POTUS 2016 General Election Discussion Thread

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by Butter

So, Hillary gets pardoned now for sure, right?

*shrug* that email thing was all a stunt, nothing more.

They'll just forget about her.

They never cared about emails. They just needed a negative talking point.

[wustin]

Hillary was -550 going into Tuesday, Trump was +375. I should've made some money.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Butter

Trump ran on a platform of division, so it's a reasonable reaction to be afraid of what his leadership will bring in that regard.

That's pretty rich given the last 8 years of Executive Leadership.
I think we have all lived through the definition of divisiveness. Once the narrative started that Obama wasn't black enough, it seemed that he went out of his way, at every opportunity to ensure his legacy was never one of an Uncle Tom. Evan at the expense at times, in my opinion, of his own personal beliefs.

When a video surfaced from the Charlotte riots showing an uninvolved white teen being beaten for being white in a protest area, and Obama responds "You have to understand how oppressed african americans have felt" that is neither leadership nor inclusive.

Look I have stated here publicly I would vote for Obama over Trump. But that wasnt the election choice. To me this was a major swing and miss by the DNC. The republican party was as weak as it has been in my lifetime. It was cracking and in fighting threatening its very foundation. And the Dems run out likely the only candidate in existence that could galvanize the opposition in defiance. It is clearly one of the biggest political blunders of all time.

That said, I never thought there was any chance that Trump would be elected. I'm not crazy about the fact that I live in a country that Donald Trump will preside over. I am thankful, and said a prayer of thanks last night, that I will not be forced to face the choice of living in a country that HRC presided over.

[Butter]

Regardless of how you feel about Obama, dismissing any people of color's nervousness over a Trump presidency is highly cavalier.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

No. Sorry, you don't get it at all. Any other Republican would not have resulted in this fear. The fact that you can't see it indicates your massive blinders.

And no other Republican would have won last night. He was the only one willing to say a lot of things that needed saying. And that's what brought people to the polls, the ones who were the tipping point between victory & defeat anyway.

Honestly, the BLM crowd/backers SHOULD be afraid today, their fifteen minutes is just about up ... IF Trump is the guy he portrayed himself to be.

And, really, maybe even if he isn't. A whole lot of Americans woke up today to realize that, by golly, maybe we can things around. Maybe, just maybe, that'll give them their balls back and a whole lot of foolishness will be coming to an abrupt halt. BLM, transbathrooms, "free" health care, "amnesty zones", it's a very very very long list.

Four years won't be enough to get everything done in D.C. but perhaps this is what emboldens citizens to stand up & finally say enough is enough, no more.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And no other Republican would have won last night. He was the only one willing to say a lot of things that needed saying. And that's what brought people to the polls, the ones who were the tipping point between victory & defeat anyway.

Honestly, the BLM crowd/backers SHOULD be afraid today, their fifteen minutes is just about up ... IF Trump is the guy he portrayed himself to be.

And, really, maybe even if he isn't. A whole lot of Americans woke up today to realize that, by golly, maybe we can things around. Maybe, just maybe, that'll give them their balls back and a whole lot of foolishness will be coming to an abrupt halt. BLM, transbathrooms, "free" health care, "amnesty zones", it's a very very very long list.

Four years won't be enough to get everything done in D.C. but perhaps this is what emboldens citizens to stand up & finally say enough is enough, no more.

Are you putting off plans for that secluded island in the middle of nowhere?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And no other Republican would have won last night. He was the only one willing to say a lot of things that needed saying. And that's what brought people to the polls, the ones who were the tipping point between victory & defeat anyway.

Honestly, the BLM crowd/backers SHOULD be afraid today, their fifteen minutes is just about up ... IF Trump is the guy he portrayed himself to be.

And here is where I'll say that JIMG gets it (Trumpism in general) more than the others that responded to my quoted post.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by lungs

Are you putting off plans for that secluded island in the middle of nowhere?

[molson]

That reminded me of something

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by lungs

Are you putting off plans for that secluded island in the middle of nowhere?

Not if the right lottery numbers come in I'm not

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Jacobin had an interesting article and I wanted to highlight part of it:

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/11/t...ocratic-party/


The basic idea being that the Democrats have been losing rural areas for a long while based on neo-liberal policies and Obama is popular now, but it wasn't all that long ago when he was under 50% and, as pointed out, the Democrats have lost a ton of lower level seats under Obama. It could be that his personal charisma is what is bolstering those numbers.

Jacobin, of course, suggests the Democrats go back to working-class politics. Basically strong pro-union, anti-trade - like Bernie Sanders.

Which makes me wonder if they'll take that advice and another party is going to be leaving me behind. Guess being an independent isn't all that lonely these days.

The state wide races are fair game, but you can't look at legislature seats without mentioning redistricting. In several states where Dems do well statewide the GOP dominates the Congressional races because of redistricting in 2010.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by VPI97

This viewpoint tends to mirror an article I read last month that attempted to explain the appeal of Trump. In hindsight, it seems like it was pretty spot on with its assessment.

How Half Of America Lost Its F**king Mind

The same author also wrote this article (a counter piece if you will), which was also spot on. The combination of two pieces together really paints a solid picture of the sentiment and it's one of the few times I truly thought someone got it, all of it.

I grew up in the midwest, small town, it wasn't like we had a lot in our town. I remember the first time I was in Williston back in the 80's. The first oil boom fizzled out and this town of a few thousand was essentially a ghost town. I don't recall any anger about it, it just was what it was. I don't remember a rural backlash at the loss of drilling jobs (although I was far to young to grasp such a thing). Still, even in the decades that followed that sentiment never came back up.

Williston was a sad, sad town. Many others like it in Western NoDak were the same, but that was the one that stuck with me.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by VPI97

This viewpoint tends to mirror an article I read last month that attempted to explain the appeal of Trump. In hindsight, it seems like it was pretty spot on with its assessment.

How Half Of America Lost Its F**king Mind

IIRC, I saw that article via an FB friend around the time it came out. (I know I'd seen it previously, just not sure of the source). He missed a few things here & there as I recall but overall, yes, it's pretty darned good stuff.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

What's the under/over on faithless electors next month?

0.5 and I'll take the under. To get that job you need to be someone who loves and spends a lot of time doing party things, and what's the.point of throwing away all that when the EV count isn't close?

Originally Posted by Arles

Young people just weren't that jazzed by Hillary and decided not to vote. It's hard for the democrats to win when they run out the "old veteran who deserves a turn" (a la Gore, Kerry, Hillary, ..). They need a candidate who inspires the young vote (like Bill and Obama did). Now, as the current younger people in their 20s get older, I think the voting block will shift a little more left (esp on social issues). But, there's also a chance that as young people get more money and careers, they shift republican as well. Either way, democrats need to look for a candidate that inspires in 2020 - not just who's "next in line".

Been saying this for months during the Dem.Primary thread, though singling out Millenials is a mistake because many blocs did not come out. Bernie is not the answer in 2020. I don't think Joe Biden is. Gillibrand would be the torchbearer if they want revenge for HRC, but maybe it's a Booker or Castro or even my dark horse Michelle Obama (though I think it's way too early for her.) But the Clinton machine setting things up for a coronation since 2008 has prevented the Democrats from having a real bench and nationally known candidates.

Originally Posted by Galaxy

I also do think this was a referendum on Obama's Presidency as well in addition to Hillary.

Disagree. This wasn't a repudiation of Democratic policies, just as it wasn't sexist opposition. It was a repudiation of a specific, incredibly polarizing candidate who has had the highest unfavorable ratings of any politician for 20+ years.

Originally Posted by Noop

So now we will have a conservative Supreme Court given that Trump could realistically appoint 2-3 Justices. To a majority of Trump supporters they likely don't care about any amendment but the second, however the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendment could forever be changed depending on who is appointed to the Supreme Court.

People said this when Bush got elected, and the flip side when Obama got elected. He gets 1 for sure, but SC justices hold on longer than people think, and there's a solid chance the Republicans lose at least one chamber in 2018.

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

One thought that occurred to this Canadian upon waking up: who knew American white men were more misogynistic than they are racist?

Yep, keep blaming it on misogyny. It couldn't possibly be animus against a specific woman, or a failure of the Democratic party to understand what issues matter to "working class white people" or inspire their own base. Kristen Gillibrand, Michelle Obama, Nikki Haley, I can think of several women who would likely have won last night.

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'd hope removing him is among the first few things on the priority list frankly.

He, along with a lot of establishment hacks, are every bit as repudiated by the result as HRC.

This is what I was saying to my liberal friends who think the sky will fall. Obamacare will be gone, NIH and EPA budgets will be cut, but the tea party are such basket cases and the House Republicans are so split I doubt they'll be proactively enacting much legislation, and there's a good chance of the chambers flipping in a Democratic wave in 2018. A united Republican government under a Trump presidency is probably the best bet the Democrats had of regaining House control for a decade.

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I like CNN mainly for John King who really breaks down the map well. I think I muted it most of the time he wasn't talking. The problem was that Wolf Blitzer interrupted him a million times. I mentioned it last night and thought maybe I was over-reacting, but apparently some people have written articles about it.

Wolf Blitzer interrupts John King at CNN Magic Wall During Election Night

Originally Posted by QuikSand

I'm still hanging Blitzer out to dry, he was awful. They couldn't get out of their own way, insisting on talking about the most pointless crap while there was interesting stuff to actually discuss.

KING: Let's take a look at what hasn't yet reported in Virginia, which is looking close right now...
BLITZER: No, I want to go to the total electoral votes, where we are now calling Alabama for Trump, what does that mean for the race tonight?
KING:

I couldn't care less if political commentators show a personal agenda, but Wolf desperately trying to find more Dem votes in toss up states was an ongoing joke where I was last night. My favorite was when they were looking for an HRC path to victory if Hillary lost Wisconsin & Wolf said "Let's give North Carolina to Clinton too." and King just got completely flustered and flabbergasted. It's like no, that one's been called.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

The state wide races are fair game, but you can't look at legislature seats without mentioning redistricting. In several states where Dems do well statewide the GOP dominates the Congressional races because of redistricting in 2010.

That's fair. But legislatures are responsible for redistricting. Losses in 2010 hurt them (and will continue to hurt them) the rest of the decade.

[ISiddiqui]

Regardless of anything else, one would be insane to think Kristen Gillibrand would have won last night. Maybe Representative Gillibrand (who would never have gotten out of the Primaries), but Senator Gillibrand is a completely different politician.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Regardless of anything else, one would be insane to think Kristen Gillibrand would have won last night. Maybe Representative Gillibrand (who would never have gotten out of the Primaries), but Senator Gillibrand is a completely different politician.

I haven't actually paid attention to her since Obama's election. What's she done poorly?

(I did forget to list Elizabeth Warren with Bernie as people who are definitely not the answer.)

EDIT - to save a little face, I do think this backs up my point some I don't pay attention like I used to but I still check in from time to time, and you have someone who was a rising star in 2008 that has basically had no national attention since.

Also, I know nothing about her positions, but Tammy Duckworth is another woman who I could see in contention down the line.

[rjolley]

A couple of things:

1. In October, I went on the site that matches you with a candidate based on a set of questions. I matched with Clinton over 90%. However, even with the high match, I was not voting for her because I didn't trust her to actually hold to those positions and I don't think she's a good person. I voted for Obama not because I agreed with everything he did, but because I thought he was a good family man and the kind of leader we needed at the time. And yes, him being African American helped a lot. I don't think there were enough people who felt Clinton was a good leader instead of felling she was just a better choice than Trump. You don't energize your people by just being the better of 2 bad choices. Trump at least had his fear machine moving his base.

2. Clinton's biggest mistake was trying to sling mud with Trump. She should've stayed on the high road more often and pushed her views as much as possible. I always heard that Trump didn't have a plan for this or that, but honestly, I never felt Clinton had one either.

3. I agree with what Ben and others have said. Trump's campaign, while negative and divisive, can end up being very good for the country. It really depends on how we as a nation build from here. Do we keep the conversations going to evoke changes and inclusion, or do we go back to pretending that people aren't afraid of and hate other people simply due to race, sexuality, gender, or insert difference here and sweep in back under the rug?

4. People in this country are very afraid of the way the world is changing. I understand it. They are afraid of being able to survive. For me, after 19 years of working in IT for my career, there's a massive change coming to move work to "the cloud." It's everywhere you look and every email about the future of the company mentions it. It's a scary thought that if I don't adjust, I could be passed by for advancement or even let go. I'm sure there are people where technology is making their jobs more and more obsolete who feel the same way. They are the ones that probably held their noses and voted for Trump.

It wasn't just about being racist or sexist or anything else. It was about that group feeling that Trump would change the way the country grows it's economy. The question is can he change the economy from growing with technology like it is now to growing with more "old school" jobs that are leaving the country. Making more products here in the US and diminishing trade with other countries can have a very bad impact on differentiation and overall cost of the products, which can also cause new business growth to stagnate. It's a problem of a transitioning economy that may not be solved until the older workforce is replaced by the more technical-savvy one that we're raising.

Edit: How did Clinton lose with White women? That's like Obama losing with African American men. I could see her losing them for a second term, but in the first term against a person who seemed to revel in sexually attacking women, has multiple rape charges pending, and basically did the same things Bill Clinton did, whom they hate? That would be an interesting study.

[NobodyHere]

So what's the future for Hillary? Is her political career done for?

[wustin]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

So what's the future for Hillary? Is her political career done for?

She doesn't have to smile anymore.

[Ryche]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

That's fair. But legislatures are responsible for redistricting. Losses in 2010 hurt them (and will continue to hurt them) the rest of the decade.

In the long run this could be good for Democrats. If the Trump presidency goes badly, they will be set up for a wave in 2018 and 2020, Just in time to influence redistricting

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

And here is where I'll say that JIMG gets it (Trumpism in general) more than the others that responded to my quoted post.

I get it too. There are a lot of scary things about this. A lot. I don't think people should be dismissive of your or your friends/families fear even if I were a minority. You have a right to your fears.

I don't think Trump can end the BLM movement anymore than he can invent flying unicorns, but that is MY opinion. I hope everything goes well for you and your family.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

That's fair. But legislatures are responsible for redistricting. Losses in 2010 hurt them (and will continue to hurt them) the rest of the decade.

Yes. I think Obama's biggest failure was the way they disengaged before 2010.

edit: If Trump doesn't dismantle NATO and our Pacific alliances, I expect 202 will be brutal for the GOP. If it was any other GOP candidate I probably would be fine today knowing that the next redistricting will be more likely to favor the Dems.

edit: or what Ryche said.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Arles

Obama is still at 55% in approval. I think the republican base rallied against Obama, but they were voting republican no matter what. Millions of people who voted for Obama did not feel the need to vote for Hillary. I think her campaign took certain voting blocks for granted (union members, African Americans, young people, states like Wisconsin and Michigan) and tried to keep hammering Trump instead of giving reasons to believe in her.

At the same time, 7 out of 10 people think the country is moving in the wrong direction. Don't these two things conflict a bit? I'm not sure how the read into these two things.

[Kodos]

Of course, a 2020 Democratic wave is a big if at this point. Sounds great, but we can't predict things correctly the day of the election, much less 4 years out.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by wustin

She doesn't have to smile anymore.

And Bill doesn't have to care anymore.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

At the same time, 7 out of 10 people think the country is moving in the wrong direction. Don't these two things conflict a bit? I'm not sure how the read into these two things.

In the Gallup poll, since it began in 1981, the wrong track has led over 80% of the time.

[wustin]

Turns out Trump has less total votes than Romney and less white voters than him too. Makes pinning the loss on the DNC even more devastating.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Great read about all the times where Trump advisors said one thing and he did another.

Doggedness and Defiance: How Trump won | Fox News

[wustin]

Trump won Wisconsin because Dems didn't turnout: Bush 2004 - 1,478,120; Romney 2012 - 1,410,966; Trump 2016 - 1,407,401

Wisconsin Dem votes: Kerry 2004 - 1,489,504; Obama 2012 - 1,620,985;
Hillary 2016 - 1,380,512; A 14.8% drop-off from Obama to Clinton

source

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Kodos

Of course, a 2020 Democratic wave is a big if at this point. Sounds great, but we can't predict things correctly the day of the election, much less 4 years out.

And the next re-redistricting will slightly favor the Republicans (Texas will gain the most seats/votes, along with the southern states picking up most of the new seats/votes at the expense of the northern, more blue states).

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

I haven't actually paid attention to her since Obama's election. What's she done poorly?

(I did forget to list Elizabeth Warren with Bernie as people who are definitely not the answer.)

EDIT - to save a little face, I do think this backs up my point some I don't pay attention like I used to but I still check in from time to time, and you have someone who was a rising star in 2008 that has basically had no national attention since.

Also, I know nothing about her positions, but Tammy Duckworth is another woman who I could see in contention down the line.

Gillibrand basically went pretty left after becoming Senator. She'd quite easily be targeted by charges of flip flopping, which of course a lot of folks would be. But it seems like to beat Trump you needed to reach the old Reagan Democrats. And Gillibrand left that area as soon as she reached the Senate.

Also her husband is a venture capitalist... which would have played quite poorly. And before being a Congresswoman she was a big time attorney who was defense counsel for Phillip Morris (maybe not the worst thing in some of those areas).

One can, perhaps, argue that she is basically a younger Hillary Clinton clone without the Clinton baggage, but that also comes without as much experience (she entered Congress in 2006) while also seeming part of the establishment.

And as you stated, she hasn't really made much of a splash lately.

(in 4-8 years, who knows... but I imagine most in the Democratic Primaries will reject a Hillary mini-me)

[Butter]

Maggie Hassan leads Kelly Ayotte for the New Hampshire Senate seat by 716 votes out of over 730,000 cast. Presidential race is within 1,337 votes with Clinton ahead.

Trump is probably going to win Michigan with a 12,000 vote margin out of about 4.7 million votes cast.

McMullin pulling 21% of votes in Utah with 25% of the vote still to report... looks like he will finish 3rd there.

Gary Johnson didn't even make 10% in New Mexico.

Roy Cooper leads NC governor's race by under 5,000 votes with over 4.5 million votes cast.

[wustin]

Yeah even though Trump won NC, at least Roy Cooper is going to be the new governor.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Jacobin had an interesting article and I wanted to highlight part of it:

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/11/t...ocratic-party/


The basic idea being that the Democrats have been losing rural areas for a long while based on neo-liberal policies and Obama is popular now, but it wasn't all that long ago when he was under 50% and, as pointed out, the Democrats have lost a ton of lower level seats under Obama. It could be that his personal charisma is what is bolstering those numbers.

Jacobin, of course, suggests the Democrats go back to working-class politics. Basically strong pro-union, anti-trade - like Bernie Sanders.

Which makes me wonder if they'll take that advice and another party is going to be leaving me behind. Guess being an independent isn't all that lonely these days.

There's usually a loss in the midterm for the president's party in congress. Happened to Clinton, W and Obama. In this election, People didn't shift from Obama to Trump - they just didn't vote. Democrats rely a great deal on traditional voting blocks that just don't vote as regularly as the old white republicans (young people, african americans, latinos,...). So, the candidate needs to inspire those people to get out and vote. Bill did that, Obama did that, but Hillary did not. As I said months ago, elections are about who people like more. Trump was fairly unlikable, but he had a more disciplined and dedicated voting block to pull from. Hillary was unlikable and had a very flaky voting block in certain areas.

Still, she had a chance if she would have tried harder to get the blue collar factory worker and the non-liberal white woman. But, her entire platform was on trying to scare people from voting against Trump instead of convincing them to vote for her. That's a tactic that gets a lot of "attaboys" from the liberal elite, but doesn't really swing a union guy in Wisconsin or a somewhat religious 30-year old wife in Michigan. In the end, she just didn't inspire young people to vote or make a strong effort to convince the stronger voting blocks (blue collar, women, disgruntled republicans) on why she was the better choice.

[miami_fan]

Apologies if this has been posted already.

231,556,622 eligible voters
46.9% did not vote

[wustin]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Apologies if this has been posted already.

231,556,622 eligible voters
46.9% did not vote

That's about the same as 2012.

edit:

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/turnout.php

[Jas_lov]

Michelle Obama? I think we've learned thst people don't want relatives of former Presidents. They want something new. A younger version of Bernie or Biden is what they need. Those two would have beaten Trump. They wouldn't have gotten destroyed in the rust belt. Bernie could have offset Trumps outsider appeal.

[Arles]

I stand by what I said back in March:
Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - 2015-2016 Republican Primary Season - Trump Courts the Conservatives

Originally Posted by Arles

I tend to agree with the earlier sentiment that a big turnout for the GOP is coming no matter what. You will have the Trump believers, as well as the Hillary haters. Finally, you will have some who aren't in either group (like myself) voting for Hillary but voting more republican on local races. The last thing we want is for Trump to win.

I don't really see the "Trump fear" being enough for a big democratic turnout - esp for the Sanders crew. Most (including the media) will explain how Trump can't win and the non-Hillary supporters in the democratic party may just stay home (esp if there aren't any super important ballot/local races). Obama was great at getting the democratic turnout - I can't see Hillary getting that level of support on election day. He's just a more inspirational guy while Hillary reminds me of the McCain/Romney/Kerry/Gore type candidate who you vote for on party lines - but aren't super jazzed about it.

[TCY Junkie]

I read through this and wondered if anyone looked at State of PA website during vote count. Was looking at Florida site and they seem couple minutes ahead. Then went to PA and they had Trump up 10k votes when cnn, fox site had him down 200k. Said 73 percent reported. But on PA site had 93 percent report. They were 45 minutes ahead for long time. Then suddenly cnn showed trump 2555000 aND hilary 2553000. 2k gap. But when pa site had trump at that total he was 40k above her. Just strange. Both ended with about 65k gap.

[Butter]

I blame that on Russian hackers.

[tarcone]

Dems putting Clinton up lost Missouri a chance at a fair Dem Governor. Koster should have won. And he would have done right by the state. But the Dems throwing up the most unlikable candidate in history blew a lot of Dems chances.

We are stuck with an unknown in MO. But this guy may kill our state.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

At the same time, 7 out of 10 people think the country is moving in the wrong direction. Don't these two things conflict a bit? I'm not sure how the read into these two things.

I'll toss in the same thing I point out every time Rasmussen (who does this topic to death) brings up the figure:

the problem is that 35% think it's becoming too liberal and 35% think it's becoming too conservative. The majority ain't happy but the reasons they're unhappy are completely different.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Apologies if this has been posted already.

231,556,622 eligible voters
46.9% did not vote

eligible by age (and criminal status, etc etc), or registered?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Okay, explain to me -- in 4th grade language if need be -- how these two stories can both be true.

Voter turnout (*in counties reported by 1am) up 4.7%
Voter turnout up 4.7% around the country

Voter turnout down to lowest level since 2004.
Voter turnout in 2016 looks low so far — and that may have helped Donald Trump - Vox

Assuming both are accurate, is the difference
a) registered voter percentage vs age-eligible percentage?
b) what happened after 1am?
c) something,uh, else?

[tarcone]

D) Dead democrats started coming out of the grave to vote

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Arles

There's usually a loss in the midterm for the president's party in congress.

Might happen in the House, but have you LOOKED at the Senate map?

Something like 75% of the seats up for re-election are held by Democrats. Making any Senate gains would essentially require a wave election that not only holds the Democratic seats in Republican territory, but also picks off the few Republican-held seats up for re-election.

Oh, and it would have to do that in a midterm election, for which Republican voters reliably show up and Democratic voters do not.

Good luck.

[wustin]

2008
Obama: 69,498,516
McCain: 59,948,323

2012
Obama: 65,915,795
Romney: 60,933,504

2016 (as of 1:31pm EST, Nov 9th)
Clinton: 59,602,634
Trump: 59,396,462

[JPhillips]

Hypothetically, would Trump concede knowing he won the popular but lost the electoral?

[ISiddiqui]

Sorry to revisit, but I think this is good reading for the discussion about minorities being scared (brings up the point that maybe not for him, but for who he'd put at Attorney General):

Fear is a totally rational reaction to the Donald Trump presidency - Vox