Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is articles such as this that makes me scratch my head about Mr. Trump spending today in Michigan and Wisconsin. He needs, for instance, to get up to New Hampshire. He simply can't waste time in states that, in all probability, will go for Clinton. It was good that he was in Arizona yesterday, but why New Mexico?
I guess that Mr. Trump wants to 'win' all states. Yet, he must be reasonable and concentrate on those states that he absolutely must win to have a chance.
However, at least he is not wasting his time campaigning in California. I also have not seen where he has campaigned in his home state of New York.
One reason, back in 2000, I readily accepted the Bush win was due to Mr. Gore's failure to win his home state of Tennessee. A presidential candidate should win his or her home state (Ms. Clinton will likely win her 'home' state of Illinois, but not her other 'home' state of Arkansas, but she will win her new 'home' state of New York). Yet, Mr. Trump has always lived in New York. He says he is very much admired in his home. Yet, even if it is a lost cause, he should at least make one stop in New York City (however, perhaps he will make it his final stop next Monday; I would hope so).
I am for Ms. Clinton. However, I enjoy the presidential races, and have for decades. I am always interested in how candidates campaign, what states they target, etc. While I am not for Mr. Trump, my political side wants to see him campaign intelligently and with specific goals in mind. If Mr. Trump wins, I would rather it be due to his running an excellent campaign, and not a 'default' win due to Ms. Clinton's woes and tribulations.
He should speak in front of the NY Times building.
I think maybe no events are scheduled yet for Wednesday is because they think the polls that come out on Tuesday will give him a better idea of what he could win.
My favorite thing on primary days and Election Day is CNN's John King at the election map which he uses to talk about voter patterns in counties or districts and throws in a lot of historical numbers talk. I think that's way more interesting than a bunch of opining know-nothings blathering away.
He should speak in front of the NY Times building.
I think maybe no events are scheduled yet for Wednesday is because they think the polls that come out on Tuesday will give him a better idea of what he could win.
My favorite thing on primary days and Election Day is CNN's John King at the election map which he uses to talk about voter patterns in counties or districts and throws in a lot of historical numbers talk. I think that's way more interesting than a bunch of opining know-nothings blathering away.
That is an excellent point, which I am glad you made. It does make sense to keep days open so that one may respond quickly to poll results.
I imagine that I shall spend the evening switching between CNN and Fox, like in 2012. I believe I happened to be on Fox when Carl Rove expressed his disbelief on Fox calling Ohio for Obama.
That is an excellent point, which I am glad you made. It does make sense to keep days open so that one may respond quickly to poll results.
I imagine that I shall spend the evening switching between CNN and Fox, like in 2012. I believe I happened to be on Fox when Carl Rove expressed his disbelief on Fox calling Ohio for Obama.
Too many Bush people on Fox News who don't want Trump to win, for me, plus I have trouble reading the bottom of the screen on Fox News as results come in. Bigger fonts Fox News! Hard to read your Election Night results on older TVs. As much as I don't want to listen to the CNN talking heads, I can't take Megyn Kelly all night and Perrino, Steirwalt and Rove are Bushies who don't like Trump. At least CNN puts some Trump supporters on their panels and again, I like John King at the map.
Here's an interesting one. These poll results came out yesterday:
Florida Senate - Rubio vs. Murphy NBC/WSJ/Marist Rubio 51, Murphy 43 Rubio +8
Florida Senate - Rubio vs. Murphy Gravis Rubio 46, Murphy 46 Tie
What a bunch of crappola! An 8 point difference!
They both polled on the same 2 days 10/25 - 10/26. One polled 779 likely voters and the other polled 780 likely voters. I still think the pollsters ought to all get together after this election and define "Likely Voter" so they are all on the same page.
Voting for that nutbag, Johnson? There goes your credibility.
BTW, lots of people are paying attention to the LA Times poll as it's been the one closest to reality for some time. However, it seems to show a 46-44 spread in favor of Trump, not the spread mentioned earlier.
They are coming undun....full psychotic mode soon.
Remember when they stubbornly argued that Trump was way behind last week? Some of those experts have disappeared yet again.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
