Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
For the Love of the Christ, this thread title creeps me the fock out. Can it Please be changed. I'm begging here.Amazingly enough, Trump managed to offend a whole new minority, just 2 weeks before the election. The Catholics were not amused at his mean spirited comments at their charity function, and actually booed him.
This is the kind of guy, when you were in elementary school, who everyone took turns beating up at recess.
For the Love of the Christ, this thread title creeps me the fock out. Can it Please be changed. I'm begging here.Amazingly enough, Trump managed to offend a whole new minority, just 2 weeks before the election. The Catholics were not amused at his mean spirited comments at their charity function, and actually booed him.
This is the kind of guy, when you were in elementary school, who everyone took turns beating up at recess.
For the Love of the Christ, this thread title creeps me the fock out. Can it Please be changed. I'm begging here.Amazingly enough, Trump managed to offend a whole new minority, just 2 weeks before the election. The Catholics were not amused at his mean spirited comments at their charity function, and actually booed him.
This is the kind of guy, when you were in elementary school, who everyone took turns beating up at recess.
Get your mind out of the gutter! Perv!
Amazingly enough, Trump managed to offend a whole new minority, just 2 weeks before the election. The Catholics were not amused at his mean spirited comments at their charity function, and actually booed him.
This is the kind of guy, when you were in elementary school, who everyone took turns beating up at recess.
By Nate Silver
I’m not sure I need to tell you this, but Hillary Clinton is probably going to be the next president. It’s just a question of what “probably” means.
Clinton went into the final presidential debate on Wednesday with a lead ofabout 7 percentage points over Donald Trump. And according to the onlytwo scientific polls we’ve seen, voters thought that Clinton won the debate. Occasionally, the initial reaction to a debate can differ from the way it’s perceived days later. But in this case, the morning headlines, which focused overwhelmingly on Trump’s refusal to say whether he’ll accept the election results, are potentially worse for Trump than the debate itself. In YouGov’spoll of debate watchers, 68 percent of voters said they think the candidates should pledge to accept the results of the election.
There are less than three weeks left in the campaign, and there are no more guaranteed opportunities for Trump or Clinton to command a huge public audience, as they do at the conventions and the debates (although, they’ll get plenty of attention, of course). Millions of people have already voted. Trump has had a significant advertising deficit, and an even more significant deficit in terms of his turnout operation. He’ll probably spend a significant chunk of the remaining news cycles quarreling over his contention that the election is rigged, and with the numerous women who have accused him of sexual assault. He doesn’t have an obvious — or even a not-so-obvious — path to the presidency.
So we’re left to argue about the probability of an unforeseen event, or a significant polling error. It’s perhaps significant that almost no matter what news has occurred, and there’s been a lot of it — terrorist attacks, mass shootings, foreign crises, her email scandal, the Wikileaks dump, her Sept. 11 health scare — Clinton has almost always led Trump in the polls, although there have certainly been times when the election was close. What if her State Department emails are sitting on one of Julian Assange’s servers? That would be interesting, I suppose. But there are also October (or November) surprises that could work against Trump: more accusations from women, more damaging videotapes, further leaking of his tax records.
The other possibility is a massive polling failure. There aren’t really any direct precedents for a candidate coming back from this far down to win an American presidential election, although you can make a few loose analogies. Harry Truman’s comeback over Thomas Dewey in 1948 almostworks as a comparison, but Truman wasn’t coming from as far behind as Trump is, and there was much less polling in 1948. Ronald Reagan had a significant late surge against Jimmy Carter in 1980, but he was ahead beforehand — and the surge came in large part because of a debate that occurred just one week before the election, whose impact was too late to be fully reflected in the polls. If Trump was going to have a Reaganesque surge, in other words, it probably would have started with a commanding performance in last night’s debate — and not another loss.
Rest of article here:
Clinton Probably Finished Off Trump Last Night
--------------------
Trump has absolutely no chance guys. It's over. Clinton is going to be our next president. Get your meds in order.
By Nate Silver
I’m not sure I need to tell you this, but Hillary Clinton is probably going to be the next president. It’s just a question of what “probably” means.
Clinton went into the final presidential debate on Wednesday with a lead ofabout 7 percentage points over Donald Trump. And according to the onlytwo scientific polls we’ve seen, voters thought that Clinton won the debate. Occasionally, the initial reaction to a debate can differ from the way it’s perceived days later. But in this case, the morning headlines, which focused overwhelmingly on Trump’s refusal to say whether he’ll accept the election results, are potentially worse for Trump than the debate itself. In YouGov’spoll of debate watchers, 68 percent of voters said they think the candidates should pledge to accept the results of the election.
There are less than three weeks left in the campaign, and there are no more guaranteed opportunities for Trump or Clinton to command a huge public audience, as they do at the conventions and the debates (although, they’ll get plenty of attention, of course). Millions of people have already voted. Trump has had a significant advertising deficit, and an even more significant deficit in terms of his turnout operation. He’ll probably spend a significant chunk of the remaining news cycles quarreling over his contention that the election is rigged, and with the numerous women who have accused him of sexual assault. He doesn’t have an obvious — or even a not-so-obvious — path to the presidency.
So we’re left to argue about the probability of an unforeseen event, or a significant polling error. It’s perhaps significant that almost no matter what news has occurred, and there’s been a lot of it — terrorist attacks, mass shootings, foreign crises, her email scandal, the Wikileaks dump, her Sept. 11 health scare — Clinton has almost always led Trump in the polls, although there have certainly been times when the election was close. What if her State Department emails are sitting on one of Julian Assange’s servers? That would be interesting, I suppose. But there are also October (or November) surprises that could work against Trump: more accusations from women, more damaging videotapes, further leaking of his tax records.
The other possibility is a massive polling failure. There aren’t really any direct precedents for a candidate coming back from this far down to win an American presidential election, although you can make a few loose analogies. Harry Truman’s comeback over Thomas Dewey in 1948 almostworks as a comparison, but Truman wasn’t coming from as far behind as Trump is, and there was much less polling in 1948. Ronald Reagan had a significant late surge against Jimmy Carter in 1980, but he was ahead beforehand — and the surge came in large part because of a debate that occurred just one week before the election, whose impact was too late to be fully reflected in the polls. If Trump was going to have a Reaganesque surge, in other words, it probably would have started with a commanding performance in last night’s debate — and not another loss.
Rest of article here:
Clinton Probably Finished Off Trump Last Night
--------------------
Trump has absolutely no chance guys. It's over. Clinton is going to be our next president. Get your meds in order.
You are right. It's over. He's done. No
Need for you to vote now. There are other important things you can be doing that day.
By Nate Silver
I’m not sure I need to tell you this, but Hillary Clinton is probably going to be the next president. It’s just a question of what “probably” means.
Clinton went into the final presidential debate on Wednesday with a lead ofabout 7 percentage points over Donald Trump. And according to the onlytwo scientific polls we’ve seen, voters thought that Clinton won the debate. Occasionally, the initial reaction to a debate can differ from the way it’s perceived days later. But in this case, the morning headlines, which focused overwhelmingly on Trump’s refusal to say whether he’ll accept the election results, are potentially worse for Trump than the debate itself. In YouGov’spoll of debate watchers, 68 percent of voters said they think the candidates should pledge to accept the results of the election.
There are less than three weeks left in the campaign, and there are no more guaranteed opportunities for Trump or Clinton to command a huge public audience, as they do at the conventions and the debates (although, they’ll get plenty of attention, of course). Millions of people have already voted. Trump has had a significant advertising deficit, and an even more significant deficit in terms of his turnout operation. He’ll probably spend a significant chunk of the remaining news cycles quarreling over his contention that the election is rigged, and with the numerous women who have accused him of sexual assault. He doesn’t have an obvious — or even a not-so-obvious — path to the presidency.
So we’re left to argue about the probability of an unforeseen event, or a significant polling error. It’s perhaps significant that almost no matter what news has occurred, and there’s been a lot of it — terrorist attacks, mass shootings, foreign crises, her email scandal, the Wikileaks dump, her Sept. 11 health scare — Clinton has almost always led Trump in the polls, although there have certainly been times when the election was close. What if her State Department emails are sitting on one of Julian Assange’s servers? That would be interesting, I suppose. But there are also October (or November) surprises that could work against Trump: more accusations from women, more damaging videotapes, further leaking of his tax records.
The other possibility is a massive polling failure. There aren’t really any direct precedents for a candidate coming back from this far down to win an American presidential election, although you can make a few loose analogies. Harry Truman’s comeback over Thomas Dewey in 1948 almostworks as a comparison, but Truman wasn’t coming from as far behind as Trump is, and there was much less polling in 1948. Ronald Reagan had a significant late surge against Jimmy Carter in 1980, but he was ahead beforehand — and the surge came in large part because of a debate that occurred just one week before the election, whose impact was too late to be fully reflected in the polls. If Trump was going to have a Reaganesque surge, in other words, it probably would have started with a commanding performance in last night’s debate — and not another loss.
Rest of article here:
Clinton Probably Finished Off Trump Last Night
--------------------
Trump has absolutely no chance guys. It's over. Clinton is going to be our next president. Get your meds in order.
You are right. It's over. He's done. No
Need for you to vote now. There are other important things you can be doing that day.
Shit, I'm voting next week. Ain't no Donald Trump gonna be in the oval orifice, that's for sure...
By Nate Silver
I’m not sure I need to tell you this, but Hillary Clinton is probably going to be the next president. It’s just a question of what “probably” means.
Clinton went into the final presidential debate on Wednesday with a lead ofabout 7 percentage points over Donald Trump. And according to the onlytwo scientific polls we’ve seen, voters thought that Clinton won the debate. Occasionally, the initial reaction to a debate can differ from the way it’s perceived days later. But in this case, the morning headlines, which focused overwhelmingly on Trump’s refusal to say whether he’ll accept the election results, are potentially worse for Trump than the debate itself. In YouGov’spoll of debate watchers, 68 percent of voters said they think the candidates should pledge to accept the results of the election.
There are less than three weeks left in the campaign, and there are no more guaranteed opportunities for Trump or Clinton to command a huge public audience, as they do at the conventions and the debates (although, they’ll get plenty of attention, of course). Millions of people have already voted. Trump has had a significant advertising deficit, and an even more significant deficit in terms of his turnout operation. He’ll probably spend a significant chunk of the remaining news cycles quarreling over his contention that the election is rigged, and with the numerous women who have accused him of sexual assault. He doesn’t have an obvious — or even a not-so-obvious — path to the presidency.
So we’re left to argue about the probability of an unforeseen event, or a significant polling error. It’s perhaps significant that almost no matter what news has occurred, and there’s been a lot of it — terrorist attacks, mass shootings, foreign crises, her email scandal, the Wikileaks dump, her Sept. 11 health scare — Clinton has almost always led Trump in the polls, although there have certainly been times when the election was close. What if her State Department emails are sitting on one of Julian Assange’s servers? That would be interesting, I suppose. But there are also October (or November) surprises that could work against Trump: more accusations from women, more damaging videotapes, further leaking of his tax records.
The other possibility is a massive polling failure. There aren’t really any direct precedents for a candidate coming back from this far down to win an American presidential election, although you can make a few loose analogies. Harry Truman’s comeback over Thomas Dewey in 1948 almostworks as a comparison, but Truman wasn’t coming from as far behind as Trump is, and there was much less polling in 1948. Ronald Reagan had a significant late surge against Jimmy Carter in 1980, but he was ahead beforehand — and the surge came in large part because of a debate that occurred just one week before the election, whose impact was too late to be fully reflected in the polls. If Trump was going to have a Reaganesque surge, in other words, it probably would have started with a commanding performance in last night’s debate — and not another loss.
Rest of article here:
Clinton Probably Finished Off Trump Last Night
--------------------
Trump has absolutely no chance guys. It's over. Clinton is going to be our next president. Get your meds in order.
By Nate Silver
I’m not sure I need to tell you this, but Hillary Clinton is probably going to be the next president. It’s just a question of what “probably” means.
Clinton went into the final presidential debate on Wednesday with a lead ofabout 7 percentage points over Donald Trump. And according to the onlytwo scientific polls we’ve seen, voters thought that Clinton won the debate. Occasionally, the initial reaction to a debate can differ from the way it’s perceived days later. But in this case, the morning headlines, which focused overwhelmingly on Trump’s refusal to say whether he’ll accept the election results, are potentially worse for Trump than the debate itself. In YouGov’spoll of debate watchers, 68 percent of voters said they think the candidates should pledge to accept the results of the election.
There are less than three weeks left in the campaign, and there are no more guaranteed opportunities for Trump or Clinton to command a huge public audience, as they do at the conventions and the debates (although, they’ll get plenty of attention, of course). Millions of people have already voted. Trump has had a significant advertising deficit, and an even more significant deficit in terms of his turnout operation. He’ll probably spend a significant chunk of the remaining news cycles quarreling over his contention that the election is rigged, and with the numerous women who have accused him of sexual assault. He doesn’t have an obvious — or even a not-so-obvious — path to the presidency.
So we’re left to argue about the probability of an unforeseen event, or a significant polling error. It’s perhaps significant that almost no matter what news has occurred, and there’s been a lot of it — terrorist attacks, mass shootings, foreign crises, her email scandal, the Wikileaks dump, her Sept. 11 health scare — Clinton has almost always led Trump in the polls, although there have certainly been times when the election was close. What if her State Department emails are sitting on one of Julian Assange’s servers? That would be interesting, I suppose. But there are also October (or November) surprises that could work against Trump: more accusations from women, more damaging videotapes, further leaking of his tax records.
The other possibility is a massive polling failure. There aren’t really any direct precedents for a candidate coming back from this far down to win an American presidential election, although you can make a few loose analogies. Harry Truman’s comeback over Thomas Dewey in 1948 almostworks as a comparison, but Truman wasn’t coming from as far behind as Trump is, and there was much less polling in 1948. Ronald Reagan had a significant late surge against Jimmy Carter in 1980, but he was ahead beforehand — and the surge came in large part because of a debate that occurred just one week before the election, whose impact was too late to be fully reflected in the polls. If Trump was going to have a Reaganesque surge, in other words, it probably would have started with a commanding performance in last night’s debate — and not another loss.
Rest of article here:
Clinton Probably Finished Off Trump Last Night
--------------------
Trump has absolutely no chance guys. It's over. Clinton is going to be our next president. Get your meds in order.
You are right. It's over. He's done. No
Need for you to vote now. There are other important things you can be doing that day.
Shit, I'm voting next week. Ain't no Donald Trump gonna be in the oval orifice, that's for sure...
Oh, look! You wrote in paragraphs. When did you suddenly learn how to do that?He had to know she was going to bait him, just the way she did in the previous two debates, saying things about him that belittle him, usually with some truth behind them to add sting. She said Trump “choked” when he had the chance to challenge the president of Mexico. “Didn’t even raise it. He choked,” Clinton said. “Then got into a Twitter war because the Mexican president said, ‘We’re not paying for that wall.’”
Trump resisted that dig. But Clinton kept calling him “Donald” instead of his preferred “Mr. Trump.” And she continued to characterize his positions in ways that Trump didn’t like. Eventually, his rude interjections from the earlier debates reasserted themselves.
As Clinton kept reminding people that Donald supported the Iraq War he repeatedly grunted the word “Wrong,” as he had done in the earlier two debates.
He finally lost it when Clinton “My SS payroll contribution will go up, as will Donald’s assuming he can’t figure out how to get out of it.” The tax-dodge blow fell like a depth charge, with the reaction a little slow in coming. Trump’s head tilted, and he started to shake it back and forth. He blinked and then squinted as the angry comeback boiled up from inside while Clinton went on about the trust fund.
“Such a nasty woman,” Trump said, raising a finger with more head-shaking, a smirk and a mouth that opened and closed as he stopped himself from saying more.
But that was probably enough. “Nasty Woman” became an anti-Trump meme to rally around almost instantly. From "Nobody respects women more than me” to “you are a nasty woman." She got him. Like Tom Cruise got Jack Nicholson in a Few Good Men. Trump lost it. LOL
ummm grammar police ... mirror.Oh, look, you wrote in paragraphs. That's a dead giveaway that your post is plagiarized.He had to know she was going to bait him, just the way she did in the previous two debates, saying things about him that belittle him, usually with some truth behind them to add sting. She said Trump “choked” when he had the chance to challenge the president of Mexico. “Didn’t even raise it. He choked,” Clinton said. “Then got into a Twitter war because the Mexican president said, ‘We’re not paying for that wall.’”
Trump resisted that dig. But Clinton kept calling him “Donald” instead of his preferred “Mr. Trump.” And she continued to characterize his positions in ways that Trump didn’t like. Eventually, his rude interjections from the earlier debates reasserted themselves.
As Clinton kept reminding people that Donald supported the Iraq War he repeatedly grunted the word “Wrong,” as he had done in the earlier two debates.
He finally lost it when Clinton “My SS payroll contribution will go up, as will Donald’s assuming he can’t figure out how to get out of it.” The tax-dodge blow fell like a depth charge, with the reaction a little slow in coming. Trump’s head tilted, and he started to shake it back and forth. He blinked and then squinted as the angry comeback boiled up from inside while Clinton went on about the trust fund.
“Such a nasty woman,” Trump said, raising a finger with more head-shaking, a smirk and a mouth that opened and closed as he stopped himself from saying more.
But that was probably enough. “Nasty Woman” became an anti-Trump meme to rally around almost instantly. From "Nobody respects women more than me” to “you are a nasty woman." She got him. Like Tom Cruise got Jack Nicholson in a Few Good Men. Trump lost it. LOL
By Nate Silver
I’m not sure I need to tell you this, but Hillary Clinton is probably going to be the next president. It’s just a question of what “probably” means.
Clinton went into the final presidential debate on Wednesday with a lead ofabout 7 percentage points over Donald Trump. And according to the onlytwo scientific polls we’ve seen, voters thought that Clinton won the debate. Occasionally, the initial reaction to a debate can differ from the way it’s perceived days later. But in this case, the morning headlines, which focused overwhelmingly on Trump’s refusal to say whether he’ll accept the election results, are potentially worse for Trump than the debate itself. In YouGov’spoll of debate watchers, 68 percent of voters said they think the candidates should pledge to accept the results of the election.
There are less than three weeks left in the campaign, and there are no more guaranteed opportunities for Trump or Clinton to command a huge public audience, as they do at the conventions and the debates (although, they’ll get plenty of attention, of course). Millions of people have already voted. Trump has had a significant advertising deficit, and an even more significant deficit in terms of his turnout operation. He’ll probably spend a significant chunk of the remaining news cycles quarreling over his contention that the election is rigged, and with the numerous women who have accused him of sexual assault. He doesn’t have an obvious — or even a not-so-obvious — path to the presidency.
So we’re left to argue about the probability of an unforeseen event, or a significant polling error. It’s perhaps significant that almost no matter what news has occurred, and there’s been a lot of it — terrorist attacks, mass shootings, foreign crises, her email scandal, the Wikileaks dump, her Sept. 11 health scare — Clinton has almost always led Trump in the polls, although there have certainly been times when the election was close. What if her State Department emails are sitting on one of Julian Assange’s servers? That would be interesting, I suppose. But there are also October (or November) surprises that could work against Trump: more accusations from women, more damaging videotapes, further leaking of his tax records.
The other possibility is a massive polling failure. There aren’t really any direct precedents for a candidate coming back from this far down to win an American presidential election, although you can make a few loose analogies. Harry Truman’s comeback over Thomas Dewey in 1948 almostworks as a comparison, but Truman wasn’t coming from as far behind as Trump is, and there was much less polling in 1948. Ronald Reagan had a significant late surge against Jimmy Carter in 1980, but he was ahead beforehand — and the surge came in large part because of a debate that occurred just one week before the election, whose impact was too late to be fully reflected in the polls. If Trump was going to have a Reaganesque surge, in other words, it probably would have started with a commanding performance in last night’s debate — and not another loss.
Rest of article here:
Clinton Probably Finished Off Trump Last Night
--------------------
Trump has absolutely no chance guys. It's over. Clinton is going to be our next president. Get your meds in order.
You are right. It's over. He's done. No
Need for you to vote now. There are other important things you can be doing that day.
Shit, I'm voting next week. Ain't no Donald Trump gonna be in the oval orifice, that's for sure...
But he's finished, it's over. You said so yourself. Why bother?
By Nate Silver
I’m not sure I need to tell you this, but Hillary Clinton is probably going to be the next president. It’s just a question of what “probably” means.
Clinton went into the final presidential debate on Wednesday with a lead ofabout 7 percentage points over Donald Trump. And according to the onlytwo scientific polls we’ve seen, voters thought that Clinton won the debate. Occasionally, the initial reaction to a debate can differ from the way it’s perceived days later. But in this case, the morning headlines, which focused overwhelmingly on Trump’s refusal to say whether he’ll accept the election results, are potentially worse for Trump than the debate itself. In YouGov’spoll of debate watchers, 68 percent of voters said they think the candidates should pledge to accept the results of the election.
There are less than three weeks left in the campaign, and there are no more guaranteed opportunities for Trump or Clinton to command a huge public audience, as they do at the conventions and the debates (although, they’ll get plenty of attention, of course). Millions of people have already voted. Trump has had a significant advertising deficit, and an even more significant deficit in terms of his turnout operation. He’ll probably spend a significant chunk of the remaining news cycles quarreling over his contention that the election is rigged, and with the numerous women who have accused him of sexual assault. He doesn’t have an obvious — or even a not-so-obvious — path to the presidency.
So we’re left to argue about the probability of an unforeseen event, or a significant polling error. It’s perhaps significant that almost no matter what news has occurred, and there’s been a lot of it — terrorist attacks, mass shootings, foreign crises, her email scandal, the Wikileaks dump, her Sept. 11 health scare — Clinton has almost always led Trump in the polls, although there have certainly been times when the election was close. What if her State Department emails are sitting on one of Julian Assange’s servers? That would be interesting, I suppose. But there are also October (or November) surprises that could work against Trump: more accusations from women, more damaging videotapes, further leaking of his tax records.
The other possibility is a massive polling failure. There aren’t really any direct precedents for a candidate coming back from this far down to win an American presidential election, although you can make a few loose analogies. Harry Truman’s comeback over Thomas Dewey in 1948 almostworks as a comparison, but Truman wasn’t coming from as far behind as Trump is, and there was much less polling in 1948. Ronald Reagan had a significant late surge against Jimmy Carter in 1980, but he was ahead beforehand — and the surge came in large part because of a debate that occurred just one week before the election, whose impact was too late to be fully reflected in the polls. If Trump was going to have a Reaganesque surge, in other words, it probably would have started with a commanding performance in last night’s debate — and not another loss.
Rest of article here:
Clinton Probably Finished Off Trump Last Night
--------------------
Trump has absolutely no chance guys. It's over. Clinton is going to be our next president. Get your meds in order.
You are right. It's over. He's done. No
Need for you to vote now. There are other important things you can be doing that day.
Shit, I'm voting next week. Ain't no Donald Trump gonna be in the oval orifice, that's for sure...
But he's finished, it's over. You said so yourself. Why bother?
What do you mean?
By Nate Silver
I’m not sure I need to tell you this, but Hillary Clinton is probably going to be the next president. It’s just a question of what “probably” means.
Clinton went into the final presidential debate on Wednesday with a lead ofabout 7 percentage points over Donald Trump. And according to the onlytwo scientific polls we’ve seen, voters thought that Clinton won the debate. Occasionally, the initial reaction to a debate can differ from the way it’s perceived days later. But in this case, the morning headlines, which focused overwhelmingly on Trump’s refusal to say whether he’ll accept the election results, are potentially worse for Trump than the debate itself. In YouGov’spoll of debate watchers, 68 percent of voters said they think the candidates should pledge to accept the results of the election.
There are less than three weeks left in the campaign, and there are no more guaranteed opportunities for Trump or Clinton to command a huge public audience, as they do at the conventions and the debates (although, they’ll get plenty of attention, of course). Millions of people have already voted. Trump has had a significant advertising deficit, and an even more significant deficit in terms of his turnout operation. He’ll probably spend a significant chunk of the remaining news cycles quarreling over his contention that the election is rigged, and with the numerous women who have accused him of sexual assault. He doesn’t have an obvious — or even a not-so-obvious — path to the presidency.
So we’re left to argue about the probability of an unforeseen event, or a significant polling error. It’s perhaps significant that almost no matter what news has occurred, and there’s been a lot of it — terrorist attacks, mass shootings, foreign crises, her email scandal, the Wikileaks dump, her Sept. 11 health scare — Clinton has almost always led Trump in the polls, although there have certainly been times when the election was close. What if her State Department emails are sitting on one of Julian Assange’s servers? That would be interesting, I suppose. But there are also October (or November) surprises that could work against Trump: more accusations from women, more damaging videotapes, further leaking of his tax records.
The other possibility is a massive polling failure. There aren’t really any direct precedents for a candidate coming back from this far down to win an American presidential election, although you can make a few loose analogies. Harry Truman’s comeback over Thomas Dewey in 1948 almostworks as a comparison, but Truman wasn’t coming from as far behind as Trump is, and there was much less polling in 1948. Ronald Reagan had a significant late surge against Jimmy Carter in 1980, but he was ahead beforehand — and the surge came in large part because of a debate that occurred just one week before the election, whose impact was too late to be fully reflected in the polls. If Trump was going to have a Reaganesque surge, in other words, it probably would have started with a commanding performance in last night’s debate — and not another loss.
Rest of article here:
Clinton Probably Finished Off Trump Last Night
--------------------
Trump has absolutely no chance guys. It's over. Clinton is going to be our next president. Get your meds in order.
You are right. It's over. He's done. No
Need for you to vote now. There are other important things you can be doing that day.
Shit, I'm voting next week. Ain't no Donald Trump gonna be in the oval orifice, that's for sure...
But he's finished, it's over. You said so yourself. Why bother?
What do you mean?
Your OP. Clinton has it in the bag. It's over. No need for you to waste your time voting.
You are right. It's over. He's done. No
Need for you to vote now. There are other important things you can be doing that day.
Shit, I'm voting next week. Ain't no Donald Trump gonna be in the oval orifice, that's for sure...
But he's finished, it's over. You said so yourself. Why bother?
What do you mean?
Your OP. Clinton has it in the bag. It's over. No need for you to waste your time voting.
Why?
Shit, I'm voting next week. Ain't no Donald Trump gonna be in the oval orifice, that's for sure...
But he's finished, it's over. You said so yourself. Why bother?
What do you mean?
Your OP. Clinton has it in the bag. It's over. No need for you to waste your time voting.
Why?
What are you, a toddler now?
By Nate Silver
You say, "It’s just a question of what “probably” means."
But I'm still trying to figure out what the definition of is is.
.
