Clinton will win but only because the alternative is Trump. Trump is the only person Clinton could beat in an election. A sad state of affairs really
Your underestimating the connection and hook trump has with a large proportion of the American public.
It's loyalty from people that want things such as "not having to always be so f*cking politically correct all the time"
I think if a different republican nominee was up against Clinton. She would still win.
Probably be easier and more straight forward.
He can be connected to angry white people in Ohio all he likes, but he's completely disconnected from Hispanics, African Americans and women in the states which could flip the election like Nevada, New Mexico, Florida and potentially Arizona.
He's going to lose the states that matter, and as they've said on 538
Nevada: This could be the key state for determining who wins the presidency and the Senate. If Clinton wins it, she can become president without taking Florida, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Ohio.
Here is one from the NY Times, which breaks it out by state and what time their polls close (and thus early results will start to come in). All times are Eastern, which is -5GMT.
Because there is so much early voting, particularly in Florida and North Carolina, we should get results right when polls close there.
Here are some key times: 1900EST/0000GMT: Polls close in most of Florida, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Virginia. If Clinton wins New Hampshire and Florida (plus Virginia where she's up pretty comfortably), it's going to be very hard for Trump to come back.
1930EST/0030GMT North Carolina and Ohio, If Clinton wins in North Carolina, and this one may not be called right away despite early voting, and she wins Florida, this thing is over. In some ways Trump need to win Ohio and North Carolina just to make it to the next round if you will.
2000EST/0100GMT Most of Michigan, Pennsylvania Trump really has to win one of these or his night could be all but over.
2100EST/0200GMT Wisconsin, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona: Clinton is ahead in the first three, and if she wins them, even if she loses states like Florida, Michigan, and North Carolina, she will win the election. At this point you will know who will win the presidency.
2300EST/0400GMT Oregon, Washington, California, this is the earliest the election will formally be called as these states would be what puts Clinton over the edge.
Well personally I just hope Trump loses. He stands for ignorance and simplistic answers to complicated issues. He has taken propaganda lessons straight from some of history's biggest shits IMO. The man is simply hideous to behold.
What I was trying to say, but a better way of putting it
Anyone with a penchant for "car crash TV", should be watching this all unfold with a vengeance tonight...
Two of the most undesirable candidates for the White House in many years. This thread has been a delight to a voyeur. I expected, due to CL's left leaning demographic that comment would be vehemently against the Trump camp, but we all know those usual suspects. A few have been supportive of Trump and have all been shouted down without much trouble but with some well played last stands. The paucity of choice for America this time around is depressing but I think my tenner on Trump at 4/1 all those weeks ago is dead, finito, kaput-ten and is an ex-tenner!
Anyone with a penchant for "car crash TV", should be watching this all unfold with a vengeance tonight...
Two of the most undesirable candidates for the White House in many years. This thread has been a delight to a voyeur. I expected, due to CL's left leaning demographic that comment would be vehemently against the Trump camp, but we all know those usual suspects. A few have been supportive of Trump and have all been shouted down without much trouble but with some well played last stands. The paucity of choice for America this time around is depressing but I think my tenner on Trump at 4/1 all those weeks ago is dead, finito, kaput-ten and is an ex-tenner!
Hillary by a record small margin.
It isn't the right voting for Trump, it's the unhinged
Anyone with a penchant for "car crash TV", should be watching this all unfold with a vengeance tonight...
Two of the most undesirable candidates for the White House in many years. This thread has been a delight to a voyeur. I expected, due to CL's left leaning demographic that comment would be vehemently against the Trump camp, but we all know those usual suspects. A few have been supportive of Trump and have all been shouted down without much trouble but with some well played last stands. The paucity of choice for America this time around is depressing but I think my tenner on Trump at 4/1 all those weeks ago is dead, finito, kaput-ten and is an ex-tenner!
Hillary by a record small margin.
To be fair we've only had 2-3 people who've said they'd vote for Trump, and there was some incredulity, but not a lot of "shouting down" for supporting Trump unto itself. The most consistent conservative voice has been limey--and that's to his credit, it's not easy being in a space where you're a minority--and he's never particularly aligned himself with Trump.
Your tenner on Trump at 4/1 was a smart bet, even if it doesn't come off. This election has been so crazy that anything could (and just about did) happen in the last few weeks.
Anyone with a penchant for "car crash TV", should be watching this all unfold with a vengeance tonight...
Two of the most undesirable candidates for the White House in many years. This thread has been a delight to a voyeur. I expected, due to CL's left leaning demographic that comment would be vehemently against the Trump camp, but we all know those usual suspects. A few have been supportive of Trump and have all been shouted down without much trouble but with some well played last stands. The paucity of choice for America this time around is depressing but I think my tenner on Trump at 4/1 all those weeks ago is dead, finito, kaput-ten and is an ex-tenner!
Hillary by a record small margin.
To be fair we've only had 2-3 people who've said they'd vote for Trump, and there was some incredulity, but not a lot of "shouting down" for supporting Trump unto itself. The most consistent conservative voice has been limey--and that's to his credit, it's not easy being in a space where you're a minority--and he's never particularly aligned himself with Trump.
Your tenner on Trump at 4/1 was a smart bet, even if it doesn't come off. This election has been so crazy that anything could (and just about did) happen in the last few weeks.
I've seen a lot of stuff on American websites proclaiming "If you're in line when the polls close, they have to let you vote."
So what's the issue? Do polls close really early (meaning people who work long shifts will miss the vote)? Are there not enough poll stations so lines will be really long? Or is it like the UK where apparently half the population wait until 21.30 to put down the Wotsits, put some clothes on and go outside for the first time that day?
I've seen a lot of stuff on American websites proclaiming "If you're in line when the polls close, they have to let you vote."
So what's the issue? Do polls close really early (meaning people who work long shifts will miss the vote)? Are there not enough poll stations so lines will be really long? Or is it like the UK where apparently half the population wait until 21.30 to put down the Wotsits, put some clothes on and go outside for the first time that day?
C'mon, there are obvious distractions to voting in this country... Judge Rinder, Strictly spinoff waffle fests, soaps coming out of your ears... but, Wotsits? they just get stuck in the cracks and gaps of your neglected teeth!
I've seen a lot of stuff on American websites proclaiming "If you're in line when the polls close, they have to let you vote."
So what's the issue? Do polls close really early (meaning people who work long shifts will miss the vote)? Are there not enough poll stations so lines will be really long? Or is it like the UK where apparently half the population wait until 21.30 to put down the Wotsits, put some clothes on and go outside for the first time that day?
It's a combination of factors but one of them is that there aren't enough polling places, usually, odd this, in working class/minority neighborhoods. Also, since the repeal of the Voting Rights Act, this has really accelerated.
And yes, part of it is that it's really hard for working voters to carve out time. If you work an 8-5 job you'd either have to go at like 6am (which can be problematic if you have kids) or after work (where the lines get insanely long and you can end up waiting up to five hours).
We are bad at democracy in ways most of you don't even realize.
I've seen a lot of stuff on American websites proclaiming "If you're in line when the polls close, they have to let you vote."
So what's the issue? Do polls close really early (meaning people who work long shifts will miss the vote)? Are there not enough poll stations so lines will be really long? Or is it like the UK where apparently half the population wait until 21.30 to put down the Wotsits, put some clothes on and go outside for the first time that day?
It's a combination of factors but one of them is that there aren't enough polling places, usually, odd this, in working class/minority neighborhoods. Also, since the repeal of the Voting Rights Act, this has really accelerated.
And yes, part of it is that it's really hard for working voters to carve out time. If you work an 8-5 job you'd either have to go at like 6am (which can be problematic if you have kids) or after work (where the lines get insanely long and you can end up waiting up to five hours).
We are bad at democracy in ways most of you don't even realize.
No no, that's what I thought and that's really sad.
Whereas here, we having polling stations that run from 7am to 10pm, usually no more than a short walk for 95% of the people yet somehow we still end up with people complaining they had to queue.
I've seen a lot of stuff on American websites proclaiming "If you're in line when the polls close, they have to let you vote."
So what's the issue? Do polls close really early (meaning people who work long shifts will miss the vote)? Are there not enough poll stations so lines will be really long? Or is it like the UK where apparently half the population wait until 21.30 to put down the Wotsits, put some clothes on and go outside for the first time that day?
It's a combination of factors but one of them is that there aren't enough polling places, usually, odd this, in working class/minority neighborhoods. Also, since the repeal of the Voting Rights Act, this has really accelerated.
And yes, part of it is that it's really hard for working voters to carve out time. If you work an 8-5 job you'd either have to go at like 6am (which can be problematic if you have kids) or after work (where the lines get insanely long and you can end up waiting up to five hours).
We are bad at democracy in ways most of you don't even realize.
No no, that's what I thought and that's really sad.
Whereas here, we having polling stations that run from 7am to 10pm, usually no more than a short walk for 95% of the people yet somehow we still end up with people complaining they had to queue.
I dont think theres any excuse for it here.
During the Brexit vote - my first one in Bromley - I could look out of my window and see one, and then trapse into the other room and see another one out of that window. Schools get affected, cadet huts, church halls, leisure centers etc all seem to get involved.
It's quite refreshing to think that we can muster up that kind of voluntary manpower in the UK.
I'm tempted to get some snacks and drink in, queue up Twitter and stay up watching the coverage on TV.
I'm sure Twitter will be absolutely hilarious - albeit infuriating - regardless of outcome.
Hopefully a lot of the trolling and general nonsense will stop by tomorrow morning. Alas, if CharltonLife's very own Brexit thread is anything to go by...
I've seen a lot of stuff on American websites proclaiming "If you're in line when the polls close, they have to let you vote."
So what's the issue? Do polls close really early (meaning people who work long shifts will miss the vote)? Are there not enough poll stations so lines will be really long? Or is it like the UK where apparently half the population wait until 21.30 to put down the Wotsits, put some clothes on and go outside for the first time that day?
It's a combination of factors but one of them is that there aren't enough polling places, usually, odd this, in working class/minority neighborhoods. Also, since the repeal of the Voting Rights Act, this has really accelerated.
And yes, part of it is that it's really hard for working voters to carve out time. If you work an 8-5 job you'd either have to go at like 6am (which can be problematic if you have kids) or after work (where the lines get insanely long and you can end up waiting up to five hours).
We are bad at democracy in ways most of you don't even realize.
No no, that's what I thought and that's really sad.
Whereas here, we having polling stations that run from 7am to 10pm, usually no more than a short walk for 95% of the people yet somehow we still end up with people complaining they had to queue.
I dont think theres any excuse for it here.
During the Brexit vote - my first one in Bromley - I could look out of my window and see one, and then trapse into the other room and see another one out of that window. Schools get affected, cadet huts, church halls, leisure centers etc all seem to get involved.
It's quite refreshing to think that we can muster up that kind of voluntary manpower in the UK.
It's not voluntary - people get paid to work as polling clerks and to count the votes. They usually are council workers earning a bit extra as it means it can be handled through the payroll. The party members standing outside asking you how you voted are volunteers though.
I've seen a lot of stuff on American websites proclaiming "If you're in line when the polls close, they have to let you vote."
So what's the issue? Do polls close really early (meaning people who work long shifts will miss the vote)? Are there not enough poll stations so lines will be really long? Or is it like the UK where apparently half the population wait until 21.30 to put down the Wotsits, put some clothes on and go outside for the first time that day?
It's a combination of factors but one of them is that there aren't enough polling places, usually, odd this, in working class/minority neighborhoods. Also, since the repeal of the Voting Rights Act, this has really accelerated.
And yes, part of it is that it's really hard for working voters to carve out time. If you work an 8-5 job you'd either have to go at like 6am (which can be problematic if you have kids) or after work (where the lines get insanely long and you can end up waiting up to five hours).
We are bad at democracy in ways most of you don't even realize.
No no, that's what I thought and that's really sad.
Whereas here, we having polling stations that run from 7am to 10pm, usually no more than a short walk for 95% of the people yet somehow we still end up with people complaining they had to queue.
I dont think theres any excuse for it here.
During the Brexit vote - my first one in Bromley - I could look out of my window and see one, and then trapse into the other room and see another one out of that window. Schools get affected, cadet huts, church halls, leisure centers etc all seem to get involved.
It's quite refreshing to think that we can muster up that kind of voluntary manpower in the UK.
It's not voluntary - people get paid to work as polling clerks and to count the votes. They usually are council workers earning a bit extra as it means it can be handled through the payroll. The party members standing outside asking you how you voted are volunteers though.
Geez, thanks for destroying one of my last little strands of belief in the good of people..
In all seriousness though, I never knew that - very interesting. On the other hand - I thought party affiliated individuals were banned from any activity on voting days, and the police were meant to get involved if they're ouside asking who you voted for? Or have I got the wrong end of the stick as usual!
Why can't you vote in an app or on a website or by pressing the red button or phoning up a hotline? This is the 21st century people!
As annoying as it is, I think paper ballots are the most secure - and I'm guessing security is the main concern. Although I understand that the US elections do use electronic machines, differing by state..?
Perhaps SDAddick can answer about the machines, but from what I read this morning, some provide you with a voting receipt for auditing purposes. (Whilst supposedly NY has some pretty interesting bits of gadgetry too)
Fully electronic/remote voting would probably be cheaper, provide instant results, be quicker and so on.. but only if you get it right.
Clinton will win but only because the alternative is Trump. Trump is the only person Clinton could beat in an election. A sad state of affairs really
Your underestimating the connection and hook trump has with a large proportion of the American public.
It's loyalty from people that want things such as "not having to always be so f*cking politically correct all the time"
I think if a different republican nominee was up against Clinton. She would still win.
Probably be easier and more straight forward.
He can be connected to angry white people in Ohio all he likes, but he's completely disconnected from Hispanics, African Americans and women in the states which could flip the election like Nevada, New Mexico, Florida and potentially Arizona.
He's going to lose the states that matter, and as they've said on 538
Nevada: This could be the key state for determining who wins the presidency and the Senate. If Clinton wins it, she can become president without taking Florida, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Ohio.
A lot of my girlfriends family are American, based in Boston. All the females in that family are voting trump and I read an interesting article that one of them shared about women being against trump but backing Clinton, in this article there was some sort of story how Clinton had pressured and essentially bullied one of her husbands rape victims, which had made a lot of women not want to vote for her. (I'm aware I'm not being very clear as I read it about a month ago and can't remember it in detail)
Why can't you vote in an app or on a website or by pressing the red button or phoning up a hotline? This is the 21st century people!
As annoying as it is, I think paper ballots are the most secure - and I'm guessing security is the main concern. Although I understand that the US elections do use electronic machines, differing by state..?
Perhaps SDAddick can answer about the machines, but from what I read this morning, some provide you with a voting receipt for auditing purposes. (Whilst supposedly NY has some pretty interesting bits of gadgetry too)
Fully electronic/remote voting would probably be cheaper, provide instant results, be quicker and so on.. but only if you get it right.
I think I've only ever voted by paper ballot, yesterday here in Oregon and the past in California, and I think it's still done that way in a decent chunk of the country.
As for apps and things, what voting machines we have are, I believe, not allowed to be connected to the internet to prevent things like DDoS attacks, hacking, etc.
For as many things as I would love to have an app for, I cannot think of a way of securing this so it wouldn't be tampered with.
Here in Boston it's a paper ballot that you mark up and feed into a scanner. The scanner provides a count when voting closes, but the totals are reported manually, and they have to manually count any "write in" votes.
I don't think it the same throughout Mass. I think towns can choose the scanner or manual counting.
Comments
It's loyalty from people that want things such as "not having to always be so f*cking politically correct all the time"
I think if a different republican nominee was up against Clinton.
She would still win.
Probably be easier and more straight forward.
He's going to lose the states that matter, and as they've said on 538
Nevada: This could be the key state for determining who wins the presidency and the Senate. If Clinton wins it, she can become president without taking Florida, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Ohio.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/when-is-the-us-election-day-results-times-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-date-when-will-we-know-winner-a7403346.html
Here is one from the NY Times, which breaks it out by state and what time their polls close (and thus early results will start to come in). All times are Eastern, which is -5GMT.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/07/us/elections/polls-closing-times.html
Because there is so much early voting, particularly in Florida and North Carolina, we should get results right when polls close there.
Here are some key times:
1900EST/0000GMT: Polls close in most of Florida, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Virginia. If Clinton wins New Hampshire and Florida (plus Virginia where she's up pretty comfortably), it's going to be very hard for Trump to come back.
1930EST/0030GMT North Carolina and Ohio, If Clinton wins in North Carolina, and this one may not be called right away despite early voting, and she wins Florida, this thing is over. In some ways Trump need to win Ohio and North Carolina just to make it to the next round if you will.
2000EST/0100GMT Most of Michigan, Pennsylvania Trump really has to win one of these or his night could be all but over.
2100EST/0200GMT Wisconsin, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona: Clinton is ahead in the first three, and if she wins them, even if she loses states like Florida, Michigan, and North Carolina, she will win the election. At this point you will know who will win the presidency.
2300EST/0400GMT Oregon, Washington, California, this is the earliest the election will formally be called as these states would be what puts Clinton over the edge.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-to-watch-election-night/
I would vote for Clinton over trump but a piece of dog poo on the floor over Clinton.
Two of the most undesirable candidates for the White House in many years. This thread has been a delight to a voyeur. I expected, due to CL's left leaning demographic that comment would be vehemently against the Trump camp, but we all know those usual suspects. A few have been supportive of Trump and have all been shouted down without much trouble but with some well played last stands. The paucity of choice for America this time around is depressing but I think my tenner on Trump at 4/1 all those weeks ago is dead, finito, kaput-ten and is an ex-tenner!
Hillary by a record small margin.
Your tenner on Trump at 4/1 was a smart bet, even if it doesn't come off. This election has been so crazy that anything could (and just about did) happen in the last few weeks.
So what's the issue? Do polls close really early (meaning people who work long shifts will miss the vote)? Are there not enough poll stations so lines will be really long? Or is it like the UK where apparently half the population wait until 21.30 to put down the Wotsits, put some clothes on and go outside for the first time that day?
And yes, part of it is that it's really hard for working voters to carve out time. If you work an 8-5 job you'd either have to go at like 6am (which can be problematic if you have kids) or after work (where the lines get insanely long and you can end up waiting up to five hours).
We are bad at democracy in ways most of you don't even realize.
Whereas here, we having polling stations that run from 7am to 10pm, usually no more than a short walk for 95% of the people yet somehow we still end up with people complaining they had to queue.
During the Brexit vote - my first one in Bromley - I could look out of my window and see one, and then trapse into the other room and see another one out of that window. Schools get affected, cadet huts, church halls, leisure centers etc all seem to get involved.
It's quite refreshing to think that we can muster up that kind of voluntary manpower in the UK.
I'm sure Twitter will be absolutely hilarious - albeit infuriating - regardless of outcome.
Hopefully a lot of the trolling and general nonsense will stop by tomorrow morning. Alas, if CharltonLife's very own Brexit thread is anything to go by...
In all seriousness though, I never knew that - very interesting. On the other hand - I thought party affiliated individuals were banned from any activity on voting days, and the police were meant to get involved if they're ouside asking who you voted for? Or have I got the wrong end of the stick as usual!
Perhaps SDAddick can answer about the machines, but from what I read this morning, some provide you with a voting receipt for auditing purposes. (Whilst supposedly NY has some pretty interesting bits of gadgetry too)
Fully electronic/remote voting would probably be cheaper, provide instant results, be quicker and so on.. but only if you get it right.
Expect her to win nearly all of the 'swing states'.
As for apps and things, what voting machines we have are, I believe, not allowed to be connected to the internet to prevent things like DDoS attacks, hacking, etc.
For as many things as I would love to have an app for, I cannot think of a way of securing this so it wouldn't be tampered with.
I don't think it the same throughout Mass. I think towns can choose the scanner or manual counting.