Clinton supporters, are you scared that Hillary will blow it?

[ag]

Yes, of course I am concerned.  I would have prefered a stronger candidate, such as, say, Cuomo. The cost of failure is too high in this case.

[ag]

Yes, of course I am concerned.  I would have prefered a stronger candidate, such as, say, Cuomo. The cost of failure is too high in this case.

wat?

Thanks for bolding the part I think is important. Cuomo would have been stronger: he is a better politician.

[ag]

Yes, of course I am concerned.  I would have prefered a stronger candidate, such as, say, Cuomo. The cost of failure is too high in this case.

wat?

Thanks for bolding the part I think is important. Cuomo would have been stronger: he is a better politician.

You mean better in doing politics than Hillary? I agree. However, I can't see him as a stronger nationwide candidate.

Also, the Atlas would have a collective meltdown (and I'm one of those who consider hatred toward Cuomo rather overblown).

Well, the last reason is why I chose Cuomo as an example

Cuomo would have been a far stronger candidate: he is both centrist and a good politician. Radicalism does not make a good general eleciton candidate.

[ag]

A little bit.  I'm at least 70% sure Trump will lose to Hillary, but if that doesn't happen, it would be pretty awful.  It is concerning that Hillary doesn't generate much excitement compared to the cult following Trump has among his supporters.

Thinking there is a 30% chance you may have an incurable cancer is far too high a probability to be saying that you are "only concerned a little bit".

[ag]

Yes, of course I am concerned.  I would have prefered a stronger candidate, such as, say, Cuomo. The cost of failure is too high in this case.

Damn, they must have some good stuff down in Mexico.

I have never ever in my life taken an illegal drug, and I have almost stopped drinking alcohol years ago (haven't been seriously drunk in years, and the last few times that happened I was in the US). So, this is very much a sober opinion.

[ag]

Yes, of course I am concerned.  I would have prefered a stronger candidate, such as, say, Cuomo. The cost of failure is too high in this case.

wat?

Thanks for bolding the part I think is important. Cuomo would have been stronger: he is a better politician.

You mean better in doing politics than Hillary? I agree. However, I can't see him as a stronger nationwide candidate.

Also, the Atlas would have a collective meltdown (and I'm one of those who consider hatred toward Cuomo rather overblown).

Well, the last reason is why I chose Cuomo as an example

Cuomo would have been a far stronger candidate: he is both centrist and a good politician. Radicalism does not make a good general eleciton candidate.

Yeah, he's such a great candidate and politician that he got only 62% against a some chick in the primary...as an incumbent governor. And got an amazing 54% in the general as an incumbent governor...in sapphire blue New York.

He was assured of victory, so he did not, really, do much to win. It would be different in a nationwide race.

[ag]

I can say one thing for sure.  If Trump is elected president, I'll become a permanent ex-pat.  I'm not kidding at all.  That would probably make some happy.  But I'll do it anyway. 

Same here. I've got family in BC, and gradually contemplating making the move on general principles, but if Trump wins, it goes from casually keeping an eye out for jobs in my field and tossing out the occasional resume to priority number one.

We will be hiring for a job in Mexico next year and will be active on the US market. Perhaps, we will take some Americans at their word.