Clinton Rises to 348 Electoral Votes, Trump Drops to 190

Sabato's Crystal Ball ^ | August 18, 2016 | Larry J. Sabato, Kyle Kondik and Geoffrey Skelley

[C19fan]

New Hampshire may just have four electoral votes, but it’s important. If you doubt it, just ask any Granite State citizens, and they’ll tell you about their first-in-the-nation primary. Even that quartet of electoral votes can matter; in 2000, if Al Gore had just won them (and without Ralph Nader on the ballot, he probably would have), Gore would have been president even without Florida. He didn’t and he wasn’t.

Since 2000, we’ve watched New Hampshire become more reliable for the Democrats in presidential years. Neighbor John Kerry of Massachusetts won 50.2% in 2004, and Barack Obama easily carried the Granite State in 2008 (54.1%) and 2012 (52.0%). And now, Hillary Clinton is doing so well that her polling lead in the state is about seven-to-eight points, depending on the average, and now we’re ready to shift New Hampshire from Leans Democratic to Likely Democratic.

[longtermmemmory]

how were his predictions in the primary?

[dsc]

“IF it happens—what will we do?”

Can we stop the corruption at the ballot box?

[ClayinVA]

He is wrong. Here is good example, he thinks that Terry McAuliffe the Virginia Governor would step aside and appoint someone else to the Senate. Fast Terry would appoint himself so fast your head would spin. It really calls into question any of his polling data.

[nathanbedford]

I think it’s good to see what is being said ‘out there.’ We need to work for Trump as if this prediction were actually true! We can’t lay back and take it easy. We must act like we are in 4th Quarter and we’re 20 points down! It is that urgent.

Oh no, no, no, no, that is not the new way we do things on Free Republic. We no longer face reality and deal with it rather we deny reality and excoriate those who bring it to our attention and, if necessary, we zot those who bring us unpleasant truths or censor their contributions to the forum or both.

If the truth teller is an academically credentialed full professor at the University of Virginia, a recognized television personality, a genuine political scientist, we demean him. If the truth teller is Mark Levin who has the number five talk radio program in the land, has authored many foundational conservative books, who has served in the Ronald Reagan administration, a crusading litigator in the courts for conservative causes, we libel him. If the truth tellers are pollsters we simply deny the reality they discover for us. If we are told that the pollsters were wrong in the 2012 cycle we rejoice but we forget that they were wrong in favor of Mitt Romney not Barack Obama.

It doesn't matter whom we must destroy in his quest for "unity." It does not matter how much we must distort logic and history. How much better to curse the darkness than light a candle?

We will never see victory in the war against terrorism if we cannot identify the enemy and we will never see victory in elections if we cannot face reality.

[t4texas]

Nathan my man!

We have but one flag, one country; let us stand together. We may differ in color, but not in sentiment. Many things have been said about me which are wrong, and which white and black persons here, who stood by me through the war, can contradict.

[papertyger]

Hyperbole is the sincerest form of butthurt....

[t4texas]

Is it November already? These pro forma outcomes have been wrong about Trump through the whole primary cycle. Hillary won’t even be able to hold up through the meat grinder that is about to begin. The stench that is Clinton will soon foul the air. It would be totally laughable but for the fact that so many people in this country are so retarded that they actually support the insane and inept, unconstitutional policies foisted upon us by traitors to our way of life.

[grey_whiskers]

We will never see victory in the war against terrorism if we cannot identify the enemy and we will never see victory in elections if we cannot face reality.

Say, how's that Ted Cruz revolution at the convention workin' out for you?

[sargon]

Lighten up, Francis.

There you go again, NB, losing focus on gthe big picture. Your snotty and hysterical sarcasm demonstrates your selfishness and failure to join the Revolution. You'd rather cast aspersions at Trump and his supporters, and, in general, not-so-subtly attempt to undermine morale here in this community.

And there you go, bellyaching about your zot again.

You're just going to carry the torch for the poor, misjudged, pledge-breaker Ted Cruz until the bitter end, apparently.

As for your ability to say anything helpful about or complimentary of Donald Trump, you just can't bring yourself to do it. You just can't get on board with the positive vibe.

Instead, you seem tp prefer the role of Tokyo Rose; the veritable voice of "reason" and "sobriety" with respect to incisively analyzing the "disturbing" Trump campaign.

Please give it a rest, sir. Until you can sincerely embrace the Trump campaign, you're just a big killjoy here.

Vote Trump!

[nathanbedford]

Vagueness is tedious.

[nathanbedford]

If you are imputing involvement by me in the movement to deny Trump the nomination after it secured the requisite numbers, your allegation is misplaced. I have supported Trump ever since and continue to do so.

Once Trump got the nomination, I have held my pledge to support him in the general election-a pledge which is made more difficult every time some Trump supporter gratuitously attacks Cruz.

How is accusing George Bush of guilty knowledge of 9/11, advancing Trump's candidacy? How is accusing George Bush of lying about Iraq advancing Trump's candidacy? How is the insinuation that Rafael Cruz participated in the murder of John F. Kennedy advancing Trump's candidacy? How is the allegation that Cruz committed serial adultery advancing Trump's candidacy?

How is the unfair criticism that Cruz broke his pledge to support the nominee advancing Trump's candidacy when Trump himself repudiated the pledge, released Cruz from the pledge, said he did not need Cruz' support, and failed to object to Cruz' speech at the nominating convention when it was submitted for approval in advance?

How does it advanced Trump's candidacy weeks after the fact for Trump supporters to incessantly attack Ted Cruz? Do you think you can drive Cruz supporters to the polls?

These things might not have advanced Trump's candidacy much, but they sure did antagonize whole sections of the Republican party. That was not my revolution but yours for which Ted Cruz' supporters will not have to answer on November 9.

[nathanbedford]

You are aware because I have so informed you that I cannot reply to you in private mail because that function has been suspended or, perhaps, terminated. Similarly, I cannot reply to you by public reply because so often those replies disappear into the black hole of censorship. So I am left the position in which you can slander me personally but I cannot effectively reply.

By way of example: in reply to your rather fatuous reply arguing that the recent polls are not to be believed, I offered two citations in separate replies to the averages compiled by Real Clear Politics showing unanimity in polls showing big leads beyond the margin of error in all cases but one by Hillary nationally and in battleground states. These replies were censored and never published yet today we see reference to the very same Real Clear Politics polls all over this forum. I attempted to answer your criticisms of me personally with the reference only to a reputable factual source hoping that that at least would get published here. No joy.

Today you compare me unfavorably to a traitor who was executed for her crime. How might I respond to that? With another factual reference which gets censored away? With a private reply, which is denied me?

Yet you accuse me of bellyaching about being zotted when you're fully aware of the limitations of my ability to reply to your personal slanders of me and you cynically and cravenly exploit the situation.

[ZULU]

Bingo and Bump!!!!

Great analysis.

[ZULU]

Should start calling him Sabadope.

[Nailbiter]

be funny if she passed into the great beyond and they stole an election for a deceased beast

[jetson]

Has he factored in that Hillary may have to drop- out in a month due to major health problems.

[Heart of Georgia]

So the election is over?

[grey_whiskers]

Jumping in on this reply because it is consecutive to the reply to me.

Two points.

1) I cannot remember where I read it (and given the volume of my online reading, if I haven't explicitly saved the URL I probably won't find it again)...but someone pointed out that according to these polls, Trump went up from +10 to -10 (a twenty-point swing) in little over one week. This does not happen in the absence of a 9-11 type event.

2) If one reads the internals of the polls, one finds things like oversampling of Democrats by 10% or 12%. Given that attendance at primaries is often decently correlated with general election enthusiasm, and that Triump gained more primary votes than any Republican in history (against a crowded field widely regarded as the most talented of all time), while Hillary's numbers are below the 2008 and 2012 numbers, this oversampling is at best...questionable.

3) If one further reads details of the polls, one finds that they are of "adults" or "registered voters" many times, not just of "likely voters". And some polls have been caught openly asking to speak to the youngest person of voting age in the household: the 34-and-below demographic is the *ONLY* one which shows a Clinton lead.

4) Trump leads by about 20% among men; and somewhere between 10%-12% among independents. In order for Hillary to really be showing the poll numbers she has, the surveys must be taking place among the staffs of Huffington Post and Jezebel.

5) If Hillary were really winning in a landslide, you'd find all the talking heads and all the online trolls crowing about her inevitability, and bragging about what they're about to do once she's elected: just as Obama did. Instead, you find her hiding from public appearances, spending tens of millions of dollars in the summer without appreciably affecting Trump's numbers, having Obama and Biden variously appear with her, and 24x7 coverage by ALL the MSM which makes Bush Derangement Syndrome appear like William F. Buckley's old Firing Line.

And her numbers never top about 40% favorability. That's the kiss of death for an incumbent (which she represents, being a member of the current administration).

Dukakis was up big at this point; and Carter was up by 9% in October.

Oh, yes. If this is an ironclad cinch for Clinton, why the f*ck are there numerous lawsuits to overturn voter ID laws the moment after Trump wins the GOP nomination? They're *scared sh!tless*.

[jmaroneps37]

Well of course; based on the wildly enthusiastic crowds she is pulling in night after night it’s a wonder this number isn’t higher.

[Grampa Dave]

Start calling him Sabadope.