republican "fools gold" state like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. They've won only once in NH since 1992 when Nader siphoned off 22K liberal votes and Gore lost by 7K in 2000.

New Hampshire Republicans are moderate Eisenhower type Republicans and are comfortable with women in power--their incumbent Repiblican senator and her Democratic challenger are both women. Although its demographics aren't typical Clinton demographics, New Englanders are also not Trump people. No way Trump wins NH.

I think this election is a different situation for two reasons:

1) NH leads the nation in percentage of "independent" voters, and many of these people consider themselves independent because they hate establishment politics. This clearly favors Trump.

2) There is plenty of bitterness there over the Bernie Sanders situation, and the e-mails have stoked that bitterness once again.

[MumblesBadly]

[Dan Druff]

For those who care, here are the % chances for Trump to win in the various battleground states, according to the betting on PredictIt:

NH: 39%
AZ: 75%
WI: 17%
MI: 22%
IA: 79%
OH: 70%
FL: 37%
PA: 23%
NV: 23%
CO: 23%
GA: 84%
NC: 42%

So these people aren't very bullish on Trump's overall chances.

After further looking into Nevada, I agree he is probably screwed there: http://www.ktnv.com/news/ralston/the...ly-voting-blog

I think there may be some value going with Trump in NH and perhaps NC.

There may be some additional value for Clinton in AZ, given what seems to be happening in NV, though I still don't think she's winning there.

Also might be some Hillary value in Iowa, given that one poll did show her ahead there.