tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post4515896857511532875..comments2024-03-27T23:28:20.274-04:00Comments on Face to Face: Blacks vs. progressives: The Bernie movement as Eugene McCarthy plus George Wallaceagnostichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-16597144531784521852016-06-22T17:40:47.479-04:002016-06-22T17:40:47.479-04:00I pretty much agree with your electoral map projec...I pretty much agree with your electoral map projections (though you claim Trump's victory will be by a larger margin!) There's one or two states Trump might lose though - the prime example being a state like North Carolina, which, like Virginia, has been "corrupted" by the growth it has seen in the last 20 years in places like Charlotte and Raleigh, which probably have aspirations to be the next Atlanta. Arkansas might be another "wobbly prospect, for uniquely Clintonian reasons. But damn, if he could somehow pick up Michigan or New Jersey (with a little Christie help?) Trump's prospects would be quite bright. I know I'll be up late on election night.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-73463272945953102972016-06-14T20:58:22.411-04:002016-06-14T20:58:22.411-04:00Trump isn't neglecting his ground game, he'...Trump isn't neglecting his ground game, he's just not boasting about it. He's hired members of Obama's 2008 analytics team, and he's doubled or trebled his offices in many states, including some pretty blue ones. He doesn't tell a hostile media every little thing he does, but supporters are getting the information since we're being asked to continue volunteering for the general. Wheenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-88654673404717566272016-06-14T01:40:15.233-04:002016-06-14T01:40:15.233-04:00Romney only got 52% of the non-Hispanic white vote...Romney only got 52% of the non-Hispanic white vote, Obama 44%, other candidates 4% (General Social Survey).<br /><br />In 1980, Reagan also got 52% of whites, Carter 41%, and Anderson 7%.<br /><br />Black turnout was not massive -- it was McCain and Romney bombing big-league with whites that cost them the elections. See recent Nate Kohn article at NYT.<br /><br />So the demographic gloom-and-doom story is dead wrong. How many blacks do the know-nothings think there are in Indiana for McCain to have lost it to Obama?<br /><br />I'm skimming the rest of the comment and seeing other red flag names like Ace of Spades, so won't respond further.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-36520514822736409922016-06-14T00:17:49.818-04:002016-06-14T00:17:49.818-04:00Let me add that it was Trump's insight that th...Let me add that it was Trump's insight that the old GOP Washington Generals trick of losing gracefully on social issues and selling out the White working/middle class was a loser no matter what. A Marco Rubio, a Jeb! or even Ted Cruz would not do anything other than lose in the general election because about 40% of Whites would vote in the opposite direction of the cultural wars, in favor of gays, Muslims, Blacks as magical racial redeemers, the like. Open Borders, gun control, feminism, "that's not who we are" etc. Not to mention that pretty much most single White women vote Dem in the Presidential race. Hillary btw still has a substantial lead in women; who vote more than men do on average.<br /><br />Trump seems like a political Napoleon or Sherman, alone in his initial insight on how the strategic and tactical position can be changed by no longer having the static assumptions of the past establishment. Which is why btw the GOP establishment hates him.<br /><br />Trump's gamble is essentially loss-less, as any Rubio esque strategy of just trotting out the old and guaranteed to lose social issues while gutting the White working/middle class economically would lose anyway.Whiskeyhttp://whiskeysplace.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-4079792447507756212016-06-14T00:10:52.879-04:002016-06-14T00:10:52.879-04:00Trump's gamble, and it is a gamble, is to incr...Trump's gamble, and it is a gamble, is to increase White working/middle class turnout, the number of voters who have not voted. Romney got according to Steve Sailer 60% of the White vote; Obama lost there. And that percentage was better than Reagan's. Its just that Black voter turnout was MASSIVE and Obama got something like 98.99% of it; Latino turnout was also above average and Obama got most of that, in the 80s IIRC. So that analysis that the GOP was doomed already by demographics was not off the mark.<br /><br />IF and only IF the GOP stuck to the old Culture War but losing on them issues, gay marriage and the like; while flooding the nation with even more illegals and legal competitors to White (and also Latino/Black working/middle class people). Trump draws better than Romney or McCain among Blacks and Hispanics because of class issues -- decreasing the flood of labor competitors driving down wages and sucking up social spending has appeal to a non-trivial fraction of that demographic. Not enough to win. But non-trivial.<br /><br />Trump likely knows that the Cucks, the upper class people like Charles Murray (who has come out against Trump) and the like WILL NOT VOTE TRUMP. They will either vote Hillary (as the NRO crowd has stated) or stay home.<br /><br />Ace at Ace of Spades made that argument, that the party cannot win without the Romney faction and therefore must cater to it at all times. That's a static analysis, and Trump is gambling on getting all the "hidden" voters -- people who voted Reagan twice and maybe Bush 1 once, and then just withdrew. And their younger counterparts who never voted for GWB, McCain, or Romney Mr. 47 percent.<br /><br />IT is gamble. I assume Trump being a numbers guy with big real estate developments depending on time/schedule/cost to come under budget and start renting out space for his office buildings and luxury apartments has done the numbers. I would be shocked if he has not.<br /><br />You can see this as he rejects campaign consultants and "the ground game." I assume this is because Trump has largely written off the hard-core Romney types who the ground game targets, and is relying on nothing more than trolling the media to get out the hidden potential White vote (and again a non-trivial Black/Hispanic fraction larger than Romney's) who are not amenable to a call or knock on the door from their local cuckservative.<br /><br />Like everything else Trump, it certainly is bold.<br /><br />Whiskey.Whiskeyhttp://whiskeysplace.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-15614256675816950012016-06-13T22:53:10.830-04:002016-06-13T22:53:10.830-04:00See the turnout of D vs. R primaries, and who won ...See the turnout of D vs. R primaries, and who won them (and came in 2nd or 3rd).<br /><br />For example: Trump lost MN, the only state other than UT where he came in 3rd (fucking Scandis), while Bernie won the state 60-40, with D turnout nearly twice that for R. Also a long-time blue state, part of the Lutheran Belt that hates Trump and loves soft-spoken Scandinavian socialists.<br /><br />Wisconsin turnout was about equal for both parties, but Bernie won about 55-45, while Trump lost to Cruz about 50-35.<br /><br />The Lutheran Belt also has very high turnout (around 70% or higher), so there isn't a yuge reservoir of non-voters for Trump to tap into and mobilize.<br /><br />If Bernie had stayed in for real, rather than disappearing, he definitely would have won MN, WI, and VT, being heavily favored in IA, ME, RI, CO, and OR.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-65410913353408656682016-06-13T20:21:45.768-04:002016-06-13T20:21:45.768-04:00I think you're being wildly optimistic about S...I think you're being wildly optimistic about Sander's ability to actually carry states, rather than just hand them to Trump. If Trump does as well as we think/hope he will and outperforms Bush much less McCain and Romney in the likes of Oregon and Wisconsin (ie nearing 50%) then how could he possibly lose them with Sanders and Clinton splitting the remainder? Sanders would have to take a large chunk of Trumps support also, something you haven't even discussed - presumably because you consider it so unlikely.<br />Realistically Sanders could only hope to carry Vermont, maybe Maine if he had Angus King as his running mate.Andrewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-59532818524262281632016-06-11T22:11:51.847-04:002016-06-11T22:11:51.847-04:00Yeah, a big part of PC is belittling bigots. Deman...Yeah, a big part of PC is belittling bigots. Demanding that they explain and defend their positions and then refusing to accept the response. Then demanding an apology, with the expectation that the offender will express solidarity with the "victims" and be charitable too.<br /><br />The spectacle (and it always is heavily publicized to add extra pressure and humiliation) concludes with the offender stripped of his backbone and dignity.<br /><br />Trump has bolstered his points by just not backing down. The media can continue to cry about Trump staying off the PC reservation but at a certain point it falls on deaf ears since the media loses credibility when Trump eludes capture. He hates to be the loser and his aversion to groveling protects his image and his freedom. He saves face and the media and PC can't gain from his not losing.<br /><br />Worth noting is that even as Trump has defended his stance, he's avoided any show of empathy for the judge himself (or the subversive groups to whom the judge has an allegiance). Thus he maintains his goal to make people aware of this traitor and his desire to eventually settle the score with him and those like him.<br /><br />Eventually the media will put the Mex. judge arrow back in the quiver and they'll find and draw more PC arrows. But the more arrows they draw and shoot, the more they find that the arrows don't have the same precision and power that they once did.Ferylhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01336057631877941839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-84521110440959534952016-06-11T20:18:29.339-04:002016-06-11T20:18:29.339-04:00Notice the difference in how intensely and success...Notice the difference in how intensely and successfully the media and shitlibs dragged on their witch hunt against Trump when he was saying he was a victim of non-white prejudice (the La Raza judge).<br /><br />We agree with what he said, of course, but it may have put off bystanders and neutral parties. And at any rate, Trump can fire his ass once he's President. He gave it his best shot, and knew when to let it go (in public, for now -- later, in private, La Raza is fired).<br /><br />When he does something seemingly more outrageous, he gets no witch hunt. He just declares "I am the least racist person there is" without any argument. Or at most, "Hey folks, if I were racist, then why did Don King, Iron Mike Tyson, and many other wonderful African-Americans endorse me?"<br /><br />The shitlibs are cerebral and want to get into a twisted logical argument, bickering Talmudicly back and forth forever.<br /><br />Deny them that by flat declarations with no argument or a transparently troll argument, and it deflates all of their seething anger. You can't get into an endless back-and-forth when one side refuses to argue or make sincere points.<br /><br />The media asked him about that early on. They'd ask, "How do you respond to those who say you're a racist?" "I am the least racist person there is." "Why? What evidence do you have to support that claim?" "I don't know, I just believe that I'm not a racist person."<br /><br />If he gave a reason, they'd criticize it, then he'd counter, they'd counter-counter, someone would switch to a different piece of evidence, they'd counter-counter-counter, etc etc etc.<br /><br />After he flatly said, "I just don't think I'm a racist person, I don't believe I am," they stopped pestering him about the charges. No fun to be had.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-74891166436045767572016-06-11T20:07:24.384-04:002016-06-11T20:07:24.384-04:00I do sense signs of change, though, with the Trump...I do sense signs of change, though, with the Trump movement treating liberals, even the shittiest of shitlibs, with a more lighthearted tone, rather than seething gloom-and-doom.<br /><br />We're always going to have liberals with us, even if this country becomes 100% white. We have to at least get along with them. That will be reflected in taking more of a ribbing / roasting tone when we put down their regular fainting spells from getting triggered by inane stuff.<br /><br />What really freaks out the shitlibs is that the Trump movement doesn't get into seething apocalyptic battles with them about their pantywaisted cries of DAS RAYCISS anymore. "Trump and the media have normalized racism!" (i.e., no more witch hunts against alleged racists).<br /><br />Yeah, I guess we have -- now you get to have fun calling *everybody* a racist! Except yourself, of course, Pocahontas.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-26749692767066704282016-06-11T19:57:43.415-04:002016-06-11T19:57:43.415-04:00When the cucks tried to reel in non-white ethnic g...When the cucks tried to reel in non-white ethnic groups, they were appealing to "natural conservatives" with "traditional family values" -- y'know, getting knocked up during your quinceanera party, or getting honor-killed by your mother for dating a boy outside of your own ethnic group.<br /><br />Not many conservatives in other ethnic groups, and guaranteed to be no conservatives among white liberals and moderates.<br /><br />If they were really the white party, they would have courted and accepted white liberals, while ignoring and shunning conservative Cubans, blacks, etc. This courtship and retention would have been reflected in their platform and policies.<br /><br />Instead they chose to alienate the 25% of whites who are liberals, and the 40% of whites who are moderates. Not to mention even larger chunks of non-white groups, who are way less conservative.<br /><br />Can the paleocon / alt-right / etc. crowd get over their hatred of liberals and moderates in order to make the Trump party the party of Americans, or white-aspiring people? We'll see.<br /><br />They had better, though, or else this country is looking at an endless reign of the Clintons and the Obamas.<br /><br />Leave your hatred of liberals at the door, and if you want to change their minds -- evangelize to them, with whatever the message is. Religious values, secular homogeneity, or whatever.<br /><br />Only some of those goals will be going through the government -- like controlling demographics through immigration / deportation policy, and giving states wide latitude to determine their own affairs so that liberal regions can't impose their values on conservative regions. The rest of it will come through grassroots organizing in social and cultural affairs.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-28634457654075004732016-06-11T19:34:42.813-04:002016-06-11T19:34:42.813-04:00In fairness to cuckservative Establishment hacks, ...In fairness to cuckservative Establishment hacks, a yuge chunk of the paleocon / alt-right / etc. crowd had also been acting all GAME OVER MAN GAME OVER about demographics.<br /><br />How did Obama win uber-white states in the Great Lakes and New England? There aren't that many blacks in Chicago and Detroit to swing the whole state. Let alone the seven black people in all of Vermont.<br /><br />The lame response was that it was blacks' fault *plus* the damn white liberals.<br /><br />OK, so the Republicans were not the white party, then. Only the white natalist apocalyptic party -- and we see how broad the base for that is.<br /><br />Trump is steering the GOP back to being the American party, and the Dems will become the party of those who don't identify culturally as Americans.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-60701598414800959422016-06-11T19:26:05.942-04:002016-06-11T19:26:05.942-04:00The political class no longer works to win electio...The political class no longer works to win elections but to make money on the spectacle of elections -- even if their side loses, they still made out like bandits. Consultants, analysts, pollsters, commentators, propagandists, etc.<br /><br />Politicians themselves get a little more money if they win, since they can sell access. But even if they lose, they join the consultant / etc. class and settle for 7 instead of 8 figures.<br /><br />Republicans as well as Democrats. Who in the hell would run Evil Hedge Fund Mormon Man? And who in the hell would run Crooked Hillary Clinton?<br /><br />The GOP was only big in the '80s because the Dems were so out of touch, still LARP-ing as New Deal / Great Society types, when it was 20+ years out of date. After Jimmy Carter got the New Deal band back together one last time in 1976, the Dems should have been able to tell that something new was needed.<br /><br />Instead they ran Mondale and Dukakis, representing the broad-appeal states of Minnesota and Massachusetts.<br /><br />Now that the Dems are so insulated and out of touch again, Trump Republicans are going to bulldoze the opposition.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-28856708602134465422016-06-11T15:59:14.759-04:002016-06-11T15:59:14.759-04:00http://www.unz.com/isteve/the-sailer-gap-in-action...http://www.unz.com/isteve/the-sailer-gap-in-action-nyt-says-in-2016-what-i-said-in-2001-there-are-more-white-voters-than-people-think/<br /><br />Turns out that GOP "intellectuals" and "analysts" went fishing for proof of the great Latino wave beginning in the 90's. Not really finding much using rigorous methods and studies, they began seizing on exit polls (which often exaggerate the presence of young and non white voters) to "prove" that the GOP could no longer afford to be the white party. <br /><br />PC blows. The GOP was yuge in the 80's. Why turn your back on that era? It's not like demographics changed all that much in the 90's; what happened in the 90's is that sticking it to old white guys became hip. Why not go ahead and pretend that their relevance has faded because, any moment now, a massive brown surge means that the GOP must shed it's white dude material.<br /><br />Check out the blog link. It's stunning how meaningless Mexicans are. The majority live in either California (a big blue state since conservative whites fled the state after the 80's) or Texas (solid red). Why go out you're way to appeal to either irrelevant Mexicans or shameless blacks particularly if such efforts alienate populist whites who've either been inactive or pushed to the Dems by the GOP running boring shit for brains guys like McCain or Romney?Ferylhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01336057631877941839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-7523868145773284072016-06-11T13:54:24.201-04:002016-06-11T13:54:24.201-04:00Feryl: "Ya know how most actors are black or ...Feryl: <i>"Ya know how most actors are black or white? Well, it's because they seem like they've got a mission (albeit not necessarily a noble one). They want things and they've got the charisma and energy to get them. What do Mexicans want? It's the problem with Asians and Mixtec type farmers; they grind, and they grind. Nothing more."</i><br /><br />Re: Asian actors, I think Asians are actually close to 1:1 in their representation in Hollywood, actually - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpp8slWpFpI<br />Yeah, that's less than the White and Black groupings being more represented howver actually pretty good given how many of them are FOBs who don't really even speaka the English so well, and the whole culture there frowning on doing work like acting that's not serious, how many Hollywood movies are period pieces set in the '70s and the like (best recent movie I watched from Hollywood, "The Nice Guys" had a '70s setting, written and directed by the scriptwriter from Lethal Weapon, buddy action comedy - worth watching) and are otherwise throwbacks and remakes.<br /><br />Asians are not so good at being the hot blooded charismatic type, but they've got a lot of quiet determination and grit / stoicism, and they're definitely strivers towards their goals (for good or bad). It's not like China, Japan, Korea all don't have a fuck of a lot more of a serious movie industry making movies with artistic expression than really any place outside the Anglosphere (Mainland Euros really only have art cinema and trash, Bollywood really only has trash).<br /><br />Generally also Chinese culture's full of stories about righteous bands of rebels rising up against the corrupt bureaucracy and rejection of the establishment eunuchs who try to take control and things. (Of course, the corrupt bureaucracy's a black mark against them as well).Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-51174545896475157952016-06-11T12:07:49.198-04:002016-06-11T12:07:49.198-04:00Hevy Kevy said...
"Trump has no chance. The o...Hevy Kevy said...<br />"Trump has no chance. The only people who vote for him are older white people. Plus the electoral college controls the vote and there is no way intellectuals vote for something like him. Also, Sanders supporters will now support Clinton"<br /><br />http://www.theonion.com/article/will-be-end-trumps-campaign-says-increasingly-nerv-52002Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-85269273341624409762016-06-11T01:56:02.705-04:002016-06-11T01:56:02.705-04:00I don't think this is 100% true. Conservative...I don't think this is 100% true. Conservatives of the Cruz-favoring variety have a clearly childlike mindset.<br /><br />https://thepracticalconservative.wordpress.com/2016/06/04/gnostic-americans-ted-cruz-and-why-conservatives-play-to-lose/<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-53980997263016082792016-06-11T01:33:39.168-04:002016-06-11T01:33:39.168-04:00I agree with you on your views about the electorat...I agree with you on your views about the electorate. But I think Bernie will be going full cuck in the next few months and endorsing Hillary 100%. He already sold out entirely once on immigration and he'll do it again.Sublatenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-16325527046680406722016-06-10T23:48:27.629-04:002016-06-10T23:48:27.629-04:00You can't make this up Mitt Romney says Donald...You can't make this up Mitt Romney says Donald Trump will change America with 'trickle-down racism' - CNNPolitics.com - www.cnn.com<br />http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/10/politics/mitt-romney-donald-trump-racism/Marcusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-26200769841362673082016-06-10T22:24:56.988-04:002016-06-10T22:24:56.988-04:00"Ya know how most actors are black or white? ..."Ya know how most actors are black or white? Well, it's because they seem like they've got a mission (albeit not necessarily a noble one). They want things and they've got the charisma and energy to get them. What do Mexicans want? It's the problem with Asians and Mixtec type farmers; they grind, and they grind. Nothing more."<br /><br />I think both those groups know deep down that they're boring as hell. Only a few token SJW's among them try to make noise about being underrepresented.Marcusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-43176651627899142822016-06-10T21:16:44.826-04:002016-06-10T21:16:44.826-04:00Only via ridiculously unprincipled exemptions can ...<i>Only via ridiculously unprincipled exemptions can you take progressivism's central logic, "All people are equal. Some people have too much and we should take it from them.", and not immediately apply it to groups that have more (whites, males) and those that have less (blacks, females). </i><br /><br />And yet progressives never criticize a certain (((group))) who's wealthy and influential like whites.Reallynewguyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16383900329508663485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-84395875293386003552016-06-10T20:30:21.499-04:002016-06-10T20:30:21.499-04:00Progressives don't have a philosophy -- almost...Progressives don't have a philosophy -- almost nobody follows an articulated list of beliefs, let alone seeking to apply it as consistently as possible. Conservatives, liberals, whoever. We're talking less than 1% of the population.<br /><br />Progressives are instead defined by wanting more of a social safety net -- not taking from group A and giving it to group B.<br /><br />But if someone becomes unemployed, give them a padded landing until they're working again. If someone gets sick, pad the landing until they get better.<br /><br />The unemployed and the sick are not permanent groups like blacks and women are, so it's not a transfer from one enduring group to another enduring group.<br /><br />More people are gaming the system and relying chronically on unemployment and disability benefits. That goes against the progressive idea that these benefits are serving as insurance -- but the response is not to take away those benefits and that's it.<br /><br />Why are more and more people relying on these welfare payments? Because all the decent-paying jobs have been sucked out of the country. Thanks to trade agreements, there go all the $40 per hour manufacturing jobs, and you're lucky if you can get hired for $8 an hour in retail over some illegal immigrant.<br /><br />The real solution is to keep the generous social safety net for the needy and victims of circumstance, and bring back the sources of prosperity for those who are capable of working yet are using welfare chronically. In other words, the Trump agenda.<br /><br />Railing against the social safety net in general is a losing program, aside from being wrong-minded.<br /><br />And painting progressives as a bunch of communists is going to pointlessly alienate the other side.<br /><br />Warren et al. are not progressives -- they don't give a damn about providing a more generous or secure social safety net, let alone bringing back good-paying jobs for those who are chronically relying on welfare. Instead, they only want to grandstand about their superior moral values, rather than do anything about the problem.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-75865082446326672362016-06-10T18:32:53.691-04:002016-06-10T18:32:53.691-04:00Warren et all aren't fake progs, though. Only ...Warren et all aren't fake progs, though. Only via ridiculously unprincipled exemptions can you take progressivism's central logic, "All people are equal. Some people have too much and we should take it from them.", and not immediately apply it to groups that have more (whites, males) and those that have less (blacks, females). There's just no logical way once you except prog premises.Calvinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10145579801829169386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-7594868772799870332016-06-10T18:30:00.886-04:002016-06-10T18:30:00.886-04:00Sure, so is Michigan and others. I'm being gen...Sure, so is Michigan and others. I'm being generous to Crooked Hillary.<br /><br />So in reality, if Bernie entered the general election, his state and electoral count would be even closer to Hillary's because Trump is going to win several of the states I've generously given to her.<br /><br />In fact, if Trump also takes Nevada, New Hampshire, and Michigan, and if Bernie squeezes through the three-way battle for California, it would be Trump 299, Bernie 120, and Hillary 119.<br /><br />Come on, Bernie, be a man and put Crooked Hillary in last place!agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-72792241477815047152016-06-10T17:41:04.972-04:002016-06-10T17:41:04.972-04:00Honestly I really feel like Nvada is a heavy Trump...Honestly I really feel like Nvada is a heavy Trump state, he was practically made for it. I have a hard time seeing Hillary win it outside of some serious dark side crap.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com