Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 29, 2016, 10:18:47 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 42
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: When will people get over "deplorables"? on: September 15, 2016, 10:18:35 pm
I don't think you're pretending to be dense, so i'll bother explaining.
A) illegal immigrants commit rapes
B) Trump said "They're rapists"
C) Democrats called Trump a racist for saying B.
--- C can not be true because A is true.  A factual statement is not racism, it is a factual statement.     

A) If stating facts is not allowed than our society will collapse.
B) Dems don't allow facts to be stated as evidenced by above. 
C) Dems want society to collapse.
--- This is logically sound



Oh okay, so it's okay to make sweeping statements if the fact of the matter is true for a subset, a small one mind you. Let me try your logic then (Disclaimer: I obviously don't believe this):

A) White people commit mass killings at Black churches
B) X person states that White people are mass murderers and racists
C) Republicans called X person a racist for saying B

--- C can not be true because A is true.  A factual statement is not racism, it is a factual statement.     

A) If stating facts is not allowed than our society will collapse.
B) Republicans don't allow facts to be stated as evidenced by above. 
C) Republicans want society to collapse.
--- This is logically sound
Sounds about right to you? Lemme know.
You have to explain this more...
 
Are you saying A is true?
B wouldn't be true unless all whites committed many murders
republicans would say it wouldn't apply to everyone, not call x a racist.  why would you call x a racist?
A isn't true and C wouldn't happen... not sure what your point was.

2B you didn't evidence anything above

2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Washington Post: Blacks worry Trump has awoken a resentment that won’t go away on: September 15, 2016, 10:06:22 pm
They're right, unfortunately.

Unfortunate?  You think blacks should think differently than they do?  Are you racist?

LOL! No, if I were racist, I'b be supporting the racist currently running. I'm saying that it's unfortunate that Trump has increased resentment and allowed people to be more vocal about their prejudice.
Currently, Hillary Clinton is the only candidate to make truly bigoted statements. 

Seriously it's true, let's compare:

Trump:
called people who commit rape: "rapists"   ---- not racist
said a judge might be biased against him  ---- not racist

Hillary:
at least 25 million people are "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it"... because they aren't voting for her.  --- extremely bigoted and racist
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: When will people get over "deplorables"? on: September 15, 2016, 09:53:27 pm
I don't think you're pretending to be dense, so i'll bother explaining.
A) illegal immigrants commit rapes
B) Trump said "They're rapists"
C) Democrats called Trump a racist for saying B.
--- C can not be true because A is true.  A factual statement is not racism, it is a factual statement.     

A) If stating facts is not allowed than our society will collapse.
B) Dems don't allow facts to be stated as evidenced by above. 
C) Dems want society to collapse.
--- This is logically sound

4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Trump now the favorite? on: September 15, 2016, 01:50:37 pm
Guys I'd have to see some credible polling on CO before I can consider this. 
yea, I'm just going off the blitz of polls this week.
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Trump now the favorite? on: September 15, 2016, 01:48:26 pm


Now he's up in NC and tied up the RCP average there. 
So, if the election was held today he would win.
I guess if you are ahead you are the favorite?
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Black Female Pastor emasculates Donald Trump on: September 15, 2016, 01:38:54 pm
What did he lie about?

He said she looked nervous. She didn't.

He said "The audience was saying, 'Let him speak, let him speak,' , and they weren't saying that. Some were actually heckling him. It was Timmons, the pastor, who told them to let him say his piece. Again, he lied about it, twisting it to seem like the people actually supported him.

He agreed to not give a campaign speech in her church, and he did it anyway, then after feeling emasculated by her, went on to lie and criticize as he usually does when someone stands up to him.

In the end, this is just another typical day for Trump. He lies more than anyone, and about the most stupid and mundane stuff. Things he has no real good reason to lie about. He just does it because it is so normal and standard for him. Lying is an essential part of his life.
Yea I'm sure The hardest working presidential candidate in history was expected to say nothing about politics... She acted kind of odd given the situation.  Trump points out obvious things and is trashed for his honesty, typical.  
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Trump now the favorite? on: September 15, 2016, 10:59:35 am

 Hillary Clinton, as a candidate;
1) she just comes off as
2)untrustworthy and secretive,
3) many voters still do not understand what drives her. 
4) qualifications or necessary ability to govern a complex system like the US
1) She doesn't "come off as", this is her.
2) She IS untrustworthy and secretive
3) Her motivations repulse people, the more people understand her "drives" the worse she will do.
4) She hasn't accomplished anything or shown any ability here.  Trump who is under qualified in a traditional sense actually has done something productive with his life.  Hillary has shown herself to be a good reader in the past.... I'm searching for her next best attribute / accomplishment.   
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: When will people get over "deplorables"? on: September 15, 2016, 10:44:01 am
She has never called for anyone to be "oppressed". She called racism and sexism "deplorable", because that's what they are- a disgrace upon our country's name. "Re-education camps" are nothing but a purifies conspiracy theory.
those words are(were) important words with meaning.  

They should be used carefully.

They should be used only when something fits perfectly into context and definition.

You have shown zero context and met zero criteria of the definitions.

You are acting recklessly and wrongly, just like Hillary Clinton.  

Misuse of those words and the actions / decisions  made by a person who believes in the massive misuse of those words is / will be oppressive and wrong.  She is calling for people to be dismissed and silenced (wrongly) for no reason.  

As for re-education camps, they are real and their is mountains of evidence.
simply type
"mandatory college diversity courses"
into a search engine.  
you get at least 86 million hits.
The euphemism "diversity" is used to push a lot of really stupid stuff for no reason... you aren't allowed to point out all the stupid / incorrect stuff in the mandatory brainwash session.  You are forced to admit guilt for your transgressions, even if you haven't done anything... classic maoist re-education camps.  
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: I'm disgusted with the media on: September 15, 2016, 10:24:34 am
Atlas is probably the only place that thinks the media is biased in favor of Trump.
This has been the lefts new thing, especially since the town hall thing where Matt Lauer dared to ask Hillary about her emails (aka violating the espionage act tens of thousands of times)... if we were fair about it wouldn't we be talking about Hillary "miraculously avoiding jail" or "treasonous acts" not "emails"  Huh

They now expect the Candy Crowley inappropriate lying interjections to prop up their candidates when they are in trouble.  If they get less than that they claim "bias" in favor of Trump.        
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The country is falling apart on: September 15, 2016, 10:13:40 am
This is gonna sound partisan and I am not sorry but I blame the Republican party for Trump. The way the establishment weren't adults with Obama during his presidency and excused people like Trump and Palin.

You're allowing partisanship to fog your judgment on this. While those events were obviously a prelude to our current predicament, they are not what directly led to it. The reason I make that argument is simple: look at Europe. A growing right-wing movement that embodies many of the same characteristics found in Trump's politics are happening in Austria, Switzerland, France, Germany, Denmark, Holland, United Kingdom, Sweden, Finland, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Czech Republic, and elsewhere in Europe, albeit with their own qualities unique to their cultural context. These are concurrent developments that are cross-cultural. Would you blame the Republican Party for directly causing the parallel rise of the right-wing in Europe? Thus, the problem goes deeper than merely American political events, but something that is below the surface and shared between nearly all Western countries. That doesn't even mention the phenomenon of a social media-savvy terrorist group with a significant composition of European-derived fighters.

Fair point.

People want leadership acting in the interests of them or in other words "their country", not acting in the interests of the
international committee of boarder crashing, compulsory re-education, de-industrialization... 

Love how that gets turned into "right-wing" "partisan" "non-adult behavior" "I blame republicans"

You guys do realize that by Trump holding these positions or figuring them out, that he is more intelligent than every democrat in the country.  If they were as smart as him than they would take the issue, but they aren't smart.     
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Trump now the favorite? on: September 15, 2016, 09:51:42 am


Trump has basically eliminated Hillary's advantage by swinging OH and FL pretty firmly in his column.
The polls with him up in Nevada and Colorado are very interesting.  
He would only need North Carolina if those are real.    
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: When will people get over "deplorables"? on: September 15, 2016, 09:31:35 am
She's done damage to her campaign that she'll never undo; she can only contain and minimize.

I've never seen a campaign where a candidate trashed 1/2 of the other candidate's supporters.  Hillary, however, can't hide her contempt for culturally conservative white voters.  They're scum in her book, for WHO they are.  

Ummm... try 2012?

Besides, if "cultural conservatism" is the new euphemism for bigotry, then yeah, so-called cultural conservatives deserve some criticism (even if not in these words). At least get them thinking about their own choices; maybe some of them can pull a Robert Byrd. Unlike poverty, open racism is an individual choice.

Robert Byrd long ago apologized for being a Klan member, and compiled a mostly liberal record in public office on civil rights matters.  Jesse Jackson has not yet apologized for calling NYC "Hymietown" in 1984.  Al Sharpton has never apologized for perpetuating a hoax that smeared the name of white police officers in the Tawana Brawley matter, nor have the Democratic elite shunned them.  But I digress.

Whatever one's beliefs, folks have at least a moral right to believe that their President has their best interests as Americans at heart.  It is sad that black folks haven't had that at least from the Grover Cleveland Administration until LBJ, and the Nixon and Reagan Presidencies did, indeed, engage in "Southern Strategies".  I'm not for that at all.  But I'm also not in favor of a President governing America by doing, say, white folks in Appalachia in the same way that many Presidents did black folks.  That's Hillary's message to 25% of America; that they're scum, and now it's THEIR turn to be oppressed.  The guesswork is in trying to figure out who comprises the 25%.

Trump's comments on Mexicans may have been over the top, but he wasn't referring to American citizens.  He was referring to foreigners who sought to crash our border, and pointing out that a significant number of these folks have, indeed, engaged in crimes within the US.  He has no obligation to those folks beyond dealing with them in a Constitutional manner during the deportation process and respecting their Constitutional rights to due process of law.  Trump has, to date, never disparaged a group of American citizens as (edit:)Hillary did.  Trump, indeed, is far more likely to conduct himself in a manner as being President of ALL Americans, even in polarizing times, than Hillary Clinton will.  "Stronger Together" isn't a governing philosophy for a Hillary Clinton Administration; it's a rallying cry for the Democratic Left, pure and simple.  And that's fine for being a candidate.  But let's dispel the notion that Hillary Clinton is a candidate that considers the welfare of every American citizen to be important.  (I doubt the re-education camps she intends for the "deplorables" will even be air-conditioned, lol.)
Exactly right.

You must be punished because your grandfather was alive when someone else's grandfather did something to someone is the dems 'best' justification for this crap...  yea your family may have freed the slaves, BUT you must pay for the sins of someone who owned a slave, etc etc.   

Yea, you are the party founded to end slavery. and yea the dems are the party of slavery, segregation, jim crow, and the clan, BUT you are white, so you're racist. 

Can any dems talk anymore without devolving into this stupidity???
the answer is basically no, because they automatically go to this when they lose an argument and they can't put forward any winning arguments.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: I'm disgusted with the media on: September 15, 2016, 09:01:08 am
The irony is that Red Hacks/media don't understand that they help Trump.

Every time Trump says something Red Hacks/media is SCREAMING:

RACIST!!! FASCIST!!! DEPLORABLE!!! HITLER!!! MUSSOLINI!!!

All those word are high-energy and should be used carefully, only when those fit perfectly in context.

Textbook definition of  "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" Grin
This part is almost perfect. 

Leftists have acted so 'incorrectly' for so long, that they have changed the response to information.  The good people of America can't trust "establishment" institutions because they are largely corrupt.
Fool me once shame on you, twice - shame on me.  well, this has been going on for decades.     
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: When will people get over "deplorables"? on: September 15, 2016, 08:52:16 am
The difference is, several polls have shown that many Trump supporters (particularly during the primaries) do hold racist views (birtherism, belief that Obama is a Muslim, outright white supremacism). Do you deny that these views are disgraceful?
Lol, it is not a racism.
Do you really believe that any white President would be subjected to this bullsh*t? And about the whole Obama=Muslim thing, given that he has publicly denied being a Muslim, this would imply that being a Muslim was something to hide- something potentially incriminating.
A white arab-looking male whose name is Barack Hussein Obama. Of course! Smiley

And if it was a white whose name Vladimir Ivanov Putin, it would be plausible to assume that he belongs to Russian orthodox church. Racism?
If he publicly denied being Russian Orthodox, then it would indeed be bigoted to assume that, as it would imply that Russian Orthodoxy was somehow a suspect religion.
LOL, it isn't bigoted to try and figure out the truth... the wrong is on the guy lying about his religion, background, sympathies, etc.  
This is like the Hillary health saga.  She is displaying nearly all the symptoms of a neurological disease.  If someone says "I think she has parkinson's disease" They aren't racist, bigoted, or homophobic.  They are trying to figure out the truth based on math, science, wisdom, etc.  The Clinton's lying about everything makes it impossible to believe them.     
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: When will people get over "deplorables"? on: September 15, 2016, 08:44:52 am
The difference is, several polls have shown that many Trump supporters (particularly during the primaries) do hold racist views (birtherism, belief that Obama is a Muslim, outright white supremacism). Do you deny that these views are disgraceful?
Lol, it is not a racism.
Do you really believe that any white President would be subjected to this bullsh*t? And about the whole Obama=Muslim thing, given that he has publicly denied being a Muslim, this would imply that being a Muslim was something to hide- something potentially incriminating.
A white arab-looking male whose name is Barack Hussein Obama. Of course! Smiley

And if it was a white whose name Vladimir Ivanov Putin, it would be plausible to assume that he belongs to Russian orthodox church. Racism?
If he publicly denied being Russian Orthodox, then it would indeed be bigoted to assume that, as it would imply that Russian Orthodoxy was somehow a suspect religion.
LOL, it isn't bigoted to try and figure out the truth... the wrong is on the guy lying about his religion, background, sympathies, etc.  
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: When will people get over "deplorables"? on: September 15, 2016, 08:40:59 am
The difference is, several polls have shown that many Trump supporters (particularly during the primaries) do hold racist views (birtherism, belief that Obama is a Muslim, outright white supremacism). Do you deny that these views are disgraceful?
1) Birther stuff was started by Hillary Clinton and fueled by Obama acting really weird about it...
Kind of a weird thing, but the worst actors in the saga are Democrats. 

2) Obama has more affiliation with Islam than any other religion.  His education by Muslims, living in Muslim countries, his family being Muslim, the only church he has claimed to belong to was led by a racist 'former' Muslim Jeremiah Wright, but he says he isn't a Muslim...
I think he is pretty obviously an atheist, but he clearly over sympathizes with Islam.

3) Not sure what you're talking about with white supremacy, so I can't comment. 

The first 2 are pretty reasonable given the circumstances, so no not disgraceful at all.  It seems like a nauseating gotcha game dems like to play.  They pretend justified suspicion or interest is some sort of super crazy.  Maybe study people sometime, you might learn something.       
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Atlas Polling Map thread (2016/09/14: Clinton 264, Trump 143) on: September 15, 2016, 08:14:17 am
This week's polling.
North Carolina is probably the next to move, maybe Pennsylvania.  



Trump - 259 EVs
Clinton - 214 EVs
Too close to call - 65 EVs
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: When will people get over "deplorables"? on: September 15, 2016, 07:39:31 am
She's done damage to her campaign that she'll never undo; she can only contain and minimize.

I've never seen a campaign where a candidate trashed 1/2 of the other candidate's supporters.  Hillary, however, can't hide her contempt for culturally conservative white voters.  They're scum in her book, for WHO they are.  

Ummm... try 2012?

Besides, if "cultural conservatism" is the new euphemism for bigotry, then yeah, so-called cultural conservatives deserve some criticism (even if not in these words). At least get them thinking about their own choices; maybe some of them can pull a Robert Byrd. Unlike poverty, open racism is an individual choice.

I don't know how much effect it will have politically, but

You have an over the top example of Hillary MAKING a bigoted comment.
The audience laughed and applauded a bigot.

Trump has said controversial things, nothing was this offensive or wrong.

She said 50% of Trump's supporters are:
“The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it."
...She's talking about 25 to 30 million Americans. 
Military veterans and the people who make the country function are Trump's base --- they are the opposite of deplorable they are honorable. 

Part of the damage isn't the insult though, it is that it is so wrong and out of touch with reality that it scares people.  If you wanted to look at it sure maybe 1 to 2% of Trumps support could be called one of those things, but More of Hillary's supporters could by far.  She says it to feed the smug sense of moral superiority that leftist idiots and elitists get high off of.  You have a cult of delusional-s who need to lie in order to feel better about themselves. 

The fact that you have people saying:
yes she should say this and
 "cultural conservatism is the new euphemism for bigotry"
etc
is evidence that people are in a scary bubble of hate. 

Trump says he doesn't like people breaking the law -- Dems call him racist
Hillary says 30 million people are deplorable scum based on her bigoted thought process -- Dems agree
Who are the bigots???
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: I'm disgusted with the media on: September 15, 2016, 07:06:27 am
That graph says a lot. 

The media is non-stop going after trump, but (virtually) no republican or independent trusts them. 
When 85% and 70% think the media is unfairly lying about someone (because they are), than you kind of get behind the victim of the ridiculous attacks naturally. 

The graph probably flips around when they actually cover a democrat scandal... the facts are so undeniable and so rarely mentioned that people are very interested in it. 
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Good Lord, He's Serious About This on: May 29, 2016, 08:52:13 pm
I think I know what he's trying to do. Think trickle down but with EV's. He's thinking if he wins normally blue states, he'll by default win their more swingy neighbors maybe because of his nationalized campaign?
Well, that's a really idiotic way of doing it...the New York and California media markets are two of the most expensive in the country.    Heck, NY and CA are just expensive to campaign in period...
It actually makes some sense in a truly nationalized campaign (that you are better than your opponent at) to not ignore EV gold mines... Also, winning the popular vote does have some effect on helping to win the EC for some reason (human connectivity or something).

An interesting thought, He isn't going to spend much money on TV anywhere... He wins TV without paying for it.  "Focus" is just that?  showing up and holding his mega rallies?  Internet resources? Hiring some people?

....West Virginia is on the map?Huh?  is he trying to get 100% of the vote?
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Minnesota/Iowa/Wisconsin on: May 29, 2016, 08:16:08 pm
It makes no sense at all.

MN/IA/WI aren't states with industrial bases in secular decline like OH/MI/PA.

They have a much bigger agricultural presence.

Their residents tend to be better-educated and have lower rates of poverty.

They are much more racially homogeneous than OH/MI/PA with a disproportionate number of white people of German/Norwegian/Dutch ancestry.

Basically, they're some of the least hospitable states to Donald Trump.
Basically.
The GOP "establishment" in Wisconsin (Iowa to some degree) was basically the only organization in the country to derail the Trump train.  The "establishment" will back him eventually (somewhat grudgingly) and he has a lot of appeal with 'Reagan' democrats.

Can he win? yes, but it's different than the eastern rust belt.
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump Campaign Planning Swing State Level Effort in NY, Possibly in CA as Well on: May 29, 2016, 07:34:57 pm
Corey Lewandowski mentioned a close poll in California on fox news Sunday today.

I can see a path in New York, but California is not going to happen.

the 27 EV of NM, CO, NV, and OR...
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: May 22, Finally TRUMP is ahead vs Hillary by RCP Average(first time) on: May 23, 2016, 07:53:01 pm
We need to jackhammer away with males. She's doing so horribly and male voters are the least likely to sway back and forth. If we can get too many whites to vote against her, all she will have is the McGovern rainbow coalition.

LOL.
We have so many Republicans and trump followers here on Atlas, saying that they hate when the "other side" keeps claiming that the trump campaign is nothing but "white male" voters.
Yet, you have a Pub here, advocating this EXACT campaign strategy. And to just forget about everyone else, including people of color ('the McGovern rainbow coalition").


I'm not proud of the divisions of our country, but this is a campaign, dammit. If I were in charge of Trump's campaign, I'd carpet-bomb the airwaves with Hillary barking, Hillary's coal comment, Hillary's liberal positions. The most unflattering images. Lee Atwater style. WEAK. WEAK. WEAK. In politics, it's about repetition. Trump strong, Hillary weak. Hillary hurts, Trump wins. Over and over and over.

It may not work with all voters, but this certainly has the feel of a change election. Hillary isn't change, Trump is, and that should terrify Hillary supporters.


I will be among the first to admit that I am indeed terrified at the prospect of a vile and idiotic psychopath who regularly dog-whistles the Horst-Wessel-Lied being elected President of the United States. (I have a great deal of empathy for people who don't want to vote for Hillary Clinton, but anyone actively supporting her near-certain Republican opponent is spitting on everything good and decent in Western Civilization.)
h
 
Interesting that Obama and Hillary have each in their own ways spent their entire lives trying to destroy Western Civilization.  They are both post-modern that way whereas Trump is more of a traditionally modern guy. 

Destroy Western Civilization? There is no way you can actually believe that. Obama and Clinton are actually trying to help people. Obama passed the stimulus, health care reform, and reduced the deficit. Clinton has fought for women's rights and healthcare for children and families for many years. That is the opposite of destroying Western Civilization.

If you want someone who will destroy Western civilization, you institute extreme authoritarian laws and increase the national debt by ten trillion dollars, like Donald Trump will do if he is elected.
If you read history at university, than their is a chance that you could grasp what western civ. IS, but judging by your comments that is not the case. 

Western Ethics and Philosophy is based on an Aristotle concept of a tangible reality.  Hillary and Obama reject nearly all tangible reality (because it is very often inconvenient for them).  Therefor, On that simple fact they can not futher western civ.

Your first point "trying to help people" is a huge red flag.  intentions are virtually meaningless.  A A-hole like Trump has actually helped more people than a no-drama, cool-guy Obama, but you care about "intentions" not tangible realities.   
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Early Election 2016 Prediction: Donald Trump Wins! on: May 23, 2016, 07:41:46 pm


Yep, MN might not ever happen, but it could start polling like a mirage.  Penn is almost certain to move to Trump's collumn, MI will move that way, WI is razor close without Obama on the ballot. 
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: IF, Trump wins FL, OH, PA. THAN, what state puts him over the top? on: May 23, 2016, 07:31:26 pm
I really want to hear your reasoning for Washington being a toss-up, but not Oregon.

I will likely think your answer is incredibly stupid, but I'm morbidly curious.

I never said anything was a toss-up, several scenarios are possible.
If the North West came into play quite-possibly Oregon would as well. 
If I had to favor Washington coming into play before Oregon (I'm not necessarily) than I'd say it was do to a larger suburban population overcoming or counter balancing fringe left voting blocks.
Oregon could come into play before Washington by a less complicated Rural v Urban dynamic. 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 42


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines