Posted on 11/07/2016 2:31:37 PM PST by wise_caucasian
RCP now has Trump leading FL and at 266 electoral votes with no tossups. Only trailing NH by 0.6 but that includes the phone WMUR poll with Clinton +11. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map_no_toss_ups.html
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Thanks for your hard work and your updates. It helps to hear from someone on the inside and is keeping me sane.
I pray you are right. Thanks for all the reports.
Gloomy prediction.
Oh, I’ve been praying just this prayer for days. Standing in agreement with you.
You’re wrong.
Thanks LS. You have been great.
Please vote straight R.
I hate the RINOs too, but the best outcome for Trump is a big win that is perceived as a mandate.
That means a big margin of victory, but it also means big coattails. If he runs the table - fed, state and local - meaning hold the house and senate, increase R governors, win a lot of state legislatures, etc. this gives him a tremendous advantage advancing his agenda.
The perception that the voters were squarely behind his movement and voted to empower him up and down the ticket is of huge importance - the RINO’s will be MUCH better behaved if they feel there was a tidal wave of support - and the coattails accomplishes this.
Sending the message that Trump won, but the Democrats won down ticket, sends the opposite message, and stacks the deck against him.
Then, in two or four years, feel free to primary the hell out of every stinking RINO.
That way, you’re replacing the RINOs with conservatives, not Democrats.
Believe me, it’s the smart play - big league - that I can tell you.
So your map plus CO, FL and WI puts Trump at 319. That actually seems doable.
Question to all FReepers: Would it be better for all states to do apportioned electoral votes instead of winner-take-all? California would probably look more like 35 blue and 20 red. New York would probably be much more evenly divided since the majority of the state goes red while the huge population of NYC goes blue.
Amen
I’m glad you’re here for this, Johnnie
First off I’m still shocked that we are considered Red and the others Blue. Shouldn’t that be reversed
I’m sorry, but I can’t do it. I’m in Illinois, and the reprehensible Mark Kirk, the GOP incumbent in the Senate, will not get my vote. Of course, I will not vote for the Dim, the equally reprehensible Tammy Duckworth.
I am writing in my dog’s name for the Senate race. Go ahead, cuss me out and call me names. I really don’t care.
I have utter contempt for Mark Kirk, who has zero chance of being re-elected, anyway.
I’d like to see us assign one electoral college vote per Congressional district.
That’s’ majority vote. Had we had that it would have been Clinton/Gore/Obama 25 years of (u name it)
As I see things, relative to the RCP No-Toss Up Electoral Map, with Trump at 268, the devil at 272:
- Imagine if PA (20), VA (13), or MN (10) swing to Trump!!!
- or even NM (5), CO (9), or MI (16) vote for Donald!!
- or just Sander’s NH (4) going Trump!
Its that close ... or maybe not even close on Tuesday! We have superman on our side.
"Big news to share in New Hampshire tonight! Polls looking great! See you soon."
I won’t cuss or call you names. I imagine if I really hated a republican on my ticket, I’d probably do the same.
I’d just like to see Trump win big, but also end up with the republicans “owing him”.
One of the lies, back in the primaries, was that Trump was going to be bad for the Republican Party, and drag them down with him. I just want to prove them wrong - big league.
The real truth is that Trump is the best thing that ever happened to Republicans; he will not only sweep them into office, but he’s taught them how to win by being honest, unafraid and politically incorrect.
He’s taught them to stand up to the corruption, the globalism, the socialism and the big bank cartell. He’s taught them that when a democrat or the press falsely accuses you of being a racist or sexist, you don’t resign and tuck your rail between your legs and slink away, you get angry and fight back.
Considering how we do much better in the House than in the Senate, and worse still in the Presidency, YES, it would be better to apportion the vote. The more representative a body truly is of the people, the better we do.
Keep in mind this would change the whole nature of campaigning and spending money. You can’t just assume a past election would’ve turned out slightly different.
I see where you’re coming from but don’t necessarily agree. I think if people like me (a conservative in deep blue California) knew that our presidential vote would actually count for something instead of being a urination in the wind, we’d be much more likely to show up and vote. And that could realistically change the overall numbers.
I voted for (Palin) in 2008 but stayed home in 2012 because there was zero chance of Romney winning California and my congress guy is in a safe seat.
And in 2000, I’m fairly certain the popular vote totals would have been different if all the voters knew that they’d have more of a voice in what are currently non-competitive states.
Of course, I could very well be way wrong.
Not me. I want a margin big enough where one state won't change the end result. I'm talking 280-290. Remember what they did in Florida, 2000 and Ohio, 2004. Democrats tried *everything* to claim that the win was illegitimate and swore not to accept the results. Let him win Michigan on top of Ohio, NC, FL, IA and CO. Then, if he gets PA, VA or NH, it will just be gravy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.