Jump to content
270soft Forum

General Election Prediction Poll: 10/9/2016


Who wins the election?   

16 members have voted

  1. 1. What is the most likely outcome?

    • Clinton wins and gets over 400 electoral votes
      0
    • Clinton wins and gets between 350-399 EVs
    • Clinton wins and gets between 300-349 EVs
    • Clinton wins and gets between 275-299 EVs
    • Clinton wins and gets 270 to 274 EVs
    • Clinton and Trump tie at 269; or no candidates gets 270 EVs, election goes to the house
      0
    • Trump wins and gets 270 to 274 EVs
    • Trump wins and gets between 275-299 EVs
    • Trump wins and gets 300-349 EVs
    • Trump wins and gets 350-399 EVs
      0
    • Trump wins and gets over 400 EVs
      0
  2. 2. The winner of the election will get approximately this many popular votes

    • Over 60%
      0
    • About 55%
    • Barely more than 50%
    • Slightly less than 50%
    • About 45%
    • About 40%
      0
  3. 3. Which candidate is more likely to be a better president than they were as a candidate?

    • Hillary Clinton
    • Donald Trump


Recommended Posts

1. Clinton; 275-299
2. 45% (Trump will win popular vote)
3. Donald Trump, without a doubt. Hillary would handle foreign and domestic policy better, but Trump will be better with Immigration, the economy, and everything else much more professional. Trump knows how to make his own money - Hillary just knows how to redistribute others.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

1. Clinton; 275-299
2. 45% (Trump will win popular vote)
3. Donald Trump, without a doubt. Hillary would handle foreign and domestic policy better, but Trump will be better with Immigration, the economy, and everything else much more professional. Trump knows how to make his own money - Hillary just knows how to redistribute others.

What plan has Trump presented that's firmly and clearly stated, realistic, and not unconstitutional, that makes you believe these things?

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Trump knows how to make his own money - Hillary just knows how to redistribute others.

With a few small multi million dollar loans from his father and the ability to lose almost a billion dollars in a single year so he doesn't have to pay any income taxes for twenty years while simultaneously tweeting about how not enough people pay income tax.

Phew. There's certainly one candidate, or should I say couple, in this election whom have truly gone from lower-middle class roots to building an empire. But it isn't Drumpf.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kauai said:

With a few small multi million dollar loans from his father and the ability to lose almost a billion dollars in a single year so he doesn't have to pay any income taxes for twenty years while simultaneously tweeting about how not enough people pay income tax.

Phew. There's certainly one candidate, or should I say couple, in this election whom have truly gone from lower-middle class roots to building an empire. But it isn't Drumpf.

Sure, he lost a billion dollars in one year, but at least he didn't lose 6 billion dollars, 4 American lives, and thousands of emails as Secretary of State.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Sure, he lost a billion dollars in one year, but at least he didn't lose 6 billion dollars, 4 American lives, and thousands of emails as Secretary of State.

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-lost-6-billion-at-state-dept/

The loss of lives was tragic. But to blame it on Hillary is ridiculous and the equivalent of blaming the loss of lives in any terrorist action on the political leaders in charge at the time.

The emails were a mistake and Hillary's already admitted this. But she followed the exact same practices that Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell did, to the admission of both. It's a tired issue, and not one with any traction any more.

I understand your side is angry and lashing out at the collapse of your supreme leader but really, try to have some common sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Kauai said:

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-lost-6-billion-at-state-dept/

The loss of lives was tragic. But to blame it on Hillary is ridiculous and the equivalent of blaming the loss of lives in any terrorist action on the political leaders in charge at the time.

The emails were a mistake and Hillary's already admitted this. But she followed the exact same practices that Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell did, to the admission of both. It's a tired issue, and not one with any traction any more.

I understand your side is angry and lashing out at the collapse of your supreme leader but really, try to have some common sense.

I agree with that logic on equating deaths from terrorist attacks to the person on watch's direct responsibility and fault being foolish. That connection directly means if Clinton is responsible for 4 death, than George W. Bush, and Rice and Powell, his Secretaries of State, are for over 5000, roughly...

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Jonathan Kudelka said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/10/10/fox-newss-bill-oreilly-is-about-to-expose-an-unprecedented-american-media-conspiracy/?utm_term=.e6efffa1b91e

Bill O'Reily- It’s a complicated situation, but I think everyone can agree — except for the media organizations that now have ordered their employees to destroy Trump — there’s at least three of them. And, I can’t say who they are right now because I don’t have it nailed down, but I am 100 percent convinced, and these media organizations have actually put out, ‘If you support Trump, your career is done done here.’ … News organizations have sent, not officially, but through the corporate grapevine that we don’t want anybody supporting Trump. If you study it, you can see which ones they are.

O'Reily doesn't often engage in conspiracy theories but seeing how they covered the post debate spin is it completely out of the realm of possibility? @vcczar

I've never trusted anything O'Reilly was said. He's more coherent than Limbaugh, yes, and less prone to big conspiracy theories than Beck, and tends not to lace his diatribes with endless invectives and undeserved ephithets, like Coulter, but, at the end of the day, they all strike me as being on the page, in general, and very dubious, untrustworthy, and manipulative page at that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jonathan Kudelka

I think the media is pretty much unified against Trump, but I don't think employees have been "ordered." Perhaps some organizations have. There has never, in the history of the United States, been such a one sided preference by the media. Every major paper is against Trump. He hasn't a single endorsement. Republican papers are  endorsing Clinton, not endorsing or endorsing Johnson. Papers/magazines that have never endorsed are endorsing Clinton. One paper has only endorsed Lincoln, FDR and LBJ in it's history. It is endorsing Clinton. 

Republicans leaders are unendorsing, or refusing to defend Trump. This has never happened. 

There has never been so much unity against a single candidate. Imagine if he wasn't facing someone with equally as low integrity? 

If it were Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker against Trump, I don't know if he would even get 100 electoral votes. 

A poll a few weeks ago suggested that most registered Republicans wish that the party had nominated someone else! 

Donors are pulling money, which means he will have to do more self-funding or rely on voter donations. 

Clinton has many times more ground troops and offices in the states in which they both have offices. It isn't even close. 

The thing is, is that the fight isn't about Trump winning Clinton supporters or Clinton winning Trumps supporters. They are fighting for independent (mostly centrist, moderate) voters. Notice how Clinton is tacking hard to the center. Trump is just doing stuff to make his base happy, and he isn't moving to the center. This said, Trump is making his committed voters happy, but he is going to lose undecideds with this strategy. 

His war about showing that Clinton's integrity is low would work, if his wasn't just as low or lower. A recent polls showed that Trump had lower favorability than Clinton; although, both were low. 

Trump really can't do anything except make Clinton life hell until she wins. She could go into office with an amazingly low approval rating. The good thing for her is that she can improve this in office by learning what she learned about her image in this campaign. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jonathan Kudelka

I think Clinton will be a boring, but competent president. She'll be no more or less corrupt than any establishment politician. It won't be ideal, for sure. However, I think she will be low risk, compared to Trump. Basically, I think it will be a 3rd term Obama, but with less new ideas. I don't think she will start a war with Russia. I'm more concerned with Trump provoking wars, since he's way more combative. I don't think Clinton will be a great president. She'll be safe or adequate. Trump, I think, would be among the worst or among the best, with a higher chance of being among the worst (he'd be powerless or dangerous, most likely). He's high risk. I think most Americans are comfortable enough to take a chance playing Russian Roulette. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎9‎/‎2016 at 3:24 AM, Patine said:

I agree with that logic on equating deaths from terrorist attacks to the person on watch's direct responsibility and fault being foolish. That connection directly means if Clinton is responsible for 4 death, than George W. Bush, and Rice and Powell, his Secretaries of State, are for over 5000, roughly...

The facts are that Hillary didn't accept any additional security requests that led to their deaths.  Then, there were 13 hours where Americans didn't help.  It wasn't even an American plane to took the survivors from Benghazi.  Then, she lied to the families of the victims as well as the American people about the details.  13 Hours is a great movie on the true story of the attack.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...