User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: Some questions for Republicans

  1. #11
    Points: 173,037, Level: 98
    Level completed: 85%, Points required for next Level: 613
    Overall activity: 50.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    donttread's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    88558
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    51,931
    Points
    173,037
    Level
    98
    Thanks Given
    18,311
    Thanked 20,526x in 14,783 Posts
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Individual View Post
    Media Darling, aka Donald Trump, has “won” the election. He came out of nowhere and at the last minute swept to victory in a scene reminiscent of Dewey V Truman, or any Rocky movie. Hillary Clinton had a huge lead for a year, a lead that she did not relinquish after the debates. Then, about a week before the election, the poll numbers began to change, even though nothing new happened in the campaign. That ten percent swing in the poll numbers really couldn’t have come at a more convenient time for you. It really is...shall we say…unbelievable.

    So answer me this:

    Why did so many people, for no apparent reason, suddenly abandon a candidate they had supported for a year and switch to a candidate whose policies they abhor? Can you give one plausible, intelligent reason why so many people had this inexplicable change of heart at the last minute?

    There are some people who have an answer.

    Here’s an article from a progressive publication that supplies an answer. I know all the Republicans will automatically want to dismiss it, but it is a well documented article if you care to go through the footnotes.

    http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0601-34.htm


    Clint Curtis has an answer.



    And here’s an interesting answer from retired NSA analyst Michael Duniho. (Republicans may not want to read this article as it brings very bad news about the elections of 2008 and 2012.)

    http://readersupportednews.org/news-...ections-part-i

    Michael Connell also had an answer, but he was killed when his private plane crashed before he could give his answer in court.

    If we look at the “results” from this election and we flip the numbers by ten percent we arrive at pretty much the same numbers we were showing after the debates.

    What’s your answer for this conveniently timed and suspicious number? Do you have one that doesn’t involve words like “tin foil hat” or “crybaby” or “sore loser”? I have an article that presents proof for all of its statements, a video of testimony by the guy who wrote the prototype for the vote changing program, and an article where a former NSA analyst gives you the formula you need to verify election results yourself so you don’t have to take his word for it. Will you answer by pointing to a “news” article where your Media Darling’s fellow media shills simply run their mouth with claims of fraud against them without offering anything in the way of proof? Do you have an intelligent answer as to why so many people changed their mind at the last minute even though nothing new happened in the campaign?

    We’re trying to live in a society where the voice of the people actually matters. Does the voice of the people matter to you? Or do you only care that the Red Party wins? Take a step up in life. Make the transition from Red back to Republican. Give an intelligent answer. The continued existence of this country may depend on it.

    You've got a set I'll give you that . After the way Hilary and the DNC and "hackable voting machines" cheated Bernie sanders out of a chance, even if it was rigged she deserved it.
    I think it's more likely that the pollsters and media were trying to influence the election and sell air time.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to donttread For This Useful Post:

    Ravens Fan (11-13-2016)

  3. #12
    Points: 33,845, Level: 44
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 105
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Subdermal's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    184660
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    11,998
    Points
    33,845
    Level
    44
    Thanks Given
    13,718
    Thanked 5,374x in 3,871 Posts
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Individual View Post
    Wow. These replies came so fast. You must be quick readers to have read all the evidence this fast.

    So now your claim is that every poll was wrong until the last days of the election? The bottom line is the polls showed the numbers one way and then began to show different numbers just before the election. And you think the ones that disagreed with you were wrong but the ones that agreed with you were right. So if these people found out their polls were wrong for such a long time, how did they find out and what method did they use to take their "accurate" polls just days before the election? Yes, someone ran his mouth that he was wrong all along and then suddenly found a way to be accurate just days before the election. What proof does he give to back up his flapping mouth? How did they discover their polls were in error and what method did they use to suddenly be "accurate"?

    I asked for an intelligent answer. Try reading the evidence. (There's plenty more where it came from.) And then give me one good reason why so many people would change their mind for no reason.


    Yes, I'm a fast reader.

    Where was your evidence that Trump is or was "a media darling"?

    If that were so, would it not stand to reason that the polls - overwhelmingly conducted and disseminated by the media itself - would have reflected the results which actually took place throughout, thus further demoralizing Clinton turn out?

    Here's what happened: the media - totally and overtly in the bag for Clinton - attempted throughout the campaign to support Hillary by using polls as a weapon. These pollsters have their own political biases, as do members of the media themselves.

    Do you wish to challenge that assertion?

    If not, let's continue.

    Once their propagandic work was done, they had self-preservation to think about: they want to be correct, so they remain credible. This was, in fact, predicted by many leading conservative political pundits: the polling would suddenly - inexplicably, if necessary - tighten, and show Trump and Hillary in a very tight race.

    As I argued very early on - and was correct about, despite the whines and wails of posters like @maineman and @Bethere - the formula pollsters used for oversampling was wrong. I believe the formula was intentionally wrong, and said so.

    One of the great things to falsify theorem is predictive accuracy. If I was correct, the media/polls was going to 'revert' at the end, and suddenly declare the race 'tight': a totally different narrative than they had been spinning throughout.

    I'm correct. You're not. You, in fact, are whacky.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Subdermal For This Useful Post:

    MisterVeritis (11-13-2016)

  5. #13
    Points: 7,196, Level: 20
    Level completed: 21%, Points required for next Level: 554
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Individual's Avatar Junior Member
    Karma
    2968
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    65
    Points
    7,196
    Level
    20
    Thanks Given
    41
    Thanked 37x in 26 Posts
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Totally and overtly in the bag for Clinton? In what way? All they ever told us about Clinton was Benghazi and email scandals. Meanwhile, the TV star who never saw a camera he did't like, was reported on every time he came outside. I know this might shatter your image of yourselves as the poor, picked on little babies, but the fact is the media is about as liberal as Barry Goldwater. Now that Media Darling is the Republican nominee, your assertion that the media is constantly against you wears even thinner.

    You claim there was a bad formula used for all the polls up until the last few days of the election. Show me the formula used, and not just someone from Republimedia flapping his mouth. Show me the new formula that suddenly got it right just days before the election. Give one credible and intelligent reason why so many people were conducting bad polls only to suddenly learn they were wrong and miraculously discover a correct polling method just days before the election. Give me one good reason as to why this was so conveniently timed. Give me one good reason as to why their inaccurate methods would be off by the same numbers that have been proven to be used by the Republican vote switching program.

    I've presented evidence that Republicans have been rigging elections since 2004. I asked for an intelligent response.
    If you don't know what communism is then how do you know you're not a communist?

  6. #14
    Points: 31,896, Level: 43
    Level completed: 61%, Points required for next Level: 554
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    maineman's Avatar Banned
    Karma
    165932
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    14,366
    Points
    31,896
    Level
    43
    Thanks Given
    3,654
    Thanked 2,948x in 2,401 Posts
    Mentioned
    255 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Subdermal View Post
    As I argued very early on - and was correct about, despite the whines and wails of posters like @maineman and @Bethere - the formula pollsters used for oversampling was wrong. I believe the formula was intentionally wrong, and said so.
    you proved over and over and over and over and over again that you actually do not even KNOW what oversampling in polling actually is, señor.


  7. #15
    Points: 500,453, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    SocialOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Cigar's Avatar Banned
    Karma
    325517
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Wow, what next?
    Posts
    78,900
    Points
    500,453
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    4,088
    Thanked 12,276x in 9,780 Posts
    Mentioned
    1541 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    This is a Perfect Storm for Washington ...

    The Republican Party is in charge ...

    They have a House!
    They have a Senate!
    They have a President!

    ... and soon they will a Supreme Court in their favor.

    No excuses ... No Boogie Man to blame ... it's all on them.

    I say let them Execute ...

    It won't take Decades or Centuries to get real results.

    Now Everyone will know in real time the truth. The good news is, denying the Truth won;t work anymore with them, because "they are in charge" of the decisions, the execution and the results.

    ... stay tuned

  8. #16
    Original Ranter
    Points: 314,886, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second Class50000 Experience PointsOverdriveVeteranYour first Group
    Captain Obvious's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    773942
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    80,473
    Points
    314,886
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    30,199
    Thanked 40,087x in 27,208 Posts
    Mentioned
    1041 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    tick... tick...

  9. #17
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,122, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496592
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,700
    Points
    859,122
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,223
    Thanked 147,602x in 94,423 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I said a long time ago, and often during the election cycle, that Hillary would have a problem with turnout. Disregard the possible criminality. She has zero charisma.

    Also her deplorables comment about half the population will go down in history as the stupidest comment made by an experienced politician in US history.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Peter1469 For This Useful Post:

    Ravens Fan (11-13-2016)

  11. #18
    Points: 56,719, Level: 58
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 1,631
    Overall activity: 0.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience PointsTagger Second Class
    patrickt's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    17597
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Living in Oaxaca, Mexico, born in Memphis and worked in Colorado
    Posts
    11,977
    Points
    56,719
    Level
    58
    Thanks Given
    916
    Thanked 5,009x in 3,481 Posts
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Individual View Post
    Totally and overtly in the bag for Clinton? In what way? All they ever told us about Clinton was Benghazi and email scandals. Meanwhile, the TV star who never saw a camera he did't like, was reported on every time he came outside. I know this might shatter your image of yourselves as the poor, picked on little babies, but the fact is the media is about as liberal as Barry Goldwater. Now that Media Darling is the Republican nominee, your assertion that the media is constantly against you wears even thinner.

    You claim there was a bad formula used for all the polls up until the last few days of the election. Show me the formula used, and not just someone from Republimedia flapping his mouth. Show me the new formula that suddenly got it right just days before the election. Give one credible and intelligent reason why so many people were conducting bad polls only to suddenly learn they were wrong and miraculously discover a correct polling method just days before the election. Give me one good reason as to why this was so conveniently timed. Give me one good reason as to why their inaccurate methods would be off by the same numbers that have been proven to be used by the Republican vote switching program.

    I've presented evidence that Republicans have been rigging elections since 2004. I asked for an intelligent response.
    What passes for evidence for liberals doesn't merit a response. Dedicated Democrats finally saw what they were supporting and felt sick. I think very few voted for Donald Trump but a lot simply didn't vote for a Presidential candidate.

    And, Individual, quit whining. I'm fairly certain President Obama and Sen. Clinton can handle the whining on their own.

    And, a liberal saying the Republicans engage in voter fraud is like Jeffrey Dahlmer saying his mother fixed dinner. The Democrat have always been and always will be the party of voter fraud. Melowese Richardson rules.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to patrickt For This Useful Post:

    MisterVeritis (11-13-2016)

  13. #19
    Points: 33,845, Level: 44
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 105
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Subdermal's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    184660
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    11,998
    Points
    33,845
    Level
    44
    Thanks Given
    13,718
    Thanked 5,374x in 3,871 Posts
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by maineman View Post
    you proved over and over and over and over and over again that you actually do not even KNOW what oversampling in polling actually is, señor.



    And - yet - I turned out to be totally and completely correct.

    And you didn't.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Subdermal For This Useful Post:

    MisterVeritis (11-13-2016)

  15. #20
    Points: 33,845, Level: 44
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 105
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Subdermal's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    184660
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    11,998
    Points
    33,845
    Level
    44
    Thanks Given
    13,718
    Thanked 5,374x in 3,871 Posts
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Individual View Post
    Totally and overtly in the bag for Clinton? In what way? All they ever told us about Clinton was Benghazi and email scandals. Meanwhile, the TV star who never saw a camera he did't like, was reported on every time he came outside. I know this might shatter your image of yourselves as the poor, picked on little babies, but the fact is the media is about as liberal as Barry Goldwater. Now that Media Darling is the Republican nominee, your assertion that the media is constantly against you wears even thinner.
    You've built a mighty thick wall of utter denial.



    No one - and I mean no one - with credibility thinks that the media isn't liberal. Particularly, the media itself.
    Now tell me: if the media itself is telling you something that you cannot admit, why should anyone take you seriously?
    You claim there was a bad formula used for all the polls up until the last few days of the election. Show me the formula used, and not just someone from Republimedia flapping his mouth.
    Neat little paradigm: reject anything but the media itself admitting it was fudging. Do you need prosecutors on this planet from which you hail? Sounds like everyone simply confesses.



    John Zogby tells you where the problem was.

    Show me the new formula that suddenly got it right just days before the election. Give one credible and intelligent reason why so many people were conducting bad polls only to suddenly learn they were wrong and miraculously discover a correct polling method just days before the election. Give me one good reason as to why this was so conveniently timed. Give me one good reason as to why their inaccurate methods would be off by the same numbers that have been proven to be used by the Republican vote switching program.
    I already did. They wanted to hold onto their credibility by being at least near accurate at the end. Most were still wrong, but not as badly. I was correct from the beginning. you should consider that, and wonder why.
    I've presented evidence that Republicans have been rigging elections since 2004. I asked for an intelligent response.


    I've already posted actual proof of Dem vote rigging, and there is - additionally - videotape of Dem operatives plainly confessing to rigging votes with buses. Join the correct planet.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts