If Clinton wins PA and MI but loses WI then it will come down to the split votes in Maine and Nebraska or indeed the elector in D.C who says he won't vote for Clinton (Assuming that Alaska does go blue)
I think I heard ME2 went for Clinton, NE3 for Trump. If Clinton holds PA+MI+NV, we're at 269-269 (assuming Arizona/Iowa go to Trump).
Imagine the bribes that would get thrown around by both sides to get electors to have a "change of conscience"....
If Clinton wins PA and MI but loses WI then it will come down to the split votes in Maine and Nebraska or indeed the elector in D.C who says he won't vote for Clinton (Assuming that Alaska does go blue)
I think I heard ME2 went for Clinton, NE3 for Trump.
If Clinton holds PA+MI+NV, we're at 269-269 (assuming Arizona/Iowa go to Trump).
If Clinton wins PA and MI but loses WI then it will come down to the split votes in Maine and Nebraska or indeed the elector in D.C who says he won't vote for Clinton (Assuming that Alaska does go blue)
I think I heard ME2 went for Clinton, NE3 for Trump. If Clinton holds PA+MI+NV, we're at 269-269 (assuming Arizona/Iowa go to Trump).
Imagine the bribes that would get thrown around by both sides to get electors to have a "change of conscience"....
If Clinton wins PA and MI but loses WI then it will come down to the split votes in Maine and Nebraska or indeed the elector in D.C who says he won't vote for Clinton (Assuming that Alaska does go blue)
I think I heard ME2 went for Clinton, NE3 for Trump. If Clinton holds PA+MI+NV, we're at 269-269 (assuming Arizona/Iowa go to Trump).
Imagine the bribes that would get thrown around by both sides to get electors to have a "change of conscience"....
Why are the polls so crap this year when they were so accurate in 2012?
Because people were paying attention to the wrong demographics. Trump was going after people who aren't likely voters so don't appear in likely voter polls, and plenty of these people are registered dems.
Clinton Clicked through 11 to 12 on Betfair when I looked right now. Even if you believe Clinton has a way through, just wait and the price will get more attractive
Wisconsin is safer than Michigan because the reason it goes Democrat is due to alot of normally small blue counties, Michigan has Wayne County which is massively AA so Hillary still has a chance there.
Why are the polls so crap this year when they were so accurate in 2012?
Because people were paying attention to the wrong demographics. Trump was going after people who aren't likely voters so don't appear in likely voter polls, and plenty of these people are registered dems.
Yes, they were polling the wrong electorate, as was the case with Brexit.
If Clinton wins PA and MI but loses WI then it will come down to the split votes in Maine and Nebraska or indeed the elector in D.C who says he won't vote for Clinton (Assuming that Alaska does go blue)
I think I heard ME2 went for Clinton, NE3 for Trump.
If Clinton holds PA+MI+NV, we're at 269-269 (assuming Arizona/Iowa go to Trump).
Why are the polls so crap this year when they were so accurate in 2012?
Because people were paying attention to the wrong demographics. Trump was going after people who aren't likely voters so don't appear in likely voter polls, and plenty of these people are registered dems.
Because the Media and Liberal Elite cannot ever believe that we thickies vote for a thickie. The elite, the remainers, the all white men are c*nts regime have driven normal people underground. So, polls, outside big cities, seem consistently wrong. Just a view.
If Clinton wins PA and MI but loses WI then it will come down to the split votes in Maine and Nebraska or indeed the elector in D.C who says he won't vote for Clinton (Assuming that Alaska does go blue)
I make it that Trump only needs one of PA, MI, WI or MN to win the Presidency.
There were remarks interpreted as subtle criticism during the trip to India, but by and large she has kept her own counsel on Trump. Unlike Cameron, thank God.
First move in event of Trump victory, congratulatory phone call. Second move, put Farage in the Lords - immediately. The presence there of over a hundred LDs and practically no Ukippers is - whatever you think of the latter - an absurdity, anyway, and Trump likes him. Thirdly, arrange for the Cambridges to come calling at the White House as soon as possible after the inauguration (with an invite for him to come here on a state visit.) Fourthly, throw some extra money at the defence budget and spend it on American hardware. Fifthly, tell Liam Fox to move his office to the British Embassy in Washington.
Good turnout on PB tonight for his test debut and a bit of cricket betting. Is anything else happening?
Gareth Bale is Wales' player of the year for the sixth time. That's the thing about betting -- the good things always win. Now, what's happening in America?
If Clinton wins PA and MI but loses WI then it will come down to the split votes in Maine and Nebraska or indeed the elector in D.C who says he won't vote for Clinton (Assuming that Alaska does go blue)
I think I heard ME2 went for Clinton, NE3 for Trump. If Clinton holds PA+MI+NV, we're at 269-269 (assuming Arizona/Iowa go to Trump).
Imagine the bribes that would get thrown around by both sides to get electors to have a "change of conscience"....
Alaska is normally Republican. I think Clinton does need to win PA+MI+NV+WI, and WI is looking very dicey now.
Why are the polls so crap this year when they were so accurate in 2012?
God alone knows. All one can really say is that IIRC the final national polls showed a margin of error difference between the candidates, AND there's the matter of the electoral college to factor in. Those projections from the NY Times suggesting Clinton might actually win the popular vote and lose the presidency could very well be borne out by the end of the night.
If Clinton wins PA and MI but loses WI then it will come down to the split votes in Maine and Nebraska or indeed the elector in D.C who says he won't vote for Clinton (Assuming that Alaska does go blue)
My gut just told me he would Trump would do it. I've been feeling it since Brexit. Despite much commentary on why the two aren't the same, there is the same core voter overlap, the left behind. They are going to make themselves heard.
In case of Trump victory and Republican Congress, possibility of US-UK trade deal greatly increased. Firstly, UK is single biggest foreign investor in US. Secondly, Britain deals largely in services so does not have a huge overlap with sensitive American industries that Trump appears to wish to defend. Thirdly, we can butter them up by increasing defence spending and purchasing expensive American kit.
Wisconsin is safer than Michigan because the reason it goes Democrat is due to alot of normally small blue counties, Michigan has Wayne County which is massively AA so Hillary still has a chance there.
A lot of small blue counties are going bigly trump.
Comments
Imagine the bribes that would get thrown around by both sides to get electors to have a "change of conscience"....
Clinton 50%
Trump 42%
http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/states/minnesota
PA 73% in
Clinton 49%
Trump 47%
http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/states/pennsylvania
Clinton 197
Trump 187
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/forecast/president
64% in PA
70% in MI
90% in WI
Good turnout on PB tonight for his test debut and a bit of cricket betting.
Is anything else happening?
http://www.270towin.com/maps/m0k7O
Obviously WI and MN are inter-changeable
That's usually what happens at times like these.
First move in event of Trump victory, congratulatory phone call. Second move, put Farage in the Lords - immediately. The presence there of over a hundred LDs and practically no Ukippers is - whatever you think of the latter - an absurdity, anyway, and Trump likes him. Thirdly, arrange for the Cambridges to come calling at the White House as soon as possible after the inauguration (with an invite for him to come here on a state visit.) Fourthly, throw some extra money at the defence budget and spend it on American hardware. Fifthly, tell Liam Fox to move his office to the British Embassy in Washington.
The punters think it's all over.
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/forecast/president
Go down to the states.
http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/states/utah
Popular Vote Trump 49% Clinton 46.6%
EC vote Clinton 197 Trump 187
http://edition.cnn.com/election/results
Right, heading to bed for a few hours I think. No winner likely before breakfast. Goodnight
Is it important? Would you let me know what happens please?
[settles down to the Test match]
We've heard that record before
NEW THREAD
Maine CD2 ??
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/michigan/
Admittedly Wisconsin looked a bit safer, but there were Clinton leads of 2, 3 and 4 for that state as well :
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/wisconsin/
Would cover all my prematurely cashed out spread losses....
"She prepared 2 speeches tonight...because she is superstitious"
Not because she might lose...
4 points is not far from the average polling error in US elections - an error of that magnitude ain't unexpected.
The polls just pointed to the *wrong* overall result, which will be their main crime.
Having just said that, the herding in the final polls was a bit ridiculous.
As Nate Silver pointed out yesterday morning. 538 deserve a gold coconut for their coverage/analysis.