How will Trump handle losing the election?

Quote snood:

Quote:

But, but... You've already said that Trump will definitely win and usher in 20 years of Republican presidencies, right? Don't start stuttering now!! I'm hoping to enjoy your triumphant commentary on election night! Buck up!!

I second that emotion. Throughout this election cycle, oralloy has been the inspiring example of faith and belief in a certain set of principles. I disagreed with his principles, but I admired his faith and belief in them. Surely Oralloy is not joining the pack of rats deserting the ship now. I couldn't bear it.

In November, Donald Trump could become the first Republican presidential nominee to lose Orange County, California, since 1936. He could also be the first to lose Virginia Beach, Virginia, since 1964. But he could simultaneously become the first Republican to win an electoral vote from Maine since 1988 and only the second Republican to carry Iowa since 1984.

Hillary Clinton is favored to win the presidency, perhaps by a lot. Republicans are still favored to hold the House. In other words, after all the madness, the balance of power in Washington post-2016 could look surprisingly similar to that after 2012. Yet beneath the surface, the tectonic plates of the American electorate are shifting.

By now, it's clear where the fault lines lie: The 2016 election is poised to be among the most polarized elections ever, not only along gender and generational lines, but especially along lines of race and educational attainment.

In August, Nate Cohn of The New York Times put it well when he wrote: “The simple way to think about Mr. Trump’s strength is in terms of education among white voters. He hopes to do much better than Mitt Romney did in 2012 among white voters without a degree so that he can make up the margin of Mr. Romney’s four-point defeat and overcome the additional losses he’s likely to absorb among well-educated voters and Hispanic voters.”

There’s evidence that Trump is underperforming Romney among Asians and African-Americans, not just Latinos and college-educated whites. Clinton, on the other hand, has been underperforming President Obama among non-college-educated whites.

To get a handle on how these shifts could affect the electoral landscape, we modeled how many of Romney’s votes came from college-educated whites and minorities and how many of Obama’s votes came from non-college-educated whites in each state, county and congressional district. The difference between these two vote totals, shown in the map above, can tell us where Clinton and Trump have the most potential to build on 2012.

Then we went a step further: How would the 2016 map look if one out of every five whites without a college degree who voted for Obama in 2012 defected to Trump and if one out of every five non-whites and college-educated whites who voted for Romney in 2012 switched to Clinton? (Why one out of five? It’s a somewhat arbitrary number but represents a realistic shift of these groups, according to polls released over the past few months.)

Let's call this scenario the “2016 Vote Swap.” In it, Clinton would win the election, and her share of the two-party vote would be 52.7 percent — 0.7 percentage points higher than Obama’s 2012 showing. However, we also estimate she would win 10 fewer electoral votes than Obama did in the Electoral College.

Donald Trump's "deeply unsettling and disturbing" views make him a danger internationally, the UN's human rights chief has said.

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Raad al-Hussein cited Mr Trump's comments on the use of torture and his attitude to "vulnerable communities".

Mr Hussein said at a news briefing in Geneva: "If Donald Trump is elected on the basis of what he has said already - and unless that changes - I think it is without any doubt that he would be dangerous from an international point of view."

Mr Hussein said he was "not keen or intent on interfering in any political campaign within any particular country".

But he said that when an election could result in an increase in the use of torture "or the focus on vulnerable communities in a way that suggests that they may well be deprived of their human rights, then I think it is incumbent to say so".

Mr Hussein has spoken out before on Mr Trump's policies, saying in June that "bigotry is not proof of strong leadership", while in September he launched a scathing attack on Western populist politicians, branding them "demagogues and political fantasists".

During the campaign, Mr Trump has said that "torture works" and has promised to bring back "a lot worse than waterboarding".

Waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques previously used by US forces on terror suspects have been banned by the Obama administration.

Mr Trump said of waterboarding in June: "I like it a lot. I don't think it's tough enough."

His comments on migrants, Mexicans in particular, have drawn fire from rights activists.

He has vowed to build a wall along the Mexican border and in June 2015 branded some Mexican migrants "rapists" and "murderers".

Mr Hussein's latest comments are unlikely to change the New York billionaire's harsh criticism of the United Nations.

But you know that it won't happen that way. Should Trump lose, he will go on a rant about how "illegals" poured over the border to rig the election. He'll use the platform he has along with the white nationalist press he's gathered to his side (Breitbart and Alies) to continue to spread his lies and whip up his base. Eventually he will fail because he's too caustic (and honestly too stupid) to lead (think Jean-Marie Le Pen in France), but then a more charismatic figure will arise to take over the movement. Since the Republican party counts on this group for a significant portion of their support (and the Democrats are fooling themselves if they think some of their support isn't in this group as well), we will see a split along the lines of what happened to the Democrats in the 40's when the Dixiecrats in the South started to split off.

I second that emotion. Throughout this election cycle, oralloy has been the inspiring example of faith and belief in a certain set of principles. I disagreed with his principles, but I admired his faith and belief in them. Surely Oralloy is not joining the pack of rats deserting the ship now. I couldn't bear it.

One thing is obvious; Trump has split the republican party into the Trump party and the Paul Ryan party.

The people of the Republican party, the same ones that elected members of Congress, chose Trump to be the candidate of choice. If they are actually representatives of the people that voted both them and Trump in, they would be wise to heed the will of the people if they wish to keep their jobs.

The people of the Republican party, the same ones that elected members of Congress, chose Trump to be the candidate of choice. If they are actually representatives of the people that voted both them and Trump in, they would be wise to heed the will of the people if they wish to keep their jobs.

but I admired his faith and belief in them.