What time would be best to wake up and see if its getting interesting or not? If its clear-cut it'll be as good as over by about 3am won't it?
What time would be best to wake up and see if its getting interesting or not? If its clear-cut it'll be as good as over by about 3am won't it?
If true that is even more pathetic than having to take sick days to help someone you don't like.
I've just had this e-mail through from Ryanair. Pretty lol:
I wouldn't take time off for this. Any outcome will result in a sour recount.
I've already booked my annual leave for the French elections in April (both rounds).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French...election,_2017
You start off thinking 'ooh no not Marine' but then you look at the other options and think you know what, France has had it.
Trump up 2...in MICHIGAN:
https://twitter.com/trfgrp/status/795728426770567169
What is there to watch?
Mélenchon .Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
A load of bores boring on about the boring result.
So the same as in here. Count me in.
What I'm really looking forward to is the in-depth analysis of the polls afterwards. Who was right? Who was wrong? Can't wait!
Is there a poll on which poll is more likely to be right?
Nathalie Arthuad looks like she could be one of my left-wing women shameful lusts in that picture but a google image search reveals much worse. Probably still would though. Imagine the pillow talk.
Like you have anything better to do or get up for the next morning.
It's the end of civilisation in the new world at any rate, and that has to be worth the price of the ticket.
River in Egypt.Ryan added that Trump “does actually support our agenda. He may not talk about it or run on it, but he does support our ‘Better Way’ agenda.”
America broke politics. That's what happened. I wonder how academics in a hundred years will study this election.
When you're electing prosecutors and sheriffs, it's time to consider whether you may have taken 'democratic accountability' just a little bit too far.
Electing judges is the worst. They frequently base their campaigns on how many people they've put in prison.
Just think about that. The public measure for many judges is not how dedicated they are to see the law enforced correctly, or how well they understand its many details. It's how many "bad dudes" they put behind bars. Otherwise their opponent accuses them of being "soft on crime". This is not how judges should be appointed.
I agree. Their system is a joke. Some of the gerrymandering in the House is a genuine disgrace for a supposed democracy as well.
Districts 1 and 12 in North Carolina. Look at that shambles. It's not even the worst of it, either.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...nal-districts/
Eight of the ten worst districts were drawn by Republicans too. I'm kind of getting tired of the false equivalence that both parties would do it if they could, because it really does seem like the Republicans stoop faster and lower when they get a sniff of a chance. Like the fake Clinton mailers with fraudulent voting instructions that have been circulating around of late, and the voter intimidation stuff. Plenty of Republicans have acknowledged shamelessly and publicly that "voter fraud" measures are attempts to reduce the minority vote, which is a truly horrifying sentiment. It's possible that they're just better at fighting dirty, but it really does seem like they don't mind it that much either.
EDIT: Credit where it's due, as there are exceptions. Maryland gerrymandering is a Democratic pastime, and apparently the borders in Republican-controlled Indiana and Nevada are very sensible. But it simply shouldn't be in the hands of politicians at all.
The best way to measure a people is to see where outsiders put their money.In a fascinating piece in BuzzFeed, Craig Silverman and Lawrence Alexander report that much of the fake Trump news filling your feed is produced by teenagers in Macedonia. The teens don’t actually want Trump to win, and don’t have any real interest in sowing chaos in America. They simply want hits. As the authors wrote, the trolls “learned the best way to generate traffic is to get their politics stories to spread on Facebook — and the best way to generate shares on Facebook is to publish sensationalist and often false content that caters to Trump supporters.”
The reason there are more gerrymandered Republican districts isn't because Republicans are more evil, it's more so because Republicans dominate state-level politics (combined with the Washington Post being your source).
Measures of gerrymandering are are simple mathematical geometry. Even I'm not willing to claim that mathematics is inherently liberal.
Trump is most welcome to run for one of Queensland's Senate seats after he loses. He can live anywhere North of Rockhampton and spout the same shit and he will be worshipped as a hero by the Boomers.
He'd probably get on worryingly well with Pauline. Let's just hope they never, ever meet.
I reckon she adores him.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo..._toss_ups.html
Final RCP aggregator of polls shows the electorla college at Clinton 272 - 266 Trump; the only difference between them is NH which is at +0.6 Trump. This is going to be close, anyone who says differently is ignorant or has a blatant agenda.
Hey Mert I bet you $50 in Australian currency that Mr Trump will lose the election.
You couldn't make it up.
I trust bookies more than I trust RealClearPolitics, and the bookies have Clinton at 1/5.
So exactly where they had Brexit?
I agree that it's going to be close. Polling aggregation suggests that Clinton does have a buffer in New Hampshire, and a narrow one in Nevada (where early vote exit polls have been good for Clinton, apparently). North Carolina and Florida are toss-ups. It's quite possible that every other state is basically decided.
Trump needs to sweep that to win, and it's not impossible that he might. I'd be surprised though.
A bunch of my Harvard/MIT friends in Boston are heading up to knock on doors and get out the vote in New Hampshire. The ones who can't go up are working on phone banks. Everyone's figured out that if it does wind up being that close, New Hampshire is quite likely to decide the election. There's going to be a lot of out-of-state people there that day.
Bill Belichick and Tom Brady endorsed him tonight, they are basically religious figures in New England could be a game changer.
Also last rally going on right now on Facebook live, Trump is at 80k viewers, Clinton is at 4.5k. Enthusiasm.
And the same as Obama in 2012.
Brexit was the exception, not the norm.
First Results In
Dixville Notch
Clinton 4
Trump 2
Johnson 1
Romney () 1
Hart's Location
Clinton 17
Trump 14
Johnson 3
Sanders 1
Kasich 1
Millsfield
Clinton 4
Trump 16
Sanders 1
Overall
Trump 35 - 25 Clinton
Why on earth do people write-in vote before a candidate has been chosen for each party?
Just watching Sky, and apparently these guys are normally hanging around Times Square all the time... is that right? If so, Jesus Christ... talk about a militarising your cities.
Toggle Spoiler
Idk. I think the election has been so unpredictable that there's virtually nothing that we can say with any certainty, except that Trump won't win by a large margin.
Tomorrow will be an ugly day, in reality if Clinton wins and on the internet if Trump wins.
America has never gotten past the idea of downscaling military in times of peace. There's too much money involved in all the wrong places.
Obama was polling much better than Hillary at this stage.
Not according to your friends at RealClearPolitics... They have Clinton up more now than they had Obama in the days leading up to the election.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...bama-1171.html
EDIT; Unless, of course, you are saying that RCP aren't reliable...
Leave them to it.
Newby as a second name.
Eisenhower figured this out in the '50s, and gave one of the great orations on the topic. The military-industrial complex one.
America promptly said "great speech" and then ignored it entirely.
I'm with Mert here. I reckon this will be super close. Looking at how much the polls have swayed, it's clear that a shitload of people are undecided and also quite clueless what either person stands for. The fact that anyone evens sways back and fourth between them is a little insane in itself.
What I make of it is that Trump would have had this bagged if he could have just controlled himself a little bit, and that Pussy tape (etc) wouldn't have come out. Basically - it doesn't matter that he seems batshit crazy and never really seems to say anything of context to, well, anything.
Looking at the graph on this site, for example, you can clearly see each time Trump fucks something up:
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...tion-forecast/
It's like he's the slowest racing car in a racing game you know - once he gains momentum he's hard to stop, but each time he takes a bump he has to sort of restart from scratch to catch up.
I dunno what I'm on about, but I have a nasty feeling that everyone will walk around thinking "it's probably fine and Clinton seems like an idiot but at least she seems fairly normal" and then, just like with Brexit, we'll wake up tomorrow to a Trump victory because a bunch of people thought "ah fuck it, my vote isn't important anyway" in the booths and just voted out of anger.
Maybe democracy isn't very good.
Hillary starting to pull out on 538
I disagree. The single biggest game-changer in terms of the post-convention running percentages was the first debate. That was 100% just Trump being Trump. That was the point where he was judged on his temperament, his policy, and his communication.
Brillo is fronting the Beeb's coverage.
'mon Donnie, give us the liberal tears we've been waiting for.
Interesting.Brillo is fronting the Beeb's coverage.
Maybe the Beeb are worried Dimbleby won't make it through the night this time. He looked to be hanging on by a thread for the referendum.
Who's brillo?
Reply With Quote
