Trump by name......

Discussion in 'Off Topic Area' started by Dead_pool, Dec 9, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    Well, if you're going to make claims and then refuse to provide even basic evidence you can't really complain about people saying you're making it up. It's not much to ask for website link to a site you're presumably already looking at to have your poll figures.

    Although as far as mod work goes, I do have to remind you about multiposting rules. Six posts in a row for one word replies isn't very acceptable
     
  2. Giovanni

    Giovanni Well-Known Member Supporter

    screenshot of the rasmussen site.

    stop lying.
     

    Attached Files:

  3. The Iron Fist

    The Iron Fist Banned Banned

    Not really, it's all in the sample.

    Every debate poll you can post with Donald winning is unscientific, that can be proven with math.

    Every scientific poll post debate, as in those performed according to scientific standards, showed Hillary winning.

    Every scientific poll of the national election, shows they are running close, but those polls don't mean anything. He could be 5-10 points ahead nationally and still lose the Electoral college.

    I'm conservative, and I understand how poll sampling works, dude, all the polls showing Trump won were very flawed samples. I won't argue he doesn't have a LOT of popular support, that is reflected in the national polls, but that's never won a presidency. Not even once.
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2016
  4. The Iron Fist

    The Iron Fist Banned Banned

    That's true, statistical conclusions can be twisted, which is why people are asking for your sources, so they can examine your samples, and the data. If you can see the data, it can't be twisted because that's how peer review works, and how many a 'survey' was shot down in dissertation defense because the methodology was poor.

    See, the polls and samples I've analyzed that also fall within standard scientific polling methodologies, all show people felt Clinton won the debate, and will probably (not assuredly) win the electoral vote. These two things are correlated obviously. Nationally, just means that Trump might win a vote if the US was an actual democracy. But we're not, the national vote doesn't elect the President. If it did Al Gore would have won in 2000 (and I don't like Al Gore, so I voted for Bush Jr.).

    Let's pretend for a minute that's true, and they are statistically close in national polling (which is close to true, but I still think the majority of scientific polls lean in Clinton's favor).

    But again, you're forgetting that the statistical tie you keep referencing isn't what wins the US election. There is no statistical tie when it comes to the electoral map. The electoral map is clearly, as of today, in Clinton's favor and even Rasmussen's polling experts said today a vast majority (80+% of people sampled) have made up their minds.

    That means Trump lost already, and the fact that he still has a chance is true, but the chance is very, very small and he's run out of time.

    Is Julian Assange or Vladimir Putin's nationalist hacker army going to save him with an October surprise? If they did, would you support that sort of thing, foreign influence in our election?
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2016
  5. The Iron Fist

    The Iron Fist Banned Banned

    Your source appears to be fake, and the email you receive is probably bogus.

    I also just checked my own email and according to the latest news, I'm due to inherit $20M in USD if I send my information to this guy with a funny sounding name in Botswana. Want to be my business partner? You fly to Africa and pick up the cash and we'll split it?

    So feel free to join the realm of science, and post a URL, that'll help everyone determine whether or not your information is legitimate. It's really easy to do...provide URL, check survey methodology, check sample, ok it's a scientific survey or it's not ("Who won? click here to vote find results!"...not scientific).

    Just post sources dude, this is how we in the scientific community actually check each others work when stats are involved.
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2016
  6. Ero-Sennin

    Ero-Sennin Well-Known Member Supporter

    There is literally nothing at the Florida Election Division website on early voting beyond how to get an early voting ballot. http://dos.myflorida.com/elections/

    Please point out where on that site you're getting your information from.
     
  7. Kwajman

    Kwajman Penguin in paradise....

    Just went there, the dropdown tab that says 'early voting results' or you can do a search on their site.

    I'll just leave it at this, no one is going to change my mind, Trump was not who I voted for in the primary but I would vote for almost literally anyone before I would vote for hillary. I really don't care if I change any of you democrats minds. It's all good. I've been flamed enough and gotten enough pro and con PM's and e-mails to know some people agree with me and some don't. I can find a hundred sites to support my point of view and all of you can do the same.

    So vote for who you want to vote for. Because of where I work and what I do, most of hillary's policies won't really affect me, raising taxes for example. But I understand why the millennials want the democrats to win, free tuition, free this, free that....someone's got to pay but it won't be me. Most democrats say they want the rich to 'pay their fair share' even though they've worked to create the incredible amounts of money they have. No one can decide what that fair share is or why hillary gets a pass on her taxes. Democrats are always eager to give other peoples money away, I understand that. So vote your conscience, call me and Trump whatever you want to, life will go on and it's all good. But when hillary raises EVERYONE'S taxes, which she admitted in the debate she would, it will be YOUR wallet she's taking money out of, not mine. So enjoy the discussion, have fun, train hard, I've got classes to teach....
     
  8. The Iron Fist

    The Iron Fist Banned Banned

    Fox News polls:

    Friday, September 30

    General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein: Clinton 43, Trump 40, Johnson 8, Stein 4 Clinton +3

    General Election: Trump vs. Clinton: Clinton 49, Trump 44 Clinton +5
     
  9. The Iron Fist

    The Iron Fist Banned Banned

    Princeton University Electoral Map Model, which is a really good visual because it really shows how little electoral influence the "fat" Red states have compared to the metropolitan areas.

    Key metric here folks, is that Clinton already has 217 electoral votes in the bag..picking up another 53 is not that big a challenge, all things being equal, and the probabilities are in her favor of winning over those states that aren't safe (>95%).

    http://election.princeton.edu/electoral-college-map/

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2016
  10. Kwajman

    Kwajman Penguin in paradise....

    Busted? In you're opinion....if all you can do is flame......
     
  11. Kwajman

    Kwajman Penguin in paradise....

    My apologies....
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2016
  12. Kwajman

    Kwajman Penguin in paradise....

    Oh Giovanni.....
     
  13. Aegis

    Aegis River Guardian Admin Supporter

    I linked the page for everyone to see. I copied text directly from the page for everyone to see. The only way that you could accuse me of changing the numbers is if you didn't even bother to click the link I provided to check, which would have taken you about 5 seconds because it was the headline on the page I linked to.

    Do not accuse me of lying when I support my claim with the actual figures straight from the source being discussed. I will not take that sort of outright attack on my character, especially not from someone that won't even directly link to his actual sources when making claims.

    If you are in any way a decent human being, I expect you to apologise in your very next post in this thread, because I have shown facts with sources which can be checked without any effort and you've still accused me of dishonesty.
     
  14. Kwajman

    Kwajman Penguin in paradise....

    Of course Aegis, if I've offended you I apologize.
     
  15. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    It's very easy to just tarnish everyone disagreeing with "you democrats xxxx yyyy zzz" and its a really weird thing to see from the outisde looking into the states that people disagree are always brushed away with all you liberals, or all you lefties, or whatever. Despite people openly saying they're on the right because they've disagreed they're automatically democrats and because they're democrats they're automatically free loaders.

    I'm not surprised American politics is so stalemated and so unable to work together and get anything done whe everyone is so entrenched in their camp and the idea of even entertaining the notion someone from the other side can hold a complex view, or you can be a normal person and have leanings from both sides in different areas is so alien to people across the pond it seems. I'm generalising massively but that is the impression I get broadly speaking. You're either all in republican or all in democrat, you're either a gun obsessed government fearing redneck with a rambo complex or a work shy, hippy, drug loving, communist liberal and heaven forbid you be anything else.

    And speaking on politics generally not just the states, its really really really sad people can't disagree or try to come to a compromised view instead of just whipping out the easy oh you on the left or the right. It's such a simplistic way of thinking and so lazy.
     
  16. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    ...or you're "a black" or "an Asian", because apparently they have some kind of hive mind going on as distinct groups too.
     
  17. Giovanni

    Giovanni Well-Known Member Supporter

    what are we supposed to do with your posts except call you out on how dishonest you are.

    wow, just wow.

    i just can't believe anyone can hate america so much.
     
  18. holyheadjch

    holyheadjch Valued Member

    This 'facts are subjective' nonsense that Kwaj keeps spouting seems to be a spreading phenomena. We saw it in the Brexit vote, where almost every expert was screaming at the top of their lungs 'this is bad, this is really, really bad' and the Brexiteers were just ignoring it and saying stuff like 'for every expert that is pro-remain, I can find one that is pro-leave' and the fact that it was utterly untrue just seemed to slide off them.

    We're seeing it now in the UK Labour party, where, despite every poll showing the Labour party in absolutely dire straits, the Corbyn crew just merrily go along saying 'Corbyn was ahead in all the polls before the leadership challenge' even though that is simply not true.

    And we see it most clearly with Trump supporters. He is a pathological liar - he literally can't help himself, but his supporters are completely immune to it. It was a funny line in the debate when Clinton said Trump lived in his own reality, but we see with Kwaj - his supporters really do live in that alternate reality. How else can you explain him arguing that Rasmussen have Trump ahead, even after links and screengrabs of the Rasmussen website that been posted that comprehensively show this to be incorrect. It is some kind of mass delusion?
     
  19. The Iron Fist

    The Iron Fist Banned Banned

    You know, as a recovering Breitbart reader, I still check in there now and then to see whatever the current state of 'news' is on that site, and I use the term 'news' only in the loosest, least journalistic sense.

    Breitbart was a site I once enjoyed reading if not so much because I liked Andrew B or was politically ever much of a radical... but felt that his kind of muck-raking has always been important to US journalism and the political process, and so to me Breitbart was the "MAD Magazine" of politics. Funny, annoying, sometimes legitimately concerning to the average citizen, but ultimately, as welcome a player as Fox, CNN, or MSNBC.

    Today, let's lament the death Breitbart.com should have suffered when Andrew himself kicked the bucket, because ever since then, his baby has mutated into some sort of unholy hive of wretched cynicism and political propaganda of the extreme far right, right up to and including the site's general anti-minority, anti-migrant, fat shaming, misogynistic overtones.

    With that folks, I give you the sad state of what passes for FRONT PAGE NEWS at this rag of a political website. I used to think sources like Fox News and the National Review were getting a little far from moderate...but this has to be the lamest, silliest, non-story I've ever seen. Can't even bring myself to post the link...the hit I gave them was bad enough, I'll feel guilty for bringing others.

    Bob Dole was, by comparison, an undead zombie compared to Hillary Clinton's youthful sprite, and he never got this level of health scare garbage thrown at him by the Democrats. Going after someone for their age, or physical features, is as low as it gets, just prior to going after someone for their religion, ethnicity, or culture. But, this is what Breitbart fashions itself the expert in, I guess. Age-shaming, fat-shaming, protestor-shaming....if it's against Trump, shame it!

    Best (worst) quote in this 'story': she apparently needed a cough drop!!!!

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2016
  20. Ero-Sennin

    Ero-Sennin Well-Known Member Supporter

    That downward gaze of hers to make sure she gets the next step is EXACTLY why other countries will not respect us and will start to attack us.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page