What would a Rubio electoral map have looked like?

[Hillary Lost]

Rubio 348
Clinton 190


Considering the polls were so far off to the point Democrats had her winning Ohio by 8, I'd say this map is about right.  Remember Hillary leading by 17 in August?  What happened to that?

Wait let me guess Russia right?  

[Hillary Lost]

Considering the polls were so far off to the point Democrats had her winning Ohio by 8, I'd say this map is about right.  Remember Hillary leading by 17 in August?  What happened to that?

That's because of Trump's volatility as a candidate, such as with his Khan comments, in particular in August, this habitually happened with whatever remarks Trump made.

Only an idiot believes there was such a swing.  Trump really led the entire time.  As for Khan Trump should've said in August what he said at the debates.  "Had I been president, Khan's son would still be alive."  Anyhow only an idiot believes there could've been such a swing.  There's not even 17% of people in this country who don't have their minds made up from the get go these days.  It takes an even bigger moron to follow the polls and media over the will of the people.  How out of touch can someone be with their country?

[Hillary Lost]

Considering the polls were so far off to the point Democrats had her winning Ohio by 8, I'd say this map is about right.  Remember Hillary leading by 17 in August?  What happened to that?

That's because of Trump's volatility as a candidate, such as with his Khan comments, in particular in August, this habitually happened with whatever remarks Trump made.

Only an idiot believes there was such a swing.  Trump really led the entire time.  As for Khan Trump should've said in August what he said at the debates.  "Had I been president, Khan's son would still be alive."  Anyhow only an idiot believes there could've been such a swing.  There's not even 17% of people in this country who don't have their minds made up from the get go these days.  It takes an even bigger moron to follow the polls and media over the will of the people.  How out of touch can someone be with their country?

He led with HIS CORE VOTERS, and many of those voters were a lot of independents and crossover dems who went for him in the primaries, but those comments he made about the Khans, etc. gave him issues with the traditional gop base/suburban republicans, hence the volatility, and hence why it would be an apples-to-oranges comparison with Trump v. a more conventional republican.

He was never down by 17.  The polls were wrong in relation to the final vote even though Democrats arrogantly bragged about her lead at the time.

[Hillary Lost]

Considering the polls were so far off to the point Democrats had her winning Ohio by 8, I'd say this map is about right.  Remember Hillary leading by 17 in August?  What happened to that?

That's because of Trump's volatility as a candidate, such as with his Khan comments, in particular in August, this habitually happened with whatever remarks Trump made.

Only an idiot believes there was such a swing.  Trump really led the entire time.  As for Khan Trump should've said in August what he said at the debates.  "Had I been president, Khan's son would still be alive."  Anyhow only an idiot believes there could've been such a swing.  There's not even 17% of people in this country who don't have their minds made up from the get go these days.  It takes an even bigger moron to follow the polls and media over the will of the people.  How out of touch can someone be with their country?

He led with HIS CORE VOTERS, and many of those voters were a lot of independents and crossover dems who went for him in the primaries, but those comments he made about the Khans, etc. gave him issues with the traditional gop base/suburban republicans, hence the volatility, and hence why it would be an apples-to-oranges comparison with Trump v. a more conventional republican.

He was never down by 17.  The polls were wrong in relation to the final vote even though Democrats arrogantly bragged about her lead at the time.

Actually it wasn't just democrats, it was nevertrump republicans (like the entire national review) who wanted him to lose too and were constantly talking about his poll numbers even in the primaries, because like I said Trump had his unique voters, but he had issues with traditional gop base.

He was never down by 17.  The polls were wrong in relation to the final vote even though non-Trump supporters arrogantly bragged about her lead at the time.  Never Trumpers were mainly neo-cons who said we'd be greeted as liberators in Iraq.

[Hillary Lost]

Considering the polls were so far off to the point Democrats had her winning Ohio by 8, I'd say this map is about right.  Remember Hillary leading by 17 in August?  What happened to that?

That's because of Trump's volatility as a candidate, such as with his Khan comments, in particular in August, this habitually happened with whatever remarks Trump made.

Only an idiot believes there was such a swing.  Trump really led the entire time.  As for Khan Trump should've said in August what he said at the debates.  "Had I been president, Khan's son would still be alive."  Anyhow only an idiot believes there could've been such a swing.  There's not even 17% of people in this country who don't have their minds made up from the get go these days.  It takes an even bigger moron to follow the polls and media over the will of the people.  How out of touch can someone be with their country?

He led with HIS CORE VOTERS, and many of those voters were a lot of independents and crossover dems who went for him in the primaries, but those comments he made about the Khans, etc. gave him issues with the traditional gop base/suburban republicans, hence the volatility, and hence why it would be an apples-to-oranges comparison with Trump v. a more conventional republican.

He was never down by 17.  The polls were wrong in relation to the final vote even though Democrats arrogantly bragged about her lead at the time.

Actually it wasn't just democrats, it was nevertrump republicans (like the entire national review) who wanted him to lose too and were constantly talking about his poll numbers even in the primaries, because like I said Trump had his unique voters, but he had issues with traditional gop base.

He was never down by 17.  The polls were wrong in relation to the final vote even though non-Trump supporters arrogantly bragged about her lead at the time.  Never Trumpers were mainly neo-cons who said we'd be greeted as liberators in Iraq.

Yes, and you're cheering on a neocon candidate (who thinks invading Iraq was a positive move, even in hindsight) in this thread whose neocon backers were bragging about the same polls, what is your point?

No I'm not cheering anyone on and who is this "neo-con" candidate? Whose backers were supporting what polls?  What is your point?

[Hillary Lost]

Considering the polls were so far off to the point Democrats had her winning Ohio by 8, I'd say this map is about right.  Remember Hillary leading by 17 in August?  What happened to that?

That's because of Trump's volatility as a candidate, such as with his Khan comments, in particular in August, this habitually happened with whatever remarks Trump made.

Only an idiot believes there was such a swing.  Trump really led the entire time.  As for Khan Trump should've said in August what he said at the debates.  "Had I been president, Khan's son would still be alive."  Anyhow only an idiot believes there could've been such a swing.  There's not even 17% of people in this country who don't have their minds made up from the get go these days.  It takes an even bigger moron to follow the polls and media over the will of the people.  How out of touch can someone be with their country?

He led with HIS CORE VOTERS, and many of those voters were a lot of independents and crossover dems who went for him in the primaries, but those comments he made about the Khans, etc. gave him issues with the traditional gop base/suburban republicans, hence the volatility, and hence why it would be an apples-to-oranges comparison with Trump v. a more conventional republican.

He was never down by 17.  The polls were wrong in relation to the final vote even though Democrats arrogantly bragged about her lead at the time.

Actually it wasn't just democrats, it was nevertrump republicans (like the entire national review) who wanted him to lose too and were constantly talking about his poll numbers even in the primaries, because like I said Trump had his unique voters, but he had issues with traditional gop base.

He was never down by 17.  The polls were wrong in relation to the final vote even though non-Trump supporters arrogantly bragged about her lead at the time.  Never Trumpers were mainly neo-cons who said we'd be greeted as liberators in Iraq.

Yes, and you're cheering on a neocon candidate (who thinks invading Iraq was a positive move, even in hindsight) in this thread whose neocon backers were bragging about the same polls, what is your point?

No I'm not cheering anyone on and who is this "neo-con" candidate? Whose backers were supporting what polls?  What is your point?

You're on here talking about the 'liberal democrat' conspiracy against Trump, but it was neocons like rubio's backers like rick wilson who were just as much as opposed to Trump.

Yea gee I wonder if Rubio running against Trump in the primaries had anything at all to do with Rubio opposing Trump early on?