Signs:

Around the neighborhood there are zero Trump signs. There is one Hillary sign.

Now that you mention it, I haven't see any Trump or Clinton signs at all! Very weird.

---

The mind is a weird and mysterious place

Signs:

Around the neighborhood there are zero Trump signs. There is one Hillary sign.

Now that you mention it, I haven't see any Trump or Clinton signs at all! Very weird.

Counted 2 Trump Signs. No Hillary signs.

A few, very few Trump Buttons in my travels. No Hillary Buttons.

I, and I believe most of the Voters. Wish both would 'Go Away'.

Are we going to get a low turnout? With a lot of people being honestly able to say after it all goes base over apex "I did not vote for ________". Insert winners name.

---

But is ~20% of the population enough to win even with a low turnout?

---

I, and I believe most of the Voters. Wish both would 'Go Away'.

LOL

---

The mind is a weird and mysterious place

But is ~20% of the population enough to win even with a low turnout?

Unfortunately the USA does not require a majority of registered voters to win. If it did a contest such as we have this time would be self destructive.

The #nevertrump seem just as energized as the #voteforpervert crowd. They cancel each other.

If the turnout is extremely low then all the down-race contests become unpredictable. We could end up with a super-majority for either party. Likely the opposite of the presidential winner.

---

SNL

---

The mind is a weird and mysterious place

SNL

Very good.

---

Reality Internet Personality

'm hoping for a land-slide surprise victory for Trump. More than 40 states.

Reality check ... http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-idUSKBN12F0PC

If the election were held this week, the project estimates that Clinton's odds of securing the 270 Electoral College votes needed to win the presidency at more than 95 percent, and by a margin of 118 Electoral College votes.

---

'm hoping for a land-slide surprise victory for Trump. More than 40 states.

Reality check ... http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-idUSKBN12F0PC

If the election were held this week, the project estimates that Clinton's odds of securing the 270 Electoral College votes needed to win the presidency at more than 95 percent, and by a margin of 118 Electoral College votes.

What is disturbing is him trying to rile up his followers into some sort of insurrection if he loses.

---

Reality Internet Personality

'm hoping for a land-slide surprise victory for Trump. More than 40 states.

Reality check ... http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-idUSKBN12F0PC

If the election were held this week, the project estimates that Clinton's odds of securing the 270 Electoral College votes needed to win the presidency at more than 95 percent, and by a margin of 118 Electoral College votes.

What is disturbing is him trying to rile up his followers into some sort of insurrection if he loses.

I know. Riots in the street are bad. One has to hope the victory for Hillary is such an incredible landslide that kind of think is seen as useless and they simply head out of the USA. Although their options are perhaps limited to the former Soviet Union, like Snowden.

---

Drumpf is Phi Gamma Delta, but it would surprise me a bit if they did the same as Delta Upsilon at Mizzou.

---

Washington Post-ABC News poll: Clinton holds four-point lead in aftermath of Trump tape

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/washington-post-abc-news-poll-clinton-holds-four-point-lead-in-aftermath-of-trump-tape/2016/10/15/c31969a4-9231-11e6-9c52-0b10449e33c4_story.html

Hillary approaching 50%.

We will see.

That's a low figure the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll says Clinton Holds 11-Point National Lead Over Trump

Even Fox News says Clinton leads Trump by 7 points

---

When a business person spends 28¢ to raise a Dollar and the competitor only spends 20¢, who is the Great Business man?

Donald Trump and the Republican National Committee spent big to raise small dollars

The two committees together shelled out nearly $60 million on expenses. That's about the same amount that two committees that jointly raise money for Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party spent on operating expenses last quarter. But those two committees, the Hillary Victory Fund and Hillary Action Fund, raised 40 percent more than the Trump committees, pulling in $294.5 million during the last three months.

That means that for every dollar that the Trump committees brought in, about 28 cents went to operational costs, while the Clinton committees spent about 20 cents of every dollar.

---

When a business person spends 28¢ to raise a Dollar and the competitor only spends 20¢, who is the Great Business man?

Donald Trump and the Republican National Committee spent big to raise small dollars

The two committees together shelled out nearly $60 million on expenses. That's about the same amount that two committees that jointly raise money for Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party spent on operating expenses last quarter. But those two committees, the Hillary Victory Fund and Hillary Action Fund, raised 40 percent more than the Trump committees, pulling in $294.5 million during the last three months.

That means that for every dollar that the Trump committees brought in, about 28 cents went to operational costs, while the Clinton committees spent about 20 cents of every dollar.

The guy who fed himself caviar on the small people's money!

---

When trump uses fighting words ... the result.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/north-carolina-gop-office-attacked-229865

---

I spoke with a gathering of 26 family, friends, and friends of family today. (for a birthday)
We had frank discussions about the US Presidential election.
I wrote down some results of the discussions. Most people were eager to tell who they would vote for and why.

1. Everyone, (all 26), are completely disgusted by the media and it's lack of interest or willingness to discuss and report on important issues.
Everyone said how "sick they are" of the low class mud the media is enjoying wallowing in.
2. 3 of 26 said they would vote for Clinton/Kaine.
3. 4 of 26 said they would vote for Trump/Pence.
4. 2 of 26 said they would be writing in a name.
5. 3 of 26 said they preferred not to say who they would vote for because they didn't like the candidate they would be voting for.
6. 12 of 26 said they would be voting for Libertarian Johnson/Weld
7. 2 of 26 said they would vote "Rastafarian" (not sure who that candidate is)

I notice that this backyard sample DOES NOT look anything like all of the media sponsored polls I see quoted here. What gives? These people I was with are all from a variety of backgrounds with various education levels and a wide age variance.

Given what I see, I can comfortably predict that neither Trump nor Clinton will be able to get to that 270 number.

When trump uses fighting words ... the result.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/north-carolina-gop-office-attacked-229865

It is not Trump, or his supporter's, who are responsible.

It is the Hate-filled Left, who is responsible for their actions.

Dems fundraise for firebombed GOP office

Look at the hate filled left.

---

Reality Internet Personality

I notice that this backyard sample DOES NOT look anything like all of the media sponsored polls I see quoted here. What gives? These people I was with are all from a variety of backgrounds with various education levels and a wide age variance.

Polling shouldn't be done from a single locale. Even if you believe you have diversity, there will still be local societal influences that can sway opinions from allegedly diverse backgrounds. Polling should be done in multiple locales, preferably in multiple states, and the questions should be given such that they don't influence the answer.

I notice that this backyard sample DOES NOT look anything like all of the media sponsored polls I see quoted here. What gives? These people I was with are all from a variety of backgrounds with various education levels and a wide age variance.

Polling shouldn't be done from a single locale. Even if you believe you have diversity, there will still be local societal influences that can sway opinions from allegedly diverse backgrounds. Polling should be done in multiple locales, preferably in multiple states, and the questions should be given such that they don't influence the answer.

I was not polling. I did not word any questions.
I simply listened to a number of different discussions that people were having with each other at a get together. It was most certainly a diverse group of 26 voting adults (plus kids)from 4 different states, from 19 to 84 years old and a variety of backgrounds.

I would never consider it statistically accurate and was NOT a poll.
I simply could not get over how the cumulation of all day long discussions within this group resulted in roughly the same voter preference as I had seen in one person conversations I have had with individuals.
The results from the backyard birthday conversations DID NOT reflect the polls I see quoted here on this forum. I find that suspect.

I do not suspect my notations made about conversations I listened to.
I DO suspect polls done by the various media that are known for their misleading questions and biased wording.

Again, my feeling is that neither Trump or Clinton will get the magic 270 number when the electoral college votes on December 19th.