Any anti trump protests in your area?

[Singuy]

50.2578722766% to be exact

I honestly don't recall if Obama ever stated he wanted to be President for all of the people. I do know that in the 8 years he was in office I never felt represented.

63% of total voters didn't think trump has the temperament to be president
60% of total voters didn't think donald trump is qualified to be president

http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls/national/president

So no I didn't mean just HC voters thought trump is unfit to be president. A small percentage (18%) of trump voters thought so as well.

Overall , HC is slightly more favorable(by 6%), way more qualified to be POTUS (by 14%), more trustworthy (by 3%), and much better temperament (by 20%). Looking at the data, you would think HC won more votes..oh yeah she did...

[StormRichards]

63% of total voters didn't think trump has the temperament to be president
60% of total voters didn't think donald trump is qualified to be president

http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls/national/president

So no I didn't mean just HC voters thought trump is unfit to be president. A small percentage (18%) of trump voters thought so as well.

Overall , HC is slightly more favorable(by 6%), way more qualified to be POTUS (by 14%), more trustworthy (by 3%), and much better temperament (by 20%). Looking at the data, you would think HC won more votes..oh yeah she did...

Perhaps those polls were off just like the ones predicting HC would win

[Singuy]

Perhaps those polls were off just like the ones predicting HC would win

Except HC is considered more qualified by 14 points. That's not within the margin of error. The last poll before the election was pretty much neck and neck if you factor in the margin of error. Also the polls were not totally off..Clinton did receive more votes as predicted...not like Clinton received 14% less votes than Trump.

[StormRichards]

Except HC is considered more qualified by 14 points. That's not within the margin of error. The last poll before the election was pretty much neck and neck if you factor in the margin of error. Also the polls were not totally off..Clinton did receive more votes as predicted...not like Clinton received 14% less votes than Trump.

That trustworthy % you posted is the one I have the most doubt in.

[StormRichards]

I forgot to report earlier that no I did not encounter any protests on my way to and from my daughter's soccer game Saturday.

[bjl584]

No. Not one around here. I live in a rural area. Pittsburgh is less than 30 minutes from me. I'd imagine that there are some protests going on in the city, but I don't know for sure. The local media hasn't made mention of anything going on.

[bigdaddybus]

No protests in my area, I'm sure if I head up to Chicago I can find some.
I posted this in the other election thread, and its something post election protestors need to understand.


I decided to watch "Inside Politics" on CNN this morning.

I found it interesting how they were discussing that Trump got 400K fewer votes than Romney in 2012 so it wasnt like Republicans increased in their voting.
It was that Clinton that got between 5-6 million less votes than Obama in 2012 and 2008.

The numbers say Clinton was rejected by previous Democratic votes, not this increase in racest, uneductated, white blue color voters.
I was pleasantly surprised at the honesty of the discussion on CNN.

[Singuy]

That trustworthy % you posted is the one I have the most doubt in.

Why? Donald Trump lied way more during a presidential debate (check PolitiFact). He just makes up things and call them facts. Now he is backpedaling on a lot of the things he have swore to do after meeting with Obama. Even you as a trump supporter have no idea what direction he is going to take. The swamp he swore to drain is now filled with a bunch of insiders who makes up that swamp.

I mean most Trump voters voted for him on a leap of faith. They voted on not what he said, but what he meant..which is apparently up for interpretation like the passages in the bible.

[Singuy]

The numbers say Clinton was rejected by previous Democratic votes, not this increase in racest, uneductated, white blue color voters.
I was pleasantly surprised at the honesty of the discussion on CNN.

Absolutely Clinton lost because the DNC sucked. Clinton was a poor choice and the only reason why she even had a chance is because the other side was Donald Trump.

Clinton should of picked Sanders as the VP and blow this thing out of the water. So many young people stayed home because they couldn't get over the blood bath between Clinton and Sanders in the primary.

[disneysteve]

Absolutely Clinton lost because the DNC sucked.

Clinton lost because of the FBI fiasco coming out with a report about a scandal that didn't really exist just days before the election.

That said, I totally agree that neither candidate was a shining example of what the President should be. That these were the two "best" people the parties could put forth is a sad statement.

More than any prior election I can recall, I've heard so many people say they voted outside of their party, both Democrats and Republicans, because their party's candidate was so unappealing to them. I think that speaks volumes about how difficult this election was on both sides.

[Singuy]

Clinton lost because of the FBI fiasco coming out with a report about a scandal that didn't really exist just days before the election.

Of course the FBI fiasco and the slow drip of non-consequential emails from wikileak absolutely did not help. It will take a matter of hours to dump all of the emails on wikileak, but it was done deliberately to put the word "email" into the publics mind by doing a slow drip release.

That being said, Clinton just didn't get the enthusiasm we got from Obama who had 6million more votes. Bernie had WAY more enthusiastic voters than Clinton. Clinton can't blame anyone but herself. The establishment who thought she was adequate enough to win all by herself was delusional.

[disneysteve]

Clinton just didn't get the enthusiasm we got from Obama who had 6million more votes. Bernie had WAY more enthusiastic voters than Clinton.

Agreed on both points. Obama is way more charismatic than Clinton. As for Sanders, I have absolutely no clue what the appeal was there. I just don't. His supporters were more enthusiastic but there just weren't that many of them. I do think him staying in the race so long also negatively impacted Clinton.

[StormRichards]

Why? Donald Trump lied way more during a presidential debate (check PolitiFact). He just makes up things and call them facts. Now he is backpedaling on a lot of the things he have swore to do after meeting with Obama. Even you as a trump supporter have no idea what direction he is going to take. The swamp he swore to drain is now filled with a bunch of insiders who makes up that swamp.

I mean most Trump voters voted for him on a leap of faith. They voted on not what he said, but what he meant..which is apparently up for interpretation like the passages in the bible.

First, I am not a Trump supporter. I think anyone that has followed Trump over the years knows he exaggerates everything. As for lies during the campaign, sadly that is the norm for every major race these days. They take a quote or stat and distort it to mislead the voters.

Clinton has been caught in lies related to her position as Secretary of State. That is why I feel she is less trustworthy.

[StormRichards]

Agreed on both points. Obama is way more charismatic than Clinton. As for Sanders, I have absolutely no clue what the appeal was there. I just don't. His supporters were more enthusiastic but there just weren't that many of them. I do think him staying in the race so long also negatively impacted Clinton.

And despite him throwing his support behind Clinton, the leaked e-mails that pertained to him and his supporters made it a tough sell for them to get behind her.

[StormRichards]

I agree with Conway.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/conway-calls-on-clinton-to-calm-protests/ar-AAkfAct?li=BBnb7Kz