This is actually a smart move on their part. Fuck.

no, it was just a clever induction on behalf of my cleverableness ^^

*showers self gratuitously with undue accolades*


it could be right though, but so could you.


e: i have anecdotes though. lemme introduce exhibit A: #nevertrump

I wouldn't hold your breath.

On one hand it will give dems the ability to wag their finger even harder at people who are not supportive of the party "SEE WE DO WHAT YOU WANT WERE GOOD SEE!" which, will turn away voters that are thinking of coming back because of this decision in the first place.

But the reality is, the fine print, and their role in the primary, may not change. Lets wait and see.

If you're comparing the 2016 and 2012 elections, Trump improved upon Romney's numbers and Clinton failed to meet Obama's numbers.

The key areas where this happened were Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Indiana.

https://i.imgur.com/TrposSY.jpg

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspi.../#392190211661

Your voters can turn into Independents (or "traitors") real quick if you ignore them long enough.

Trump gained less than Clinton lost, as compared to 2012. More stayed home than appeared to switch sides. Turnout.

Did you read the article?

I did not. Giving it a glance now it looks like Forbes doesn't know what population growth is. Closed.

Yes.

Clinton missed Obama's numbers by 70,000

Trump gained over 2 million past Romney.

Turnout in 2016 was 0.9% less than 2012.

Lol face it, man. You're wrong.