Wow a caller with a brain

Rush used to screen callers like that out. He only allowed folks on the air who completely agreed with him. Mega dittos Rush.

Rachel Maddow just showed a PPP poll on Trump's favorability with African Americans.

Unfavorable: 97%
Favorable: -
Not Sure: 3%

Race is probably around 6-7 points. Not great, honestly.

That's as much of a blowout as you get

The Nightman Cometh wrote:Race is probably around 6-7 points. Not great, honestly.

You more than almost anyone here knows better than to give much of a hoot about margins in national polls


that said the two campaigns should pre-emptively agree to call bilaterally for a special proscecutorial investigation of anything that blows up anywhere in the US within 60 days of the election

pacino wrote:That's as much of a blowout as you get

This isn't true. Hillary has been up by more at a few points already this cycle. And if the nominated Democrat wasn't insanely unpopular herself this would easily be a double digit race, we wouldn't even be talking about the Senate, and all focus would be on whether there'd be a clean sweep.

jerseyhoya wrote:

pacino wrote:That's as much of a blowout as you get

This isn't true. Hillary has been up by more at a few points already this cycle. And if the nominated Democrat wasn't insanely unpopular herself this would easily be a double digit race, we wouldn't even be talking about the Senate, and all focus would be on whether there'd be a clean sweep.

Eh, you're being disingenuous. Anyone who knows anything about the current political climate knows that 5% is a landslide, regardless of who the candidates are.

And spare us the "if the Democrat wasn't unpopular" nonsense. This says more about your fellow Republicans that they would actually vote for Donald fucking Trump for President. Donald fucking Trump.

Honestly don't know what's the point of posting anything if posting something screamingly obvious is 'disingenuous'

jerseyhoya wrote:Honestly don't know what's the point of posting anything if posting something screamingly obvious is 'disingenuous'

No, it's not obvious and you know it. Hillary's unpopularity, which you constantly bring up, has nothing to do with the fact that she won't win Texas and Mississippi and Alabama and Wyoming and Oklahoma and every other state that's deep red.

Hillary will likely win by 5% because this country is divided. But you already knew that.

Someone told me on Facebook today that he wishes we coukd nuke the entire middle East becsuse it saddens him that Americans have to die fighting Muslims which he believes are scumbags.

It is somewhat imperfect to use national House vote share to measure partisan preference, but over the past five elections

2006 - D+8
2008 - D+10.6
2010 - R+6.8
2012 - D+1.2
2014 - R+6.7

We're supposed to pretend 5 points is a landslide, when one of the two parties has won 4 of the last 5 House elections by more than that? Supposed to pretend one candidate winning by 6-7 points is a ceiling, when Dems won the popular in the House by more than that in 2006 and 2008? Supposed to think it's the max for this race when Clinton had much larger leads than that in March/April and in the midst of the Khan controversy?

If Hillary wins by 5 points, that's fine. Would be pretty ideal in my book because it means a bunch of GOP senators will survive, and we'll hold the House. To pretend like this is some sort of reallly great achievement against a historically unpopular candidate like Trump - especially in a world where 3rd party candidates are getting 10% so she's well under 50% - is utterly fucking ridiculous. She's way underperforming what as much of a blowout as you could get because she's very unpopular herself. Really shouldn't be controversial

They weren't taking the house regardless. It's fairly impossible for reasons we previously disagreed on.

hackers are editing documents being released

*shocked face*

People breaking the law may not be on the up and up, folks.

I sometimes wish there were motive/resources/mechanism to permit a sort of undercard coalition of more appealing national-level politicians to divert some of the spotlight from HRC, whilst allowing her to surf their appeal into November.

Put a band (back) together of (I dunno) Warren, Biden, Granholm, Cory Booker, with Bernie, Big Dog, & Barry making special appearances to reprise their hits.

It would be valuable to steamroll fuck out of the crumbbums the Rs are fielding in so many races, but that ain't happening with a too-wily-for-her-own-good dead-armed veteran as your stopper. Winning the presidency is nice, & good, & all, but winning surefire governability is better

I'd be interested in seeing a hypothetical Obama vs. Trump poll, because I suspect Obama would be ahead by more than Hillary--and probably noticeably more. So, yeah, I'm on jerseyhoya's side here.

Rick Perry will be announced on Good Morning America tomorrow as being on the next season of DANCING WITH THE STARS...

Hopefully the steps only go up to two.

Polar Bear Phan wrote:I'd be interested in seeing a hypothetical Obama vs. Trump poll, because I suspect Obama would be ahead by more than Hillary--and probably noticeably more. So, yeah, I'm on jerseyhoya's side here.

Hillary is up by 10% in some polls. She's not going to win by 10 and neither would have Obama. The country is too divided. On a really good year, a Democrat might win North Carolina and Virginia. Maybe even one red state like Indiana. But that's probably it.

Doll Is Mine wrote:

Polar Bear Phan wrote:I'd be interested in seeing a hypothetical Obama vs. Trump poll, because I suspect Obama would be ahead by more than Hillary--and probably noticeably more. So, yeah, I'm on jerseyhoya's side here.

Hillary is up by 10% in some polls. She's not going to win by 10 and neither would have Obama. The country is too divided. On a really good year, a Democrat might win North Carolina and Virginia. Maybe even one red state like Indiana. But that's probably it.

This is stupid and wrong on multiple levels.