[RESULTS ARE FINAL] 2016 Election for President of the United States | Donald Trump Victory

[Phantom Roxas]

It's ironic y'all are throwing a bigger fit than the supporter himself. Typical outraged whites speaking for the great injustice that that stains their skin

Again with the generalizations. It's ridiculous how often you rely on sweeping statements like this. Stop it.

 

No, I take issue with Roxas statement

 

Oh, and here's my favorite part of that article.

 

 

Interesting how the first actual proof of rigging the election is actually Trump's own group. It seems that Trump is actually the one who's guilty of encouraging crime, and is merely projecting onto Clinton to avoid culpability for his own camp.

 

That's a load of bullshit, one woman in Iowa was a Trump voter who tried to vote twice, Roxas conveniently ignored like the 10 similar cases that happened with Dems this weeks. He was full of sheet and Hina called him out on it. Roxas should have stopped at it was a trump supporter. And then maybe pushed for voter id laws since this election SHOULD be fairly done on both sides. Hina wasn't wrong in calling him a fool, because instead of doing that he went off extrapolating some vendetta against Trump

 

I didn't "conveniently ignore" supposedly similar cases, I was appreciating that the article repeated something I had already heard about this, which is that this is one of the first documented examples of voter fraud from an average citizen.

 

The problem is you want hina to debate Roxas. Fair.

 

Roxas statement about Trump mentally reflecting his own voter fraud on Hillary has no evidence what so ever. It's hard to debate that. Say what you want about the O'keffe videos, but alteast out side has some ground to stand upon. The numbers aren't in his favor here.

 

I go on vendettas against Hillary, yes. I call her a treasonist guilty of espionage. I have emails written by her to balance my claim. You can argue that it's not enough, sure.

 

But Roxas gave nothing to back up his assertions. And ignoring a 10:1 occurrence does make you blind

 

When I made my claim on scalia, y'all shut me down asap like you should have. Why should Roxas be given special privileges for his bullshit?

 

If you're going to claim that I don't have evidence, how about you provide evidence for your claim that there is supposedly a 10:1 occurrence? Did ten other people do the same as we are discussing here?

 

And if you're going to call what I say "bullshit", then that should answer your question. I'm not being given "special privileges." It's just that I don't make rude remarks as often as you do.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Idk wetworks being a euphemism for political assassination, and then paying an actor to finish the job on a movie (that was never made) in a vineyard (when scalia dies in a vineyard), while tinfoilhat is a lot more secure than blindly ignoring a 10:1 occurrence and then extrapolating based on that to accuse Trump of pushing his voters to commit fraud

 

Gladly, let me pull of the FL and Cali cases

 

http://www.aol.com/article/news/2016/10/29/three-in-florida-virginia-charged-with-voter-fraud/21594732/

 

http://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/article_e008ce00-0365-57a2-95c0-4d9aa70012f9.html

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-30/meet-young-virginia-democrat-registered-19-dead-people-vote-virginia

 

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/06/24/smoking-gun-approximately-15-of-bernies-votes-were-flipped-to-clinton-in-california/

 

Not general election, but you didn't see any of this bullshit on the GOP side

 

Looking for the 3 illegals who got caught today in cali

 

http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/bombshell-1000-illegal-votes-cast-eight-virginia-localities/

 

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/election/article111029767.html

[Aerion Brightflame]

By 'shut down on Scalia' do you mean that post you made of 3 completely unrelated images of an email, google maps and wikipedia trying to infer that Clinton had Scalia assassinated? 

 

Because... you were shut down because there was no argument. It was baseless speculation around a very vague mention of the term 'wetworks' without any kind of evidence or elaboration for what it meant. There was nothing to debate, nothing to discuss. Thus we rightfully pointed it out, and ended it there. Because that was entirely speculation. Your entire argument was based around a single word. 

 

It is worse than simply being unaware (Or willfully ignorant of, I have no idea which it is) of 10 instances of voter fraud (Which may or may not be fraud) because you are trying to invent conspiracy to commit murder without ANY evidence. The term 'wetworks' in reference to a vineyard is not evidence when there is nothing suggesting foul play in the first place. I would actually argue that Hillary being able to arrange the murder of a Supreme Court Justice without leaving a trail is out of character from what we have seen of her because it implies a high level of competence to achieve. 

 

If you are going to try and argue 'bias' against yourself, please pick an example grounded in something that passes as evidence, not speculation. Because shutting down speculation is not bias. 

 

As Dad has said; if the situation was reversed, if we were trying to 'prove' that Trump had a man killed on similar levels of evidence you wouldn't stand any of it. You'd say we were making a conclusion with no evidence just because we don't like the man. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3884528/James-Comey-felt-obligation-inform-Congress-Clinton-email-investigation.htmlBy 'shut down on Scalia' do you mean that post you made of 3 completely unrelated images of an email, google maps and wikipedia trying to infer that Clinton had Scalia assassinated? 

 

Because... you were shut down because there was no argument. It was baseless speculation around a very vague mention of the term 'wetworks' without any kind of evidence or elaboration for what it meant. There was nothing to debate, nothing to discuss. Thus we rightfully pointed it out, and ended it there. Because that was entirely speculation. Your entire argument was based around a single word. 

 

It is worse than simply being unaware (Or willfully ignorant of, I have no idea which it is) of 10 instances of voter fraud (Which may or may not be fraud) because you are trying to invent conspiracy to commit murder without ANY evidence. The term 'wetworks' in reference to a vineyard is not evidence when there is nothing suggesting foul play in the first place. I would actually argue that Hillary being able to arrange the murder of a Supreme Court Justice without leaving a trail is out of character from what we have seen of her because it implies a high level of competence to achieve. 

 

If you are going to try and argue 'bias' against yourself, please pick an example grounded in something that passes as evidence, not speculation. Because shutting down speculation is not bias. 

 

As Dad has said; if the situation was reversed, if we were trying to 'prove' that Trump had a man killed on similar levels of evidence you wouldn't stand any of it. You'd say we were making a conclusion with no evidence just because we don't like the man. 

Bigger problem is his extrapolation 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3884528/James-Comey-felt-obligation-inform-Congress-Clinton-email-investigation.html

 

AG trying to keep this quiet is everything wrong with this country 

[Aerion Brightflame]

The FBI doesn't usually inform congress of ongoing investigations though. It's not hushing up to ask respect for established protocols; especially when not respecting said protocols could result in your budget getting slashed. 

 

Like if Hillary is found guilty from these new emails, a verdict won't come till after the election anyway. They've not given any details about what the emails show, so we don't know if it's the same emails or new ones. Why tell now in that case? All it achieves is altering the election, it doesn't bring her closer to a conviction, or serve justice, it just throws some political points towards Trump because Hillary gets seen as more dirty with an active investigation on her. 

 

Are you saying that the FBI should be serving politics instead of justice? 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

The FBI doesn't usually inform congress of ongoing investigations though. It's not hushing up to ask respect for established protocols; especially when not respecting said protocols could result in your budget getting slashed. 

 

Like if Hillary is found guilty from these new emails, a verdict won't come till after the election anyway. They've not given any details about what the emails show, so we don't know if it's the same emails or new ones. Why tell now in that case? All it achieves is altering the election, it doesn't bring her closer to a conviction, or serve justice, it just throws some political points towards Trump because Hillary gets seen as more dirty with an active investigation on her. 

 

Are you saying that the FBI should be serving politics instead of justice? 

Perjury, she said she turned over all relevant information. Worse case she's involved in espionage and treason, best case she lied to congress and the FBI 

 

The DoJ has no right hide this information from the US public.

 

They gave one detail, tens of thousands of emails. That's massive. Also Kim.Dot ('fugitive' hacker) recently revealed how to access the 33k deleted emails so expect that too

[Sunshine Jesse]

Idk wetworks being a euphemism for political assassination, and then paying an actor to finish the job on a movie (that was never made) in a vineyard (when scalia dies in a vineyard), while tinfoilhat is a lot more secure than blindly ignoring a 10:1 occurrence and then extrapolating based on that to accuse Trump of pushing his voters to commit fraud

 

Gladly, let me pull of the FL and Cali cases

 

http://www.aol.com/article/news/2016/10/29/three-in-florida-virginia-charged-with-voter-fraud/21594732/

 

http://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/article_e008ce00-0365-57a2-95c0-4d9aa70012f9.html

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-30/meet-young-virginia-democrat-registered-19-dead-people-vote-virginia

 

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/06/24/smoking-gun-approximately-15-of-bernies-votes-were-flipped-to-clinton-in-california/

 

Not general election, but you didn't see any of this bullshit on the GOP side

 

Looking for the 3 illegals who got caught today in cali

 

http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/bombshell-1000-illegal-votes-cast-eight-virginia-localities/

 

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/election/article111029767.html

 

 

http://www.aol.com/article/news/2016/10/29/three-in-florida-virginia-charged-with-voter-fraud/21594732/

"Police did not disclose the political affiliation of the woman, identified as Terri Lynn Rote, 55, but the Des Moines Register newspaper reported she was a registered Republican."

 

The "dead people registered to vote" thing has been went over countless times so I'm not going to bother with that

 

 

Careful now, r/HC r/Pol and r/ETS is on suicide alert after seeing images like this

 

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map.html

 

 

It's a bit funny that you're accusing republicans of cherry-picking when both those pieces do so quite egregiously

lol

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Darling look at the Florida graph you put up, who's dropping and who's rising. 

 

The reason I linked the ABC/WaPo poll is because it's usually Clinton friendly and had her up 12 recently

 

But sure, lets get into some of those states. I wonder why Hillary is suddenly airing ads in Michigan and Wisc if she really has it locked up lol

 

You do you 

[Sunshine Jesse]

I'm not the one who posted a graph in a blatantly misleading manner.

 

But hey, you do you.

[Tourmaline]

It's no surprise Trump's chances have recently improved though.

 

Also, how often do what the polls say by the end accurately predict who becomes president?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I'm not the one who posted a graph in a blatantly misleading manner.

 

But hey, you do you.

Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realize most people on this thread couldn't understand that the red value being below the blue value, (despite rising) meant that Clinton was still ahead. Misleading, very misleading. 

 

Guess some people are leading their head up their ass

 

I've overestimated once again. My apologies 

[Sunshine Jesse]

insert meme image expressing bewilderment here

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/29/dc-attorney-fbi-never-destroyed-laptops-of-clinton-aides/

 

This gets better

 

The murder weapon still exists, they need to subpoena those laptops asap

 

@brightfire

 

The problem is the AG recused herself from the case, and now is trying twist comey's hand

 

ACCORDING TO U.S. LAW 2071, HILLARY CLINTON CANNOT HOLD PUBLIC OFFICE

 

 

 

[Phantom Roxas]

Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realize most people on this thread couldn't understand that the red value being below the blue value, (despite rising) meant that Clinton was still ahead. Misleading, very misleading. 

 

Guess some people are leading their head up their ass

 

I've overestimated once again. My apologies

 

Don't pretend to "apologize" if you're going to continue insulting Jesse.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

It's no surprise Trump's chances have recently improved though.

Also, how often do what the polls say by the end accurately predict who becomes president?

Generally speaking: quite often. Of course, there are exceptions, but as a whole, polls have fairly consistently predicted the race winner.

 

That said, there is still time left in this race, and it has been an incredibly heated one, so changes in their polling results are to be expected (and already showing up)

 

Whether Trump's current slow (but admittedly steady) rise will continue until/after he passes HRC is yet to be said, considering just how unpredictable both candidates are this election.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

 

Don't pretend to "apologize" if you're going to continue insulting Jesse.

I insulted anyone who saw a poll with Trump closing a distance, but still behind HRC by 2 pts taking it as me saying Trump was ahead. Not sure if Jesse fits that bill

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YY-CiPVo_NQ

 

Micheal Moore nailed it 

 

 

Generally speaking: quite often. Of course, there are exceptions, but as a whole, polls have fairly consistently predicted the race winner.

 

That said, there is still time left in this race, and it has been an incredibly heated one, so changes in their polling results are to be expected (and already showing up)

 

Whether Trump's current slow (but admittedly steady) rise will continue until/after he passes HRC is yet to be said, considering just how unpredictable both candidates are this election.

Trump was rising before this FBI thing dropped, the 10 pt swing was pre-fbi, I don't see why he would drop now.

 

HRC is the one defending Blue states like WI, MI, and NM atm

 

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/former-fbi-asst-director-final-bomb-drop-hillary-next-10-days-video/

 

I dislike the site, but I watched this happen just now. It's time for the other shoe to drop

[Phantom Roxas]

I insulted anyone who saw a poll with Trump closing a distance, but still behind HRC by 2 pts taking it as me saying Trump was ahead. Not sure if Jesse fits that bill

Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realize most people on this thread couldn't understand that the red value being below the blue value, (despite rising) meant that Clinton was still ahead. Misleading, very misleading. 

 

Guess some people are leading their head up their ass

 

I've overestimated once again. My apologies

Would you care to specify which "people" you're referring to and how you totally didn't include Jesse in yet another generalization?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Would you care to specify which "people" you're referring to and how you totally didn't include Jesse in yet another generalization?

Whoever jesse felt I was misguiding

 

I think Trump 45 Clinton 47 is pretty self explanatory, but apparently that was misguiding 

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

I know this is off topic but given that this whole thing has gone on for a bunch of posts I feel this would be good for a fresh perspective (as I only just read all the stuff from today)
Winter please can you not try to act like you're not just blatantly insulting people? Like, you're digging yourself deeper with this "No, totally, I didn't say anything SPECIFICALLY to them so I'm all clear".

It's obvious Jesse didn't understand as they are the one who came out to say how they read the thing wrong. So it's obvious if you refer to someone who didn't read it right it'd include her.

Not to mention you're still insulting *insert vague number of people here* with those posts. You at least admit that it's meant to insult those people. Saying something to intentionally insult has already, in fact today, been said as bad.

And hell, man, idk if she cares but you call her "Darling" and similar in most posts, that seems fairly condescending.

 

Like, this has nothing to do with me, yeah, but from that perspective it really seems you're just trying to get away with insulting people through technicalities.

 

This shouldn't have gone on this long. Dad said not to say those kinds of things, his words should have been heeded, as he's the authority here, not debated.

 

Also I request no one rep this post. I'd like to avoid being accused of trying to rep-whore.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

All I implied, cowcow, is that polls are trending Trump atm, and that traditionally good predictive measures like social media support and google searches as well as all well known predictive models point to a Trump win

 

I'm not sure what there is to be misunderstood there. I don't get how people can hold a straight face and attack Hina while misinterpreting 45 v 47

 

Insult is the wrong word, I'm calling them (if they exist) on out on their bullshit just like they called Hina out. If nobody was misguided then we have no problem. 

 

If someone really did look at me posting a poll of Trump gaining 10 pts from his nightmare deficit last week in the span of 5 days, and then went, hmm, Clinton 47, Trump 45, AHA WINTER IS SAYING TRUMP IS AHEAD

 

Then yes, those brainiacs have their head up their ass

[Sunshine Jesse]

I called it misleading because you intentionally left out the state in which it was in, giving off the impression that it was another one of your cherry-picked polls where Trump has a much larger chance than he actually does.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I called it misleading because you intentionally left out the state in which it was in, giving off the impression that it was another one of your cherry-picked polls where Trump has a much larger chance than he actually does

 

 

Maybe I didn't include a state, because it's not a state poll, it's the Washington Post / ABC national poll

[Sunshine Jesse]

I somehow doubt that considering the RCP poll I linked had the exact same numbers and you posted a link containing the aforementioned poll, but whatever. I guess I was wrong!

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Indeed you were. But we're all wrong sometimes. And sometimes we're right

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-anthony-weiner-fbi-230494

 

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/382245828737245185?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

1:51 PM - 23 Sep 2013

 

"Degenerate former Congressman Anthony Weiner is trying to make a comeback. He is a sick & perverted man that New York does not want or need"

 

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/628231488794923008?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

8:50 AM - 3 Aug 2015

 

"It came out that Huma Abedin knows all about Hillary’s private illegal emails. Huma’s PR husband, Anthony Weiner, will tell the world."

 

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/638318502059880450?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

4:52 AM - 31 Aug 2015

 

"Huma Abedin, the top aide to Hillary Clinton and the wife of perv sleazebag Anthony Wiener, was a major security risk as a collector of info"

 

Nostradamus trump strikes again

 

 

[Dad]

I know this is off topic but given that this whole thing has gone on for a bunch of posts I feel this would be good for a fresh perspective (as I only just read all the stuff from today)

Winter please can you not try to act like you're not just blatantly insulting people? Like, you're digging yourself deeper with this "No, totally, I didn't say anything SPECIFICALLY to them so I'm all clear".

It's obvious Jesse didn't understand as they are the one who came out to say how they read the thing wrong. So it's obvious if you refer to someone who didn't read it right it'd include her.

Not to mention you're still insulting *insert vague number of people here* with those posts. You at least admit that it's meant to insult those people. Saying something to intentionally insult has already, in fact today, been said as bad.

And hell, man, idk if she cares but you call her "Darling" and similar in most posts, that seems fairly condescending.

 

Like, this has nothing to do with me, yeah, but from that perspective it really seems you're just trying to get away with insulting people through technicalities.

 

This shouldn't have gone on this long. Dad said not to say those kinds of things, his words should have been heeded, as he's the authority here, not debated.

 

Also I request no one rep this post. I'd like to avoid being accused of trying to rep-whore.

Stop making minimodding. You're creating a secondary, unneeded problem. I appreciate your enthusiasm, but let me handle it.