Fivethirtyeight.com predicts 80% chance for Clinton victory

[Fugus]

You are expecting too much, Jill Stein is incompetent as well.

Haven't looked up on Jill Stein much yet.

Waiting till the actual General to look beyond the big 2 for now because no guarantee on them running till the time comes while for the big 2 it would take a miracle for both of them to drop.

Here is hoping for that miracle.

[maomoa]

That's not what is being said. Try re-reading.

Trump supporter and reading...You're asking a lot here.

[mickybrighteyes]

Crooked Hillary does not deserve ANY votes. How can someone who does not deserve ANY votes have an 80% chance of winning anything.

The Late Carlin has some insight on this subject.

[Pangean]

I believe you came in here to correct me on the matter, so obviously it means a lot to you as well right?

Not really. Correcting you is quite a common activity.

[Machismo]

Haven't looked up on Jill Stein much yet.

Waiting till the actual General to look beyond the big 2 for now because no guarantee on them running till the time comes while for the big 2 it would take a miracle for both of them to drop.

Here is hoping for that miracle.

I recommend giving Gary Johnson a look.

[therayeffect]

So......

In a vote between calculated corruption and incompetence, corruption has a 80% chance of victory....

I really hope a viable 3rd option comes up because voting between 2 completely unelectable candidates sucks for the nation as a whole because that leads you with a truly unelectable candidate actually getting it. And having a history in the field does not act as a qualifier for the job, how you performed in that history does.

There's no 'viable' third-party option because the system and the people don't want it. 40% of people are voting for Clinton and 40% of people are voting for Trump simply because of the D and R next to their name and the dislike for 'the other person'. With Bernie, hope that we can get some actual change has grown but unless the FBI comes out and indicts Clinton, she's likely to win.

I honestly would put it at 60/40 for Clinton. I was much lower at 10% for Trump but Clinton kept pulling stupid shit after stupid shit in the face of Sander's supporters who didn't do hardly anything wrong and Trump honestly has a lot of interesting points of view. Whether anyone trusts either of them to do anything constructive is a different story.

[Fugus]

There's no 'viable' third-party option because the system and the people don't want it. 40% of people are voting for Clinton and 40% of people are voting for Trump simply because of the D and R next to their name and the dislike for 'the other person'. With Bernie, hope that we can get some actual change has grown but unless the FBI comes out and indicts Clinton, she's likely to win.

I honestly would put it at 60/40 for Clinton. I was much lower at 10% for Trump but Clinton kept pulling stupid shit after stupid shit in the face of Sander's supporters who didn't do hardly anything wrong and Trump honestly has a lot of interesting points of view. Whether anyone trusts either of them to do anything constructive is a different story.

I personally am planning on writing Sanders name in if I don't see another option and hoping enough does that it starts costing them both electoral votes and forces it to a convention to get a winner.

Even if one of them wins that way, it still sends a huge red flag to both parties and the nation and they either force a change or they end up getting eaten from whatever new party starts to form in the void they refuse to fill.

Or they just double down on vote stealing and disenfranchisement and kick the can further down the road so the eventual explosion is just that much more spectacular.

Despite what many say, voting 3rd party isn't throwing your vote away if you can get enough to do it en mass.

[Harekrsna]

As I said in another thread

This is what I seen here over the past mo

Trump and Hillary tied on the polls, Well its to Early polls don't matter

Trump is beating Hillary in the polls, Well its to Early polls don't matter

Hillary is beating Trump in the polls, OMFG POLLS MATTER THESE POLLS ARE SO FUCKING RIGHT AND COULD NEVER BE WRONG HILLARY HAS THIS WON FOR THE NEXT 8 YRS, POLLS DO MATTER NOW !!!!!!1111111ONE!!!!!!!

a) there is a big difference between a poll and compiled data of all polls.

b) polls that are posted on news sites are slanted and should be invalidated period (whether it be CNN or Fox News, these outlets always have a biased user base which isn't representative of the American people as a whole. You may as well take the poll at an NRA convention).

c) who cares, both these candidates suck and the only thing that will keep them from destroying this country any more than it already has been is the completely toxic pile of dung that is the senate. They'll make sure the pipes stay clogged like they've been doing for god knows how long.

[Wildtree]

I recommend giving Gary Johnson a look.

He's got some good ideas, but some very bad ones too.

Things he said over time:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

His policy frame
https://johnsonweld.com/issues/

[Fugus]

He's got some good ideas, but some very bad ones too.

Things he said over time:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

His policy frame
https://johnsonweld.com/issues/

Just browsed through that, one of the first thing that caught my eye....

"Eliminate corporate income tax as real way to create jobs. (Jun 2011)
Lower the tax burden; eliminate corporate tax. (May 2011)"

Anyone who thinks lowering or eliminating corporate taxes creates jobs either doesn't know how corporate income taxes work or is being pure disingenuous.

[Machismo]

He's got some good ideas, but some very bad ones too.

Things he said over time:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

His policy frame
https://johnsonweld.com/issues/

He's a little bit more "big government" than I would like, but he's light years ahead of the other candidates when it comes to supporting freedoms.

[Thetruth1400]

Aren't there places that take wagers on this sort of thing? Assuming they're reputable, why are we not all betting on Hillary? I'm seriously considering it.

Odds are so in her favor that the returns aren't favorable at this point. Trump is a 33/1 odds, while Clinton had 3/10 odds. What that means if, if you bet $100 on Trump and he wins, you'd take home $3,400, where the same bet for Clinton, you'd only take home $130. You have a lot more to lose it Clinton loses, so the bet is a horrible one. You have a higher chance of winning the bet, but the payout is far and away unfavorable.

That being said, there are places taking that bet so if you're super confident in Clinton not screwing up between now and November, then by all means, go make a little extra money, but don't expect the world.

[Machismo]

Just browsed through that, one of the first thing that caught my eye....

"Eliminate corporate income tax as real way to create jobs. (Jun 2011)
Lower the tax burden; eliminate corporate tax. (May 2011)"

Anyone who thinks lowering or eliminating corporate taxes creates jobs either doesn't know how corporate income taxes work or is being pure disingenuous.

In his defense, he wants to lower everyone's taxes. Other than a few outlying instances, he believes in less government intrusion.

[Pangean]

Just browsed through that, one of the first thing that caught my eye....

"Eliminate corporate income tax as real way to create jobs. (Jun 2011)
Lower the tax burden; eliminate corporate tax. (May 2011)"

Anyone who thinks lowering or eliminating corporate taxes creates jobs either doesn't know how corporate income taxes work or is being pure disingenuous.

He is no friend of labor, that's for sure. Also on record supporting NAFTA.

[purebalance]

Trump supporters have that same mentality. There's plenty of videos of violent and aggressive Trump supporters.

Hardly lol. There's far more cases of anti Trump protesters instigating and being more violent.

[Machismo]

Hardly lol. There's far more cases of anti Trump protesters instigating and being more violent.

Are you going to deny those instances I brought up happened? If you like, I'll gladly post the videos.

[Wildtree]

He's a little bit more "big government" than I would like, but he's light years ahead of the other candidates when it comes to supporting freedoms.

I for my taste have absolutely no objection to big government. As long as it's done properly, it is a good thing.
Puts people at work even.
On that note, Johnson, much like Cruz has the IRS figures wrong
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/03/cru...es-irs-agents/

And the matter of the IRS looks a bit different as Cruz and Johnson make it out to be.
John Oliver tackled the issue over a year ago

[WernerCD]

As I said in another thread

This is what I seen here over the past mo

Trump and Hillary tied on the polls, Well its to Early polls don't matter

Trump is beating Hillary in the polls, Well its to Early polls don't matter

Hillary is beating Trump in the polls, OMFG POLLS MATTER THESE POLLS ARE SO FUCKING RIGHT AND COULD NEVER BE WRONG HILLARY HAS THIS WON FOR THE NEXT 8 YRS, POLLS DO MATTER NOW !!!!!!1111111ONE!!!!!!!

This. We are months out and both sides are rattling their sabers and haven't even started the General Election portion yet...

I mean shit... Hillary hasn't even "fully" beat the Socialist that should have been a footnote against a good candidate... she's lost all semblance of control (Bern has controlled the narrative on the Democrat side most of the time) and hasn't had any honest interviews with real questions thrown against her.

We'll see how the Conventions go and how people swing as we get closer to the actual election. We'll see how she handles real debates. How many people are going to switch sides (NeverDouche and NeverTurdSandwich). How many will vote Turd Parties (Liberal and Green Turds acting as spoilers).

I won't believe the outcome until all the lawsuits are settled afterwords.

[Machismo]

I for my taste have absolutely no objection to big government. As long as it's done properly, it is a good thing.
Puts people at work even.
On that note, Johnson, much like Cruz has the IRS figures wrong
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/03/cru...es-irs-agents/

And the matter of the IRS looks a bit different as Cruz and Johnson make it out to be.
John Oliver tackled the issue over a year ago

That's the problem, expecting government to get it right. I'd rather support freedom.

[Fugus]

In his defense, he wants to lower everyone's taxes. Other than a few outlying instances, he believes in less government intrusion.

I am browsing some of it and I can already see HUGE problems with it.

While removing the government from our education standards sounds great at face value, that will lead to some VERY varied and subpar education even in education that we have now. We already have schools trying to teach creationism in science class and other such stuff. Without the government being able to step in, we won't have just uneducated people, we will have full on mal-educated people who's school taught them that evolution is a myth and God, Alah, Budda, or some spagetti monster created the world and it's people in science class.

While I dislike some of our current stuff, it is still better than the hell we would get from schools being allowed to teach whatever religious or political extremist views they liked and some cities able to change their curriculum to allow their schools to full on fall apart to divert funds from it without recourse.


Same with his stance on the internet which is a huge double edged sword. While I agree the government shouldn't be allowed to intrude and spy over it, I disagree that they shouldn't have a huge hand in regulating how companies act when selling it as we in the US already see the level of abuse they will go when the government refuses to do their jobs, let alone when they are barred from doing it.

A great deal of our issues with internet came when the providers transitioned from dial which had full common carrier provisions to other transmission mediums which they no longer were required to follow those some requirements. And much of the issues with it are caused at the state level or lower where private companies have lobbied the state level to ban municipal internet within their boarders.

And worst of all, his position on a minimum wage is disastrous for us as a nation as he wants to abolish it at the national level and have it be only state or lower level which allows companies to further lobby states to unlivable wages to get businesses to come there which results in further reliance on welfare for the residents of that area to survive on the now even lower than survivable wages and such.


Sorry, I am looking at the guy and so far, I am not too impressed in some key areas.