Libertarian vice presidential nominee Gov. Bill Weld released a statement Wednesday lambasting the websites and media outlets that have used his criticism of Trump to suggest that he was retreating from his running mate, Gov. Gary Johnson, and making a de facto endorsement for Hillary Clinton.

Measure 5 puts ranked choice voting (RCV) on the ballot to be used statewide. RCV is worthwhile to support because it’s better than Maine’s current plurality voting system. But if you dress up RCV and say it can do things that it can’t, then you’ll set yourself up for disappointment.

This week we discussed what having a woman president could mean for women in politics and gender relations. We welcomed Congresswoman Susan Davis (CA-53), who discussed the effect HRC could have as a female role model, as well as the Pentagon's order for U.S. Soldiers to return reenlistment bonuses from the mid 2000s.

Game one of the World Series last night was a blowout, as the Cleveland Indians beat the Chicago Cubs, 6-0. So that was not fun if you’re a Cubs fan, as I am through the World Series.

I also texted Theo Epstein Saturday night in the 7th inning, while the Cubs were beating the LA Dodgers 5-0 at Wrigley, and I wrote that his team would win four straight. So, while that’s still possible, it’s not probable.

In its ruling in the Citizens United case of 2010, the Supreme Court decided that organizations that are wholly independent of candidates could spend unlimited sums of money to influence elections because, in the words of Justice Anthony Kennedy, “independent expenditures do not lead to, or create the appearance of, quid pro quo corruption.”

Some reporters recently have reported on research that, based on only a few elections and without factoring in election competitiveness, suggests voter turnout has been adversely affected by introduction of ranked choice voting (RCV) in local elections. FairVote's research does not support this conclusion. Nor do the findings from a much more extensive research project led by University of Missouri-St. Louis professor David C. Kimball and presented at the September 2016 American Political Science Association annual meeting.

In a 21st century world filled with modern technological marvels that spread information far and wide instantaneously, a campaign's physical ground game is still the surest way for a candidate to win at the ballot box.

Deep in their cups after November 8th, lamenting the rolling tragedy that was this election season, the realization will settle in: “We could have won this one.”

“This was a winnable race. The opponent was so flawed. The people are so mad. We could have elected a worthy American to be president. Someone all Americans can believe in. We could have....”

More than one observer of American life has lamented the dark and depressing tone of the 2016 presidential election, believing we have sunk to a previously unknown low.

Regardless of political inclinations, no one feels good about the tone of either campaign of the two major party candidates or the absence of substance in online and mainstream media coverage.

Most people will agree, the 2016 presidential election has been the craziest in modern U.S. history, and there are millions of Americans who are looking forward to its end. While the threat of possible legal challenges looms in the event of close races in key battleground states, what would cause voters' heads to collectively explode is if there is a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College.

Don't lose your head just yet. This outcome is statistically unlikely. However, the first question of whether it is possible can be answered with an indisputable “yes.”