Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Evangelicals came home for Trump 81 to 16.

At this point I think it's safe to conclude Republicans can move forward ignoring evangelicals even worse than Democrats ignore black voters. I mean, at least the black voters might stay home sometimes. Evangelicals will turn out to vote even if their candidate is Donald fething Trump.

 sebster wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
By my rough math, as things lay now, I think Trump is going to win with 293 EV.

I did not see this coming.

You, me both.

Maybe people could just start fething listening to me? Remember 2012, when I said Obama was locked in because he was really safe in enough states to hit 270 EV? And this time around I said Trump was a real chance because he was close enough in enough states, that if he beats his polls by 2 points he can reach 270?

Aw... shucks seb.

Me so sowwy.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
No it was more of 'Let's hate straight white males, Christians and people that believe in the Constitution, and border integrity'.

I don't recall any hatred of white men, in fact I seem to recall a lot of white men voting for Obama. Nor do I buy the idea that a Christian running for president was running on a platform of "hate Christians".

Shhh...you're interrupting their echo-chamber self-congratulatory circle-jerk

LOL really? If anyone was living in an 'echo chamber' pretty sure it was all you baffled lefties that just can't believe what's going on lol.

 Easy E wrote:
FL to Trump.

How did the D fail to motivate their base to vote when the stakes were so high?

Clearly it's because of the oppressive voter ID laws.

 Easy E wrote:
FL to Trump.

How did the D fail to motivate their base to vote when the stakes were so high?

By nominating Hillary Clinton.

Trump is a horrible person... and even SHE couldn't beat him.

What does that tell you about Clinton?

Woah, two different multi-posts in a row? Is this a Russian cyberattack?

 sebster wrote:
Evangelicals came home for Trump 81 to 16.

At this point I think it's safe to conclude Republicans can move forward ignoring evangelicals even worse than Democrats ignore black voters. I mean, at least the black voters might stay home sometimes. Evangelicals will turn out to vote even if their candidate is Donald fething Trump.

As an evangelical Christian, I am honestly ashamed.

I think Michigan is the one to watch, actually.

Sooooo. "Let's vote for 3rd party since Clinton has it in bags". "Close polls are just news twisting polls to make it look close race". Oh really? When o when people learn it's never over before it's done. Good job.

Oops. My bad. I hit submit on a previous draft. Remember to keep track of where you land when using the Back button.

 SickSix wrote:
LOL really? If anyone was living in an 'echo chamber' pretty sure it was all you baffled lefties that just can't believe what's going on lol.

No, I know exactly what's going on: there are a whole lot of deplorables in the US, and now they get to run the government. God help us.

 SickSix wrote:
No it was more of 'Let's hate straight white males, Christians and people that believe in the Constitution, and border integrity'.

If anyone is wondering how Donald Trump won an election, here it is folks. A deliberate decision on the part of a large number of Americans to start believing ridiculous nonsense, such as the above.

Mmmhm. I guess it goes to show that Trump had exactly as much respect for his voter's ability to fact-check as they deserved.

 sebster wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
No it was more of 'Let's hate straight white males, Christians and people that believe in the Constitution, and border integrity'.

If anyone is wondering how Donald Trump won an election, here it is folks. A deliberate decision on the part of a large number of Americans to start believing ridiculous nonsense, such as the above.

Or Hillary Clinton is an awful candidate.

So, since so many here have voiced concern about nuclear war under Holy God Emperor Donald Trump, you might find this useful.

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

So how many intolerant celebrities actually move out of the country if Trump wins?

 SickSix wrote:
So how many intolerant celebrities actually move out of the country if Trump wins?

None, historically.

I dont think trump is going to win this one, but he will make it closer than is comfortable for the aftermath. There is alot of hatred between left and right, it will be hard to reconcile.

 whembly wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
No it was more of 'Let's hate straight white males, Christians and people that believe in the Constitution, and border integrity'.

If anyone is wondering how Donald Trump won an election, here it is folks. A deliberate decision on the part of a large number of Americans to start believing ridiculous nonsense, such as the above.

Or Hillary Clinton is an awful candidate.

Do you really believe she's worse than Donald Trump? I know you don't like her, but do you really, honestly believe she'd be less prepared to lead the nation in a positive direction?

 ZergSmasher wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 sourclams wrote:
I would balance that against likelihood of more foreign wars under a Trump presidency at about a hundredth of what it would be under Hillary. Hillary is demonstrably hawkish.

How many times do I need to post this quote in this thread?

ISIS is making a tremendous amount of money because of the oil that they took away, they have some in Syria, they have some in Iraq, I would bomb the gak out of them.
I would just bomb those suckers, and that's right, I'd blow up the pipes, I'd blow up the refineries, I'd blow up ever single inch, there would be nothing left.
And you know what, you'll get Exxon to come in there, and in two months, you ever see these guys? How good they are, the great oil companies, they'll rebuild it brand new... And I'll take the oil.

But somehow it's Clinton that's the hawk, not the guy running on a platform of "bomb the out of them". Unbelievable.

Trump knows that you can't play pattycake with people like ISIS. He's willing to do whatever it takes to end a credible threat to US security. That's such a terrible thing. Now, of course Trump is Trump and just had to say it in a ridiculously bombastic fashion and make it sound like he wanted to turn the Middle East into glass. That's not what he actually intends to do of course; he just has this annoying habit of turning the crazy talk up to 11 when he's riled up. To me, that's his main flaw. People gotta learn not to take that gak seriously. Lots of people say dumb things when they're angry, after all.

Trump has no fething idea, not a single fething one, how the military functions, let alone the office of President. He is a five time draft-dodger and a coward. He has no idea, outside of some jerk-off fantasy, of how to deal with ISIS.

 SickSix wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
No it was more of 'Let's hate straight white males, Christians and people that believe in the Constitution, and border integrity'.

I don't recall any hatred of white men, in fact I seem to recall a lot of white men voting for Obama. Nor do I buy the idea that a Christian running for president was running on a platform of "hate Christians".

Shhh...you're interrupting their echo-chamber self-congratulatory circle-jerk

LOL really? If anyone was living in an 'echo chamber' pretty sure it was all you baffled lefties that just can't believe what's going on lol.

Yes, I'm such a baffled leftie because I dislike Donald Trump. Yup.


Or, it could just be I'm calling a circle-jerk what it is.

 Spinner wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
No it was more of 'Let's hate straight white males, Christians and people that believe in the Constitution, and border integrity'.

If anyone is wondering how Donald Trump won an election, here it is folks. A deliberate decision on the part of a large number of Americans to start believing ridiculous nonsense, such as the above.

Or Hillary Clinton is an awful candidate.

Do you really believe she's worse than Donald Trump? I know you don't like her, but do you really, honestly believe she'd be less prepared to lead the nation in a positive direction?

Yes.

 whembly wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
FL to Trump.

How did the D fail to motivate their base to vote when the stakes were so high?

By nominating Hillary Clinton.

Trump is a horrible person... and even SHE couldn't beat him.

What does that tell you about Clinton?

*mandatory disclaimer that I am not talking about the Republican Party as a whole here*

I think we have seen the full power of the informal American White Male Nationalist Workers Party come out in force for their guy. They were the voting block that, together with the traditional and non-racist, non-sexist, non-deplorable portion of the Republican Party pushed Trump over the edge.

The ethical thing would be for the GOP to distance themselves from them after the election and make it clear that they don't want them. But if you are wining with the help of the deplorables, then why would you alienate them.

The main lesson is that the GOP no longer represents people that want traditional GOP principles.

 Psienesis wrote:


Trump has no fething idea, not a single fething one, how the military functions, let alone the office of President. He is a five time draft-dodger and a coward. He has no idea, outside of some jerk-off fantasy, of how to deal with ISIS.

NO offense, but neither does Hillary, whats your point?

tneva82 wrote:
Sooooo. "Let's vote for 3rd party since Clinton has it in bags". "Close polls are just news twisting polls to make it look close race". Oh really? When o when people learn it's never over before it's done. Good job.

That's not necessarily why those who vote 3rd party chose to do so.

Can't wait for the first British political encounter with the new establishment.
Foreign secretary Boris Johnson and U.S. president Donald Trump.
Oh god, that's going to be hilarious.

 thekingofkings wrote:
I dont think trump is going to win this one, but he will make it closer than is comfortable for the aftermath. There is alot of hatred between left and right, it will be hard to reconcile.

AZ, AL, and NH are pretty much his at this point. It's going to take a remarkable shift in New Hampshire to give it to Clinton. That's the only way Trump doesn't out right win. If she does that, it becomes 269/268. No 270.

 whembly wrote:

 Spinner wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
No it was more of 'Let's hate straight white males, Christians and people that believe in the Constitution, and border integrity'.

If anyone is wondering how Donald Trump won an election, here it is folks. A deliberate decision on the part of a large number of Americans to start believing ridiculous nonsense, such as the above.

Or Hillary Clinton is an awful candidate.

Do you really believe she's worse than Donald Trump? I know you don't like her, but do you really, honestly believe she'd be less prepared to lead the nation in a positive direction?

Yes.

So why did you vote Johnson?

 Spinner wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
No it was more of 'Let's hate straight white males, Christians and people that believe in the Constitution, and border integrity'.

If anyone is wondering how Donald Trump won an election, here it is folks. A deliberate decision on the part of a large number of Americans to start believing ridiculous nonsense, such as the above.

Or Hillary Clinton is an awful candidate.

Do you really believe she's worse than Donald Trump? I know you don't like her, but do you really, honestly believe she'd be less prepared to lead the nation in a positive direction?

Um, do you have any idea who she is and what her history is? Because if you did you would say, YES! She is awful!

I really don't understand the lefts urgency to start WWIII with Russia. Because that's exactly what Killary would start as soon as she got elected.

 djones520 wrote:
AZ, AL, and NH are pretty much his at this point. It's going to take a remarkable shift in New Hampshire to give it to Clinton. That's the only way Trump doesn't out right win. If she does that, it becomes 269/268. No 270.

If that happens, I'm going to poop blood IRL.