ohnonotgmail wrote: » wow, the election might come down to a few states deciding it? Please share us more of your great insights.
OS_Head wrote: » Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida. Get those and it's done.
OS_Head wrote: » You think it's gonna be a walk in the park then.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » WOW! that is amazing information that nobody else thought of.
duploelabs wrote: » 11 out of 45 is 75.4%. Again ill ask the same question. Has an incumbent being doing this badly in the polls at this stage and turned it around?
ohnonotgmail wrote: » If you could win arguments by stating the bleeding obvious you would be well ahead.
OS_Head wrote: » Besides it being bleeding obvious, what other reason do you want to ask.
partyguinness wrote: » I left it at 10 rather 11 as JFK was...well... he was dead and not best placed to run anywhere let alone for reelection. Again, the sentence clearly states that when incumbent was able to run. Even 75% is still a massive majority. That's the difference here which I said from the very outset. I do not read too much into polls or read too much into them. It may very well turn out that the polls are spot on. We will just have to wait and see.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » I wasn't asking you anything. why would I do that????
OS_Head wrote: » Cos you probably felt you got schooled earlier on. My bad.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » is that the post where you described me as a leftie? LOL
8-10 wrote: » Electoral college is such a dumb system. If Trump does win the White House, it's again going to be a winner with less votes than his opponent. #Democracy
OS_Head wrote: » Nope, just in general.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » you seem to share trumps trait of massive overconfidence in your own ability.
Call Me Jimmy wrote: » I think it's well designed and strikes a balance that is proved in the pudding that conservatism and liberalism get roughly half the time in charge and that a lot of elections are close. If you really don't want it to be possible for less populated or rural states to be meaningful in the elections then do you really want a united states?
OS_Head wrote: » It doesn't take much ability to school you though, does it?
Igotadose wrote: » Not enough. Still leaves 38 undecided - that's 260 Biden, 240 Trump.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » Blimey, it is worse than I thought.
Igotadose wrote: » Still leaves 38 undecided - that's 260 Biden, 240 Trump. Take a look at the map and decide all the undecideds.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » you describe a system where a handful of votes relatively speaking in a very small number of states decides the presidency as balanced?
duploelabs wrote: » Adams Burren Polk Pierce Buchanan Hayes Harrison Taft Hoover Carter GHW Bush All would like a word
Call Me Jimmy wrote: » What I mean is it balances the two ends of the political spectrum, the two most relevant differences between populations in the country imo. If it wasn't balanced you'd have democrats with power over all the states almost all the time, which you can say is more directly representative but would not be great for the union and would sow a lot more resentment than the current system.
duploelabs wrote: » There's 11 names in my list, it doesn't include Kennedy. Can you not answer the question I've asked you three times already
Outlaw Pete wrote: » Birthergate was going on long before Trump largely helped put the matter to bed