Who will win Georgia's electoral votes? (Decatur: inspection, residential, residency)

[deadsavannahian]

Who will win Georgia in the presidential election? - Poll
This poll is not about who Georgians want to be president, (I have omitted Johnson and Stein) but who you think is likely to take our state. Thanks

[Newsboy]

LOL!

[deadsavannahian]

Georgia can't suffer through another Republican presidency, especially not a bigoted tyrant

[Fountain-of-youth]

Clinton by 50,000-100,000 votes.

[Iconographer]

Originally Posted by deadsavannahian

Georgia can't suffer through another Republican presidency, especially not a bigoted tyrant

In the unforgettable words of The Rolling Stones, you can't always get what you want. Even when you frame the original post in an aura of objectivity.

[bUU]

To be fair, objectivity is pointless in mid-August. The smartest, most informed person couldn't make a worthwhile guess right now about how the state will vote. Come back in October and we can have this discussion.

[Iconographer]

We have this discussion every election. "This is the year Georgia goes blue!"...and then it doesn't. I don't see it happening in 2016, either.

[chiatldal]

If Gary and Clinton get enough votes it will turn Blue.

Polls show Clinton gain most Sanders and Democrats supporters

While Gary is taking a small nice chunk of republicans away for Trump.

Changing Demographics can give Hillary a win. but if Hilary can't win Georgia on her on, Trump issue can cause Gary to spoil Georgia from him, Giving Hilary a win.

[bUU]

Originally Posted by LovinDecatur

We have this discussion every election. "This is the year Georgia goes blue!"...and then it doesn't. I don't see it happening in 2016, either.

It's hard to talk about such things in historical context, because contexts, themselves, change as rapidly as trends take hold and show progress. What's the point in pointing out that red states turned blue and blue states turned red over the last 120 years when what "red" and "blue" meant changed during that period. When you pull back to see longer term trends, specific parties and personalities are meaningless. All you can talk about are concepts.

Today, "red" is typified by the Marlboro man, out on his own, self-reliant, without anything constraining his conduct; while "blue" is epitomized by the book It Takes a Village. What can we say about the long-term trend as it pertains to these archetypes? Over the last 350 years, a very clear trend from the "red" to the "blue" is undeniable. The trend is so pronounced that "red" today is bluer than "blue" has been in the past. It's so pronounced that "red" is proud of "blue" past, and claim it as their own even though, in the context of the past's own time, what they're proud of is unequivocally "blue".

So will "red" states turn "blue"? Probably not, or at least not as a rolling trend that makes the entire nation "blue". As time goes on, the 350 year old trend will continue: What will happen is that "red" will continue to moderate its anti-collectivism, over and over again, until "red" will again be bluer than today's "blue".

Does that mean "red" survives? Of course not. "Red" becoming bluer than a past "blue" is blue's best case scenario. "Red" has for over three centuries continually fallen to "blue" but insidiously such that it is not evident from surface inspection.

[ipkl07]

If the joker from batman ran as president with lex luthor being vice president for the republicans against superman and batman as the democrats. Georgia would still vote for the joker and lex luthor.