Trump to win in a landslide

[Wepwawet]

I predict that the winner will be sellers of popcorn, as this one may make the "hanging chad" election look like a meeting of My Little Pony enthusiasts

[ian hacktorp]

2 hours ago, Helen of Annoy said:

You know, even if Biden was in some shady business in Russia or Ukraine, which he wasn't, he still paid a lot of taxes in the US. That man is not bankrupt or evading taxes. Which means that even if he was a crook, which he wasn't, he's good at that. It's what you believed Trump was.

Well, gosh...maybe someday Trump will finally be investigated by somebody. 

As for the Biden's "business" in Ukraine, given the way the Dems, MSM, and social media are losing their collective sh!t right now, I'd say there's a LOT more to their story than simply Hunter taking money.  I'd wager the nature of their business has to do with trafficking in drugs, humans, or both.

Good thing the Dems have Hillary warming up in the bullpen!

Lol...

[Cookie Monster]

On 10/14/2020 at 7:11 PM, RoofGardener said:

An interesting story.... 

Professor Helmut Norpoth has used a mathematical mode called the "Primary Model" to predict five out of the last six presidential elections. ( and when retrospectively used on previous elections, correctly 'predicted' 25 out of 27 of them. 

He is predicting not only a win for Donald Trump (on a 91%  probability), but a landslide, with him winning 362 electoral votes. 

https://patch.com/new-york/threevillage/stony-brook-professor-predicts-president-trump-landslide-win

Most interesting ! 

Oh Yeah!

We all know its on its way. The Democrats are going to get a well deserved mauling.

[Helen of Annoy]

55 minutes ago, ian hacktorp said:

Well, gosh...maybe someday Trump will finally be investigated by somebody. 

As for the Biden's "business" in Ukraine, given the way the Dems, MSM, and social media are losing their collective sh!t right now, I'd say there's a LOT more to their story than simply Hunter taking money.  I'd wager the nature of their business has to do with trafficking in drugs, humans, or both.

Good thing the Dems have Hillary warming up in the bullpen!

Lol...

Yeah, only everyone sane knows by now that trumpers are constantly projecting their own behaviour on others. 

So when you spread slanderous conspiracies, sane people expect another proof of Trump's involvement in the exact schemes you're trying to pin on others.

Human trafficking, you say? My god, is it that bad? Is it why Trump wished Maxwell well?

Oh, my... thanks... you made me connect the dots. Is it what you really do, warn people about Trump's involvement in outright horrors on top of being financed by Russian regime, as one of his sons already said in public when he bragged about having influx of Russian investments so great they need no loans? 

 

In other words, my scorn for the mental abilities of the authors of the propaganda you spread cannot be expressed in words. 

I'm not saying it won't work on the cultists, they've left their brains in toilet anyway. But if only you could fathom how pathetic it seems to the not completely stupid people.  

[skliss]

57 minutes ago, ian hacktorp said:

Well, gosh...maybe someday Trump will finally be investigated by somebody. 

As for the Biden's "business" in Ukraine, given the way the Dems, MSM, and social media are losing their collective sh!t right now, I'd say there's a LOT more to their story than simply Hunter taking money.  I'd wager the nature of their business has to do with trafficking in drugs, humans, or both.

Good thing the Dems have Hillary warming up in the bullpen!

Lol...

She'll be up to her ears involved in it. Maybe Schiff will throw himself into the breach...willing to sacrifice himself to the cause. You know it's what he dreams of in his weird little Schiff mind.  

[spartan max2]

I honestly think it's going to be a blue wave. But it's only a couple weeks away, will see if this guy is right.

[ian hacktorp]

27 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

Human trafficking, you say? My god, is it that bad? Is it why Trump wished Maxwell well?

Yes, Trump must be very, very worried.

So much so, that Biden just suspended his campaign.

Haha!

[Tatetopa]

1 hour ago, ian hacktorp said:

Well, gosh...maybe someday Trump will finally be investigated by somebody.

The real danger to Trump will come if he is not re-elected.  Before investigations can take their course,  Putin will view him as an unstable liability rather than an asset.

[ian hacktorp]

7 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

The real danger to Trump will come if he is not re-elected.

Can't argue with that.  They will literally try kill him.  Again.

[Katniss]

Ooh, I am soooo book marking this thread for after Nov. 3.

Edited October 15, 2020 by Katniss

[DarkHunter]

2 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

I honestly think it's going to be a blue wave. But it's only a couple weeks away, will see if this guy is right.

There is a very real chance that the polls are drastically wrong and Trump will win by a large margin.  

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxbusiness.com/markets/voter-registration-trends-trump-edge-jpmorgan.amp

Essentially Republicans have been registering far more new voters then Democrats especially in key battleground states and those new potential voters wont be picked up in polling.  The article mentions PA where Republicans have registered around 200,000 new voters but doesnt mention how many new voters Democrats registered.  

https://patch.com/pennsylvania/lansdale/crucial-pa-trump-registers-far-more-new-voters-biden

That story is a few weeks old and seems to be a more local news source but mentions how Republicans have registered about 140,000 new voters to Democrats approximate 58,000 new voters.  I have heard of similar results in just about every battleground state.

While not proof of a hidden Trump wave it should be concerning to Ddmocrats

[the13bats]

On 10/14/2020 at 3:45 PM, Helen of Annoy said:

It's amazing that your country lasted 4 years on auto-pilot, but I seriously doubt it can go on like this for much longer.     

I get your point but Actually autopilot wouldnt have done all the damage trump has done, just imagine the disaster of 4 more Trump

[Knob Oddy]

Whatever way the election goes, i never thought in my lifetime i would see a US president go a whole term without starting or intensifying a war.

 

Well done Mr President and i do hope for four more years of peace, which i doubt we would get with an establishment candidate.

[spartan max2]

1 hour ago, DarkHunter said:

There is a very real chance that the polls are drastically wrong and Trump will win by a large margin.  

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxbusiness.com/markets/voter-registration-trends-trump-edge-jpmorgan.amp

Essentially Republicans have been registering far more new voters then Democrats especially in key battleground states and those new potential voters wont be picked up in polling.  The article mentions PA where Republicans have registered around 200,000 new voters but doesnt mention how many new voters Democrats registered.  

https://patch.com/pennsylvania/lansdale/crucial-pa-trump-registers-far-more-new-voters-biden

That story is a few weeks old and seems to be a more local news source but mentions how Republicans have registered about 140,000 new voters to Democrats approximate 58,000 new voters.  I have heard of similar results in just about every battleground state.

While not proof of a hidden Trump wave it should be concerning to Ddmocrats

It's certainly possible.

The polls are very bad for Trump but there is always the chance of a nonething 2016 where the polls ended up being wrong.

We shall see. If the polls are wrong this time I'm never trusting them again lol.

[+and-then]

57 minutes ago, Hugh Mungus said:

Whatever way the election goes, i never thought in my lifetime i would see a US president go a whole term without starting or intensifying a war.

 

Well done Mr President and i do hope for four more years of peace, which i doubt we would get with an establishment candidate.

The Democrats and their 5th column media have made it clear that if it isn't Biden they'll be taking to the streets.

[RoofGardener]

On 10/15/2020 at 10:40 AM, psyche101 said:

Challenging Obama's birth relentlessly is seen as racist driven by many.

He mocked Elizabeth Warren by calling her “Pocahontas”, which seems racist to me 

On Mexican immigrants: “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

I'd consider those comments racially driven.

Are Mexicans a 'race' ? 

On 10/14/2020 at 8:03 PM, Helen of Annoy said:

https://theconversation.com/political-forecast-models-arent-necessarily-more-accurate-than-polls-or-the-weather-144266

 

Nope. It worked with retrospective establishing the connection between primaries and elections, in sane conditions. 

But it's not just an election this time, it's referendum on irrational stupidity. And racism too.   

Oh come now, I think 'racism' is overplayed. It's true that one of the candidates has made racist comments, but I think that Joe Biden has recovered from that  

On 10/15/2020 at 9:21 AM, the13bats said:

And this guy says biden will win ny landslide,

 

MOST interesting. Well, ONE of those professors are about to lose their perfect prediction record

Edited October 16, 2020 by RoofGardener

[Horta]

On 10/15/2020 at 5:11 AM, RoofGardener said:

An interesting story.... 

Professor Helmut Norpoth has used a mathematical mode called the "Primary Model" to predict five out of the last six presidential elections. ( and when retrospectively used on previous elections, correctly 'predicted' 25 out of 27 of them. 

He is predicting not only a win for Donald Trump (on a 91%  probability), but a landslide, with him winning 362 electoral votes. 

https://patch.com/new-york/threevillage/stony-brook-professor-predicts-president-trump-landslide-win

Most interesting ! 

Probably right. Regardless what you think of Trump (certainly plenty to think about), surely an actual turnip would at least stand a chance against Biden. The signs aren't good either way for the US in particular or the world in general.

How far has US politics fallen? The sun is indeed setting on the west.

[Setton]

13 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

The article mentions PA where Republicans have registered around 200,000 new voters but doesnt mention how many new voters Democrats registered.  

Oh my god, you're right!

It's almost like fox is...biased or something 

[Setton]

12 hours ago, Hugh Mungus said:

Whatever way the election goes, i never thought in my lifetime i would see a US president go a whole term without starting or intensifying a war.

Just the odd assassination of a foreign general...

[Robotic Jew]

12 hours ago, Hugh Mungus said:

Whatever way the election goes, i never thought in my lifetime i would see a US president go a whole term without starting or intensifying a war.

 

Well done Mr President and i do hope for four more years of peace, which i doubt we would get with an establishment candidate.

We don't need soldiers to intensify wars anymore. We have drones....

 

Quote

During Mr Obama's eight years in office, 1,878 drone strikes were carried out, according to researchers. Since Mr Trump was elected in 2016, there have been 2,243 drone strikes. The Republican president has also made some of the operations, the ones outside of war zones, more secretive. As a result, things have different today: under Mr Trump, there are more drone strikes - and less transparency.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47480207

[RoofGardener]

32 minutes ago, Setton said:

Just the odd assassination of a foreign general...

For which he should get a fourth Nobel Prize nomination

[DarkHunter]

1 hour ago, Setton said:

Oh my god, you're right!

It's almost like fox is...biased or something 

Or because it doesnt really effect the rest of the article and the reporter was a bit too lazy to look it up.  The point still stands that in states Trump won by narrow margins the Republican party has registered between 2 to 3 times the new voters than Democrats have which should concern Democrats.  

[Helen of Annoy]

14 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

It's certainly possible.

The polls are very bad for Trump but there is always the chance of a nonething 2016 where the polls ended up being wrong.

We shall see. If the polls are wrong this time I'm never trusting them again lol.

Polls weren't wrong in 2016. Hilary did win popular vote. But it wasn't the landslide needed to make that bizarre electoral college match the actual will of the people. 

This time, polls show wider margin in Biden's favour than it was in Clinton's, but what's equally important, they show the turnout should be much higher. In 2016, roughly 1/3 of eligible voters didn't vote. Higher turnout likely means lower percentage for Trump, because it's not likely someone who wasn't in his cult in 2016 has joined in the meantime, while those who weren't interested in voting have probably realized in the meantime that literally anyone is lesser evil compared to Trump.   

I've seen trumpers claiming they're lying in polls - there's only one explanation for such strange dishonesty - they're trying to make up an excuse for possible actual manipulations with votes. That's the only way for Trump to "win". (Such "elections" happen regularly in authoritarian regimes, there was a country in my neighbourhood that once re-elected their president with 104% of votes. I kid you not.)  

[spartan max2]

9 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

Polls weren't wrong in 2016. Hilary did win popular vote. But it wasn't the landslide needed to make that bizarre electoral college match the actual will of the people. 

This time, polls show wider margin in Biden's favour than it was in Clinton's, but what's equally important, they show the turnout should be much higher. In 2016, roughly 1/3 of eligible voters didn't vote. Higher turnout likely means lower percentage for Trump, because it's not likely someone who wasn't in his cult in 2016 has joined in the meantime, while those who weren't interested in voting have probably realized in the meantime that literally anyone is lesser evil compared to Trump.   

I've seen trumpers claiming they're lying in polls - there's only one explanation for such strange dishonesty - they're trying to make up an excuse for possible actual manipulations with votes. That's the only way for Trump to "win". (Such "elections" happen regularly in authoritarian regimes, there was a country in my neighbourhood that once re-elected their president with 104% of votes. I kid you not.)  

Not trying to knit pick you but that's not really unusual.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_elections

 

Voter turnout typically is between 45-60 percent.

There was a peak in 2008 with Obama at 57 percent.

2016 had 55.5 percent turnout. 

 

Election	Voting Age Population (VAP)[20]	Turnout[20]	% Turnout of

1956	104,515,000	62,027,000	59.3%
1960	109,672,000	68,836,000	62.8%
1964	114,090,000	70,098,000	61.4%
1968	120,285,000	73,027,000	60.7%
1972	140,777,000	77,625,000	55.1%
1976	152,308,000	81,603,000	53.6%
1980	163,945,000	86,497,000	52.8%
1984	173,995,000	92,655,000	53.3%
1988	181,956,000	91,587,000	50.3%
1992	189,493,000	104,600,000	55.2%
1996	196,789,000	96,390,000	49.0%
2000	209,787,000	105,594,000	50.3%
2004	219,553,000	122,349,000	55.7%
2008	229,945,000	131,407,000	57.1%
2012	235,248,000	129,235,000	54.9%
2016	250,056,000	138,847,000	55.5

Edited October 16, 2020 by spartan max2

[Robotic Jew]

1 minute ago, spartan max2 said:

Not trying to knit pick you but that's not really unusual.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_elections

 

Voter turnout typically is between 45-60 percent.

There was a peak in 2008 with Obama at 57 percent.

2016 had 55.5 percent turnout. 

 

 

1956	104,515,000	62,027,000	59.3%
1960	109,672,000	68,836,000	62.8%
1964	114,090,000	70,098,000	61.4%
1968	120,285,000	73,027,000	60.7%
1972	140,777,000	77,625,000	55.1%
1976	152,308,000	81,603,000	53.6%
1980	163,945,000	86,497,000	52.8%
1984	173,995,000	92,655,000	53.3%
1988	181,956,000	91,587,000	50.3%
1992	189,493,000	104,600,000	55.2%
1996	196,789,000	96,390,000	49.0%
2000	209,787,000	105,594,000	50.3%
2004	219,553,000	122,349,000	55.7%
2008	229,945,000	131,407,000	57.1%
2012	235,248,000	129,235,000	54.9%
2016	250,056,000	138,847,000	55.5

According to republicans voter turnout this year is expected to be 167%.