Message auto-removed
riversedge
(80,063 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)It's pretty much a red state. So it is not news that Missouri Democrats like Hillary.
No surprise there, and not particularly relevant to winning the general election in 2016.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008
Response to JDPriestly (Reply #2)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Nitram
(27,337 posts)Is that a bad thing?
freebrew
(1,917 posts)Missouri is Red because of DWS and Rahm.
They abandoned Dean's 50 state strategy.
We have a 'Dem' governor. The districts here have been gerry-mandered so badly it will be difficult for ANY Dem to win a state office or any office represented by any district EXCEPT St. Louis.
SmittynMo
(3,544 posts)1. I live in MO. Can you tell by my ID?
2. No one came to my house, nor called me to get my opinion on who I, nor any of my neighbors, are voting for.
3. It's a subscription news service, from Missouri? Who the hell is going to pay for this? It certainly has to be a very low number. So even though the results above only show percentages, I'm sure the total number surveyed was extremely low. Which brings me to my next issue. Why even post this information that the state is going for HRC when perhaps the number of surveys was say 500. My point being that this post is a total waste of time and does not reflect the state, nor the voting populous accurately.
Response to SmittynMo (Reply #4)
Name removed Message auto-removed
SmittynMo
(3,544 posts)I'm just as special as you are. Unscientific? Give me a break.
The point here is this article is hardly worth mentioning. It's equivalent to polling my 500 neighbors and posting it here.
greatlaurel
(2,020 posts)She needs to build a campaign that will reach into red states and pull some of them into the blue. She will need it, as there will widespread election fraud in states run by the GOP like Ohio.
