Aerion Brightflame Posted October 12, 2016 Report Share Posted October 12, 2016 Moderation doesn't stop candidates from lying, it just challenges them on the largest bits of bullshit. So it's a win for Trump there, which is unfortunate. But I would at least hope Chris Wallace can try to keep both candidates on topic and stamp his foot down when they are being overwhelmingly evasive. So basically like Anderson Cooper because that man is amazing If he's a s*** moderator though that debate will be entertaining because you just know Trump will be at his most belligerent. If we get away without him calling Hillary a 'b****' or something I will be disappointed. Talking Climate Change is like Hillary throwing a bone to coal miners in the debate - It's a demographic you aren't favoured it, but paying them some lip service might swing some votes so it's worth ago. LeBronn endorsing Hillary in Ohio might be hugely game-changing. It's given her a surge of support, and like a 4 or 5 point lead from what I've seen. In a state Trump really needs. And Early voting started today, whilst Clinton is ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted October 12, 2016 Report Share Posted October 12, 2016 LeBronn endorsing Hillary in Ohio might be hugely game-changing. It's given her a surge of support, and like a 4 or 5 point lead from what I've seen. In a state Trump really needs. And Early voting started today, whilst Clinton is ahead. If this doesn't prove the American voterbase is incredibly stupid I don't know what will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted October 12, 2016 Report Share Posted October 12, 2016 Moderation doesn't stop candidates from lying, it just challenges them on the largest bits of bullshit. So it's a win for Trump there, which is unfortunate. But I would at least hope Chris Wallace can try to keep both candidates on topic and stamp his foot down when they are being overwhelmingly evasive. So basically like Anderson Cooper because that man is amazing If he's a s*** moderator though that debate will be entertaining because you just know Trump will be at his most belligerent. If we get away without him calling Hillary a 'b****' or something I will be disappointed. Talking Climate Change is like Hillary throwing a bone to coal miners in the debate - It's a demographic you aren't favoured it, but paying them some lip service might swing some votes so it's worth ago. LeBronn endorsing Hillary in Ohio might be hugely game-changing. It's given her a surge of support, and like a 4 or 5 point lead from what I've seen. In a state Trump really needs. And Early voting started today, whilst Clinton is ahead. You realize Dems are always ahead in EV right? Yeh about that, people hacked Podesta's phone, the internal poll from the Dems isn't looking good for HRChttp://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/12/fbi-doj-roiled-by-comey-lynch-decision-to-let-clinton-slide-by-on-emails-says-insider.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerion Brightflame Posted October 12, 2016 Report Share Posted October 12, 2016 You realize Dems are always ahead in EV right? Yeh about that, people hacked Podesta's phone, the internal poll from the Dems isn't looking good for HRChttp://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/12/fbi-doj-roiled-by-comey-lynch-decision-to-let-clinton-slide-by-on-emails-says-insider.htmlNo I had no idea that Dems are ahead in Early voting. I've never followed an American election before. It just seems significant for Hillary to have a lead in a state in polls as voting starts. Links? Because the funk do I have to discuss about 'internal polls looking bad' if I don't have the internal polls to look at. That statement means nothing on it's own, all I can do is say 'Well External's disagree' and 'oh Brexit proved internals mean nothing (I would never actually say this, but it's an argument that has been used in this thread)' unless you give me a link to the polls to look at. Likewise what is there to discuss about that Fox News article? Ignoring that it's Fox News using an anonymous source and thus liable to be false because Fox News barely classes as news, but it's not that shocking that the people who worked on the Clinton case would be pissed when no charge was made. I'd be pissed if I put in 6 weeks of work for nothing. The talk about 'The White House shut the case down', and that Conney overstepped the line when he said 'no reasonable prosecutor would take it to court' are interesting, but because we don't know who the source is we don't actually know if that comment has any credibility. He could know a lot of prosecutors, or he could not? It's just really dull talking points because there is nothing really to talk about there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted October 12, 2016 Report Share Posted October 12, 2016 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6616 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cr47t Posted October 12, 2016 Author Report Share Posted October 12, 2016 [images]I don't get your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted October 12, 2016 Report Share Posted October 12, 2016 I don't get your point.I mean you guys respond to 1 out of every 5 things I post. At this pt, I'm just tryna get the wikileaks out @Brighfire There's a scandal in 4chan atm, the mods are trying to kill the posts, I'll get it to you as soon as we put down these cucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cr47t Posted October 12, 2016 Author Report Share Posted October 12, 2016 I mean you guys respond to 1 out of every 5 things I post. At this pt, I'm just tryna get the wikileaks out I mean you didn't type any of your own text like you usually do. It's helpful to see what you're getting at, for discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted October 12, 2016 Report Share Posted October 12, 2016 I mean you didn't type any of your own text like you usually do. It's helpful to see what you're getting at, for discussion.Sorry, they just dropped another 5k emails, would you prefer I get more information or elaborate now?The last one is the current DNC chair, the one that replaced DWS telling HRC mid primary that they would deliver her the nom. She also got caught yesterday leaking debate questions to HRChttps://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5469Huma admits in email that Foreign Interests force HRC to do what they want her to do, also admits that "Friend of Hillary" list is available and rentable to people who want to influence.https://www.wikileaks.com/podesta-emails/emailid/5636Clinton campaign illegally coordinating with their Super PACS https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5399CLINTON STAFF CONCERNED THAT BILL SEXUALLY ABUSED HIS 3RD COUSIN IN THEIR HOME WHILE SHE BABYSAT CHELSEA.In May of 2015, CTR separated from its parent organization, American Bridge, and became its own SuperPAC. This structure allows CTR to retain its independence but coordinate directly and strategically with the Hillary campaign. This work is necessary now more than ever. DOJ colluding with the DNC and sharing 'sensitive information'.https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4425https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6170 https://i.sli.mg/smmOb1.pngA private off the record dinner with ~40 media personnel and the Clinton campaign, several days before she announced.Proves media collusion before she even announced and it shows you which reporters were in the bag from the start.The goals of the dinner include:(1) Give reporters their first thoughts from team HRC in advance of the announcement(2) Setting expectations for the announcement and launch period(3) Framing the HRC message and framing the race(4) Enjoy a Friday night drink before working moreIt also shows that they instructed the media on how to frame everything from before she announced.Found in the attachment on this emailhttps://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5953Bonus, the off the record meeting was held at a polsters house.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_Benenson Full out, unquestionable media collusion from before Clinton started running https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5953Media and Clinton have been colluding since before she announced her candidacy. Check attached files for this one to see https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6009From a NYT writer to Podesta:"BTW: are you aware of a forthcoming---in the next few days---massive examination of the Clinton Foundation by a conservative financial analyst? My understanding is that raises questions about the foundation's financial reports and its shift into areas---AIDs, for example---that exceeded its original authorization from the IRS. I'm not writing anything about it but curious if you have heard anything." https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6391COLLUDING OVER WITHHOLDING BENGHAZI EMAILS The Russian's are coming lies are a trick they planned on deploying should she be up against McCain in 2008. Right here: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1892 Here is the link of them bringing the Russians and Nuclear war into the fray in a Clinton/trump Campaign. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1103 Just keep an eye out on those. We all know the whole " Red's are coming" bs is just a distraction. This just proves it. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6391"Not as flippantly, and maybe just from Nick's mouth but rather than going around and around on how to release the 55k, let's just be for what's happening and use this as the excuse."Clinton campaign was aware of the congressional subpoena before they started deleting emails, they were already thinking up excuses before they deleted them! https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5955Clinton campaign worried about losing California to ¡Jeb! "I think this is terribly important especially with people like Bernie's sometimes self-righteous ideologues."https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5423 I've lived through many national conventions and have found that it's critical that all delegates, especially those representing losing candidates, emerge from the convention feeling that they have won something ... this is terribly important especially with people like Bernie's sometimes self-righteous ideologues. Bernie and his people have been jabroniing about super delegates and the huge percentage that have come out for Hillary. why not throw Bernie a bone and reduce the super delegates in the future to the original draft of members of the House and Senate, governors and big city mayors, eliminating the DNC members who are not State chairs or vice-Chairs. (Frankly, DNC members don't really represent constituencies anyway. I should know. I served on the DNC first as Executive Director and then as an elected member for 10 years.) So if we "give" Bernie this in the Convention's rules committee, his people will think they've "won" something from the Party Establishment. And it functionally doesn't make any difference anyway. They win. We don't lose. Everyone is happy. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6453I am not going to raise this publicly, but one of HRC's opponents will soon charge that she is running an "imperial campaign." If it is the right opponent, Democrat or Republican, the charge will resonate. Probably 90% of the total media coverage of HRC has a negative slant, from her paid speeches to foundation donations to not answering questions from the press. Her caution on policy has created a news vacuum that is filled by these other stories. And while I don't have the highest regard for most of the campaign press corps, they are getting dangerously unhappy about HRC refusing to answer questions. If we look at a long curve of her numbers, there is reason for serious concern if trends continue and I see nothing today that will change them. What I hear from many many Democrats is that there is something off-key about her campaign and the hope that Republican candidates are so bad she can win by playing cautious. That is a very dangerous way to run for president. Chief Counsel of the FAA begging for a job for his godson. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5373Tom Daschle, former Senator and current Taiwan lobbyist, offering a free trip to Taiwan to anyone on the Clinton campaign!! That's totally legal! https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5367Huma admitting that completely avoiding the press is a strategy spurred by not wanting to answer email or foundation questions. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5621That time CTR and the top brass at Hillary '16 had a get-together at their lawyers office. I'm sure everything they discussed was totally legal!! https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6225The time Jake Tapper (then at ABC) gets into a HUGE jabroni fight with a pro Clinton organization.https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5518 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5806Huma discussing office space for CF, need space for a "small staff that could potentially be handling more than just charitable activity." https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/238#efmABUACW"the Today show has indicated they definitely plan to ask bout guns"Just another example of fake media. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6185Tipped off by the state dept. 99.999999996999% sure thats illegal... https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5705I know you were probably kidding this morning about me in NH. I am aware of your dark sense of humor. But I should say that I would do whatever Hillary needs always. I owe her a lot. And I'm a loyal soldier. I think I might not be so useful because I overly focus on the lessons of the past but if there's something I should do to help campaign more I will do it. Let's hope it doesn't come to this and she wins Iowa. Creepy, but not illegal Race baiting (?)The only flag here is that Jordan Davis was killed by a white man, so arguably - this crime was racially motivated, which takes this outside the discussion of gun violence. Was there another mother in the Chicago meeting where the shooting was NOT racially motivated? If yes, we should use that story instead of Jordan Davis.https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6195Tip off from State department re Benghazi emails (?)Someone here just got a tip that the State Department may be planning to release her Benghazi emails tomorrow or Monday. Not sure the source is reliable. Has anyone heard anything about this?https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6185"Use this as the excuse" and "take advantage of" discussions about e-mail subpoenaNot as flippantly, and maybe just from Nick's mouth -- but rather than going around and around on how to release the 55k, let's just be for what's happening and use this as the excuse. Because we can say even if State has equities, not providing them would put her in legal jeopardy. OR, we say happy for them to have it, happy for the public to read them as soon as State is comforrtable. But let's somehow take advantage of this.https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6391More collusion with MSM. Tip off from The Huffington PostI am not going to raise this publicly, but one of HRC's opponents will soon charge that she is running an "imperial campaign."https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6453Joe Biden chief of staff: "a little hard for me to play such a role in the Biden demise"She was great last night. Thanks for inviting me into the campaign, and for sticking with me during the Biden anxiety. You are a great friend and a great leader. It's been a little hard for me to play such a role in the Biden demise - and I am definitely dead to them -- but I'm glad to be on Team HRC, and glad that she had a great debate last night. Thanks John.https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5690Revising an op-ed because it mentioned drug testing for children and teenagersThe only thing that stood out to me was annual drug screening for children and teenagers, could see the GOP having a field day. Can we explain that one a little more?https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6424 Clinton Foundation is a total extortion/bribery racket. Sheikh Mo is VP of UAE, PM and ruler of dubai. Hillary's campaign is using an unregistered sollicitor (Bonner Grp) to secretly funnel $1M/year from Soros into her coffers I'm officially 1/5 of the way through podestra emails drop 5, haven't read through drops 1-4 yet, 28 more drops incoming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerion Brightflame Posted October 12, 2016 Report Share Posted October 12, 2016 I would personally prefer if you made your own points rather than just images. I.E. if you post an image or series of images you briefly summarise and leave a couple of talking points that others can latch onto and discuss if we wish. Rather than leave us to fish through your images to find something worth discussing. Because usually the images are a fairly incoherent 'Look Hillary or people associated to her are doing something that sounds vaguely fishy'. The images alone are usually worth nothing. Rather than dumping them all at once, read through them, compose an argument and use them to support one in this thread. We cannot read your mind, we can't instinctively tell the point you are trying to make. Unless your point is 'Hillary is a crook' and you are trying to support that by bombarding the thread with stuff that 'looks' shady on the surface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted October 12, 2016 Report Share Posted October 12, 2016 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CumMbOeXYAYXIaY.jpg https://apnews.com/b8dfc194826c4c85ae75ffc7e60545dc Here we go. Gov. Mark Dayton bails on #Obamacare. One of strongest supporters. I like your legacy Obama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerion Brightflame Posted October 12, 2016 Report Share Posted October 12, 2016 I was going to save this for a better moment, but f*** it: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/upshot/how-one-19-year-old-illinois-man-is-distorting-national-polling-averages.html?_r=1&referer=http:/m.facebook.com The LATimes poll you keep insisting is the only poll we should pay attention too is bollocks for anything other than voting trends because the way it assigns weights to given demographics means that individual voters can have a disproportionate effect on the poll. In this case one Black Guy from Illinois who votes Trump choosing not to poll for a day caused a 2 point swing towards Clinton. Normally that wouldn't matter, because the guy is only liable to get polled once, but the LATimes polls the same group of 3000 people everyday, so situations like this can occur somewhat often and distort the numbers. You can actually argue that because a lot of aggregates include this set of polling that one Black Guy from Illinois actually effected the national polling average in a substantial way. Particularly when it comes to the black vote. The LATimes poll is experimental, and it is interesting because it's probably going to be the most accurate measurement of voting trends across the election due to following a specific group for an extended period of time, but the actual polling number it gives it not gospel. In fact, that one black guy probably means that the entire poll has been shifted in favour of Trump for the entire duration, which would fit with essentially every other national poll. So please don't act like this poll is gospel because it has a very clear flaw within it's methodology.It shouldn't really be considered a poll, it should be considered a matter about voting trends. Trump is probably polling closer to the national average than to this LATimes poll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted October 13, 2016 Report Share Posted October 13, 2016 I was going to save this for a better moment, but f*** it: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/upshot/how-one-19-year-old-illinois-man-is-distorting-national-polling-averages.html?_r=1&referer=http:/m.facebook.com The LATimes poll you keep insisting is the only poll we should pay attention too is bollocks for anything other than voting trends because the way it assigns weights to given demographics means that individual voters can have a disproportionate effect on the poll. In this case one Black Guy from Illinois who votes Trump choosing not to poll for a day caused a 2 point swing towards Clinton. Normally that wouldn't matter, because the guy is only liable to get polled once, but the LATimes polls the same group of 3000 people everyday, so situations like this can occur somewhat often and distort the numbers. You can actually argue that because a lot of aggregates include this set of polling that one Black Guy from Illinois actually effected the national polling average in a substantial way. Particularly when it comes to the black vote. The LATimes poll is experimental, and it is interesting because it's probably going to be the most accurate measurement of voting trends across the election due to following a specific group for an extended period of time, but the actual polling number it gives it not gospel. In fact, that one black guy probably means that the entire poll has been shifted in favour of Trump for the entire duration, which would fit with essentially every other national poll. So please don't act like this poll is gospel because it has a very clear flaw within it's methodology.It shouldn't really be considered a poll, it should be considered a matter about voting trends. Trump is probably polling closer to the national average than to this LATimes poll. They used the same methodology in 2012 and nailed the vote perfectly when a lot of people undershot the president's win value Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerion Brightflame Posted October 13, 2016 Report Share Posted October 13, 2016 They used the same methodology in 2012 and nailed the vote perfectly when a lot of people undershot the president's win value 1) I can't find any evidence of the poll running nationally in 2012, only locally in California. And it would be far easier for the model to track the behaviour in the state as opposed to the nation. 2) Even if that were true, if you read the article you'd see that it's possible for the poll to be accurate in one year and inaccurate in another. It assigned a single voter (Who votes against the trend for his age and racial group) 30 times the weight of the typical voter. Other polls were stupidly accurate in 2012 and they don't assign this one guy massively disproportionate weight. Places like 538 for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted October 13, 2016 Report Share Posted October 13, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad Posted October 13, 2016 Report Share Posted October 13, 2016 Winter. You have one of two options: provide actual evidence and back up your theory, or cease the conspiracy theory all together. Debates is not for conspiracy theories, especially after Scalia was shown to have died of natural causes. If it continues, I'll find another way to address it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine Jesse Posted October 13, 2016 Report Share Posted October 13, 2016 There is no actual evidence. It's just the desperate musings of a voting base who has to deny facts and just make s*** up in order to believe their candidate has a chance at winning. I mean, there's obviously no reason to vote for Hillary other than a potentially empty Supreme Court position. Why not murder one of the justices to sway some of the more liberal undecideds? Bonus points if it's the oldest and most hated one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted October 13, 2016 Report Share Posted October 13, 2016 Winter. You have one of two options: provide actual evidence and back up your theory, or cease the conspiracy theory all together. Debates is not for conspiracy theories, especially after Scalia was shown to have died of natural causes. If it continues, I'll find another way to address it.Would you like to offer an alternative meaning to "wetworks" If not Scalia they're musing about killing someone Actually, Dad, what evidence would you like me to find, a video of HRC's people putting a pillow over Scalia? If people w/o security clearence are causally talking about wetworks doesn't upset you, there's nothing short of HRC slitting throats herself that will. But do what you mustThere is no actual evidence. It's just the desperate musings of a voting base who has to deny facts and just make s*** up in order to believe their candidate has a chance at winning. I mean, there's obviously no reason to vote for Hillary other than a potentially empty Supreme Court position. Why not murder one of the justices to sway some of the more liberal undecideds? Bonus points if it's the oldest and most hated one.You still haven't talked about how HRC called fracking opposition a russian hoax I thought you cared about climate change, or is it only a problem when Trump says Chinese are making it an issue to lower US manufacturing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad Posted October 13, 2016 Report Share Posted October 13, 2016 Winter. Wetworks could mean a number of things. It could be a description of a pool party. It could be a description of a grieving widow who can't stop crying over the loss of her dead husband, who's death is now being exploited for votes. Provide evidence or stop. I won't ask again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted October 13, 2016 Report Share Posted October 13, 2016 Winter. Wetworks could mean a number of things. It could be a description of a pool party. It could be a description of a grieving widow who can't stop crying over the loss of her dead husband, who's death is now being exploited for votes. Provide evidence or stop. I won't ask again.Sure, won't bring it up till more leaks come out validating/damning it Now about the rest of the leaks? There's clear fund transactions to SA after HRC attests that she knows they're funding Daesh. How do you answer that? Russian Conspiracy? Or how about this Wanna talk about why the @NYTimes is plagiarizing assault cases 3 weeks before an election Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine Jesse Posted October 13, 2016 Report Share Posted October 13, 2016 You still haven't talked about how HRC called fracking opposition a russian hoax I thought you cared about climate change, or is it only a problem when Trump says Chinese are making it an issue to lower US manufacturing Show. I want to see the context. Link to the actual email, too, not just a cropped image of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cr47t Posted October 14, 2016 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2016 Or how about this Wanna talk about why the @NYTimes is plagiarizing assault cases 3 weeks before an election Link... not just a cropped image of it. So we don't know you didn't edit it yourself... (note; I am not trying to accuse you of anything -- I don't have enough evidence to do so) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted October 14, 2016 Report Share Posted October 14, 2016 So we don't know you didn't edit it yourself... (note; I am not trying to accuse you of anything -- I don't have enough evidence to do so)http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/10/clinton-blames-russians-anti-fracking-groups/ I'll go find the actual wikileak in second https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927#attachments Clinton Talked About “Phony Environmental Groups” Funded By The Russians To Stand Against Pipelines And Fracking. “We were up against Russia pushing oligarchs and others to buy media. We were even up against phony environmental groups, and I’m a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand against any effort, oh that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you, and a lot of the money supporting that message was coming from Russia.” [Remarks at tinePublic, 6/18/14] You guys really think I have nothing better to do that make up fake email claims that you could debunk in a minute with a simple google search in the hopes of maybe getting 1-2 votes...cmon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine Jesse Posted October 14, 2016 Report Share Posted October 14, 2016 So basically you're taking her mentioning the possibility that some of the groups opposing fracking weren't legitimate as full-on denial that there's an actual movement against it. lmao ok carry on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted October 14, 2016 Report Share Posted October 14, 2016 So basically you're taking her mentioning the possibility that some of the groups opposing fracking weren't legitimate as full-on denial that there's an actual movement against it. lmao ok carry onWhy? I don't care about the issue. They can frack and mine all they want. And I actually agree with HRC on this. A lot of these groups are Russian and Chinese funded because forcing us to cut down on those kinda endeavor kills our GDP and retroactively helps theirs. It would have moved me closer to her if not for the fact Trump mentioned China doing it nearly a year ago Like I said, I don't expect one of your to change your mind. I just want to document that I for one haven't given my country up to corruption Like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.