|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On October 27 2016 08:22 biology]major wrote:
The electoral map for trump is so brutal, it's unreal. Even if the national poll has trump leading or tied, the electoral nightmare persists.
how is that?
iirc electoral map favors republicans if the vote numbers are equal due to more low population states being republican.
but i haven't really looked at the details in awhile.
|
On October 27 2016 08:22 Mohdoo wrote:
I have met very few older democrats who will even consider the idea of socialized healthcare.
Considering the Democratic parties base was traditionally union labor and was refereed to as "lunch pail" America, that isn't surprising. Many of the social issues that the Democrats are known for today found their place in the party due to the fact that the Republicans out right rejected them. The Democrats were no always the party of civil rights or women's rights. So it is not surprising that many older Democrats are not as on board with goverment mandated healthcare.
People joke about Joe Biden, but politicians like him were the bread and butter of the democrats in the 70s and 80s. The party has changed a lot, so it is hard to reconcile the different views.
|
On October 27 2016 08:27 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Not directly related to this exclusively, but I don't really see the point in national polls. We have Illinois and we also have Mississippi. If they vote independently and we separate the process by states, I really just don't see why national polls even exist.
|
I think it might have something to do with national polls having larger sample sizes, so while the national polls are telling you something less useful they are also more reliable.
|
On October 27 2016 08:29 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 08:22 biology]major wrote:
The electoral map for trump is so brutal, it's unreal. Even if the national poll has trump leading or tied, the electoral nightmare persists. how is that? iirc electoral map favors republicans if the vote numbers are equal due to more low population states being republican. but i haven't really looked at the details in awhile.
Electoral map was massively in Clintons favor coming into this race. Trump just made it harder by virtue of him running the worst campaign in history.
|
Don't you want to know how many people support one candidate over the other? I mean, yeah, your system is flawed in that the person who is getting significantly less votes can still win, but that does not mean you should dismiss information about the general state of the country, does it?
|
The DNC filed a motion in federal court on Wednesday which says that the RNC, through Donald Trump’s own statements, has violated a longstanding consent decree that prohibits Republicans from engaging in “ballot security” measures which could intimidate minorities.
The DNC lawyers are asking for a judge to issue a court order preventing the voter intimidation, and also hold the RNC in contempt of court for failing to abide by the the consent decree. The decree came about in 1981, after Republican officials allegedly engaged in intimidation tactics against minority voters in the name of “ballot security.” The decree barred the RNC from engaging in various polling-related activities. Well, the DNC says the Republicans are back at it.
The DNC motion states:
Defendant Republican National Committee (“RNC”) has violated the Final Consent Decree.. by supporting and enabling the efforts of the Republican candidate for President, Donald J. Trump, as well as his campaign and advisors, to intimidate and discourage minority voters from voting in the 2016 Presidential Election. Trump has falsely and repeatedly told his supporters that the November 8 election will be “rigged” based upon fabricated claims of voter fraud in “certain areas” or “certain sections” of key states. Unsurprisingly, those “certain areas” are exclusively communities in which large minority voting populations reside. Notwithstanding that no evidence of such fraud actually exists, Trump has encouraged his supporters to do whatever it takes to stop it—“You’ve got to get everybody to go out and watch . . . and when [I] say ‘watch,’ you know what I’m talking about, right?”—and has been actively organizing “election observers” to monitor polling stations in “certain areas.” Trump has even encouraged his “watchers” to act like vigilante law enforcement officers.
In recent days, the RNC has tried to distance themselves from many of these vigilante tactics, the DNC lawyers say there is now “ample evidence that Trump has enjoyed the direct and tacit support of the RNC in its ‘ballot security’ endeavors.” The DNC’s motion is also asking the court to enforce the consent decree with sanctions. The consent decree was expected to expire in 2017. However, the DNC has asked for an 8 year extension based upon Trump and the RNC’s recent actions.
“I think this matter of the extension will get very serious consideration by the courts, including potentially the Supreme Court. It will also cause the RNC to do what it can to try to further distance itself from Trump’s election day activities,” said University of California-Irvine Law Professor Rick Hasen in his blog.
We’ve reached out to the Republican National Committee for comment. According to a WSJ article from last week, attorneys with the RNC did remind members “of the restrictions placed on the RNC by the consent decree.”
http://lawnewz.com/politics/breaking-dnc-wants-judge-to-hold-rnc-in-contempt-for-trumps-alleged-voter-intimidation/
|
On October 27 2016 08:46 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 08:29 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:22 biology]major wrote:
The electoral map for trump is so brutal, it's unreal. Even if the national poll has trump leading or tied, the electoral nightmare persists. how is that? iirc electoral map favors republicans if the vote numbers are equal due to more low population states being republican. but i haven't really looked at the details in awhile. Electoral map was massively in Clintons favor coming into this race. Trump just made it harder by virtue of him running the worst campaign in history.
was the electoral map favorable for clinton even assuming equal total vote numbers? my impression is that he was talking about equal total popular vote numbers.
|
On October 27 2016 08:49 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 08:46 On_Slaught wrote:On October 27 2016 08:29 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:22 biology]major wrote:
The electoral map for trump is so brutal, it's unreal. Even if the national poll has trump leading or tied, the electoral nightmare persists. how is that? iirc electoral map favors republicans if the vote numbers are equal due to more low population states being republican. but i haven't really looked at the details in awhile. Electoral map was massively in Clintons favor coming into this race. Trump just made it harder by virtue of him running the worst campaign in history. was the electoral map favorable for clinton even assuming equal total vote numbers? my impression is that he was talking about equal total popular vote numbers.
According to 538 equal vote numbers would actually favor Trump in the electoral college
|
On October 27 2016 08:48 Broetchenholer wrote:
Don't you want to know how many people support one candidate over the other? I mean, yeah, your system is flawed in that the person who is getting significantly less votes can still win, but that does not mean you should dismiss information about the general state of the country, does it?
Our country is not even remotely cohesive. I do not identify with my country nearly as much as I identify with living in the pacific northwest. I would not even call Mississippi the same country as Oregon, ignoring reality. I care as much about the societal background of Nevada polling as much as I do the polling in Chile. That is to say, not at all. I don't even slightly identify with those people, so it is just a mixed bag.
|
On October 27 2016 08:49 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +The DNC filed a motion in federal court on Wednesday which says that the RNC, through Donald Trump’s own statements, has violated a longstanding consent decree that prohibits Republicans from engaging in “ballot security” measures which could intimidate minorities.
The DNC lawyers are asking for a judge to issue a court order preventing the voter intimidation, and also hold the RNC in contempt of court for failing to abide by the the consent decree. The decree came about in 1981, after Republican officials allegedly engaged in intimidation tactics against minority voters in the name of “ballot security.” The decree barred the RNC from engaging in various polling-related activities. Well, the DNC says the Republicans are back at it.
The DNC motion states:
Defendant Republican National Committee (“RNC”) has violated the Final Consent Decree.. by supporting and enabling the efforts of the Republican candidate for President, Donald J. Trump, as well as his campaign and advisors, to intimidate and discourage minority voters from voting in the 2016 Presidential Election. Trump has falsely and repeatedly told his supporters that the November 8 election will be “rigged” based upon fabricated claims of voter fraud in “certain areas” or “certain sections” of key states. Unsurprisingly, those “certain areas” are exclusively communities in which large minority voting populations reside. Notwithstanding that no evidence of such fraud actually exists, Trump has encouraged his supporters to do whatever it takes to stop it—“You’ve got to get everybody to go out and watch . . . and when [I] say ‘watch,’ you know what I’m talking about, right?”—and has been actively organizing “election observers” to monitor polling stations in “certain areas.” Trump has even encouraged his “watchers” to act like vigilante law enforcement officers.
In recent days, the RNC has tried to distance themselves from many of these vigilante tactics, the DNC lawyers say there is now “ample evidence that Trump has enjoyed the direct and tacit support of the RNC in its ‘ballot security’ endeavors.” The DNC’s motion is also asking the court to enforce the consent decree with sanctions. The consent decree was expected to expire in 2017. However, the DNC has asked for an 8 year extension based upon Trump and the RNC’s recent actions.
“I think this matter of the extension will get very serious consideration by the courts, including potentially the Supreme Court. It will also cause the RNC to do what it can to try to further distance itself from Trump’s election day activities,” said University of California-Irvine Law Professor Rick Hasen in his blog.
We’ve reached out to the Republican National Committee for comment. According to a WSJ article from last week, attorneys with the RNC did remind members “of the restrictions placed on the RNC by the consent decree.”
http://lawnewz.com/politics/breaking-dnc-wants-judge-to-hold-rnc-in-contempt-for-trumps-alleged-voter-intimidation/
It's a big deal but good luck getting it throough a judge, let alone the Supreme friggin Court, before the election.
|
On October 27 2016 08:49 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 08:46 On_Slaught wrote:On October 27 2016 08:29 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:22 biology]major wrote:
The electoral map for trump is so brutal, it's unreal. Even if the national poll has trump leading or tied, the electoral nightmare persists. how is that? iirc electoral map favors republicans if the vote numbers are equal due to more low population states being republican. but i haven't really looked at the details in awhile. Electoral map was massively in Clintons favor coming into this race. Trump just made it harder by virtue of him running the worst campaign in history. was the electoral map favorable for clinton even assuming equal total vote numbers? my impression is that he was talking about equal total popular vote numbers.
How would you even measure this? Vote distribution is what matters and equal votes tells you nothing about it. So how would we know it favors Trump?
|
Since this is a strategy game forum, you guys have to hear Trump talk strategy. He is legit the most rankly ignorant and stupid person to run for commander in chief.
|
On October 27 2016 08:59 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 08:49 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:46 On_Slaught wrote:On October 27 2016 08:29 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:22 biology]major wrote:
The electoral map for trump is so brutal, it's unreal. Even if the national poll has trump leading or tied, the electoral nightmare persists. how is that? iirc electoral map favors republicans if the vote numbers are equal due to more low population states being republican. but i haven't really looked at the details in awhile. Electoral map was massively in Clintons favor coming into this race. Trump just made it harder by virtue of him running the worst campaign in history. was the electoral map favorable for clinton even assuming equal total vote numbers? my impression is that he was talking about equal total popular vote numbers. How would you even measure this? Vote distribution is what matters and equal votes tells you nothing about it. So how would we know it favors Trump?
that's beside the point, I was responding to someone and was working through the issue.
|
On October 27 2016 09:00 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 08:59 On_Slaught wrote:On October 27 2016 08:49 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:46 On_Slaught wrote:On October 27 2016 08:29 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:22 biology]major wrote:
The electoral map for trump is so brutal, it's unreal. Even if the national poll has trump leading or tied, the electoral nightmare persists. how is that? iirc electoral map favors republicans if the vote numbers are equal due to more low population states being republican. but i haven't really looked at the details in awhile. Electoral map was massively in Clintons favor coming into this race. Trump just made it harder by virtue of him running the worst campaign in history. was the electoral map favorable for clinton even assuming equal total vote numbers? my impression is that he was talking about equal total popular vote numbers. How would you even measure this? Vote distribution is what matters and equal votes tells you nothing about it. So how would we know it favors Trump? that's beside the point, I was responding to someone and was working through the issue.
I just saw some guy explaining path to 270 on CNN and even if he got Florida, NC, PA, Ohio, Iowa, Utah, NV and some others he is still short. Mission impossible
|
On October 27 2016 09:19 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 09:00 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:59 On_Slaught wrote:On October 27 2016 08:49 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:46 On_Slaught wrote:On October 27 2016 08:29 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:22 biology]major wrote:
The electoral map for trump is so brutal, it's unreal. Even if the national poll has trump leading or tied, the electoral nightmare persists. how is that? iirc electoral map favors republicans if the vote numbers are equal due to more low population states being republican. but i haven't really looked at the details in awhile. Electoral map was massively in Clintons favor coming into this race. Trump just made it harder by virtue of him running the worst campaign in history. was the electoral map favorable for clinton even assuming equal total vote numbers? my impression is that he was talking about equal total popular vote numbers. How would you even measure this? Vote distribution is what matters and equal votes tells you nothing about it. So how would we know it favors Trump? that's beside the point, I was responding to someone and was working through the issue. I just saw some guy explaining path to 270 on CNN and even if he got Florida, NC, PA, Ohio, Iowa, Utah, NV and some others he is still short. Mission impossible
Clinton wins popular vote 91.0%
Trump wins popular vote 8.9%
Clinton wins popular vote but loses Electoral College 5.9%
Trump wins popular vote but loses Electoral College 0.3%
from 538
No, it is not the map rigged against him. It is simply that he has way less people voting for him.
|
On October 27 2016 09:19 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 09:00 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:59 On_Slaught wrote:On October 27 2016 08:49 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:46 On_Slaught wrote:On October 27 2016 08:29 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:22 biology]major wrote:
The electoral map for trump is so brutal, it's unreal. Even if the national poll has trump leading or tied, the electoral nightmare persists. how is that? iirc electoral map favors republicans if the vote numbers are equal due to more low population states being republican. but i haven't really looked at the details in awhile. Electoral map was massively in Clintons favor coming into this race. Trump just made it harder by virtue of him running the worst campaign in history. was the electoral map favorable for clinton even assuming equal total vote numbers? my impression is that he was talking about equal total popular vote numbers. How would you even measure this? Vote distribution is what matters and equal votes tells you nothing about it. So how would we know it favors Trump? that's beside the point, I was responding to someone and was working through the issue. I just saw some guy explaining path to 270 on CNN and even if he got Florida, NC, PA, Ohio, Iowa, Utah, NV and some others he is still short. Mission impossible
I know the electoral math is against him; the thing I was wondering about is that you said:
"Even if the national poll has trump leading or tied, the electoral nightmare persists. "
others have already addressed the point I was wondering about though;
|
|
|
United States41976 Posts
On October 27 2016 09:19 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 09:00 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:59 On_Slaught wrote:On October 27 2016 08:49 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:46 On_Slaught wrote:On October 27 2016 08:29 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:22 biology]major wrote:
The electoral map for trump is so brutal, it's unreal. Even if the national poll has trump leading or tied, the electoral nightmare persists. how is that? iirc electoral map favors republicans if the vote numbers are equal due to more low population states being republican. but i haven't really looked at the details in awhile. Electoral map was massively in Clintons favor coming into this race. Trump just made it harder by virtue of him running the worst campaign in history. was the electoral map favorable for clinton even assuming equal total vote numbers? my impression is that he was talking about equal total popular vote numbers. How would you even measure this? Vote distribution is what matters and equal votes tells you nothing about it. So how would we know it favors Trump? that's beside the point, I was responding to someone and was working through the issue. I just saw some guy explaining path to 270 on CNN and even if he got Florida, NC, PA, Ohio, Iowa, Utah, NV and some others he is still short. Mission impossible
I've been saying this for a long time. His paths to victory are either all 6 competitive states + NH or 4/5 of the competitive states and PA. Trump knows this, there was an article a few weeks ago explaining that he'd pulled his resources from all but PA, FL, OH and NC, all of which are must win for him if he wants to pursue that route. And PA isn't even remotely competitive.
He's incredibly fucked.
edit: this is his most probable path to victory
+ Show Spoiler +On October 05 2016 23:36 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 22:08 Incognoto wrote:
Whoever gets Ohio wins the election. This is a known fact. If Hillary gets Ohio she wins. But if Trump gets Ohio and doesn't also get Florida and North Carolina Hillary wins. As I said yesterday, there are five key swing states, Florida(29), Ohio(18), North Carolina(15), Nevada(6) and Iowa(6). If he loses Florida it doesn't matter if he wins the other four. Even with New Hampshire and Michigan flipping and Massachusetts split evenly he still loses without Florida. If we assume Michigan and New Hampshire won't flip Trump needs to go 5/5 on the above states. Assuming Pennsylvania stays a Hillary stronghold that is.
and it's not probable
+ Show Spoiler [another electoral college math post] +On October 13 2016 23:58 KwarK wrote:So, on a politics note, Trump is pulling out of all states but North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. Here's the problem with that. The last three polls in Pennsylvania put Trump 9 points behind, 10 points behind and 11 points behind. 538 put his chances of winning Pennsylvania at this point outside of the margin of error. Polling is an inaccurate science but it wouldn't just take inaccurate polling at this point, it'd take a completely unexpected outside factor. Incidentally Clinton is outspending Trump in Pennsylvania 20:1. I wrote previously about how if we assume that he doesn't win Pennsylvania, an assumption I'm sticking with, he needs to win all the red states and Iowa, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio and Florida. He's currently losing hard in Nevada (and added Arizona to the list, despite it previously being pretty solidly red). This is essentially an allin bet on Pennsylvania from what I can see. If he flips it that's 20 electoral college votes. If he loses all three of the competitive states he's no longer ahead in, Iowa, Nevada and now Arizona, that's 21 electoral college votes. + Show Spoiler [electoral math] +Texas - 38 - Total so far 38 Georgia - 16 - 54 Indiana - 11 - 65 Tennessee - 11 - 76 Missouri - 10 - 86 South Carolina - 9 - 95 Alabama - 9 - 104 Kentucky - 8 - 112 Louisiana - 8 - 120 Oklahoma - 7 - 127 Arkansas - 6 - 133 Utah - 6 - 139 Kansas - 6 - 145 Mississippi - 6 - 151 West Virginia - 5 - 156 Nebraska - 5 - 161 Idaho - 4 - 165 Montana - 3 - 168 Wyoming - 3 - 171 North Dakota - 3 - 174 South Dakota - 3 - 177 Alaska - 3 - 180 That means he has to get 90 more from the following pool Florida - 29 Pennsylvania - 20 Ohio - 18 North Carolina - 15 Arizona - 11 Nevada - 6 Iowa - 6 Maine - 1 (1 competitive electoral college vote) Even if he wins Pennsylvania, which he won't, it doesn't matter unless the other swing states he's no longer campaigning in win themselves. + Show Spoiler [best case scenario for Trump, 6/6 comp…] +http://www.270towin.com/maps/W3Krg Conclusion in case anyone didn't bother to read. If we give Trump all 6 of the competitive states he wants, even though he's behind in all 6 of them today, and we give him the Maine vote, he'll get 266 electoral college votes. To win at this point he'd also have to flip a Clinton safe state, like New Hampshire. Trump needs to win 7 out of 6 competitive races to win the Presidency.
|
On October 27 2016 09:50 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2016 09:19 biology]major wrote:On October 27 2016 09:00 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:59 On_Slaught wrote:On October 27 2016 08:49 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:46 On_Slaught wrote:On October 27 2016 08:29 zlefin wrote:On October 27 2016 08:22 biology]major wrote:
The electoral map for trump is so brutal, it's unreal. Even if the national poll has trump leading or tied, the electoral nightmare persists. how is that? iirc electoral map favors republicans if the vote numbers are equal due to more low population states being republican. but i haven't really looked at the details in awhile. Electoral map was massively in Clintons favor coming into this race. Trump just made it harder by virtue of him running the worst campaign in history. was the electoral map favorable for clinton even assuming equal total vote numbers? my impression is that he was talking about equal total popular vote numbers. How would you even measure this? Vote distribution is what matters and equal votes tells you nothing about it. So how would we know it favors Trump? that's beside the point, I was responding to someone and was working through the issue. I just saw some guy explaining path to 270 on CNN and even if he got Florida, NC, PA, Ohio, Iowa, Utah, NV and some others he is still short. Mission impossible I've been saying this for a long time. His paths to victory are either all 6 competitive states + NH or 4/5 of the competitive states and PA. Trump knows this, there was an article a few weeks ago explaining that he'd pulled his resources from all but PA, FL, OH and NC, all of which are must win for him if he wants to pursue that route. And PA isn't even remotely competitive. He's incredibly fucked. edit: this is his most probable path to victory + Show Spoiler +On October 05 2016 23:36 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 22:08 Incognoto wrote:
Whoever gets Ohio wins the election. This is a known fact. If Hillary gets Ohio she wins. But if Trump gets Ohio and doesn't also get Florida and North Carolina Hillary wins. As I said yesterday, there are five key swing states, Florida(29), Ohio(18), North Carolina(15), Nevada(6) and Iowa(6). If he loses Florida it doesn't matter if he wins the other four. Even with New Hampshire and Michigan flipping and Massachusetts split evenly he still loses without Florida. If we assume Michigan and New Hampshire won't flip Trump needs to go 5/5 on the above states. Assuming Pennsylvania stays a Hillary stronghold that is. and it's not probable + Show Spoiler [another electoral college math post] +On October 13 2016 23:58 KwarK wrote:So, on a politics note, Trump is pulling out of all states but North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. Here's the problem with that. The last three polls in Pennsylvania put Trump 9 points behind, 10 points behind and 11 points behind. 538 put his chances of winning Pennsylvania at this point outside of the margin of error. Polling is an inaccurate science but it wouldn't just take inaccurate polling at this point, it'd take a completely unexpected outside factor. Incidentally Clinton is outspending Trump in Pennsylvania 20:1. I wrote previously about how if we assume that he doesn't win Pennsylvania, an assumption I'm sticking with, he needs to win all the red states and Iowa, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio and Florida. He's currently losing hard in Nevada (and added Arizona to the list, despite it previously being pretty solidly red). This is essentially an allin bet on Pennsylvania from what I can see. If he flips it that's 20 electoral college votes. If he loses all three of the competitive states he's no longer ahead in, Iowa, Nevada and now Arizona, that's 21 electoral college votes. + Show Spoiler [electoral math] +Texas - 38 - Total so far 38 Georgia - 16 - 54 Indiana - 11 - 65 Tennessee - 11 - 76 Missouri - 10 - 86 South Carolina - 9 - 95 Alabama - 9 - 104 Kentucky - 8 - 112 Louisiana - 8 - 120 Oklahoma - 7 - 127 Arkansas - 6 - 133 Utah - 6 - 139 Kansas - 6 - 145 Mississippi - 6 - 151 West Virginia - 5 - 156 Nebraska - 5 - 161 Idaho - 4 - 165 Montana - 3 - 168 Wyoming - 3 - 171 North Dakota - 3 - 174 South Dakota - 3 - 177 Alaska - 3 - 180 That means he has to get 90 more from the following pool Florida - 29 Pennsylvania - 20 Ohio - 18 North Carolina - 15 Arizona - 11 Nevada - 6 Iowa - 6 Maine - 1 (1 competitive electoral college vote) Even if he wins Pennsylvania, which he won't, it doesn't matter unless the other swing states he's no longer campaigning in win themselves. + Show Spoiler [best case scenario for Trump, 6/6 comp…] +http://www.270towin.com/maps/W3Krg Conclusion in case anyone didn't bother to read. If we give Trump all 6 of the competitive states he wants, even though he's behind in all 6 of them today, and we give him the Maine vote, he'll get 266 electoral college votes. To win at this point he'd also have to flip a Clinton safe state, like New Hampshire. Trump needs to win 7 out of 6 competitive races to win the Presidency.
yeah well no one reads your well thought out posts kwark, I'm gonna instead trust #CNN. But really though he is fucked and it's a sad moment in our country's history. In 4 years the Clinton tentacles will have spread all across our government and bill will be banging some other intern(s).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i1.wp.com/espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/screen-shot-2016-10-03-at-10-29-28-am.png?quality=90&strip=all&w=575&ssl=1)
