bluesunstorm

Elizabeth Warren already said that she doesn't want to run for president. I really like her, but she already polls under Trump and Massachusetts isn't America - John Kerry says hi! She only won her Senate election by six points, and it's speculated that 2018 won't be a cakewalk for her either. There's still too much sexism and bias in politics against strong and intelligent women, unfortunately. I don't know who the 2020 Democratic nominee will be, but I'm guessing probably a center-left heterosexual (white) man.

I thought "I Got You" was extremely catchy, but I think the rest of the EP is pretty weak/blah. Oh well, I still go back to "I'm Gonna Show You Crazy", "Pray", "I Can't Stop Drinking About You", and "No Broken Hearts".

Well really, she won. Winning by 3 million votes is winning, it's just that POTUS is not necessarily decided by who wins at least a plurality of a popular vote-unlike Congress members, governors, mayors, etc. It's beating a dead horse now, but having the second place candidate become president is never ease to take-especially when it's misogynistic, bigoted, unintelligent scum like Donald Trump. I don't like the notion that she got where she did because of family ties either. She's always been incredibly accomplished and ambitious, not to mention she worked so hard during two presidential primaries to get the nomination. I've always seen her as completely separate from Bill. I get that many people had problems with her when it came to policy, but she's not a unpopular as many people and the media make her out to be.

I love this so much, it's so catchy. The video's simple, but very pretty.

Maybe not. It just came off that way with all the articles I saw of them being critical towards Clinton and the Democratic Party, and finding out to what extent Russia was involved in boosting Trump.

I previously read the Daily Mail's website off and on when I was in the mood for some mindless celebrity gossip, but I stopped because they'd also post tons of sensationalistic stories about violence, murder, and terrorism. I went there again recently; I guess I never noticed there were so right-wing. They're total sycophants for Trump, and I don't want to give them any more web traffic.

Cool! I wish the album had more songs I like on it, but I'll probably end up buying it anyway.

It's not that worrying to be honest, since so many states ended up so close. The Democratic Party will just have to concentrate on states they have to win next election and forget about states like Iowa, Arizona, and Georgia.

The electoral college is what matters, but it's still depressing that she won the popular vote, but not the presidency. The electoral college gives more power to rural white states than to diverse Democratic strongholds. For example, blood-red Wyoming (least-populated state in the Union) gets 3 electoral votes and deep-blue California (most-populated state in the Union) gets 55. If California received the same number of electoral votes based on population in proportion to Wyoming, California would have ~195 electoral votes. This is why it's wildly improbable for a Democratic candidate to win the electoral college, but lose the popular vote.

The part that hurts the most about all of this is that she won the popular vote, but the system still gave Donald Trump the presidency. That's the second time in two decades that a Democratic candidate was the people's choice but was denied the presidency. It just doesn't feel like democracy, especially when senators and representatives are elected by popular vote. It was also very heartbreaking seeing all the stories of the women and girls she inspired and were excited about the prospect of her groundbreaking presidency. And no, they weren't voting for her solely because she was a woman, but because her experience and political platform appealed to them, and the thought of finally having a female president was also profoundly thrilling. I'm so drained and dejected after this election, because it's gone on for too long and the end result was a complete abomination of democracy. I don't think I'll ever watch presidential debates again, they are a complete waste of time and obviously don't change anyone's mind. Trump was absolutely awful in them.

I can't with all the delusions (Trump winning 40 states?!) and chicken littles around here. She's well ahead in national and state polling, ahead of where President Obama was in 2012. Even websites that are more conservative in their estimates have Hillary's probability of winning states like Michigan and Pennsylvania at about 75-80%. President Obama won Michigan by about 10 points in 2012, it's not going to swing that much in four years, when it's gone blue every election since 1992. It has a high population of African-Americans, Muslims, and college students. The polls have very much improved for Clinton since last week. The demographics just aren't there for a Trump win. He's not going to win by doing worse than Romney among people of color, college-educated whites, and women in general. I was much more worried about President Obama losing in 2012 than I am of Clinton losing tomorrow.

This is pretty good. I always love new Samantha Jade!

People are always so quick to label Clinton as a "weak candidate", but what does that say about Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders? She defeated one by a wide margin, and has been leading the other in the polling average all election. She really just needs to break the glass ceiling already.

I'm not worried anymore. Her win is so certain at this point, because her polling has been so good in Colorado, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Virginia through basically all of the election. Trump's chances of getting any of those states are quite small at this point. Plus, the fact that Florida, North Carolina, and Nevada are 50/50 at this point, and Clinton doesn't need to win any of them, while Trump needs them all and more. She has much more room for error than Trump does, and I'd rather be in her position than his. She may not defeat him in an electoral landslide like her supporters want, but a win is a win in the end.

Do Trumpanzees have a severe allergy to facts or something? They keep spouting lies that are so easy to disprove. I saw one yesterday claim Lana Del Rey was a huge Trump supporter, but that of course is a huge lie too.

I wouldn't say more right-leaners are definitely going to turnout out for Trump than for Romney in North Carolina. For one thing, Trump is much more unpopular than Romney was and Trump struggles amongst certain demographics of white voters. Plus, this year isn't comparable to 2012 in North Carolina, because local politics is a big driver there this year and may change the makeup of the turnout. The state could obviously go either way, since it's within the margin of error, like the last two elections.

If you looked at any polling aggregators, it was nowhere near a 1-point race before the "bombshell". Polling was always expected to tighten a bit due to the current hyper-partisan political climate, but it's not a 1-point race. Cable news outlets love drama and horserace narratives for views and clicks. They'll cherry-pick the worst poll for the frontrunner, and claim the race has dramatically changed without giving their audience the polling average/whole story.

If anyone considers the arrogant, corrupt, overly-privileged, racist, sexist, xenophobic, "billionaire" Donald J. Trump an "underdog", then they've lost touch with reality beyond repair.

That's assuming a lot. Sanders is very left for American standards, and would have had a difficult time in the general election if he didn't become much more centrist. Warren may not have had the broad appeal outside of white progressives, and Biden can be kind of crazy and isn't the best candidate. I think John Kerry or Martin O'Malley would have had the best shot at an easy win.

It's going to be especially difficult if Republicans continue to control Congress and state governments. Where are all the Bernie diehards during mid-terms and off-year elections? You can't complain that the government is too right-wing if you're largely politically apathetic when it comes to doing something as simple as voting.

The case is a civil suit, and bringing it up will make her look bad, because of the double standard of expected professionalism between Clinton and Trump. She can't go into the gutter like he can and expect to get away with it. Bringing it up wouldn't change any minds at this point. We've had a tape leak where he unashamedly admits that he gropes and kisses women without their consent and a dozen-plus women coming forward to corroborate that he does engage in the behavior that he admitted to in the tape, and it didn't really affect the polls. A possible majority of the American electorate has already decided that the behavior and rhetoric of a juvenile, narcissistic, divisive, totally unqualified, racist, misogynistic, and xenophobic Republican presidential candidate are nothing compared to any mistakes Hillary Clinton may have made with e-mails. It's going to come down to turnout in the end. If Trump does win, I don't want to hear any whining from white liberals who voted third party or didn't bother to vote, but always complain that the government isn't more progressive. You can't have a more progressive government if you don't actively vote against Republicans. This is especially true for college students/millennials, you either vote or "shut the hell up!".

What's with the "sky is falling!" routine over one poll? You look at averages and different outlets have her lead still between 3.8 and 9.2 points, depending on how they average polls and whether it's a 2/3/4 candidate race: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_op..._election,_2016 I would have thought Romney was a shoe-in if I only looked at the worst polls for President Obama instead of the average.

Is another one of your infallible sources telling you this? 538 currently has her with an 86.2% chance of winning the state, and has her currently 6.4 points ahead based on the polls: http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-e...ecast/michigan/. Clinton currently has a better chance at winning Georgia, Arizona, and Alaska, than Trump has at winning Michigan. You can believe whatever you want, but polling and information matter and are very reliable when it comes to US presidential elections, because polling is done so frequently. President Obama won Michigan last election by ~10 points, there's no way a candidate with such low-favorability as Trump would swing it by that much to win the state, especially when so many polls show him getting 0% African-American support in Detroit, or close to it. You can't just spout nonsense without any numbers to back it up and expect to be taken seriously.

That actually is right. If he won New Hampshire, that would result in a 269-269 tie, but if he won New Hampshire, he'd probably win Maine's second congressional district too, which is one electoral vote, which gives him 270 exactly. But, that just shows what an uphill battle it is for Trump, or really any Republican presidential nominee in recent elections. But, if New Hampshire did decide to go red this cycle, it would be 2000 all over again with them screwing us over and giving us the low-IQ Republican incompetent. This is what a tie would look like: http://www.270towin.com/maps/byzWB

Did she ever record "Let Me Be Me" by Jessica Mauboy, since she has a writing credit on it?