You have to forgive cuntrytard because the only material he has is what he gets in his talking points.
Trump's bullsh*t: Why his supporters don't care that he's lying
- Thread starter moe
- Start date
You have to forgive cuntrytard because the only material he has is what he gets in his talking points.
She went form a 5+% pt lead to 1.7%.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...s/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
A) That average is using that USC/LA Times poll (lol), B) even with a tight national race, Clinton has an electoral advantage and a far superior ground game (since she actually has professionals in her campaign). This race ended after the 1st debate.
You guys defend anything. Nobody but Trump ever reported that these were all new emails. Nobody but DJT. He lies and exaggerates every time he speaks.
Trump didn't say that either. I will defend people when they did nothing wrong. Time to put your panties back on princess and stop acting like you are not going to helicopter cankles tittes when she wins.
You are correct about the Clinton team. They are a well oiled machine, are battle tested and friendly media savvy. Trump has nothing that can compare and is one of the reasons I changed my prediction.
And you taking liberties with the truth every time you post suggesting your honesty is above his? Sometime, maybe. Every time is definitely a stretch of personal integrity.
Do you know how you can tell when little hands Donnie is lying?
When he opens his mouth.
Nate Silver disagrees with your assertion of there being no correlation of a tight national race to electoral college.
With that said, he is still predicting a Hillary win 69%, but it's dropped 4 points since Monday and has no indication of slowing down.
And you want us to believe you aren't voting for Trump? [laughing] You've been mad as hell the last two days.
I never said there was no correlation. Nat Silver also said that even with the race tightening, Trump would need to beat Hilary in PA, WISC, MINN or Michigan. Those are pretty reliable blue states. (That scenario gives Trump Ohio, NC and FL)
What else are people supposed to judge him on than his words? Words mean things. What on earth does it even mean to take someone 'seriously' but not literally, when he hasn't said one single thing of actual substance. We're supposed to just project what we want to believe he thinks? Great strategy.
Looking at the electoral college map, if he take the three you listed, he only needs Nevada.
I don't care if you believe me or not. I'm not voting for him, but I've said numerous times on here, between Trump and Hillary, I would take Trump. Of candidates on ballots, it shakes out like this for me:
Johnson
Stein
Trump
Hillary
Take what he says literally all you like. The article was linked for one reason, I read through it and saw something in it that made sense with the overall theme of the article, as opposed to what the OP pointed out for the purpose of linking the article. I think he says things for shock value, and or in a more metaphorical meaning. When pressed on them, he double down because that will continue to generate the same thing he wanted with the Shock value. Dominating the news cycle. Doesn't matter to me either way.
Johnson's a hack and a choker. Not even going to get 5% His running mate is openly campaigning for Clinton. Stein is also hysterical.
I could see McMullin, but Johnson? I just don't get it.
That's why I qualified my statement with "on the ballot"...
Mickey Mouse, Kermit the Frog, Donald Duck, Dubya, Obama, and a host of others would be above Trump and Hillary on my ballot as well. There is no scenario where I will cast a vote for either of them...
With that said, between the 2, i would rather see Trump than Hillary for a variety of reasons. 1. The liberal outrage over the next 4 years would be hilarious to watch and I can't wait for the daily display of hypocrisy coming from them with respect to respecting the democratic process, respecting the office of President, etc 2. I don't think catastrophe or even 10% of what liberals are fear mongering about would come to fruition. 3. I don't think he'll make it through 1 year without being impeached and that puts Pence at the helm, which I'm ok with.
Realistically, at this point, there isn't a candidate that represents my beliefs. I want someone who is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Basically someone right in the middle of the spectrum.
You're right, I hate him.
But I'm also not going to give him any leeway just because I think it's dangerous. You understand what he meant, I understand what he meant, but there are too many people that don't. If you want to be POTUS then you have to understand that you are talking to EVERY body.
I'm not going to throw away those statements.
A potential CIC with no military experience at all ... a draft dodger ... saying he knows more than the generals? To me that insults people that have spent the last decade or so fighting this crap and continue to do so.
"it depends on what your definition of "is" is" is absolutely parsing words ... taking what somebody said directly is not. Especially when given the chance to clarify they double down on what they said.
Exactly. I don't care where he's polling, I don't care if he's going to win or not. I need to vote FOR someone that holds closer views to me, and someone that I can respect and who has a record of being a leader, as opposed to voting against someone or for someone so they'll win.
If we can't judge him on what he says (and can't judge him on what he does, because that's evidence of a crooked media and rigged system if you believe Trump) then I'm dying to hear how it is that people are supposed to evaluate Trump's qualifications for the most important office in the entire world.
"Take him seriously." What a fatuous and baseless remark. I suppose we're supposed to just like him because he's angry?
I used to assume you were, if nothing else, at least a smart business man.
Good luck to you if this buffoon is elected leader of the free world. I really mean that.
Exactly. I'm honest in who I'm voting for. I'm not a sellout, I'm not a hypocrite. Johnson's far from perfect, but he's head and shoulders better than Trump or Clinton, by far.
Who are you voting for Clay? Hillary?
The last statement is a fallacy. The only thing that will determine if the trend slows down or not are polls that haven't been published yet. Yesterday's trajectory has no bearing on tomorrow's. If there is a larger movement afoot in the polls, then it will be true, but it's baseless to use past polls to predict future ones.
My opinion is that the poll tightening definitely has the Clinton folks more worried than they are putting on. Just yesterday one of them bashed the newest WaPo poll. Show me a campaign that bashes polls and I'll show you a campaign that's not doing well.
Considering he's worked with both parties in his own state, as well as having a VP that was a former Senator, he'd work better with Congress than Trump or Clinton will.
That is an absolute reason to not vote for Trump? Do you provide any meat with that bare boned statement? Like - WTF are you saying? Sounds like you are using Coops logic in discussion. That is what I said and no reason to challenge.
Had to smile. That was the same logic my mother used before she took out the spatula "because I said so". Difficult to question that reasoning since doing so would result in *** whipping. She is the only one who had that kind of power over two young boys.
No one on the board gets quiet that much respect.
I was talking about Trump. He doesn't exactly have strong support from his party, let alone the dems.
I don't think you have to like him at all. I certainly don't. Hence, I'm not voting for him. I'm not suggesting that you should like him or vote for him. Why so serious?
No ****. You're better than that. Take a lap.
That's his whole "claim to fame" - I'm an *******, I'm not one of them. With most of the democrats hating him and a significant number of the Republicans not supporting him, I'm sure things would go well for him if he were elected.
Exactly. He alienated ALL of them. Just ask Ryan, all of the GOP candidates, all living presidents, etc.
And that's going to be different from Hillary, how exactly?
Let's see, they've already said they are lining up to start investigations into the Clinton Foundation, Pay for Play, and now we have continued ongoing email stuff...
Gonna be a great 4 years of jack and **** getting accomplished either way.
