# "The Democrats start with 246 electoral votes"



## Mac1958 (Sep 1, 2015)

I'm seeing threads about polls on the direction of the country and Obama's numbers, but elections remain all about electoral votes.  This piece is written by a conservative writer and blogger named Myra Adams:

Can a Republican Win 270 Electoral Votes in 2016...or Ever?

From the piece, the key point:

_*3. The GOP’s biggest problem is that Democrats start with 246 electoral votes*

As Republicans gear up to “take back the White House” conservatives need to be aware of one startling fact: in 2012 if Romney had won the three swing states of Ohio, Florida, and Virginia, he still would have lost the election. 


If you want to explore this new reality, check out www.270towin.com. There you can play around with the interactive map and plot out your favorite candidate’s path to 270.

For instance, let’s look at Wisconsin, with its 10 electoral votes. Every four years the Republican mindset says Wisconsin will be a swing state. Then, a few months into the campaign the state loses it’s coveted “battleground” status as polls begin to show its “blue” reality. The truth is that not since 1984, when Reagan won in a landslide against Walter Mondale, has Wisconsin seen red.

Or take Pennsylvania, with 20 electoral votes, and New York, with 29—both have been blue since Bill Clinton won them in 1992, and blue they will remain.  Then there’s the mega-rich electoral state of California with its 55 votes that turned red for the last time in 1988 when George H.W. Bush won that “California guy” Reagan’s “third term.” 


After totaling the electoral votes in all the terminally blue states, an inconvenient math emerges, providing even a below average Democrat presidential candidate a potential starting advantage of 246. Here are the states and their votes:  CA (55), NY (29), PA (20), IL (20), MI (16), NJ (14), WA (12), MA (11), MN (10), WI (10), MD (10), CT (7), OR (7), HI (4), ME (4), NH (4), RT (4), VT (3), DE (3), DC (3).

Let me repeat, if only for the shock value: 246 votes out of 270 is 91 percent. That means the Democrat candidate needs to win only 24 more votes out of the remaining 292. (There are a total of 538 electoral votes.)  _

*Thoughts?*
_._
.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2015)

Bush at this time in office was around 20% compared to 50% for Obama. Obama isn't doing too bad!

The reason the democrats have 246 electoral votes right out of the gate is because most people want their government to govern. They don't want cut, slash and burn! They want infrastructure, science institutions, police, education, minimum wage, ssi, and on down the list. They believe republicans are fucking crazy.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2015)

Give Romney Florida, Virgina, Nh and co and he still loses by 277 to 266.

George W Bush won Ohio and Iowa...That is why he won. I honestly doubt a kookpublican can win nev with the 10% hispanic shift. And Virginia and Ohio depend on the government too much to vote kookpublican.

Ohio made the difference all by its self.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2015)

Looking at 2016 electoral set up the republican could win florida, Virgina, North Carolina, Ohio...But lose Co, Nev, Nh and Iowa and lose the election 272 to 266.

2016 Presidential Election Interactive Map and History of the Electoral College


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 1, 2015)

The OP highlights the importance of not alienating the Hispanic voter base because they are vital in the swing states. 

And no, not just in the states with large Latino populations. If the voter base contains only 5% Hispanics but if 3 or 4 out of 5 vote Dem that can be the difference between winning and losing that state.


----------



## candycorn (Sep 1, 2015)

Give it 10-20 years.  I will be very hard for a Democrat to win.  
The GOP is dominating the State legislatures and State houses.  A giant GOP farm team is forming and you'll see some of them win great popularity in a Dem Stronghold like California or New York.

As we saw with Trump, you don't need to be a republican to be popular with republican, just call yourself one and the WWE caucus takes up your cause; much like moths to a flame or pigs to a trough if you prefer.  

At some point, when someone like this arises, they will be a more hybrid form of conservative; likely pro choice but definitely pro gun, pro DOMA, anti AA.  The hard right will have to wonder if they are going to cut off their nose to spite their face or swallow hard and vote for whomever this newcomer is.  As population shifts and the blatant racist in the GOP die off, you'll se a more congenial GOP take its place.  The newcomer from Orange County or Westchester will win out.  






Even now, democrats are being relegated to smaller enclaves.This will continue.  

In truth, there are far more shades of purple out there than this map indicates but hardly enough to keep the status quo.


----------



## Freewill (Sep 1, 2015)

Mac1958 said:


> I'm seeing threads about polls on the direction of the country and Obama's numbers, but elections remain all about electoral votes.  This piece is written by a conservative writer and blogger named Myra Adams:
> 
> Can a Republican Win 270 Electoral Votes in 2016...or Ever?
> 
> ...



Reagan did it twice.
GHWBush once
GWBush twice.  and that was in a span of 30 years.   So yes, there are enough sane democrats to make a difference.  What the other insane democrats want you to believe is that the election is over before it started.  Surrender now!!!  Resistance is futile!!!!!


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 1, 2015)

Freewill said:


> Reagan did it twice.
> GHWBush once
> GWBush twice. and that was in a span of 30 years.



Actually, GWBush stole the 2000 election, and the only reason he barely won in 2004 was because America has never fired a president in the middle of a war. 

But here's the problem with your whole bit of reasoning about Pre-1988.  

In 1988, Bush-41 won the same percentages  by racial groups that the Weird Mormon Robot did in 2012.  He got 60% of the White vote, Romney got 59.  He got 8% of the black vote, Romney got 6. He got 30% of the Hispanic vote, Romney got 29.  

But Whites were only 72% of the electorate in 2012, as opposed to 88% of the vote in 1988. 

The thing is, the Democrat hasn't won the white vote since 1964, when even white people weren't crazy enough to give Barry Goldwater. 

The GOP made a conscious decision with Nixon and the Southern Strategy to play on the fears of White People.  Now that doesn't work for them anymore.


----------



## jwoodie (Sep 1, 2015)

Mac1958 said:


> I'm seeing threads about polls on the direction of the country and Obama's numbers, but elections remain all about electoral votes.  This piece is written by a conservative writer and blogger named Myra Adams:
> 
> Can a Republican Win 270 Electoral Votes in 2016...or Ever?
> 
> ...



The geographical split is a lot like 1860.  The question is how many of the swing states will vote for more Obama/Clinton.  If the Democrats win again, the GOP should be disbanded in favor of a new political party.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Sep 1, 2015)

Matthew said:


> Bush at this time in office was around 20% compared to 50% for Obama. Obama isn't doing too bad!
> 
> The reason the democrats have 246 electoral votes right out of the gate is because most people want their government to govern. They don't want cut, slash and burn! They want infrastructure, science institutions, police, education, minimum wage, ssi, and on down the list. They believe republicans are fucking crazy.



Isn't it time for Jeopardy?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Sep 1, 2015)

Mac1958 said:


> I'm seeing threads about polls on the direction of the country and Obama's numbers, but elections remain all about electoral votes.  This piece is written by a conservative writer and blogger named Myra Adams:
> 
> Can a Republican Win 270 Electoral Votes in 2016...or Ever?
> 
> ...



We need to break up CA electoral votes evenly into Northern CA and El Norte


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Sep 1, 2015)

jwoodie said:


> The geographical split is a lot like 1860.  The question is how many of the swing states will vote for more Obama/Clinton.  If the Democrats win again, the GOP should be disbanded in favor of a new political party.



If Trump gets the nomination the Democrats will win the White House and the Senate.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2015)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Bush at this time in office was around 20% compared to 50% for Obama. Obama isn't doing too bad!
> ...



How am I wrong? What other reasons would most sane people vote democrat???


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2015)

jwoodie said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm seeing threads about polls on the direction of the country and Obama's numbers, but elections remain all about electoral votes.  This piece is written by a conservative writer and blogger named Myra Adams:
> ...




The reason republicans fail is because the majority of the American people *like* ssi, medicade, infrastructure, science institutions and everything your party promises to cut. How is forming a even more rightward party going to win??  Your problem is a shit ton of moderates and some moderate republicans agree with the liberals on the basics of civilization.


----------



## Freewill (Sep 1, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Freewill said:
> 
> 
> > Reagan did it twice.
> ...



I am really tired of the left wing continuing to lie out their asses.  The same SCOTUS that made law concering Obamacare and Gay marriage that you on the left LOVE ruled properly there was no stealing.  Gore couldn't even win his own state, he is the one who tried to steal an election.  Every recount said Bush won.

If Gore's lawyer had not lied to the SCOF, and he did lie, the thing would have ended there.  But another democrat lies and gets away with it and now you lie about Bush stealing an election.  Time to grow up and be honest.

You top it off whit the southern strategy lies.  Those who keep trying to make the southern strategy about racism have had their ass handed to them so much it isn't funny but yet you continue on.  Time to grow up and be honest.

I don't mind debate, I don't mind conflicting opinions but when a post is nothing but regenerated lies that kinda gets under my skin.


----------



## mamooth (Sep 1, 2015)

Freewill said:


> I am really tired of the left wing continuing to lie out their asses



No, you're butthurt about being called out on your support of brazen election fraud.



> Every recount said Bush won.



Every recount pointed out that, by any chad standard, Gore had more legal votes than Bush. Of course, they buried those numbers on the back pages, and trumpeted "Bush Wins!" on the front page, because that's what our conservative media is paid to do.

Again, by any chad standard, Gore had more legal votes than Bush in Florida. You can pout and scream and rage all you want, but when you're done, that unpleasant fact will still be there.
.
Why? Because under every version of Florida law, overvotes with clear voter intent were legal votes. Those votes should have been counted. They were never counted anywhere, not even once. They were spit out uncounted by the counting machines, and then rejected a second or third time during any "recounts". If there had been a full statewide manual recount of all votes under a consistent standard, as the Florida SC directed, those votes would have been counted, and Gore would have won comfortably.

It wasn't the Gore team that filed a lawsuit with the SC to prevent the legal votes from being counted. Your heroes did that. The chads were just the excuse they used to stop the legal votes from being counted.

You cheated, you won, so get over it already. Stop being such a sore winner. Isn't the pride you should take in your successful cheating enough for you?


----------



## Freewill (Sep 1, 2015)

mamooth said:


> Freewill said:
> 
> 
> > I am really tired of the left wing continuing to lie out their asses
> ...



you are a liar beyond belief and that takes some on this board.  What exact real count did Bush lose?  The original count had Bush winning and whinner Gore already conceded.  That is until his handlers told him that if they lied enough there might be a chance.  And they did lie, they even lied in front of the SCOF and got away with it.

Why would I be butt burned it was your guy who lost, I suggest Prep H if it is still bothering you.  Read the following an go and lie no more.

*Vote Analysis: Bush Wins, Again*


----------



## mamooth (Sep 1, 2015)

Freewill said:


> QUOTE]What exact real count did Bush lose?



That's the point, shit-for-brains. There was no "real count" because the the Bush team sued to stop the real count that the Florida SC had ordered.

Damn, you're stupid.

On the plus side, you're not a liar, being you're actually stupid enough to honestly believe the crap you spout.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2015)

Republicans need to win Florida, Virgina, Ohio and either take Co or Iowa.

Bush won because he won Nev, Co and ohio...Nev is gone! And Ohio is worth 3 electoral less then it was in 2004. 

*Lose Ohio* = lose the election. No matter if they win Florida, Virgina, co and Iowa.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2015)

The Hispanic population is at least 1% larger now in florida then it was in 2010. Florida will be harder to win for them and this is before considering the growth of the asian and black population...Virgina's white population has also declined along with Co. Any of these three states could easily be lost by the republicans on election night

Iowa also hasn't been won since George w Bush in 2004 and either has Ohio that most important state needed.

Right now the odds are 75% that our next president will be a democrat. A massive turn out of whites would have to come out and the non-white population would need to stay home for the republicans to win.  2016 Presidential Election Interactive Map and History of the Electoral College


----------



## Zander (Sep 1, 2015)

Democrats win a few elections and suddenly they are the ones talking about a "permanent majority"...  

One thing about politics- things can and do change quickly.


----------



## Nyvin (Sep 1, 2015)

It's hard to imagine a Democrat going below 210 EV's,   but 246 might be a little high.    I probably wouldn't include PA, WI, or NH in that list of "blue states",  although NM probably should be on it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 1, 2015)

Freewill said:


> I am really tired of the left wing continuing to lie out their asses. The same SCOTUS that made law concering Obamacare and Gay marriage that you on the left LOVE ruled properly there was no stealing. Gore couldn't even win his own state, he is the one who tried to steal an election. Every recount said Bush won.



Well, no it wasn't the same SCOTUS.  It has 4 new members it didn't have in 2000.  

Bush stole the election. Deal with it. 



Freewill said:


> You top it off whit the southern strategy lies. Those who keep trying to make the southern strategy about racism have had their ass handed to them so much it isn't funny but yet you continue on. Time to grow up and be honest.



Of course the Southern Strategy was about Racism. LBJ said when he passed the civil rights act, "I've lost the South for a Generation".  If only he knew.  



Freewill said:


> I don't mind debate, I don't mind conflicting opinions but when a post is nothing but regenerated lies that kinda gets under my skin.



Guy, you made your decision to play on White Fear rather than bringing us together.  Now it doesn't work for you anymore.


----------



## jwoodie (Sep 1, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Bush stole the election. Deal with it.



Like Obama is a Muslim?  Deal with that.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2015)

What's the last time they won pa and wi??? Not in the current demographics....

Also it is stupid to run on cutting the shit out of infrastructure, science, r&d and education.


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 1, 2015)

Mac1958 said:


> I'm seeing threads about polls on the direction of the country and Obama's numbers, but elections remain all about electoral votes.  This piece is written by a conservative writer and blogger named Myra Adams:
> 
> Can a Republican Win 270 Electoral Votes in 2016...or Ever?
> 
> ...


It's true! I can't see another Republican ever winning ever again. You could take the winner of the Democratic primary and put him on the Republican ticket and run him against  the 5th place finisher and he would get slaughtered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2015)

GHook93 said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm seeing threads about polls on the direction of the country and Obama's numbers, but elections remain all about electoral votes.  This piece is written by a conservative writer and blogger named Myra Adams:
> ...




Yep,,,I keep repeating the reason for this all over the board!


----------



## Freewill (Sep 1, 2015)

mamooth said:


> Freewill said:
> 
> 
> > QUOTE]What exact real count did Bush lose?
> ...



He won the REAL count and the counts after.  BTW if there were no other counts then how can you make the statement that Gore won them all?


----------



## Freewill (Sep 1, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Freewill said:
> 
> 
> > I am really tired of the left wing continuing to lie out their asses. The same SCOTUS that made law concering Obamacare and Gay marriage that you on the left LOVE ruled properly there was no stealing. Gore couldn't even win his own state, he is the one who tried to steal an election. Every recount said Bush won.
> ...



Guy, where did I play to white fear?   You lie like all liberals lie.  Johnson, you are going to quote Johnson?  Really he was the worse of the flaming democrat two faced lying racists.


----------



## Freewill (Sep 1, 2015)

Zander said:


> Democrats win a few elections and suddenly they are the ones talking about a "permanent majority"...
> 
> One thing about politics- things can and do change quickly.



What the liars don't mention is that after about 6 years of democrat control the people kicked them to the curb in the house then they kicked them to the curb a few years later in the Senate.  Obama wins an almost forgone conclusion and they think that a mandate.  There has to be a name for the liberals special kind of mental illness.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2015)

Freewall,

Whites made up 88% of the electorate in 1980 compared to 72% in 2012.  This number was near 81% when Bush was elected!  This likely has fallen to around 70% for 2016! 

Tell me how and why you have nothing to worry about and somehow we will go back to the 1980's! lol

Blacks vote against republicans big time
Hispanics have gone from 2 to 3% to 10%! I wouldn't be surprised if this goes up to 14-15% if you piss them off. 
Asians have gone from a non-group(less then 1% in 1980) to 3%.
Woman have gone from less then men as a voting group to 2-3% higher then men. 

Things change...My belief's are based on facts.


----------



## Katzndogz (Sep 1, 2015)

You don't know what the effect of the war on the police will have with the DNC supporting murderers like they do.


----------



## Katzndogz (Sep 1, 2015)

White alone, percent, 2013 (a) 77.7% 

 Black or African American alone, percent, 2013 (a) 13.2% 

 American Indian and Alaska Native alone, percent, 2013 (a) 1.2% 

 Asian alone, percent, 2013 (a) 5.3% 

 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone, percent, 2013 (a) 0.2% 

 Two or More Races, percent, 2013 2.4% 

 Hispanic or Latino, percent, 2013 (b) 17.1%

We've been shoveling Hispanics in by the tens of thousands, how many will vote, that's a different story.  Not all illegals vote in our elections.   Blacks as an electoral force are diminishing year by year.  They are killing themselves and aborting themselves into a non entity.  There are fewer black people alive today then there was in 1920.


----------



## Nyvin (Sep 1, 2015)

Tipsycatlover said:


> White alone, percent, 2013 (a) 77.7%
> 
> Black or African American alone, percent, 2013 (a) 13.2%
> 
> ...






free image hosting


----------



## Toro (Sep 1, 2015)

Hillary will probably win, but it's going to be a lot closer than most Democrats think.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Sep 1, 2015)

Mac1958 said:


> I'm seeing threads about polls on the direction of the country and Obama's numbers, but elections remain all about electoral votes.  This piece is written by a conservative writer and blogger named Myra Adams:
> 
> Can a Republican Win 270 Electoral Votes in 2016...or Ever?
> 
> ...


As already correctly noted: this is a problem republicans themselves created – the cumulative effect of conservative hostility toward privacy rights, voting rights, gay Americans, and Hispanic immigrants, among others, have driven away the weak democrats and democratic-leaning independents and moderates the GOP candidate will need to win the GE.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Sep 1, 2015)

Toro said:


> Hillary will probably win, but it's going to be a lot closer than most Democrats think.


Every democrat knows it's going to be a close election – whomever their candidate.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Sep 1, 2015)

jwoodie said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm seeing threads about polls on the direction of the country and Obama's numbers, but elections remain all about electoral votes.  This piece is written by a conservative writer and blogger named Myra Adams:
> ...


Nonsense.

During the 20 year period from 1968 to 1988, democrats won only one GE, 1976.

During the 40 year period from 1969 to 2009, democrats held the WH for only 12 of those 40 years.

After losing what was supposed to be 'their' election in 1988, democrats finally fixed the problem, and relegated the liberals and far left to the political backseat; since 1992 democrats have won four of the last six General Elections.

If republicans lose 'their' election in 2016, perhaps as did democrats, the GOP will fix their problem and relegate conservatives and the far right to the political backseat.


----------



## Toro (Sep 1, 2015)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> > Hillary will probably win, but it's going to be a lot closer than most Democrats think.
> ...



"Every" Democrat?

I don't think so.

Democrats are very arrogant about 2016. Just read this board.  

Stat thinks Hillary is going to win 400+ electoral votes.

That's not going to happen.


----------



## Stephanie (Sep 1, 2015)

Matthew said:


> Bush at this time in office was around 20% compared to 50% for Obama. Obama isn't doing too bad!
> 
> The reason the democrats have 246 electoral votes right out of the gate is because most people want their government to govern. They don't want cut, slash and burn! They want infrastructure, science institutions, police, education, minimum wage, ssi, and on down the list. They believe republicans are fucking crazy.



why don't you just come out and say you all want Socialism and to enslave our children, grandchildren to what will be their MASTERS in the loving and giving party of the Democrats who can not only give it but also threaten to take it away if you don't bow to them or get out of line.  It seems there is never ENOUGH that most of you Want want want or care it comes off the BACK of others in the country


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2015)

Stephanie said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Bush at this time in office was around 20% compared to 50% for Obama. Obama isn't doing too bad!
> ...




I only want the basics like infrastructure, science, education and a safetynet. My vision is kind of like the 50's in taxes but otherwises like today...We spent more on infrastructure, science and education under Reagan then we're doing right now. Why can't you think logically and come to the conclusion that we must invest in our own nation.

I aint talking about taking everything from other people.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2015)

Toro said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Toro said:
> ...




I'll be very suprised if the republicans manage to win Florida, Virgina, Co and Ohio..This is what they need to win. They haven't won All these since 2004. Hispanics, Asians and the fact that the party is so far to the right has made at least a few of these super hard to get. 

How hard is this to understand?


----------



## Katzndogz (Sep 1, 2015)

Colorado is so drugged up they don't know who they are voting for.  If Trump is the republican candidate, he will take New York, which will make up for a few states.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Sep 2, 2015)

Matthew said:


> Republicans need to win Florida, Virgina, Ohio and either take Co or Iowa.
> 
> Bush won because he won Nev, Co and ohio...Nev is gone! And Ohio is worth 3 electoral less then it was in 2004.
> 
> *Lose Ohio* = lose the election. No matter if they win Florida, Virgina, co and Iowa.



Nevada isn't gone  unless Trump is the nominee


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Sep 2, 2015)

Toro said:


> Hillary will probably win, but it's going to be a lot closer than most Democrats think.



Unless she runs against Trump I don't think there is anything probable about her winning


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Sep 2, 2015)

Tipsycatlover said:


> Colorado is so drugged up they don't know who they are voting for.  If Trump is the republican candidate, he will take New York, which will make up for a few states.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 2, 2015)

Freewill said:


> Guy, where did I play to white fear? You lie like all liberals lie. Johnson, you are going to quote Johnson? Really he was the worse of the flaming democrat two faced lying racists.



Yawn, guy, so I guess the 90% of blacks who vote against you are doing so because they didn't notice what you've been doing for the last 50 years. 

You made your bed, sleep in it.  YOur current bunch, not being happy with permanently alienating blacks, are now alienating Hispanics and Asians as well.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 2, 2015)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> > Hillary will probably win, but it's going to be a lot closer than most Democrats think.
> ...



again, what do you base that on?  She leads every last one of your guys in polls.  

So what you are telling me is that even though no one is really very enthusastic about all your single digit candidates right now, when one of these clowns in the nominee people are going to suddenly like them?  

Here's why Hillary will probably win if she's the nominee. 

1) Women- FIrst time we will get a chance to elect a woman.

2) Minorities- The GOP has done nothing to repair the damage they've done with them. 

3) Electoral College Advantage - The democrat has 242 electoral votes in states they've won in six of the last six elections.  They have an additional 15 in states they've won 5 out of 6 times. There's nothing to indicate you guys can breecch this blue wall.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 2, 2015)

Tipsycatlover said:


> We've been shoveling Hispanics in by the tens of thousands, how many will vote, that's a different story. Not all illegals vote in our elections. Blacks as an electoral force are diminishing year by year. They are killing themselves and aborting themselves into a non entity. There are fewer black people alive today then there was in 1920.



Wow, you don't see Stormfront Wank Fantasies very often. 

Reality.  In the 2012 and 2008 elections, blacks made up 13% of the electorate.  in most past elections, they make up 8-11%.  Yes, Obama being on the ballot was part of that, but so is the fact they are growing as a percentage of the electorate.


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 2, 2015)

Is a GOP impossible? Nope, but it is going to be very tough. The Hispanic population swings CO left. The younger Cuban population is very leftist like the rest of the Hispanic population, unlike their Republican parents. Cubans were the swing vote that used to offset the Jewish swing vote in FL.FL is becoming more and more blue. If FL becomes a blue state then elections will not matter! Why do you think Democrats are so pro amnesty? Flood the red states with socialist loving Democrats and those red states will turn blue: CA used to be red, same with NV, NM and CO. Heck TX could become a purple state soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 2, 2015)

Conservatives can deny this trend, but they will soon have to give in, but on what? First get off the gay issue. You lost. Move on. Take a prolife stance fine, but saying rape and invest victims can't have an abortion hurts you in the polls.. Taking a stand again student loan funding or tuition free school might help you with a segment of the rich donor base, but it turns new college grads into Democrats and alienates the middle class. People don't love Obamacare, but they hated what was in place before it. They also don't buy the bullshit health savings account s and buying across state lines. Come up with real answers or you will continue to lose the middle class.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 2, 2015)

Mac1958 said:


> I'm seeing threads about polls on the direction of the country and Obama's numbers, but elections remain all about electoral votes.  This piece is written by a conservative writer and blogger named Myra Adams:
> 
> Can a Republican Win 270 Electoral Votes in 2016...or Ever?
> 
> ...


 
Republicans need to pitch a "perfect game" in swing states to reach 270. Bush did it but barely reached 270 both times

Since 2004, swing states have become more blue with Florida and Virginia almost out of reach for Republicans

Given the current crop of Republicans, it is doubtful any of them could come near to 270


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 2, 2015)

GHook93 said:


> Conservatives can deny this trend, but they will soon have to give in, but on what? First get off the gay issue. You lost. Move on. Take a prolife stance fine, but saying rape and invest victims can't have an abortion hurts you in the polls.. Taking a stand again student loan funding or tuition free school might help you with a segment of the rich donor base, but it turns new college grads into Democrats and alienates the middle class. People don't love Obamacare, but they hated what was in place before it. They also don't buy the bullshit health savings account s and buying across state lines. Come up with real answers or you will continue to lose the middle class.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


 
Some Republicans have touched on this but quickly move back into the fold

Gay marriage and gay rights is settled. Republicans need to state they disagree but accept it and move on

Immigration reform will bury the party for a generation. Unless Republicans accept the obvious, they will become a regional party

Standing up for the environment is not a losing proposition with Americans. Unless you are in the pocket of big oil


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 2, 2015)

rightwinger said:


> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> > Conservatives can deny this trend, but they will soon have to give in, but on what? First get off the gay issue. You lost. Move on. Take a prolife stance fine, but saying rape and invest victims can't have an abortion hurts you in the polls.. Taking a stand again student loan funding or tuition free school might help you with a segment of the rich donor base, but it turns new college grads into Democrats and alienates the middle class. People don't love Obamacare, but they hated what was in place before it. They also don't buy the bullshit health savings account s and buying across state lines. Come up with real answers or you will continue to lose the middle class.
> ...


Healthcare and college is where they are losing. People don't like Obamacare, but I do think people hated the old system, which let's face it wasn't much different just as much. 

A single payer system is coming, tuition free education is coming, now the Republicans can compromise and get something they want or they of do they best to bastard what is coming down the pipe and lose more and more of a share of the vote.

I am right leaning, but things like tuition free college appeals to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Hutch Starskey (Sep 2, 2015)

I believe the Repub congress is dragging the party down as well. Repubs in congress could move the needle some if they would actually try. They need to do some deals and trade for what they want.
Trade the pipeline for MW increase or close tax loopholes for some entitlement reform. Anything that looks like progress would help.


----------



## RedTeamTex (Sep 2, 2015)

Enjoyable thread.

I'm inclined to agree that the Dem's are a little misguided about the wind they think is at their back.  Even conceding this 246 is pretty secure for them in the final tally, if they think the wind is blowing their direction anywhere else they're in for a rude surprise.  They're not going to be as lucky in opponents as they were in '12.

Obama was truly an electoral phenomenon.  I've never seen a "hem of his garment" religious experience for a political figure like '08 in my lifetime.  Our gift-giving gaff machine of a candidate in '12 neutralized the fact that Obama's halo had already gone--even Obama couldn't keep his old turnout intact.  Lucky man.

The Obama coalition was already eroding 3 years ago.  No other Democrat can inherit even the '12 turnout.  (Biden might come close if an electric shock collar is installed that clamps his mouth shut when he thinks up a new gaff of his own.  Even so, just as '12 wasn't '84, we're not able to equate Obama with Reagan in terms of public mood wishing this man could have a third term.)

The blue team had better pray the '14 midterms didn't indicate a turning point in electorate consciousness.  Either way, with major Republican candidates and prospective ticket members from Florida and Wisconsin, that 246 includes some serious sinkholes of resources for defense.  The wind sheer beyond that 246 will be eye opening.  I'll say Nevada, Colorado, and NM are up for grabs and reachable by the Dems.  Let's say they get them all and even say Virginia can't climb out of the blue column.  259!  (In reality I like our shot in Virginia & elsewhere quite a bit this time, but for the sake of argument....)

This isn't going to be the year that Indiana forgets who it is and goes blue again.  Iowa and North Carolina are also quietly ready to rein in the blue team on cultural issues, too.  (Thank you BLM.)  After that, let's just say 71% say the country is on the wrong track, and I can't wait to hear how Ohio voters feel about "Mount Denali."


----------



## imawhosure (Sep 2, 2015)

But I agree with Tex.  The Democrats are trying to convince everyone this is in the bag.  That is ridiculous.  If either of the top 2 candidates on the democratic side win the nomination, and anyone on the republican side in the top 7 besides Trump or Bush wins, most believe this is almost a slam dunk for the republicans.

Yeah, yeah, I know, here come the polls.  "Look at this poll!"  "Look at that poll!"  Problem with polls is........they take a snapshot in time.  If the election was tomorrow, I too would say that the democrat was going to win.  But it isn't!

Why are conservatives more confident than anytime in the last 4 elections?  Because it isn't only the republicans pissed, it is a lot of Democrats too.  The top tier of the republican candidates aren't really seen as party specific, they are honestly Washington outsiders.  Meanwhile, the Democrats are running Hillary, a socialist, and waiting in the wings is Biden, and Gore if Hillary falters.  They are ALL Washington insiders.

Personally, I do not think the Democrats believe the angst of the American public, and even some of their own solid voters such as blue collar union workers.  Oh, they will trumpet how the UAW, or the United Steel Workers, or this or that endorse them, but as with Reagan, we know just because union bosses endorse, doesn't mean the rank and file are going to vote for them.

We conservatives...............democrats...........and especially the republican establishment, have to admit to each other, and to everyone else, that the Obama team ate our lunch on the ground, in social media, and every other way in 2012.  That won't happen this time around.  Obama and his team got young people to drive the new ways to reach out to people.  The republicans have learned this lesson very well!

Now for what I feel is the final analysis.....................Democrats carry many of these states because A. they are excited about their candidate, B. because they hate the republican so badly,  C. a combination of both; meanwhile, the repubs do not because A. they are not excited about their candidate, B. they do not despise the opposition enough, and C. because the independents are not interested.

And so, now you know why if it is anyone from the GOP that is not Trump or Bush, against any of the top 4 candidates for the democrats, the democrats have a less than 50-50 chance of winning; AND the coat tails will keep both other houses republican.  Problem is, both house and senate will fight with the new President, because the republican establishment is almost as bad as those on the left!  Watch and see.  Any of the Democrats I mentioned go up against a Carson, Fiorina, or Cruz, and the only question will be..........................."But I thought the democrats had 246 in the bag?"  Lol!


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 2, 2015)

Hutch Starskey said:


> I believe the Repub congress is dragging the party down as well. Repubs in congress could move the needle some if they would actually try. They need to do some deals and trade for what they want.
> Trade the pipeline for MW increase or close tax loopholes for some entitlement reform. Anything that looks like progress would help.


The Teapublican Congress will never compromise

That is why they can't get anything done


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Sep 2, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> again, what do you base that on?



Polling



> She leads every last one of your guys in polls.



Please specify who it is you are referring to


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 2, 2015)

imawhosure said:


> But I agree with Tex.  The Democrats are trying to convince everyone this is in the bag.  That is ridiculous.  If either of the top 2 candidates on the democratic side win the nomination, and anyone on the republican side in the top 7 besides Trump or Bush wins, most believe this is almost a slam dunk for the republicans.
> 
> Yeah, yeah, I know, here come the polls.  "Look at this poll!"  "Look at that poll!"  Problem with polls is........they take a snapshot in time.  If the election was tomorrow, I too would say that the democrat was going to win.  But it isn't!
> 
> ...


You assume everyone has an equal chance and start out even 

They don't. 

Demographics are demographics. A Republican is not going to take California or New York. A Democrat will not take Texas. Those demographics give the Dems 246 out of a needed 270 Evs 

There are a limited number of states up for grabs and Republicans have done nothing to increase their standings in those states


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 2, 2015)

In the end the GOP has to win FL, OH, NC, VA and CO (if they were able to pick up both NV and IA then they could survive the loss of CO). That is a tough proposition. If they lose any of them the Dems will win. 

They do have a better chance the most give them credit for, but keep in mind if they lose FL they lost!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 2, 2015)

GHook93 said:


> In the end the GOP has to win FL, OH, NC, VA and CO (if they were able to pick up both NV and IA then they could survive the loss of CO). That is a tough proposition. If they lose any of them the Dems will win.
> 
> They do have a better chance the most give them credit for, but keep in mind if they lose FL they lost!
> 
> ...


Pretty tall order

I doubt if anyone in the GOP clown car is capable of pulling it off





.


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 2, 2015)

GHook93 said:


> Conservatives can deny this trend, but they will soon have to give in, but on what? First get off the gay issue. You lost. Move on. Take a prolife stance fine, but saying rape and invest victims can't have an abortion hurts you in the polls.. Taking a stand again student loan funding or tuition free school might help you with a segment of the rich donor base, but it turns new college grads into Democrats and alienates the middle class. People don't love Obamacare, but they hated what was in place before it. They also don't buy the bullshit health savings account s and buying across state lines. Come up with real answers or you will continue to lose the middle class.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Damn! A good analysis. But the far right of your party will force who ever gets the nomination to go radical on all these issues. And that will lose the GOP the Presidential elections one more time. Were the candidates to listen to your advice, and present actual plans concerning education and health care, you might have a chance. 

But, you lose badly enough in the next two elections, and people like you might have a say in the platform of the GOP after 2020. If not, then we need a new conservative political party, that has happened before.


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 2, 2015)

Old Rocks said:


> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> > Conservatives can deny this trend, but they will soon have to give in, but on what? First get off the gay issue. You lost. Move on. Take a prolife stance fine, but saying rape and invest victims can't have an abortion hurts you in the polls.. Taking a stand again student loan funding or tuition free school might help you with a segment of the rich donor base, but it turns new college grads into Democrats and alienates the middle class. People don't love Obamacare, but they hated what was in place before it. They also don't buy the bullshit health savings account s and buying across state lines. Come up with real answers or you will continue to lose the middle class.
> ...


It is what Jindal referred to as the party of stupid

Republicans are unwilling to tell the extremes of their party to STFU. They can't even control Trump


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 2, 2015)

GHook93 said:


> In the end the GOP has to win FL, OH, NC, VA and CO (if they were able to pick up both NV and IA then they could survive the loss of CO). That is a tough proposition. If they lose any of them the Dems will win.
> 
> They do have a better chance the most give them credit for, but keep in mind if they lose FL they lost!
> 
> ...




Ohio hasn't been won since Bush
Va Hasn't been won since Bush
Florida hasn't been won since Bush
Iowa hasn't been won since Bush
Co hasn't been won since Bush

Why do they think by running a asshole of the far right could they change history??? More so now with the demographics shifting against them.

Bush was a moderate to right leaning republican...George Hw Bush was a moderate to right leaning republican and to be frank even Reagan wouldn't gut infrastructure, science, education and most of our departments. You'd have to go back to the 1920's or even the late 1890s to find what these people want.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 2, 2015)

rightwinger said:


> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> > In the end the GOP has to win FL, OH, NC, VA and CO (if they were able to pick up both NV and IA then they could survive the loss of CO). That is a tough proposition. If they lose any of them the Dems will win.
> ...




The closes is probably a John Kasich for Ohio and Marco rubio for Florida and the hispanic vote. I could see that winning Ohio if it can run moderately in the election.

I don't see trump getting Florida, Co, Va or Ohio.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Sep 2, 2015)

Matthew said:


> Bush was a moderate to right leaning republican...George Hw Bush was a moderate to right leaning republican and to be frank even Reagan wouldn't gut infrastructure, science, education and most of our departments. You'd have to go back to the 1920's or even the late 1890s to find what these people want.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 2, 2015)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Bush was a moderate to right leaning republican...George Hw Bush was a moderate to right leaning republican and to be frank even Reagan wouldn't gut infrastructure, science, education and most of our departments. You'd have to go back to the 1920's or even the late 1890s to find what these people want.




Sorry, but those are the most important issues a first world country has. People focus on foreign  policies and the border too fucking much.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Sep 2, 2015)

Matthew said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...



Isn't it time for you to make a trip to K Mart and buy some underwear?


----------



## Nyvin (Sep 2, 2015)

The biggest threat would probably be the Democrats winning Nevada, New Hampshire, and Virginia.    I'd see those as the hardest three for the GOP to flip, and they add up to exactly 270 when paired with the rest of the blue states.    

Of course with the mass exodus of Puerto Ricans to Orlando right now Florida might be unwinnable too for the right, who knows.    If Florida goes blue it's hopeless for the GOP.


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 2, 2015)

Matthew said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > GHook93 said:
> ...


Trump would lose in a landslide

Hillary would get 450 electoral votes against  Trump


----------



## imawhosure (Sep 3, 2015)

rightwinger said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



1.  I do not think Hillary is going to be the nominee.  I would think that it is 60-40 against it.  Doesn't mean she won't be, just means that her window has shrunk below 50%.

2.  It is all going to come back to how pissed Democrats and Independents are, and everything I see tells me they are as pissed as Republicans.

3.  The vast majority of Americans, proven by polls; are tired of the political class of both parties.  This is exactly why the BEST line up for President for both establishment groups is, Clinton V Bush.  That would keep the pissed off people out of the voting booth, and regardless of what anyone wants to admit, the Republican establishment would rather a Democrat establishment President, than a rogue Republican one.

4.  Nobody believes the Republicans are going to carry California or New York.  To believe that is a fantasy.  BUT, a perceived outsider could carry all of the states many of you think are impossible.  Why?  Because to many people are pissed, and that is who is coming to the polls for this election for sure, IF they have someone to vote for.  Since they are all on the Republican side, and add to that the democrats are lethargic about Hillary and Biden, and the Democrats have a recipe for disaster.

5.  While other conservatives would laugh at me and scratch their heads, there is little doubt that the best democratic candidate to win would be Joe Biden.  Why?  He would draw sympathy with the loss of his son.  We know when he focuses he is a great debater.  And, he is no where near rich, which makes him relevant to the common man.  Hillary is the exact OPPOSITE of the kudos I have given to Biden.  The only thing she has going for her is money, and the fact she is female. 

Now isn't it funny that the truth is..........the only two that Hillary would be able to get a slam dunk against of the top 7 is Bush, or Kasich!  And why is that?  Because the agents demanding change in the Republican party, are NOT going to go vote in droves for people who they see as a large part of the problem.  As far as most conservatives are concerned.........voting for an establishment republican is a rung above voting for an establishment democrat.  Nothing will change, and instead of wanting to strangle your person, we will want to strangle our own  No contrast means no political excitement!

Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton speeches are absolutely the cure for insomnia.  That is what both parties establishment wings want, to keep power, by insuring the pissed people have no candidate to coalesce behind.  Lets see if the establishment can pull it off, but somehow, I do not think so!


----------



## rightwinger (Sep 3, 2015)

You overstate the degree that Anericans are "pissed"

Americans were pissed in 2008. We were engaged in two unpopular wars,  700,000 people were losing their jobs, people's homes and retirement funds dropped 40%.......That is pissed

2016 is not 2008


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 3, 2015)

rightwinger said:


> You overstate the degree that Anericans are "pissed"
> 
> Americans were pissed in 2008. We were engaged in two unpopular wars,  700,000 people were losing their jobs, people's homes and retirement funds dropped 40%.......That is pissed
> 
> 2016 is not 2008




Today the unemployment rate is back to 2006-2007 levels, the housing market is looking good and Obama is fighting to keep boots off the ground. Bush's approval ratings during this period in his second term were in the 20's,,,while Obama's are in the mid 40's!   Sure the republicans are pissed but the democrats and moderates certainly aren't. Loserterianism of cutting everything isn't going to play well with these people at all. Florida, ohio, Co and Virgina such is a negative in winning people over.

The only ones that want to do away with 90% of government are the far right loserterians that lost in 2008 and 2012 at the national level....A presidential election is a lot more then just you! This is what you don't get.

Also Bush, or Kasich is probably the most likely republicans to win as 1. Kasich would win Ohio! needed badly to win, and 2. Bush would hold 40% of the hispanic vote, which would increase the chances of winning Florida, Co and Nev.


----------



## imawhosure (Sep 3, 2015)

rightwinger said:


> You overstate the degree that Anericans are "pissed"
> 
> Americans were pissed in 2008. We were engaged in two unpopular wars,  700,000 people were losing their jobs, people's homes and retirement funds dropped 40%.......That is pissed
> 
> 2016 is not 2008




But this is a different kind of pissed.  They are pissed at all of our political leaders.  All polls show this.  They don't do what they say they will do, they do not even try.  They fabricate lies to pass legislation; and both parties are guilty of this.  They do not live under their own laws, and get rich from lobbyists while regular Americans are left holding the bag.

Now, if what I said was true only for me, or a handful of people, everyone could shrug their shoulders.  But polls on this are exact, and they are constant.  It is highly unlikely the Washington ruling class could say anything in the near future to change this perception.

And one more thing I would like to point out to you which is slightly off topic.  Every one of these candidates from both parties claim they are ready to handle the countrys business.  They will have a strong hand when dealing with Putin, Iran, or anyone else.  And yet, and yet, Bush, Hillary, Paul, Christie, nor Kasich have been able to even handle Trump.  If they can't handle Trump, how are they going to handle Putin?

Trump IS as bombastic as Putin, and yet they all appear weak in front of him, or when even answering his allegations or attacks.  Do NOT assume I am for Trump, because I am not.  All I am pointing out is that NONE of these people I have mentioned, would any of us choose to send in to a negotiation for anything, unless we are dumb.  And we would choose them to run our country?  Even you have to admit that it would be a serious mistake.


----------



## RedTeamTex (Sep 3, 2015)

imawhosure said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...




Insightful post, whosure.

I'm not going to be the one laughing at your point 5.  If the Clinton candidacy continues to melt down at the rate it has been, better candidates than Joe aren't going to stick their necks out on this go-round.  I agree with you about the cards he brings to play.

The angry wings on either side of the establishment have been at it for years.  "Polarized" times haven't come to an end.  As fatigued as the center is, they're going to keep the big philosophical questions unresolved until the last minute and just yank the reigns in opposite directions every few years in the meantime.  The Obama presidency came in on a perfect storm of war fatigue and fear.  It's going out on a hangover of frustration with ineptitude.  The historical pendulum will be awfully hard to stop, and the Democrats don't look too capable of pulling it off so far.  Getting Hillary's distractions off the table will help, but septuagenarian Joe Biden selling a third Obama term with a 34% gap in "right track/wrong track"...that's a Tall order.

I like our chances in Florida.  (and Ohio, Colorado, Nevada, Iowa, Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana....)


----------



## imawhosure (Sep 3, 2015)

Matthew said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > You overstate the degree that Anericans are "pissed"
> ...




I doubt what you say is true, but even if it is, shooting yourself in the left or right foot is not a choice.

As far as Kasich, he hasn't a chance; just like neither does Paul, Christie, Huckabee, Graham, and a couple of others.

You guys should be happy, really; if what you say is true.  Why?  Because if any of those losers get the nod, the base won't vote for them because they are lieing establishment, and not enough contrast with the democrat to make it worth the effort, along with taking the blame when things really go in the crapper.

And if it is a conservative, or outsider?  Well, you guys claim it is a slam dunk, so either way you win.  So be happy, it is over, voting is just a formality for the coronation of your nominee.


----------



## imawhosure (Sep 3, 2015)

RedTeamTex said:


> imawhosure said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



I agree with you Tex.  I am from Indiana, and people are chomping at the bit to throw all the bums out.  It was exactly the same thing in Illinois, you could see it coming when Quinn got thrown out for Rauner for governor.  The democrats could not muster their base, because even they knew that Quinn was awful.  Rauner was an outsider who had really never been in politics, and you knew it was coming.  Even some Democrats voted for him.

The moral of the story is..............don't count your chickens, even if you think you have 246 of 270!


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (May 6, 2018)

JoeB131 said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think there is anything probable about her winning
> ...



That was an awesome prediction.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 6, 2018)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> That was an awesome prediction.



True, I didn't factor in the Russians rigging our election.   My bad.  

Well,Democracy is overrated.


----------



## MarathonMike (May 6, 2018)

JoeB131 said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > That was an awesome prediction.
> ...


Dang that Boris and Ivan posting those Facebook ads! Clearly that was the reason Hillary lost! We must put the FBI on this case immediately! The future of our Democracy depends on it!!


----------



## JoeB131 (May 7, 2018)

MarathonMike said:


> Dang that Boris and Ivan posting those Facebook ads! Clearly that was the reason Hillary lost! We must put the FBI on this case immediately! The future of our Democracy depends on it!!



If you think that's all they did, you are delusional. 

more along the lines, the government doesn't want to admit that it got hosed by them to the degree they did, they are just quietly trying to get rid of Trump.


----------



## Wyatt earp (May 7, 2018)

JoeB131 said:


> MarathonMike said:
> 
> 
> > Dang that Boris and Ivan posting those Facebook ads! Clearly that was the reason Hillary lost! We must put the FBI on this case immediately! The future of our Democracy depends on it!!
> ...




Then clarify what did they do except inform the public of Hillary's shenanigans  and the DMV rigged their nomination


----------



## JoeB131 (May 7, 2018)

bear513 said:


> Then clarify what did they do except inform the public of Hillary's shenanigans and the DMV rigged their nomination



Flooded the internet with false news and targeted advertising... 

I also suspect they really did hack the voting systems in PA, MI and WI.  But the government won't admit they did that.


----------



## sealybobo (May 7, 2018)

Mac1958 said:


> I'm seeing threads about polls on the direction of the country and Obama's numbers, but elections remain all about electoral votes.  This piece is written by a conservative writer and blogger named Myra Adams:
> 
> Can a Republican Win 270 Electoral Votes in 2016...or Ever?
> 
> ...


How many do republicans start with?


----------



## Wyatt earp (May 7, 2018)

JoeB131 said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> > Then clarify what did they do except inform the public of Hillary's shenanigans and the DMV rigged their nomination
> ...




I will never get why you guys get in a tizzy about false news and information it's been going before you and I were born in the media one way or another.

So do you have any links they some how hacked and changed the results? It could be possible in the close states.


----------



## imawhosure (Jun 21, 2019)

Mac1958 said:


> I'm seeing threads about polls on the direction of the country and Obama's numbers, but elections remain all about electoral votes.  This piece is written by a conservative writer and blogger named Myra Adams:
> 
> Can a Republican Win 270 Electoral Votes in 2016...or Ever?
> 
> ...




Well Mac, I think you miscalculated, don't you-)  And always remember------------->as we talked throughout that year, and I took my samples in Florida along with my friends in Penn and Wisconsin, you thought I was crazy when I told you-------->oh-oh, you dialed a wrong number!


----------



## MarathonMike (Jun 21, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> MarathonMike said:
> 
> 
> > Dang that Boris and Ivan posting those Facebook ads! Clearly that was the reason Hillary lost! We must put the FBI on this case immediately! The future of our Democracy depends on it!!
> ...


Oh do tell! What did those evil Russkies do to STEAL the Presidency from the queen and hand it to Donald Trump? Now be SPECIFIC JoeB, come on educate us!


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jun 24, 2019)

Mac1958 said:


> *Thoughts?*


----------

