AP-GfK Poll: Clinton appears on cusp of commanding victory

[attrayant]

And who is responsible for that photoshop job?

[Morch]

14 hours ago, DaddyWarbucks said:

American global hegemony resulting in a Pax Americana would be a welcome development if the country wasn't corrupt to the core.

Its political and social institutions are manifest failures at home and its military interventions abroad create appalling devastation.

Global stability?

Yes, we've had it in spades since 9/11.

Anybody pushing that line is selling snake-oil.

 

Perspective is a rare commodity on TVF.

 

The USA is not more corrupt than other countries, probably even better than most. That it doesn't fully live up to its stated ideals does not send it to the bottom of the  list, or anywhere near there.

 

Relative to the options of not having the US play a central role in global affairs, then yes - US dominance means global stability. It does not necessarily mean Utopia, or even Pax Americana. It is simply a better option than having other nations fill the vacuum or than embracing anarchy and chaos.

 

I'd say that the snake-oil merchants are those claiming otherwise without offering a viable alternative.

[Morch]

8 hours ago, JemJem said:

Clinton is so lucky to be facing Trump. If she had been facing for example Rubio or Cruz, she would have been playing catch-up by now, and she would most probably lose.

Trump has offended sooooo many people and has hardly ever put forward any proper policy ideas. I think it is quite unlikely that he will win.

 

Rubio and Cruz did not make the cut in their own party primaries. Could be argued that if things were different, the party would have rallied to support them, but that's assuming Trump wouldn't have gone on a loser's vendetta trying to sabotage their candidacy.

 

Rubio may have been more appealing to undecided voters and perhaps some of the Democrat voters unhappy with HRC. Cruz would probably have trouble winning over such voters.

 

On the other hand, perhaps Trump is doing as well against HRC because he's playing by a different rule book. Beating HRC on her own terms might have been harder.

 

[keemapoot]

More than 100,000 people from 130 countries took an online poll as to who they wanted for US President. 52% picked Clinton. 14% picked Trump.

 

Quote

“What is clear from commentary around this vote is that Donald Trump is seen by many as a threat to international prosperity and stability,” the Global Vote’s creator Simon Anholt said.

http://time.com/4560963/global-vote-hillary-clinton-president-good-country/

[Damrongsak]

4 minutes ago, keemapoot said:

More than 100,000 people from 130 countries took an online poll as to who they wanted for US President. 52% picked Clinton. 14% picked Trump.

 

http://time.com/4560963/global-vote-hillary-clinton-president-good-country/

 

Because she'd sell out the country in a heartbeat and is a globalist.  Anything for money and a personal stake in global power. If I hated the U.S., I'd want her in there.

 

Me, I just cast my one little vote tomorrow morning.  Maybe come back and do a weapons check and load up 20 or so high-capacity magazines. Always did like fireworks when I was a kid.
 

[JAG]

1 hour ago, Damrongsak said:

 

Because she'd sell out the country in a heartbeat and is a globalist.  Anything for money and a personal stake in global power. If I hated the U.S., I'd want her in there.

 

Me, I just cast my one little vote tomorrow morning.  Maybe come back and do a weapons check and load up 20 or so high-capacity magazines. Always did like fireworks when I was a kid.
 

Then what? Nip  down to the Mall with them so you can let everyone know just how angry you are - does the second amendment exist to allow you to do that?

[Publicus]

 

From Monday's news wires, these are the final national polls:

 

Bloomberg: Clinton 44%, Trump 41%, Johnson 4%, Stein 2%

 

CBS News: Clinton 45%, Trump 41%, Johnson 5%, Stein 2%

 

Washington Post/ABC News: Clinton 47%, Trump 43%, Johnson 4%, Stein 2%

 

NBC News/SurveyMonkey: Clinton 47%, Trump 41%, Johnson 6%, Stein 3%

 

Fox News: Clinton 48%, Trump 44%, Johnson 3%, Stein 2%

 

Monmouth: Clinton 50%, Trump 44%, Johnson 4%, Stein 1%

 

Depending on Hispanic voter participation in the urban centers for HRC -- the suburbs especially -- versus rednecks turning up to vote in the country's rural areas and in certain suburbs nationally, Hilllary Clinton could finish the counting 24 hours from now not far from the 6% margin she'd had before the Comey Coup letters.

 

Voting by each group is reported to be very high to include a swarm of first time voters for each candidate. A lower than reported turnout of voters would likely give HRC a 4-point winning margin. We can figure a minimal 2-point margin.

 

Recall that in 2012 Mitt Romney finished strongly with a surge of support but still lost the election to OB by 4.5 points nationally. Republicans just do not have the numbers any more, since 2004. Trump needs to get 67% of the white vote. Romney needed 62% of the white vote to win, but Willard got 59% of it (us) so he lost by a significant margin.

 

Since the 1970s election of Potus have been decided by the voters in the suburbs. HRC is consistently running ahead of OB's 2012 vote in the burbs. Which accounts for 1) her lead and 2) the margin of +4% appearing consistently in the final polling.

 

 

 

Interestingly we do the Potus election in the public and private schools across the United States each election of Potus, state by state, sponsored by a private education project in each single state. It includes the 50 states and their popular vote and Electoral College Vote total...and the winner is:

 

If the votes cast in a nationwide mock election are any indication, Hillary Clinton will be the next president of the United States.

 

In this year’s election, Clinton won 332 electoral votes, while Donald Trump earned 206 electoral votes. Clinton won 46.6% of the popular vote, Trump won 36.6% of popular voting.

 

(The voting was consistent with the 2012 Potus election map except for Louisiana and North Carolina, won in this vote by Clinton. In this election, it is expected Trump will win at least two states Obama won in 2012: Ohio, Iowa. Trump needs a half-dozen more of 'em however, while HRC needs only to hold the Obama ECV states.)

[keemapoot]

Clinton is already taking the high road. In the final day, she is ending her campaign on a note of optimism and reconciliation. She has the attitude of someone who knows she has won, and will do it with grace. She even reached out and said she will Call Donald Trump if she wins on Tuesday.

 

Meanwhile, Trump is continuing to preach doom and gloom, end of the world, and malaise. To prove his attitude of pessimism in his own campaign, in spite of continued false claims of his putting $100 million into the campaign recently, this is actually the truth, he's only put $10 into the campaign for life support to get to tomorrow.

 

Quote

Trump’s latest major contribution to his own campaign was $10 million on Oct. 28, according to Federal Election Commission reports. That brings his total investment to about $66 million.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/11/07/the-latest-from-campaign-trail-donald-trump-camp-denies-stopping-him-from-tweeting/1KAa6vDjotad3WTkQdVrBJ/story.html

[CaptHaddock]

On 11/2/2016 at 0:19 PM, Morch said:

 

Perspective is a rare commodity on TVF.

 

The USA is not more corrupt than other countries, probably even better than most. That it doesn't fully live up to its stated ideals does not send it to the bottom of the  list, or anywhere near there.

 

Relative to the options of not having the US play a central role in global affairs, then yes - US dominance means global stability. It does not necessarily mean Utopia, or even Pax Americana. It is simply a better option than having other nations fill the vacuum or than embracing anarchy and chaos.

 

I'd say that the snake-oil merchants are those claiming otherwise without offering a viable alternative.

 

I am afraid you are just mouthing empty platitudes here, rather than thinking.  I am guessing from your benign view of the US's effect on the world that you are not a citizen of Grenada, Viet Nam, Laos, Cambodia, Panama, El Salvador, Guatemala, Iran, the occupied countries of Germany, Japan, and S. Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Cuba for example.  If you were to take an objective view you would see that the biggest terrorist organization in the world is the US military.  It's the US that has been perpetually engaged in war for the past several decades. 

 

That's the way the rest of the world sees us according to an international Gallup poll in which respondents identified the US as the country they most feared. 

 

http://www.ibtimes.com/gallup-poll-biggest-threat-world-peace-america-1525008

[Publicus]

 

As I'd noted at various threads recently, since the Potus election of 1900, the winner has always won the majority of the two-party vote. That is, the combined vote of Republicans and Democrats only.

 

Independents are excluded from the two-party only stat vote because they are irrelevant and immaterial to it...every time and, apparently, always -- to include the present election anyway.

 

The scientific website PollyVote.com is the recognised and respected keeper of this vital data, calculation, election prediction and its result, and the stats.

 

Latest prediction: Nov 8th, 2016; updated daily, the winner of the election and the proportion of the two-party vote the winner will receive:

Prediction: Clinton will win.

As of November 08 the Democrats are predicted to win the presidential election of 2016.

The latest data says that the Democrats will win with 52.6 of the [two-party] vote while the Republicans get 47.4 percent [of the two-party vote].

 http://charts.pollyvote.com/

 

Baseline of the two-party vote calculation is of course 100.

 

In 2012, PollyVote predicted OB would win the election and 52.1% of the two-party vote. OB won and he got 52.0% of the two-party vote.

In 2008, PollyVote predicted OB would win with 53.9% of the two-party vote. OB won and he got 53.7% of the two-party vote (and 52.9% of the total popular vote).

In 2004, PollyVote's first active year of predicting Potus elections, their prediction was that GW Bush would win with 51.5% of the two party vote. GW won and he got 51.2% of the two-party vote.

 

The two-party only vote key to projecting the winner of Potus elections has been correct dating back to the Potus election of 1900 (as calculated by PollyVote).

This post is presented as a public service because the Trump Troopers need to know the end is near. The End is in fact at hand. Which is true for all of us, happily and thankfully.

 

[Publicus]

41 minutes ago, CaptHaddock said:

 

I am afraid you are just mouthing empty platitudes here, rather than thinking.  I am guessing from your benign view of the US's effect on the world that you are not a citizen of Grenada, Viet Nam, Laos, Cambodia, Panama, El Salvador, Guatemala, Iran, the occupied countries of Germany, Japan, and S. Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Cuba for example.  If you were to take an objective view you would see that the biggest terrorist organization in the world is the US military.  It's the US that has been perpetually engaged in war for the past several decades. 

 

That's the way the rest of the world sees us according to an international Gallup poll in which respondents identified the US as the country they most feared. 

 

http://www.ibtimes.com/gallup-poll-biggest-threat-world-peace-america-1525008

 

Here is from the survey...

 

Much of the animosity toward America comes from Muslim Middle Eastern and North African nations, all located in a region most likely to be affected by American military actions over the past decade.

 

Forty-four percent of Pakistani respondents, for instance, voted America as the most dangerous nation, despite Pakistan’s acceptance of U.S. foreign aid. The Chinese and Russians rated the United States as dangerous even more than Pakistanis did, at 54 and 49 percent, respectively.

 

 

Good going by us on all three counts. 

 

Countries and their governments that are state sponsors of terrorism, or which support, harbor or are sympathetic to terrorists, need to fear the United States. They need to fear us and their fear needs to be both a powerful factor and of an overwhelming influence in their every decision in these respects.

 

I'd also note the survey found the huge number of survey respondents would relocate in an instant to the United States to live there permanently.

 

And any American who doesn't like the Constitution can go ahead to petition to change it.

[boomerangutang]

3 hours ago, Damrongsak said:

Because she'd sell out the country in a heartbeat and is a globalist.  Anything for money and a personal stake in global power. If I hated the U.S., I'd want her in there.  Me, I just cast my one little vote tomorrow morning.  Maybe come back and do a weapons check and load up 20 or so high-capacity magazines. Always did like fireworks when I was a kid.

 

People overseas who say they like HRC and detest Trump are expressing themselves because they like HRC and detest Trump.   

 

I hope you go and shoot some tin cans at the landfill, and don't harm any people or animals.

[DaddyWarbucks]

On ‎11‎/‎2‎/‎2016 at 0:19 PM, Morch said:

 

Perspective is a rare commodity on TVF.

 

The USA is not more corrupt than other countries, probably even better than most. That it doesn't fully live up to its stated ideals does not send it to the bottom of the  list, or anywhere near there.

 

Relative to the options of not having the US play a central role in global affairs, then yes - US dominance means global stability. It does not necessarily mean Utopia, or even Pax Americana. It is simply a better option than having other nations fill the vacuum or than embracing anarchy and chaos.

 

I'd say that the snake-oil merchants are those claiming otherwise without offering a viable alternative.

 

1 hour ago, CaptHaddock said:

 

I am afraid you are just mouthing empty platitudes here, rather than thinking.  I am guessing from your benign view of the US's effect on the world that you are not a citizen of Grenada, Viet Nam, Laos, Cambodia, Panama, El Salvador, Guatemala, Iran, the occupied countries of Germany, Japan, and S. Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Cuba for example.  If you were to take an objective view you would see that the biggest terrorist organization in the world is the US military.  It's the US that has been perpetually engaged in war for the past several decades. 

 

That's the way the rest of the world sees us according to an international Gallup poll in which respondents identified the US as the country they most feared. 

 

http://www.ibtimes.com/gallup-poll-biggest-threat-world-peace-america-1525008

Your post sums it up very well.

It is a good response to the floggers whose occupation - or avocation - is to portray the US as a benign force for world peace.

[Scott]

Off-topic post removed.

[Boon Mee]

On 11/2/2016 at 8:37 AM, attrayant said:

And who is responsible for that photoshop job?

Well, we're quite sure it wasn't the Trump folks, eh? 

[attrayant]

How can we be "quite sure" about that?  It was obviously done with the intent of making the campaign look disingenuous.  Why would a campaign do that to itself?  An anonymous 4chan user made it:

 

What was fake on the Internet this Week:

 

Quote

The photoshopped image was first uploaded to 4chan this weekend, literally with the file name “Rally photoshopped.jpg.” Some have added even more circles to the image in order to point out additional duplicates in the crowd.

 

I mean did you really think the Clinton campaign, if they were going to do this at all, would have done such a piss-poor job?

Edited November 8, 2016 by attrayant
added quote

[Morch]

12 hours ago, CaptHaddock said:

 

I am afraid you are just mouthing empty platitudes here, rather than thinking.  I am guessing from your benign view of the US's effect on the world that you are not a citizen of Grenada, Viet Nam, Laos, Cambodia, Panama, El Salvador, Guatemala, Iran, the occupied countries of Germany, Japan, and S. Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Cuba for example.  If you were to take an objective view you would see that the biggest terrorist organization in the world is the US military.  It's the US that has been perpetually engaged in war for the past several decades. 

 

That's the way the rest of the world sees us according to an international Gallup poll in which respondents identified the US as the country they most feared. 

 

http://www.ibtimes.com/gallup-poll-biggest-threat-world-peace-america-1525008

 

My view of the USA is relative, not absolute. Given the existing (or potential) alternatives, then yes - US global dominance is, overall, a good thing. Obviously, doesn't work out the same way for all countries and all people. From your use of "occupied countries" I guess this would be a somewhat futile exchange, though. But do go on about "objective view"....

 

The poll linked was discussed on a previous topic, if memory serves. Doesn't say which countries were polled (65 nations leaves out some), and the "article" does not even try to put the partial results in context. As pointed out on another post, the US also holds the top position for desired relocation destination.

[Publicus]

 

Trump has collapsed in the oddsmaking prediction markets in Las Vegas, London, Dublin. It never got close and it is presently the farthest between 'em it's ever been.

 

With Election Day looming, Hillary Clinton re-established as massive betting favorite

Nov 07, 2016

 

 

With just one day to go, at offshore sportsbooks and at shops in the betting-mad United Kingdom, Hillary Clinton has rebounded from a rough week-plus in which the FBI announced it was taking another look at her email scandal, before saying Sunday it is standing by its July conclusions.

 

In the wake of Sunday’s news, Clinton firmly re-established herself as a huge betting favorite.

 

She’s a 1/5 chalk (-500) at both Ladbrokes and William Hill UK across the pond – meaning it would take a $500 wager to win $100 – and she’s all the way up to -650 at Sportsbook.ag.

 

Trump is running from +275 at William Hill to +350 at Ladbrokes to a hefty +450 underdog at Sportsbook.ag.

 

http://www.covers.com/articles/one-day-before-election-day-hilary-clinton-re-established-as-massive-betting-favorite-trump/475731

 

 

The 1-5 odds for HRC presented in the article convert to the percentage probability of 83.3% to win.

 

All the minus and plus signs stuff are American odds. In American odds the minus sign indicates the leader, the odds-on favorite. The plus sign indicates the person trailing, the person running behind in the odds.

 

HRC's American odds double converted:

 

-350 = odds of 2-7 or the probability percentage to win of 82.8%

-650 = odds of 2-13 which are astronomical and convert to 86.6% probability to win

 

Trump's American odds double converted:

 

+275 = odds of 11-4 or the probability percentage of 26.6% to win

+350 = odds of 7-2 or the percentage of 22.2%

+450 = nosebleed odds that convert to 18.8% probability to win. (Anyone at +450 may as well be at +1000.)

 

 

A reminder that wagering money on an election of any kind inside the United States is a serious federal crime with harsh sentences.

[bendejo]

It's now mid-day EST in the US, and already, hours before any results are in, guess which candidate is already filing lawsuits?  Proves he knows he going to lose.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/08/politics/nevada-voting-lawsuit-donald-trump/

 

 

[balo]

Hope we can forget to mention his name after his loss to Hillary.   I want him far away from politics and far away from any  teenage girls. 

 

[Publicus]

 

People say Trump is not a Republican but he continues to prove wrong those who doubt him. At least as far as stopping or wrongly nullifying votes are concerned.

 

Trump in Nevada is trying to cancel certain votes cast during early voting. And further, to try to reduce in as many states as possible prospective votes cast.

 

So we see that Trump doesn't bring up voters from the dead, he kills peoples' votes instead.

 

Every state (or virtually every state) keeps open its polling stations when closing time arrives and people are standing in line to vote. Trump doesn't like it and he's going to do something about it. After all, all Trump wants is to be given the benefit of the doubt so he can rule the next four years. 

 

Proves Republican right wingers have a lot of votes and voters to be apprehensive about. And that USA has a great deal to be concerned about if too many voters say 'what the hell, I'll vote for Trump'.

 

What could go wrong...

[pegman]

For anyone following the election online  the NY Times  and Wash Post have their pay walls down.