Chill with national polls.

[Drunken Irishman]

They'll always be closer than the real numbers. Why? Because this is one fucking huge nation. We just don't have popular vote blowouts like you see at the state level - where gubernatorial candidates routinely win with 60+ of the vote. It's just not common anymore - especially with the hyper-partisan reality of the voting electorate.

In 1992, Bill Clinton blew Bush out of the water - but only won by 5.5% in the popular vote. That's actually a smaller margin than Obama's win in 2008. Yeah, a lot of that had to do with Ross Perot but even in reelection, Clinton couldn't get a majority of the vote and only a popular vote margin of 8.5% in 1996.

Where he killed it was in the electoral college. Clinton won 69% of the electoral votes in 1992 and 70% in 1996. Likewise, Obama won 68% of the electoral vote in 2008 and 62% in 2012 - despite comfortable, but hardly monstrous popular vote wins.

Since the landslides of FDR, only four times has a candidate won by a margin of ten-plus points: Eisenhower (52,56), Nixon (72) and Reagan (84). That's a long stretch of <50 results.

The popular vote will be lower for a few reasons.

1) We're still a divided nation and there's enough fuckers to give Trump at least 40% of the vote.
2) Jill Stein and Gary Andersen will probably peel off votes who woulda gone to the Big Two but otherwise didn't.

In the end, I promise you Hillary is going to exceed Obama's electoral vote totals in 2012 and maybe 2008.

[MFM008]

1. Thank you

!!!

[vadermike]

2. well

i would tend to agree but IBD/TIPP has them ties and that is supposed to be one of the most accurate pollsters supposedly got the last 3 elections correct.. .. we will see more swing state polls... hopefully HRC contnues to lead... NH just now came out showing 11 pt lead for Hillary

[roamer65]

3. Yes! National polls are utterly worthless.

It is the state polls that matter. We elect a president by states, not by national popular vote.

I just don't see any way Drumpf can assemble the states required for 270. If no one gets 270, then it gets really messy.

[Upthevibe]

4. A couple of weeks ago I actually heard one of the Fox ladies say that she wasn't

Going to mislead their viewers regarding the polls. She said she didn't want people to be blind sided the way they were with Romney.

[Gabi Hayes]

5. four possible major stumbling blocks, three of which are unpredictable, the other,

sadly, always predictable:

1) some sort of terror attack, massive public disturbance

2) major setback during the debates...lord only knows what could happen there, and given the almost complete deck stacking of moderators, it doesn't look good

3) some sort of October surprise event, which will be blown massively out of proportion by....

4) the liberal media.....look how they've gone hammer and tong at Hillary over trustworthiness, emails/CGI, while ignoring the Polish workers, the models, the RAPES, the Russia/Chinese/mob connections, the utter failure of his gambling "empire" (due to a combo of corruption and total incompetence), and his fricking personal finances/tax situation

if they'd given even a fraction of the coverage to the crap listed in number four it WOULD be a blowout, but they aren't covering this stuff at ALL. pretty amazing, yes?

oh, yeah, and the minor fact of his sociopathy. how can they ignore that, and keep swiftboating away with Hillary's supposed physical infirmities?

I'm sure Gore and Kerry are just nodding ironically, and saying....see? this is what it's like to be in the barrel. I dunno how Obama got away so relatively unscathed. it's not as if McCain or Mitt were any better (or worse?) candidates than Trump, but at least they were comparatively sane.

[vadermike]

6. well

I would not be surprised to see Trump easily win this now... media will help him in the debates and media will just ignore Hillary till Nov 8 and thrash her... this is starting to resmble 2000 all over again.. Clinton Campaign needs to wake up fast

[DarthDem]

7. Thanks for Your Concern

n/t