>>Political Scientist, here. >>One who predicted Trump's win >>Swing States are not going to vote his way, with larger agriculturally based, and coal based swingers, like Pennsylvania, Virgina and Florida, revolt voting due to the damage created by Trump's amateur approach to International trade (obey Jared and Israel.)
>>Michigan, a state whom Donald the Candidate implied should be federally rescued due to the atrocious water situation, have not been aided. In fact, Michigan was abandoned. >>Solid Red States, such as Alabama, are going to be the bulk of Trump's carriage. >>The revolt vote emanating from the swing states will essentially repeat the electoral map of 1996. >>It IS over. >>Let the trolling, spamming, and crying start, now. >>I will repost gloating told you so's....
I think 379 to 159 is NOT at all an exaggeration. He probably could have benefitted from starting the trade war in the third year of his presidency. This way, Iowa, and the Bread Basket States, who have already felt the pinch of the rising COLA, and some even losing their entire market base, may have not been aware of the damage Trump was creating as quickly.
Hudson Baker
>Louisiana >Arkansas >Missouri >Kentucky >Tennessee >Arizona >West Virginia >blue I think Trump will win, but to think that he'll lose with the 96 map is a special kind of retarded you don't see on this board very often
Coal Industry shock is still happening, and that is an industry that is looking at Kentucky, and asking itself, "How long?"
The reason is that traditionally, the belt tightening around the stomachs of coal country is a donino-effect event.
Luis Clark
And thinking a) he will win and b) the D couldn't beat him with a ham sandwich totally invalidates your boomed opinion as novice, and simply unable to count past ten....no, eleven.....no, ten.
So a single news story that ignores the overall upward economic trend in Trump country means they'll vote for a Democrat who supports infanticide, open borders, socialized health care, and the green new deal. Got it
