ChrisWeigant.com

Another Brick In The Big Blue Wall

[ Posted Thursday, August 18th, 2016 – 17:22 PDT ]

It is time to consider the future of the Big Blue Wall. The Big Blue Wall, for those who haven't heard the term before, is the list of states that have voted consistently Democratic in the past six elections. They voted for Bill Clinton twice, against George W. Bush twice, and then were part of Barack Obama's winning coalition twice as well. I've written about the Big Blue Wall previously in more detail, I should mention, for anyone interested.

The upshot is that any Democratic candidate for president starts with 242 Electoral College votes. Only 270 are needed to win the presidency, meaning Democrats only have to pick up 28 from all the battleground states (Florida, the biggest battleground, has 29 Electoral College votes). Here is a full list of all the Big Blue Wall states, with their respective Electoral College votes:

California (55), Connecticut (7), Delaware (3), Hawai'i (4), Illinois (20), Maine (4), Maryland (10), Massachusetts (11), Michigan (16), Minnesota (10), New Jersey (14), New York (29), Oregon (7), Pennsylvania (20), Rhode Island (4), Vermont (3), Washington (12), Washington D.C. (3), Wisconsin (10).

By comparison, the Republicans only have what I've called a "Small Red Picket Fence" to rely on -- adding up to a meager 102 Electoral College votes. Here's the Republican list:

Alabama (9), Alaska (3), Idaho (4), Kansas (6), Mississippi (6), Nebraska (5), North Dakota (3), Oklahoma (7), South Carolina (9), South Dakota (3), Texas (38), Utah (6), Wyoming (3).

That's a pretty hefty built-in advantage for Democrats, you've got to admit. The real problem for Republicans is that this list isn't going to stay static. It changes over time, in two ways.

The first of these has actually been helping Republicans. For both of Bush's elections, the Big Blue Wall states had six more electoral votes than they do now. The Census and congressional redistricting meant the loss of one vote in five states (Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania), the loss of two votes from New York, and only one additional vote for the state of Washington. Furthermore, all six of those votes moved directly to the Small Red Picket Fence states, with Utah and South Carolina each gaining one and Texas growing by a whopping four electoral votes.

That's the bad news for Democrats -- these population shifts are likely to change the total again after the 2020 Census, although this won't be a factor until the 2024 election, so it's still pretty far off. Also, six votes out of 242 isn't all that big a deal. The good news for Democrats is that they might be on the verge of adding some bricks to their wall.

Before I get to that, however, let's take a look at how solid the wall truly is. The weakest states -- those that might just get poached by a Republican, in other words -- are probably Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Republicans have won statewide offices in all three, so the states are only really reliably Democratic when it comes to presidential elections. These three states were also, not coincidentally, the three states Democrats were most worried might go for Donald Trump. That doesn't appear to be happening, which means that a Republican candidate would have to cater even more to blue-collar white males than Trump to be successful in any of them (which is kind of hard to imagine, at this point).

If the Rust Belt states hold firm, then which states might get added to the bastion of Democratic support? I've identified three that might, and I'm not basing my picks on past performance at all. If you went down the list, there are three states which voted for the Democrat in five of the past six elections, but only one of them qualifies for my list. Iowa and New Hampshire both voted for Bush once, but have voted the other five times for Democrats. Neither one looks like a reliably Democratic state to me, though, because I think both of them enjoy their battleground status too much (as they enjoy their "first in the nation" primary/caucus designation). But New Mexico, the third state in the "five out of six" Democratic column, is now looking like it's pretty solidly in the Democratic camp for some time to come. Iowa and New Hampshire haven't appreciably gone through much in the way of demographic change, but New Mexico has, to put it another way.

Both of the two states who voted Democratic four times out of six (they voted for the winning candidate in each race, actually) are also probably still only battleground states at best. Neither Nevada nor Ohio is so clearly moving towards the Democratic direction that they could be considered safe states, at this point.

The other two states that I am seriously considering adding into my own calculations of the Big Blue Wall have much weaker voting records, but seem to now be almost demographically out of reach for an average Republican candidate. Colorado voted for Republicans in 1996, 2000, and 2004, but the shifts in population have now turned it pretty solidly blue. And the last state I would consider a possible new brick in the Big Blue Wall is kind of shocking to me, considering the state's history. But Virginia seems to have turned a fairly deep shade of blue as well. The growth of the Northern Virginia suburbs has outpaced the rural population in the state, which may have shifted it from reliably Republican to reliably Democratic for the foreseeable future. Virginia only voted Democratic in the past two elections, but it's looking like Hillary Clinton won't have too tough a time picking it up this year. Clinton has actually pulled all ads out of both Virginia and Colorado recently, because she considers them so safe.

If neither candidate bothers to advertise in a state and both sides know who it's going to vote for, then it is by definition not a battleground state any more. And at this point, I think New Mexico, Colorado, and Virginia all qualify (perhaps) for the new status of being added to the Big Blue Wall.

This should terrify Republicans. New Mexico has 5 Electoral College votes, Colorado has 9, and Virginia has 13. That is 27 more votes, which brings the Big Blue Wall total up to 269 -- only one shy of the winning amount. If these three states can now be considered to be firmly in the Democratic column, it means that any Democratic candidate will only have to win one other state to win the presidency. Any state -- of any size -- will do. It doesn't have to be a Florida or an Ohio -- New Hampshire or Iowa would be enough. Here's how this new map of Democratic states looks (map courtesy of 270toWin):

new BBW

[Click on map to see larger-scale version.]

If this truly is the new map of reliable Democratic states, then Republicans might find themselves frozen out of the White House for longer than they might now realize. Democrats have been moving the map of the battleground states into red territory, and states that were formerly purple are now blue. Hillary Clinton is competitive in North Carolina, Arizona, and Georgia in the current race. Those states used to be reliably red (and at least two of them are still longshots for Clinton, to be fair). Republicans dream of moving the battleground map into the Rust Belt, but they have consistently failed to do so. They can fight in the traditional battlegrounds all they want, but if 269 becomes the number Democrats start the race with, then the best they'll ever do is a tie. Even to do that, they'd have to perfectly run the table of all the battlegrounds, which is a daunting task for Republicans to contemplate.

Donald Trump might just wind up being remembered in American political history for building a big, beautiful wall -- just like he's been promising all along. However, it might not actually be the wall he was thinking about.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

75 Comments on “Another Brick In The Big Blue Wall”

  1. [1] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    CW-

    Nice work as usual....

    Perhaps it is just me...BUT...articles like this to some extent really get my goat as they really shine the bright light on what a relic the EC really is.

    I wouldn't mind seeing your treatment ( or any other of the usual suspects ) on what the electoral map would actually look like if we were to shift to a one person one vote system for our elections.

  2. [2] 
    Speak2 wrote:

    An electoral map and a one person one vote system are contradictory. Just saying.

    On another note, one of the interesting things about the polling happening is that polls are close in a lot of traditionally red or battleground states that have large Latino populations. Latinos are a group that doesn't always vote in high proportions (does Trump change that). They are also a group that pollsters have trouble getting into their samples. Could FL, NV, and even AZ be Clinton blowouts?

  3. [3] 
    Speak2 wrote:

    GT [1]: Unless you're saying that OPOV would actually change voting patterns within a state (maybe). States would probably vote as they would regardless, but more Dem votes might happen in MS, whereas more GOP votes might happen in CA. Wouldn't change the Electoral Map, but it is an interesting hypothesis.

  4. [4] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Some might quibble a bit about the margins, but 242 EV seems about right. That said, the number of 1s and 0s seems smaller than in 2012. Few if any genuine toss-ups this cycle.

  5. [5] 
    TheStig wrote:

    The map might have something to do with the somewhat surprising inability of the Republican Establishment to unite early and effectively against Trump. "Well, if Trump wants it that badly, let him have it."

  6. [6] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    Speak,

    An electoral map and a one person one vote system are contradictory. Just saying.

    Sure, I agree with that basic statement, in that certain voting behaviors or states would remain the same, but, at the same token it would force a change in how votes are campaigned for...

    To me, I look at the current system of EC votes as disenfranchising a large number of our population as at the end of the day the votes all come down to let's just say 11 states out of 50 (give or take and depending the the bend of ones argle bargle...) thus leaving 39 states that have predictable voting behaviors that campaigns feel they can safely ignore investing time in... to say the least I think it sucks.

    In a OPOV situation the big change I feel comes from the fact that you suddenly have to campaign in almost all of the 50 states to get every vote out that is needed. Let's look at CA vs. FL. both states have large urban centers that would vote reliably blue and non-urban centers that vote reliably red. Both states under the current EC system have two different behaviours.

    I would posit that if under the current campaign finance system were we to see OPOV we would also see a dramatic change in how BILLIONS are spent to get a job that only pays MILLIONS for the lifetime of the job.

    Anyone who claims just getting money out of campaigns as the system currently stands is just administering rectal sunburns in support of a system that is inherently corrupt. Just as the person who claims their choice is not beholden to any special interest is also doing.

    The real solution to fixing our system is not only to get the money out but also to make it one person, one vote, and whoever can get out the vote best wins. Unlike now where we just fret over what a few states are going to do...doesn't seem that democratic to me...just saying.

    Which leads me to my original thought of wouldn't it be interesting to see what the landscape looked like if, god forbid, one actually had to campaign everywhere...not that it would be all drainbows and unicorn farts...but still interesting.

  7. [7] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Please note that Michael Moore has changed his tune from "Trump is going to win" to "Trump doesn't want to win".

  8. [8] 
    Kick wrote:

    Nice map!

    If this truly is the new map of reliable Democratic states, then Republicans might find themselves frozen out of the White House for longer than they might now realize.

    Could Democrats really string a group of wins together and freeze out the GOP? Oh, how I wish. Historical statistics Republicans throw out will "prove" it's not possible, but doesn't this time in history most resemble that string of Democratic election wins after the Great Depression?

    1932-FDR
    1936-FDR
    1940-FDR
    1944-FDR/Truman
    1948-Truman

    Doesn't it seem like the election of 2016 parallels to some degree the election of 1940, the third election after the Great Recession and Great Depression? I've heard ad nauseam about how Trump is like no other candidate and this election is like no other election, but Trump reminds me of Wendell Willkie, New York businessman, Democrat turned Republican with zero government experience running a populist and isolationist message against the Democratic candidate from New York... that and the "America First" chanting makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.

  9. [9] 
    apophis wrote:

    Clinton and Trump will appear at a Commander-in-Chief forum on Sept 7. It will be in primetime on NBC and MSNBC. We might see a little pre-debate bounce in an otherwise slow moving election.

  10. [10] 
    Speak2 wrote:

    GT [6]: Complete and utter agreement on my part. It would seem that both of us can even go further in describing the benefits of OPOV.

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    And yet....

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

    The POLLS still show that Clinton is going down and Trump's numbers are going up... :D

    Isn't it funny how NO ONE wants to talk about polls when they polls aren't going their way.. :D

    Michale

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    Complete and utter agreement on my part. It would seem that both of us can even go further in describing the benefits of OPOV.

    Echo, echo, echo, echo... :D

    Michale

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    Please note that Michael Moore has changed his tune from "Trump is going to win" to "Trump doesn't want to win".

    "Of course, you can PROVE that, right?? Oh yea, that's right. I forgot. You were absent the day they taught LAW at Law School"
    -Tom Cruise, A FEW GOOD MEN

    :D

    Michale

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    Let's take a step back from all the fantasy (FL, AZ and NV blowouts for Clinton) and take a look at the FACTS..

    Ya'all remember "FACTS" don'tcha??

    Clinton doesn't want strong immigration vetting and Trump does..

    The American people are COMPLETELY with Trump on the issue..

    Trump is completely all in for a secure border and Clinton wants an open border.

    The American people are COMPLETELY on Trump's side in this issue..

    Clinton wants to globalize and send all of our jobs and factories to other countries. Trump is going to keep jobs and factories here in the US..

    Once again, the American people are COMPLETELY for Trump on this issue...

    Clinton is pushing for war and wants to send troops far and wide.. Trump is for keeping our troops here at home and is for peace thru strength..

    And again, the American people are COMPLETELY with Trump on this issue..

    Clinton promotes and honors thugs and scumbags who kill cops and Trump wants to put cops first and foremost..

    And guess what?? The American people are TOTALLY and COMPLETELY on Trump's side in this issue...

    Clinton wants to bring in terrorists by the planeload and Trump wants to keep terrorists out...

    And once again, the American people are completely with Trump..

    No matter HOW many Blue Wall fantasies ya'all come up with, no matter HOW many feet ya'all bury your heads in the sand, the simple FACT is that the vast majority of Americans on EVERY ISSUE, are completely and solidly on Trump's side...

    EVERY ISSUE....

    "These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed."
    -Captain Smilin' Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

    At least, they are undisputed by those who are grounded in reality and not enslaved by Party dogma and ideology..

    Michale

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    I am also constrained to point out that, out of all the possible random events that could be on the horizon (terrorist attack, cops ambush/assassinations, economic meltdowns, emails release, Hillary heart attack, etc etc) ALL of those will decimate Hillary and send Trump's numbers skyrocketing..

    So, by all means, play with your fantasy Blue Wall.. Enjoy ya'all's fantasies while you can...

    Just keep in mind that I'll always be here to drag ya'all back to reality with the facts.. :D

    Bad stuff is coming, people.. And it's going to favor Trump and destroy Cliton..

    Michale

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hillary is resting... Odumbo is on vacation..

    And it's TRUMP who is going to Louisiana to help the flood stricken residents...

    DONALD TRUMP Heads to Louisiana Tomorrow – While Obama Vacations, Hillary Rests
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/08/donald-trump-heads-louisiana-tomorrow-wile-obama-vacations-hillary-rests/

    "FRAK The American People!!!"
    -Demcorat Party

    And it even fits on a bumper sticker....

    Michale

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    In general, in a campaign filled with controversial statements, it's fair to say Donald Trump doesn't do apologies and he doesn't do regret. Which is why it was extraordinary that in his speech in Charlotte Thursday night — one of his first under a new campaign management — Trump did that rarest of things: he expressed regret for rhetorical excesses of the past and conceded that they may have caused pain for some people.

    "Sometimes in the heat of debate and speaking on a multitude of issues, you don't choose the right words or say the right thing," Trump told the crowd at the Charlotte Convention Center. "I have done that. And believe it or not, I regret it. And I do regret it. Particularly where it may have caused personal pain. Too much is at stake for us to be consumed with these issues."

    That was new Trump. Very new Trump.
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-from-donald-trump-a-stunning-admission-and-a-new-direction/article/2599711

    Let the panning begin from the WPG who doesn't understand the words, "giving credit where credit is due"... :^/

    Michale

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    But hay, by all means, people...

    Crow about your Big Blue Wall...

    Go on and on about Hillary blowouts and Hillary landslides and Hillary Takes Texas...

    Ya'all will convince Democrats that Hillary has this one in the bag..

    Then Democrats will stay home en masse, thinking "Yea, Hillary's gonna win.. I don't need to bother voting.."

    So yea.. Kick up your heels and kick back... :D Hillary's a cinch to win.. Nothing to worry about.. :D

    hehehehehehehehehe :D

    Michale

  19. [19] 
    TheStig wrote:

    ANARCHIST COLLECTIVE SURPRISINGLY WELL ORGANIZED

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7TeTzOgkMs

    (Mostly Safe For Work)

  20. [20] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @cw,

    if the big blue wall is as you say, let's say hillary wins the "new blue wall," but donald sweeps all the other battlegrounds. is it theoretically possible that gary johnson's plan is not entirely a pipe dream? johnson wins utah and the house of representatives after two run-off votes awards him the white house? i thought it was far-fetched, but maybe not?

    JL

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, I am certainly glad Weigantians can have serious discussions about ISSUES and FACTS and leave personal attacks out of things...

    Michale

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    That was sarcasm, in case it was too subtle...

    Michale

  23. [23] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Just a reminder, golf isn't exercise. Unless you carry your caddy around the links.

    (Old Eisenhower era joke)

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    Just a reminder, golf isn't exercise.

    Yer right.. It's pleasure..

    And Obama would rather be indulging in his pleasure rather than go down to Louisiana and give moral support...

    Ya'all bashed Bush to hell and back when he did that with Katrina..

    But Obama has a '-D' after his name so he gets a pass from ya'all...

    PARTY UBER ALLES

    :^/

    Michale

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    Just a reminder, golf isn't exercise.

    Yer right.. It's pleasure..

    Says the guy who has never played golf.. :D

    No, that's not true. I used to golf a lot... But I always got frustrated when I couldn't get the ball thru that damned windmill.... :D

    Michale

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    And a great big happy birthday to The Great Bird Of The Galaxy..... :D

    Michale

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    Interesting factoid about Gene Roddenberry...

    Roddenberry had a friend in WWII named Kim Noonien Singh... Roddenberry used the name KAHN NOONIEN SINGH in Star Trek (Space Seed) and Noonien Soong in Star Trek:TNG in hopes that his friend would see his name and make contact...

    Michale

  28. [28] 
    Bleyd wrote:

    I always find it funny how the "great blue wall" is so small geographically. I mean, I understand why it works that way since densely populated areas tend to vote democratic, but it's still odd when looking at the electoral maps to think that one party gets less than half as many base electoral votes despite being in control of probably three times the area.

  29. [29] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @bleyd,

    that's the way the founders dreamed it, representation based on population, not territory.

    JL

  30. [30] 
    TheStig wrote:

    The resignation of Manafort is another "and you want to be my latex salesman" moment for the Campaign Trump. Hard on the heels of an "I was in the pool" moment simulcast in five or six cities. The Trump campaign has Vandalay Industries written all over it.

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    The resignation of Manafort is another "and you want to be my latex salesman" moment for the Campaign Trump.

    I find it hilarious that, when there is a campaign shake-up in a Demcorat campaign, the WPG is all, "Oh it means nothing." and "oh, it's just a minor course correction" etc etc..

    But a campaign shake-up in a GOP campaign.. THAT signals the end of the campaign...

    Blatant and unequivocal hypocrisy, solely, completely and utterly based on political ideology and bigotry.. :D

    "It is to laugh"
    -Daffy Duck

    :D

    Michale

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    "It is to laugh"
    -Daffy Duck

    :D

    "Kahn... I am LAUGHING at the superior intellect."
    -Admiral James T Kirk, STAR TREK II, The Wrath Of Kahn

    :D

    Michale

  33. [33] 
    Paula wrote:

    Yet another Trump Supporter stabs an interracial couple: http://www.salon.com/2016/08/19/washington-man-stabs-kissing-interracial-couple-cites-donald-trump-when-arrested/

    Court documents seen by KOMO say Rowe “took a blood oath to fight on the street, and if he was let go tonight, he planned on heading down to the next Donald Trump rally and stomping out more of the Black Lives Matter group.” According to court documents, officers said Rowe had “extensive” white supremacist tattoos including ones including the words “skinhead,” “white power” and the Confederate flag.

  34. [34] 
    John M wrote:

    I would add New Hampshire to the big blue wall also. Hillary is far ahead there and Republican Senator Ayotte is currently losing there by a big margin also.

    Ohio, Nevada, and Iowa are all leaning Democratic but are also close enough to still be considered swing states. To these I would also add North Carolina.

    Arizona and Georgia are possibles.

    I think all the rest are still reliably Republican.

  35. [35] 
    John M wrote:

    If we did do away with the Electoral college, and went with a popular vote for President also, keep in mind that in that scenario, Al Gore would have won and become President, since he did indeed win the popular vote. The ONLY Republican to win the popular vote, since Ronald Reagan and before Bill Clinton back in the 1980's and 1990's was George W. Bush's second term.

  36. [36] 
    Speak2 wrote:

    Bleyd [28]: Silver (538.com) does have a map that reimagines the US but with States sized by electoral votes. It's interesting.

  37. [37] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "The POLLS still show that Clinton is going down and Trump's numbers are going up... :D

    Isn't it funny how NO ONE wants to talk about polls when they polls aren't going their way.. :D"

    AGAIN, I have to ask you Michale, just what universe are you living in??? Since, the polls YOU cited and provided the link to, do NOT show that and in FACT, show just the opposite.

    The link YOU PROVIDED, shows Clinton up in the polls over Trump by anywhere from 2 to 9 percent. In fact, the Real Clear average give Clinton a LEAD of 6 points. It also shows her currently with 272 electoral votes, 2 more than what is needed to win.

  38. [38] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "Hillary is resting... Odumbo is on vacation..

    And it's TRUMP who is going to Louisiana to help the flood stricken residents..."

    Funny how you conveniently IGNORE what the Governor of Louisiana had to say on the subject:

    "We welcome him to LA but not for a photo-op." a spokesman for Edward's office said in a statement. "Instead we hope he'll consider volunteering or making a sizable donation to the LA Flood Relief Fund to help the victims of the storm."

    As for Obama's handling of the situation, Edwards said: "He'd prefer Obama wait a week or two to visit because a presidential visit requires road blocks and ties up local police and first responders. Resources that could be better used aiding the flood victims right now."

    Obama did sign a disaster declaration for Louisiana on Sunday.

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump went to Louisiana to thank first responders and tour the area..

    Hillary laid her worthless ass in bed and ordered a flunky to make a facebook post...

    Who is presidential???

    The optics couldn't be worse for Hillary....

    Michale

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    Donald Trump is receiving a warm reception as he tours a heavily-damaged portion of East Baton Rouge Parish in Louisiana.

    The GOP nominee and his running mate Mike Pence were greeted by a crowd of supporters after visiting a local Baptist church where volunteers have gathered.

    "Thank you for coming, Mr. Trump," one woman screamed.

    "We knew you would be here for us!" another shouted.

    Trump greeted the crowd, shaking hands and signing hats.

    But he turned down a plate of the south Louisiana specialty, jambalaya, offered to him.
    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/latest-conway-trump-apology-donald-trump-41509183

    Michale

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    "We welcome him to LA but not for a photo-op." a spokesman for Edward's office said in a statement. "Instead we hope he'll consider volunteering or making a sizable donation to the LA Flood Relief Fund to help the victims of the storm."

    Of course the Demcorat moron said that. He's a Clinton/Obama flunky...

    Has Conway requested that Obama make a sizable donation or volunteer??

    No, of course not.. Flunky...

    Obama savaged Bush for just doing a flyover of Katrina devastation...

    Obama didn't even do that. Obama just played golf...

    You can justify it all you want, JM..

    But the facts are the facts...

    Michale

  42. [42] 
    apophis wrote:

    "Has Conway requested that Obama make a sizable donation or volunteer??"

    Why would Conway do that?

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    And it's funny how we only start hearing about Hillary doing "all" of that for Louisiana *AFTER* Trump has been getting press the last couple days.. :D

    Hillary is playing presidential catchup.. :D

    Michale

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why would Conway do that?

    Oh I dunno....

    BECAUSE IT WOULD HELP THE PEOPLE OF LOUISIANA

    You are correct of course. Conway has no reason to do that because he only cares about Hillary and Obama.

    Frak his fellow Louisianians....

    Michale

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    AGAIN, I have to ask you Michale, just what universe are you living in??? Since, the polls YOU cited and provided the link to, do NOT show that and in FACT, show just the opposite.

    I am talking about the ONLY poll that has any real relevance..

    The RCP POLL of POLLS...

    And that poll this morning showed Trump with his numbers moving up and Hillary's numbers moving down...

    In the last few hours, there IS a slight uptick in Hillary's numbers.. We'll see if that continues or if her downward slide continues...

    Michale

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    Joshua,

    Yet another Trump Supporter stabs an interracial couple: http://www.salon.com/2016/08/19/washington-man-stabs-kissing-interracial-couple-cites-donald-trump-when-arrested/

    Didn't we agree that candidates are NOT responsible for the actions of their supporters???

    Michale

  47. [47] 
    apophis wrote:

    "You are correct of course. Conway has no reason to do that because he only cares about Hillary and Obama."

    Edwards is the governor, Conway is one of Trumps managers...

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    Because, if we're back to blaming candidates for the actions of their supporters, prepare for a LITANY of Hillary Clinton Is A Scumbag Because Her Supporter Did......

    And I can assure you that I have HUNDREDS more examples than ya'all could EVER find... :D

    Michale

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    Edwards is the governor, Conway is one of Trumps managers...

    DOH!!! My mistake.. :D

    Thanx for the correction...

    Michale

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    "Ya got me.. Ya got da Tater.."
    -Ron White

    :D

    Michale

  51. [51] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Ya'all remember "FACTS" don'tcha??

    Clinton doesn't want strong immigration vetting and Trump does..

    The American people are COMPLETELY with Trump on the issue..

    Trump is completely all in for a secure border and Clinton wants an open border.

    The American people are COMPLETELY on Trump's side in this issue..

    Your continued misuse of the word "FACT" is comical/pathetic, depending on the mood.

    I am an American. I am not in agreement with Trump on these issues. Therefore, the "American people" are NOT COMPLETELY on Trump's side, and that, is a FACT!

    Rhetoric doesn't prove anything, other than that you care far less for facts than you claim.

  52. [52] 
    Michale wrote:

    I am an American. I am not in agreement with Trump on these issues. Therefore, the "American people" are NOT COMPLETELY on Trump's side, and that, is a FACT!

    Funny how you only get nit-picky with my comments.. Very telling.. :D

    Fine.. In order to not hurt your fragile sensibilities, I'll rephrase..

    Where I said, "The American People", replace that with "The vast majority of American People"...

    There.. Your fragile sensibilities are covered.. :^/

    Rhetoric doesn't prove anything

    Except when ya'all use it in EVERY comment to "prove" what ya'all want to prove... :D

    Michale

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Hillary Clinton has called Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards to discuss the state's devastating flooding and says the state's relief effort, "can't afford any distractions."

    The Democratic presidential nominee says in a Facebook post that her "heart breaks for Louisiana," where a torrent of about 2 feet of rain deluged the southern part of the state, damaging tens of thousands of home and affecting more than 100,000 people.

    Trump and Pence GO to Louisiana to help the people there...

    Hillary Clinton is too lazy to get her fat ass out of bed, so she phones it in... :^/

    Typical Demcorat... When it comes to actually CARING about Americans, Demcorats just can't be bothered...

    Michale

    Michale

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    Where's Trump and Pence??? In Louisiana...

    Where's Obama?? On the golf course, yuk'ing it up..

    Where's Hillary?? Off resting somewhere......

    These are the FACTS.....

    Michale....

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    You see, this is exactly why it's IMPOSSIBLE to have rational discussions..

    If one ignores the ideological aspect of this and is COMPLETELY Party agnostic, one simply CANNOT concede ANYTHING else but the optics are bad..

    But ya'all can't even concede that...

    In ya'all's little fantasy world, EVERYTHING Obama does is good and right and EVERYTHING Hillary does is good and right and there is absolutely NO WAY that Hillary or Obama can do wrong..

    A normal rational politically agnostic person would say, "Yea, yer right. This really looks bad for Hillary and Obama. Trump definitely won the PR war here..."

    Unfortunately, with one possible exception, no one here is a normal or rational person who can look at reality without any ideological bent...

    Michale

  56. [56] 
    Michale wrote:

    WOW

    President Obama has refused so far to survey the Louisiana flood disaster, but he did let state and local officials know that he's watching to make sure they don't engage in racial discrimination.

    Talk about TONE DEAF.......

    Michale

  57. [57] 
    Paula wrote:

    [56] The Governor of Louisiana asked the President to hold off visiting because Presidential motorcades snarl traffic and require the use of local law enforcement etc. all of which would bog them down at the moment. The President has already designated the area as an official disaster area so funding has been provided.

    But it's so much easier to throw out a slur.

  58. [58] 
    Paula wrote:

    Trump's visit is actually quite thoughtless in the context.

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump's visit is actually quite thoughtless in the context.

    So, what you are saying is that Bush did the right thing in not going to NOLA after Katrina, right??

    Of course, that's NOT what you Left Wingers said at the time.. :^/

    The blatant Partisan slavery is so obvious... It's mind-bobbling that ya'all can pretend it doesn't exist...

    Michale

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    But it's so much easier to throw out a slur.

    Yea, Odumbo can prowl and troll around for racial issues, but can't take the time away from the golf course to actually HELP the people of Baton Rouge as Trump has done...

    All Odumbo can do is threaten the people of Louisiana...

    Nice...

    Michale

  61. [61] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://sjfm.us/temp/floods.jpg

    Anyone who simply cannot see how bad this looks for Odumbo and Crooked Hillary is nothing more than a Party slave....

    Michale

  62. [62] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump Plays the Role of President in Louisiana
    GOP nominee tours disaster area while Obama, Clinton won't be parted from politics and rest

    http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/trump-takes-role-president-hard-hit-louisiana/

    This is why Donald Trump is going to be our next President..

    He is showing he CARES about every day Americans..

    Crooked Hillary and Odumbo just can't be bothered...

    Michale

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    Obama irks La. flood victims with memo warning them not to discriminate

    http://twt-thumbs.washtimes.com/media/image/2016/08/12/Deep_South_Weather.JPEG-2d7a1_c0-152-3990-2478_s885x516.jpg?f32e52222ef957fbee5ed328f2e4e06ffe06d345

    Obama can't be bothered to actually GO to Louisiana, but he sure can offend the whole state by accusing them of racism...

    Congrats, Odumbo... You just gave the entire state to Trump...

    Michale

  64. [64] 
    apophis wrote:

    "Congrats, Odumbo... You just gave the entire state to Trump"

    Not much of a give away. Trump has the state by 16%..

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    Not much of a give away. Trump has the state by 16%..

    And yet, the last couple days ya'all have been talking about all 50 states going Hillary's way..

    I wish ya'all would make up yer minds...

    I guess it's to be expected..

    Whatever fits the ideological slavery of the moment...

    Michale

  66. [66] 
    Paula wrote:

    http://washingtonmonthly.com/2016/08/19/the-gop-and-magical-thinking/

    Assuming that a presidential photo-op would make things better in Baton Rouge is very similar to the Republican notion that simply saying the words “radical Islam” is how we defeat ISIS.

    Can anyone think of a time when the Obama’s went on vacation and the right wing didn’t go apoplectic over, “OMG, POTUS is on vacation while __________ is happening!” This time you can fill in that blank with the Baton Rouge floods.

  67. [67] 
    Michale wrote:

    Can anyone think of a time when the Obama’s went on vacation and the right wing didn’t go apoplectic over, “OMG, POTUS is on vacation while __________ is happening!” This time you can fill in that blank with the Baton Rouge floods.

    Can anyone think of a time when the Bush’s went on vacation and the Left wing didn’t go apoplectic over, “OMG, POTUS is on vacation while __________ is happening!”

    Well, lookey that.. It works just as well!!! :D

    Michale

  68. [68] 
    Paula wrote:

    And the amazing thing is how perfectly and predictably Michale posts about the rightwing outrage of the day!!

  69. [69] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    And yet, the last couple days ya'all have been talking about all 50 states going Hillary's way..

    not all fifty, just "California (55), Connecticut (7), Delaware (3), Hawai'i (4), Illinois (20), Maine (4), Maryland (10), Massachusetts (11), Michigan (16), Minnesota (10), New Jersey (14), New York (29), Oregon (7), Pennsylvania (20), Rhode Island (4), Vermont (3), Washington (12), Washington D.C. (3), Wisconsin (10)"

    ... and now possibly New Mexico (5), Colorado (9) and Virginia (13).

    by my count that's only twenty. did you not read the column?

    JL

  70. [70] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    if you're looking for a landslide prediction, CW did that one on tuesday.

  71. [71] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Has anyone mentioned all of the Brain Eating Amoeba we've seen this summer? Shouldn't someone?

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    by my count that's only twenty. did you not read the column?

    I was referring to the WPG who have predicted it's possible that Hillary could sweep all 50 states...

    Michale

  73. [73] 
    Michale wrote:

    And the amazing thing is how perfectly and predictably Michale posts about the rightwing outrage of the day!!

    And the amazing thing is how perfectly and predictably the WPG posts about the Leftwing outrage of the day regarding Trump....

    Yep, it STILL works.. :D

    You don't get it, Paula... There isn't ANYTHING you can slam the Right Wingery with that doesn't ALSO apply to the Left Wingery..

    https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/status/766718390283239424

    The people are with Trump.. Trump actually HELPED in Louisiana while Obama played golf and Hillary sat on her fat ass and called it in...

    And NOW Obama is falling Trump's lead and will visit Louisiana on Tuesday...

    Hillary and Odumbo.. Playing Follow The Leader with Trump as the leader..

    That just burns ya'all up, don't it.. :D

    Michale

  74. [74] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    I was referring to the WPG who have predicted it's possible that Hillary could sweep all 50 states...

    really, what do you have against winnepeg? it's a lovely city, and not particularly interested in the US presidential election, since they can't vote in it. or were you referring to watts per gallon? web photo gallery? wind power generation? white phosphorous grenade? wildly pestilential groundhogs?

  75. [75] 
    Michale wrote:

    Weigantian Peanut Gallery

    :D

    Michale

Comments for this article are closed.