[vtsnowedin]

By Wednesday morning we should know the results of the election and at this point it could go either way.
So how will you feel if Hillary wins? and How will you feel if Trump wins?
I don't like either of them so it is a mixed bag.
If Hillary wins I'll feel that I personally lost big time and the rest of the country will have lost with me, even those Democrat voters that voted for her by being blind to her criminality and sheepishly party loyal.
If Trump wins That means Hillary lost, which is good, but that is the only good thing about it.
A trump presidency will be a crap shoot with noway to guess how he will interact with Congress or the rest of the world.
I don't sleep easy these days.

[careinke]

I will feel sad no matter who ends up wining.

[dolanbaker]

Relieved that the whole farce is over, at the end of the day the US electorate are voting for a puppet, the string pullers really call the shots.

The real question is who will be the winning puppetmasters?

[Newfie]

Sick

[vtsnowedin]

My we are a pessimistic bunch.

[Plantagenet]

After a hot shower, I'll feel great!

[Pops]

I'll look at it at the time.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Maybe its just old age setting in, but I've never been even close to this disappointed over the mainstream choices -- both of them.

OTOH, the only time I was actually really enthusiastic about a choice was in college when Reagan was running. Maybe that was primarily youthful ignorance.

But seriously, THIS was the best both parties could come up with?

...

So I think I'll feel like I took home the consolation prize for voting minor party in protest.

Given the state of Capitol Hill, I'll feel depressed about the state of the federal government, regardless of who wins. (More of the same vs the past 20+ years, only more so).

[Cog]

Hungover is my guess.

[Shaved Monkey]

No one wins this election.
And they will only get worse,we are seeing the effects of PO/collapse of exponential growth on a finite planet fantasy ecenomic model.
White men will get angrier and there is no cure.
Wanting to make it great again is only going to make them angrier when they realise it cant happen.
Accepting the reality of the times and making changes to adapt aren't politically appetising,blaming someone else is easier to sell.

[Ibon]

Happy I am in Panama in a cloud forest.

[vtsnowedin]

Hungover is my guess.

More then usual?
I have to help count votes Tuesday night so will get a late start.

[GoghGoner]

I would be shocked if Trump won. The numbers are very much against it still. I doubt if my life will be affected by the election, but perhaps, my job in government-funded research is a little safer with the Ds.

[vtsnowedin]

I would be shocked if Trump won. The numbers are very much against it still. I doubt if my life will be affected by the election, but perhaps, my job in government-funded research is a little safer with the Ds.

I wouldn't believe anything they are saying about the polls right now. They always say it is close to keep turnout high even if they know it will be a blowout.

[dolanbaker]

I would be shocked if Trump won. The numbers are very much against it still. I doubt if my life will be affected by the election, but perhaps, my job in government-funded research is a little safer with the Ds.

I wouldn't believe anything they are saying about the polls right now. They always say it is close to keep turnout high even if they know it will be a blowout.

There's always a significant number who will lie to the pollsters for a variety of reasons, just look at the recent Brexit vote in the UK. All the polls had the remain side ahead (by 5% or so), but the result was 52% for leave.
It's also very important to consider those who decide not to vote as their missing votes could make the difference.

[vtsnowedin]

I would be shocked if Trump won. The numbers are very much against it still. I doubt if my life will be affected by the election, but perhaps, my job in government-funded research is a little safer with the Ds.

I wouldn't believe anything they are saying about the polls right now. They always say it is close to keep turnout high even if they know it will be a blowout.

There's always a significant number who will lie to the pollsters for a variety of reasons, just look at the recent Brexit vote in the UK. All the polls had the remain side ahead (by 5% or so), but the result was 52% for leave.
It's also very important to consider those who decide not to vote as their missing votes could make the difference.

I'm speaking from my observations of the last ten presidential elections. The reported polls mysteriously tighten near the end and often have no relationship to the final results so one has to determine that pollsters have no idea about how to do your job or are skewing how they report their results to lead voters to vote one way or the other.
It's well known that if a candidate is way down in the polls voters will move away from them not wanting to vote for a loser. The prediction of the loss creates the reality.
And then there is this recent trend of election night results not being reported as the numbers actually come in but by some predetermined result.
I've counted a lot of votes and helped report them to the state office that tabulates them. They should and do dribble in hour by hour and precinct by precinct and the totals and percentages should change hour by hour, not sit stagnant with a large number reported right after the polls close for hours with no change. Of course large cities with voting machines can report faster then paper ballot towns but there is no way they all report at once before the same commercial break.
But if your network can feed questions to their preferred candidate before the debate what is a little manipulation of the voting results trying to get candidates to come out and give their concession speeches?
Or maybe they are just playing the viewers trying to keep the maximum number of eyeballs on the screen to view a few more commercials.

[vox_mundi]

No matter who wins, I think most of the voters in the U.S. will feel like the homeless guy in this story ...

Officials: San Antonio Police Officer Fired For Attempting to Feed Fecal Sandwich to Homeless Person

An officer from the San Antonio Police Department has been fired for allegedly attempting to feed a fecal sandwich to a homeless person, several sources have confirmed.

The City Council was briefed on the matter during a private session Thursday, sources said. The officer reportedly placed fecal matter between two pieces of bread and gave it to a homeless person.

The alleged incident occurred in May, when Officer Matthew Luckhurst, a five-year veteran of the department, bragged to a fellow officer that “he had picked up some feces, placed it in a slice of bread, and put it in a Styrofoam container next to the unknown homeless male,” according to a press release from the chief’s office. “The officer reported that he told Luckhurst to go back and throw it away. The officer said he saw Luckhurst go back and he assumed that Luckhurst discarded the container.”

The incident was reported to Internal Affairs in July. Police Department officials have been unable to locate the homeless man.

[KaiserJeep]

Nobody will have won by Wednesday. The way the polls are tightening up, it will be a close election. We are in for twp months of legal wrangling over who won, at least. That already happened once, when Al Gore lost Florida - and the presidency - by 25 votes.

Endless recounts, anyone?