how dare you compare the founders of this great country to sympathizers for terrorism and potential sympathizers for terrorism.
You need a 
in there, or some people will think you meant that nonsense seriously and unironically.
ever think that there are patriotic people who honour America?
Many of them *were *terrorists. The loyalists were hardly respected and left alone, once the rebels gained control in their areas.
Not if they talk like that.
Most recent general election poll, likely voters, includes Johnson as a choice, first to include the period after Clinton cinched, Bloomberg’s, has Clinton up 12: 49 Clinton; 37 Trump; 9 Johnson. She was also up by 10 points in “very enthusiastic” among supporters.
One poll, take it FWIW.
According to the same poll, 55% of voters would “never” vote for Trump, compared to 43% for Clinton.
Nice!
BTW - Bloomberg uses Selzer and Co or their polling. A+ rating on 538. Also FWIW.
I suspect that 43% will decrease when Sanders endorses her. Trump’s - not going to go down much at all.
Love that poll. More good stuff from it:
Not even doing as well as Romney among white men! Ouch. I mean, that’s basically all he’s got.
There was somehow a revolting finding in there though. Drumpf won on who would be better fighting terrorism, 50-45 percent. So there are apparently millions of people out there who would “never” vote for him for other reasons, even though they do think he would fight terrorism more effectively. Ok then.
ETA: Notice once again the explosion of the myth that Drumpf appeals to the downscale voter. I’ve said it before: it’s the exurban guy with a three-car garage who wants to be more ahead than he already is, and doesn’t like to see the rise of minorities and women.
That’s hardly revolting. “How well will I fight terrorism” really ought to rate in our public consciousness alongside other things that kill a similar number of Americans, like “How well will I fight lightning strikes” and “How well will I fight drunk People with dangerous fireworks”. It doesn’t, but the fact that someone thinks a candidate would be worse at fighting terrorism but doesn’t consider that the end-all, be-all of the election is a good sign.
No, the revolting part of that finding is the idea that people actually think that Trump, the man with no experience in diplomacy or statecraft or the army or anything else that might have anything to do with fighting terrorism would be better than a former senator, first lady, and secretary of state, because he’s willing to “say the magic words”. That’s fucking gross.
Uhhh…yeah, you and I find it revolting for the same exact reason. No argument from me! 
This is true. It’s also true that if a meteor the size of a small moon hits us then their won’t be political parties anymore no matter what anyone does. Of course, if money trees start growing in peoples backyards we’ll be happier than at any point in human history and political parties will go extinct because they’re not needed.
Yep, the way I see it, political parties are losing the wild ass hypotheticals wars and their futures not very likely. Hypothetically.
Yes, this is interesting. Trump appeals to anger — But not the anger of the underclass, or those who might realistically feel oppressed by the system. Nor the anger of very unskilled workers who might legitimately feel that competition from illegals depresses their job prospects.
Instead Trump supporters are well-off white voters with an irrational and inchoate anger fanned up by FoxNews. A strange anger, directed against gays, other races, against anything at all except the real reasons for their sad and shallow lives.
It’s not hypothetical. Germany has a problem and it got big enough that now even the PC types can’t deny it.
Clinton is up 49-37 in the latest ABC poll. Trump has a record-breaking (for a nominee) 70% disapproval rating, with 55% saying they’d never vote for him.
Could this be the first ever clean sweep in the Electoral College?
First let’s see if she can crack a majority.
All those polls pointing to yet another repudiation for your guys are skewed, right?
Much like “slippery slope”, you seem to have a problem with the definition of “majority”. Even this poll showing a big lead shows most people not voting for her.