Um, brain bomb? Hitler is calling on line 1, Staling on line 2, pol pot is texting and Nathan Bedford Forrest would also like a word

@Brain Does 1917 or 1933 and onward not exist in your little world?

And the sources you cite are individual pollsters while 538 is a poll aggregator. That's going be inherently more like to be accurate because of the greater level of information incorporated.

You havent seen what Trump will do when he loses. He wants a war

I'd like to propose a radical thought here...

There are good people voting for Trump. There are good people voting for Clinton. Whichever side you lie on, people are allowed to be wrong without being evil. Demonization of each group only serves to reinforce the hatred and animosity on both sides.

If I read it right, Clinton's early vote is running ahead of Obama's performance in Nevada, Florida, Iowa Ohio and Wisconsin. If true, Clinton might top 400EVs.

Wait, does brainbomb actually believe what he is saying?

Per slate's votecastr if I read their results right. (They're comparing the estimated vote to Obama and Romney's totals. So if Clinton has 33% or Obama's 2012 vote while trump has only 32% that'd suggest that Clinton is developing a wider margin that Obama had. In states Obama won that'd put Clinton on a trajectory for a bigger win

Of course extrapolating from early vote to I person voting is not something that works However, if Clinton opens up a 4% margin in early voting where it makes up, say, half of the votes, the Trump would have a lot of ground to make up.

KingCyrus, just how much racism and sexism and anti-intellectualism and elimination its rhetoric should we put up with? The GOP has been following a line of demonization and violence against liberals and people of color for decades now. At some point one has to respond and decry that style of politics for what it is. Given what Trump has said, I don't see how one can support Trump without taking a big hit to the notion that one is a "good person". The good republicans are voting for someone else or not at all

Misinformation, not bothering to keep up with the news, difference in policy, putting policy above character - these are all possible reasons. Please note, I didn't say they were *right* to vote for a particular candidate, but that doesn't make them bad for doing so. I've seen a lot of people tormented by having to choose between these candidates, and a lot I know hoped that an awful person who at least professed some of their ideology would better serve the country than a less awful person who was against them.

This isn't black and white, as much as we would like to make it so. This forum is extremely well informed, on average, compared to the typical American. Differences in policy are huge and some people prioritize that. But we really aren't fixing anything by vilifying literally everyone who votes for Trump.

@KC

run

It's hard to say with how many people are voting in this election as is. This election is expected to have one of the biggest voter turnouts in history. As my map stated the trump victory is a long shot, and if he does it'll be one of the closest races in history. I'm not sure if Trump will win but I do think he has a better shot than most people give him credit for.

I'd also like to disagree with your hate statements regarding the GOP, although I'd appreciate sources for your argument. Trump has done his fair share of philanthropy and good deeds in his life. What has Trump said that you personally take as racist?

I just got back from casting my ballot for Mr. Donald J. Trump. It was one of the most exciting moments I have ever experienced. Let's all Make America Great Again!

I'd do a ##Vote Trump, but I think mafia is over.

@Cyrus I think you put it perfectly. Most of this forum is making their decisions based on the policies of either candidate. This election however has turned into a sort of reality show that the mis/uninformed people can easily follow up on and thus it's garnered a huge amount of voters.

@Ogion

" Clinton might top 400 [electoral votes]"
Can I please have some of whatever you're smoking?

Lol Clinton will be lucky to get to 200. Honestly she will probably get about 250.

@Yoyoyozo Exactly. While I have a deep respect for everyone on this site and forum there's just some ways of thinking and conclusions people make that I can't wrap my head around.

I think Clinton will win, and I support clinton. I just also happen to support rational thought.

Right, but some claims (such as the 400 EC) just seem so unfathomable that I want to understand how someone reached that conclusion in their mind.

If Clinton had stuck to a policy driven campaign then I would agree that she represents rational thought. Instead she has given into Brainbomb lunacy-tier sensational and false stories about Trump. This is irrational. Trump's general campaign has been policy driven and an effort to end corruption. This is rational.

Agreed. But she knows her voter base loves a good headline and that's what she pandered to.

"Lol Clinton will be lucky to get to 200. Honestly she will probably get about 250." ...what?

Um this is starting to look devastating for Clinton people. Look at this exit poll return.

53% of electorate 'angry'
Massive amounts of people want a 'strong leader' -Trump-

Wow. LANDSLIDE!!!!!
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/exit-polls-what-do-voters-want-230935

Clinton might actually reach 517 Electoral votes. RCP today has massive shifts in Mississippi, Kentucky, Texas, and Guam leaning Hillary.

The funny thing is I dislike Trump intensely because he ia a boorish ass, but ND has a point.

I could easily list four or five Trump policies. I might not like any of them - but I can think of several policies that he has proposed. Clinton? I'd struggle to recall more than one or two policy-based changes she's proposed.

That's a sad indictment of her campaign - it seems to boil down to "vote for me because I'm not Donald Trump"

"Clinton might actually reach 517 Electoral votes. RCP today has massive shifts in Mississippi, Kentucky, Texas, and Guam leaning Hillary."

...

"Guam leaning Hillary."

@kingCyrus, those are excellent points you raise.

As for the 400EVs, I should have said 350 actually. 400 is out of reach. However, here's the scoop. Something like this:

http://www.270towin.com/presidential_map_new/maps/7nA0O.png

Slate is running both models of the early vote and releasing real time exit polling. *If* that's reliable and *IF* trends hold, which are two big ifs, then Clinton may be having a very good day. As a rough summary, per Slate, in the vote so far, Clinton is running ahead of Obama in Iowa by some minor miracle. *IF* that is true and holds and Clinton wins Iowa, is running ahead of Obama's margin in Florida, Nevada, PA, WI, then we're quite possibly looking at a situation where the historically large number of undecideds and third party voters (still close to 10% of the electorate) would be breaking sharply for Clinton.

Remember, 538 has been talking all election season about the high volatility especially in light of the historically high proportion of undecideds (over twice as many in 2008 and 2012). That means that a lot rides on whether they split, break for one candidate, or stay home. 538 has repeatedly said that a Clinton blow out is as likely as a Trump win. So, what do the early few tea leaves we have suggest? They suggest that Clinton is having a better run right now that the polls had predicted.

This is going to be a landslide folks. Get ready. This train has no brakes.