If American - which presidential candidate will you vote for? (Nov Edition) If

[Liberty]

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2016/11/08/warren-buffett-drives-nebraskans-to-vote/

 

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/BN-QR662_WBElec_J_20161108145248.jpg

[DonFanucci]

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2016/11/08/warren-buffett-drives-nebraskans-to-vote/

 

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/BN-QR662_WBElec_J_20161108145248.jpg

 

That turtle neck can't be comfortable.

[Spekulatius]

Anybody looking at futures? The MXN.JPY  urgency future is down 11.5%, the SP500 future ~ 3%. Interesting night.

 

Oops - make that -4%.

[whiterose]

Yeah I am.. still awake at 5am in europe.

It's f***ing unbelievable, a Brexit-like event at a much larger (global) scale.

I'm really disappointed by the outcome and the huge number of people Trump was able to rally.

[Jurgis]

Well, I had a better opinion about Americans until today.

 

So: the optimistic scenario is 4 years of Trump + Republican Senate/House. Obamacare gone. Taxes down (maybe). Recession likely. Stocks down 20% or so. 2 Supreme Court justices who may or may not be very conservative.

 

Pessimistic scenario: Recession to depression. Trump organizes the Trump-shirts. Free press suppressed. Next election cancelled. Possibly martial law. In short: fascist state in US.

 

I still hope it doesn't come to that, but I'm no longer sure it won't.

[Cardboard]

So far America is saying NO to corruption and the establishment/status quo and YES to pro-growth policies. This down move in equities won't last. Even pigs such as Tepper and Soros love money more than their so called love for the poor via entitlement. Call it more their buying of peace to maintain their status vs true charity.

 

Even if Trump loses we have gridlock blocking the left with Congress and Senate in Republican hands. It is all positive either way.

 

Cardboard

[hyten1]

i didn't vote for donald... lets get that out of the way

 

however, if people think supporters of donald are simply crazy, racist or stupid, i think you have to think hard to why someone would vote for donald, given what he has said and done etc.

 

i would also argue donald (if he wins) is a continuation of obama, along the lines of "change". people were tired of the status quo and wanted change, so they voted for someone (obama) who was different and promise the "change", however he still had part of his foot in the establishment. for a lot of people the "change" wasn't enough, or simply didn't work for them personally. now the change has been amp up 10 fold. the change is now someone who is completely outside of the status quo. despite of all the crazy/sexist things that donald has said and done.

 

[Gregmal]

Looks like those that saw the forest despite the trees are well prepared. Meanwhile those posting pictures of a guy wearing a shirt, making utterly ridiculous yet hilariously empty comparisons to Nazi Germany, and blanketing this as symbolic of the entire election lose their shirts. As I said, the pea brains didn't and probably never will "get it". To the rest of us, we didn't get caught up in the nonsense; we weren't mindlessly manipulated by the likes of the Huffington Post, Washington Post, and the likes, and ultimately everyone will get what they deserve.

[whiterose]

Is there any way to challenge the result via the legal system in the US?

 

I guess a vote for a third party candidate was a vote for Trump after all, now that it is so close.

A lot of liberals/greens had the Democrats as second choice or at least more than the Republicans. In this election it would have been better to vote strategically, rather than on principle, as many liberal pundits suggested.

 

Would be interesting if Clinton still wins in the last minute..

[rb]

She's not gonna win it. Wisconsin is done.

[TwoCitiesCapital]

So, do we all still think Scott Adams is just a lucky wacko? Or did he call the election correctly before any of the professional forecasters?

[onyx1]

So, do we all still think Scott Adams is just a lucky wacko? Or did he call the election correctly before any of the professional forecasters?

 

Scott Adams nailed it.  He also completely changed how I view the world.  Big learning experience for me.

[Liberty]

So, do we all still think Scott Adams is just a lucky wacko? Or did he call the election correctly before any of the professional forecasters?

 

He's a wacko for other reasons, but he understands very well the importance of salesmanship/charisma/persuasion. I agree with him on many of these points, and I've had good discussions in private messages about with with a couple people form this forum; I just think it's too bad that the man who could sell himself so well and understand how to tap into the electorate's emotional hooks was someone of low character. Many presidents were also very good persuaders (Obama did it better than most, esp. his first election) who won over all kinds of rivals who might have been just competent but didn't have the charisma.

[onyx1]

So, do we all still think Scott Adams is just a lucky wacko? Or did he call the election correctly before any of the professional forecasters?

 

I just think it's too bad that the man who could sell himself so well and understand how to tap into the electorate's emotional hooks was someone of low character.

 

 

Low character became unimportant with Bill Clinton.

[Liberty]

So, do we all still think Scott Adams is just a lucky wacko? Or did he call the election correctly before any of the professional forecasters?

 

I just think it's too bad that the man who could sell himself so well and understand how to tap into the electorate's emotional hooks was someone of low character.

 

 

Low character became unimportant with Bill Clinton.

 

There are many degrees between 0 and 1.

[rkbabang]

So, do we all still think Scott Adams is just a lucky wacko? Or did he call the election correctly before any of the professional forecasters?

 

He saw something I didn't.  I'm am going to go back and re-read his prediction from August of 2015 and see if I can understand what he saw and why it was so important.

 

Michael Moore also predicted that Trump was going to win when the newspapers were saying his chances "are approaching zero".

 

And it is obvious, but worth pointing out, that neither Michael Moore nor Scott Adams are Trump supporters.

 

[valcont]

So, do we all still think Scott Adams is just a lucky wacko? Or did he call the election correctly before any of the professional forecasters?

 

Scott Adams nailed it.  He also completely changed how I view the world.  Big learning experience for me.

 

Gotta give him the credit. He nailed it and no doubt about that. In future his word will matter a lot.I have also started to believe that we are in a simulation that went horribly bad.

 

I have no problems in admitting when I'm wrong. Heck I was wrong about my state. All of us looked at the polls and assumed he will lose. But since ALL of these polls were wrong, I am inclined to believe the Trump's argument that they are rigged.

 

 

 

[Cardboard]

Polls were not rigged. There was such negative press and comments from people such as yourself that people didn't want to be associated with Trump.

 

So do you believe that they all answered that they would vote for Trump when asked?

 

Cardboard

[Tim Eriksen]

The analysis on this election will be interesting.  Polls were wrong by 2-3 points on average, worse if not for the few LA Times poll. 

 

Was it that people were afraid to give their true leaning?  The problem with that is the polls were wrong on the Senate races too.  I don't see how the argument holds up.  No major reason to be embarrassed to vote R in NC, PA, WI, MO, etc.  Maybe the Trump supporter just didn't participate in the polls.

 

Was it late undecideds?  Trump did run hard hitting and I thought effective ads the last week. 

 

Was it a poor job by the Clinton campaign?  They spent heavily in OH, FL and NC and little in states they knew Trump needed and was targeting demographically (rust belt ex OH).  She didn't target just what she needed to win, she tried to win and swing the Senate.  Was it just a case of overreach?

 

Or was it the recent American "tradition" of Presidential change every 8 years?  Ike, Kennedy/Johnson, Nixon/Ford, Carter only 4 but he stunk, Reagan/Bush an unusually long 12 years, Clinton, Bush 43, Obama. 

 

 

[Cardboard]

"The problem with that is the polls were wrong on the Senate races too.  I don't see how the argument holds up. "

 

If you think that I am wrong then look at the New Hampshire Republican primary polls.

 

Regarding the Senate polls, they never indicated a highly probable loss for the Republicans unlike for Trump.

 

Cardboard

[rb]

The analysis on this election will be interesting.  Polls were wrong by 2-3 points on average, worse if not for the few LA Times poll. 

 

Was it that people were afraid to give their true leaning?  The problem with that is the polls were wrong on the Senate races too.  I don't see how the argument holds up.  No major reason to be embarrassed to vote R in NC, PA, WI, MO, etc.  Maybe the Trump supporter just didn't participate in the polls.

 

Was it late undecideds?  Trump did run hard hitting and I thought effective ads the last week. 

 

Was it a poor job by the Clinton campaign?  They spent heavily in OH, FL and NC and little in states they knew Trump needed and was targeting demographically (rust belt ex OH).  She didn't target just what she needed to win, she tried to win and swing the Senate.  Was it just a case of overreach?

 

Or was it the recent American "tradition" of Presidential change every 8 years?  Ike, Kennedy/Johnson, Nixon/Ford, Carter only 4 but he stunk, Reagan/Bush an unusually long 12 years, Clinton, Bush 43, Obama. 

 

 

I think you probably nailed it with your post. It was probably a combination of all you mentioned.

 

Yes there is a "tradition to switch after 8 years". Yes, they were probably sloppy in the mid-west. It was clear that they have a problem in Ohio. If you have a problem in Ohio you should be worried about Michigan. Wisconsin is a real head scratcher They lost by 27,000 votes, so it was tight. But Obama won it 4 years ago with Paul Ryan on the R ticket.

 

As for the polls, they were definitely off somewhat. I don't think that it was the silent Trump voter or people afraid to give their true leaning. Polling organizations collect the responses and they they pass it through proprietary turnout models. The secret sauce if you wish. Those models are based on a lot of things including past election turnouts and are the main reason why polls differ from each other. So if you have an election where turnout of non-college degree whites is slightly higher than the model and the black turnout is slightly lower than the model you get basically what just happened.

 

I would say that the number of undecideds seemed weirdly high. It's hard for me to believe that after such a long campaign with such high profile candidates you would have so many undecideds at the end. So there may be something there.

[rkbabang]

Polls were not rigged. There was such negative press and comments from people such as yourself that people didn't want to be associated with Trump.

 

So do you believe that they all answered that they would vote for Trump when asked?

 

I don't think they are rigged, but I think their methodology must be flawed in some systematic way in order for them to have been so universally wrong.  If the goal is to create a "scientific" poll that accurately predicts how people will vote, then you would think that this proves that however it is being done it is not working so methods need to be adjusted next time.  When your methodology doesn't produce results that turn out to be true, it is time to look at your methodology because it is flawed.  I don't know why, but I do have some theories.  Are they calling only landlines?  Maybe Hillary won overwhelmingly with people who not only still have landlines but answer them when they don't recognize the caller ID.  Even with cellphones I would never answer a call from a number I didn't recognize, if it were important they could leave a message and I'd call back.  Therefore I would never be able to take part in any of these polls.  Also what time of day are they calling?  If during the day, they are selecting for housewives, elderly women, and the unemployed.  Who is answering these calls and how can you extrapolate the answers they give to all of society?  I suspect the answer is "you can't".

And then there is always the question are people being honest with the pollsters?  I'm not sure you can ever adjust for that, because you have no idea how the person you talked to ended up voting.

 

[valcont]

Polls were not rigged. There was such negative press and comments from people such as yourself that people didn't want to be associated with Trump.

 

So do you believe that they all answered that they would vote for Trump when asked?

 

Cardboard

 

Oh I see what you are saying. They don't have the strength of the character to say what they believe in. Too ashamed to admit.

[Cardboard]

They don't all have tough skin like me to deal with people like you telling them that they are idiots or trying to make them feel as such.

 

In related news: Obama was able to admit defeat and he is going to help with the transition and I applause him for that.

 

Cardboard

[onyx1]

Polls were not rigged. There was such negative press and comments from people such as yourself that people didn't want to be associated with Trump.

 

So do you believe that they all answered that they would vote for Trump when asked?

 

Cardboard

 

Oh I see what you are saying. They don't have the strength of the character to say what they believe in. Too ashamed to admit.

 

Strength of character?  Ashamed?  I don't believe so. 

 

A large part of the electorate that voted Trump was fed up with the leftist bullies.  Trump supporters avoided bumper stickers because they didn't want their car vandalized.  Why would they admit to supporting Trump knowing they would be labeled racist, sexist, xenophobe, stupid, uneducated, poor, deplorable, immoral, and unredeemable jackasses?  It's not worth it.  Talk softly, vote bigly.  Bullies lose.