Female vote is the decisive factor

[gabosaurus]

We are women, hear us roar!

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...-donald-trump/

But while we’re in something of a wait-and-see mode, one demographic split caught my eye. That was from a Public Religion Research Institute poll conducted on behalf of The Atlantic. It showed a massive gender split, with Clinton trailing Trump by 11 percentage points among men but leading him by 33 points among women.

[Elessar]

Right, Gabby...Right.

But what side do you believe?

The side of unfounded rumor and allegation?

Or the side of PROVEN Fact?

[SassyLady]

I am woman ..... hear me roar ..... anyone but Clinton.

[aboutime]

My apologies to any of our Lady members here. But I would like gabby to explain, why I feel she acts, talks, and looks like.....

As the certified Troll gabby is here on DP. Does anyone find her as unlikable as HILARY too?

[Trigg]

I will never vote for Hillary

[Abbey Marie]

I will never vote for Hillary

Never indeed.

[Kaimhel]

I will never vote for Hillary

Neither will I.

[Kathianne]

That's 4 of us.

[Drummond]

That's 4 of us.

-- Indeed ?

SassyLady. Trigg. Abbey. Kaimhel. I make that four.

Are you saying there isn't (.. to this point ..) a 5th ... ?

[SassyLady]

-- Indeed ?

SassyLady. Trigg. Abbey. Kaimhel. I make that four.

Are you saying there isn't (.. to this point ..) a 5th ... ?

I'm not positive but perhaps Kaimhel isn't a female. That would indeed make 4 females who are not voting Clinton. And, not voting Clinton doesn't necessarily mean voting for Trump.

[Drummond]

I'm not positive but perhaps Kaimhel isn't a female. That would indeed make 4 females who are not voting Clinton. And, not voting Clinton doesn't necessarily mean voting for Trump.

... ah. Thanks for that ... I thought Kaimhel was / is female. Who's the 4th, then, if that's true ?

I know that not voting Clinton doesn't have to mean voting for Trump. Although, that's questionable, since the only contender with any realistic chance of defeating Clinton, is, of course, Trump !

So if a vote instead goes to a more 'fringe' candidate, for example a Libertarian one, this weakens the side which has the true chance of defeating her. It essentially translates into a vote for Clinton, by default.

[SassyLady]

... ah. Thanks for that ... I thought Kaimhel was / is female. Who's the 4th, then, if that's true ?

I know that not voting Clinton doesn't have to mean voting for Trump. Although, that's questionable, since the only contender with any realistic chance of defeating Clinton, is, of course, Trump !

So if a vote instead goes to a more 'fringe' candidate, for example a Libertarian one, this weakens the side which has the true chance of defeating her. It essentially translates into a vote for Clinton, by default.

Me, Abby, Trigg and Kathianne.

If a candidate is already so far down with electoral votes, as is Trump, the popular vote won't matter.

I'm an Independent and McMullin might get my vote.

It may sound nuts, but an analysis at FiveThirtyEight lays out the longshot scenario of how the nation's next president could be ... Evan McMullin. As Benjamin Morris writes, the chances of the independent candidate claiming the White House "are slim, not none." And it's all about Utah: A traditional Mormon conservative, McMullin has positioned himself as an alternative to Trump—and that may be a winning strategy in his home state, where Trump has acknowledged a "tremendous problem" rallying support, per the Deseret News. If McMullin snatches Utah's six electoral votes, he could prevent any candidate from collecting the 270 electoral votes required to win. In that situation, the election would be decided in Congress, opening up the chance for McMullin.

With many House Republicans turning their back on Trump of late, it's possible they'd choose McMullin over the man atop their party's ticket. (Morris lays out in detail the convoluted process in the House and Senate that could conceivably put him over the top.) You'd be forgiven for not recognizing the name—only 52% of Utahans know who McMullin is, based on a recent state poll. (The former CIA officer's bio is here.) Still, McMullin was polling at 22% in the state—ahead of Gary Johnson and trailing the deadlocked Clinton and Trump by just four percentage points. With residents in what one BYU professor describes as a "full-scale revolt" against Trump, there's a real possibility McMullin can take the state, especially if he secures Mitt Romney's endorsement. Read the full analysis here.

[Kathianne]

Me, Abby, Trigg and Kathianne.

If a candidate is already so far down with electoral votes, as is Trump, the popular vote won't matter.

I'm an Independent and McMullin might get my vote.

Is McMullin on AZ ballot? If so, might join you on that.

I don't get how voting for a bad candidate of one party, somehow is better than the bad candidate of the other. When there's no great candidate to vote for, one that at least appears to be of decent character is the best one can do.

[Drummond]

Me, Abby, Trigg and Kathianne.

If a candidate is already so far down with electoral votes, as is Trump, the popular vote won't matter.

I'm an Independent and McMullin might get my vote.

Well, I'm sticking by my conclusion. Whoever this 'McMullin' is, I doubt very much that s/he has any chance at all of beating the Dems to become President.

Regardless of how Trump is doing right this minute, the fact remains that only he has any realistic chance of depriving Clinton of the White House. So ... to deprive Trump of the means of succeeding, DOES, by default, translate into a Hillary win.

We all know that. In knowing ... and in doing that ... well, judge for yourself how complicit that would make non-Trump voters in her consequent victory.

[Elessar]

I'm not positive but perhaps Kaimhel isn't a female. That would indeed make 4 females who are not voting Clinton. And, not voting Clinton doesn't necessarily mean voting for Trump.

Easy Sassy...

She is a sweet young lady and my best friend.