What's new
By:
Filters

Never Trump

Gameface said:
I'm not implying you're racist. Just asking completely upfront and in simple English if you don't really care that Trump has the overwhelming support of racist organizations. The KKK has endorsed him. David Duke has endorsed him. He has the support of our nation's racists. That's not made up, that is fact.
Click to expand...

Gameface said:
I'm not implying you're racist. Just asking completely upfront and in simple English if you don't really care that Trump has the overwhelming support of racist organizations. The KKK has endorsed him. David Duke has endorsed him. He has the support of our nation's racists. That's not made up, that is fact.
Click to expand...

Who gives a rats *** if the KKK supports Trump. They represent well below .01% of the population. Why does this even matter?

Here is the problem you are having. You think if someone questions Hillary that automatically makes them support the KKK. That is absurd. How can you not see that?

I have said on my many occasions that I dont approve of Trump. The only thing I like about his message is calling out corrupt government. Thats it. But no, you connect these dots, Dont like Hillary = Supports Trump = Racist. With nothing inbetween. Its ridiculous and immature.

If you think Hillary is some angel, you are sadly mistaken. I remind you that she voted for the Iraq war that costs many American lives and innocent Iraqi lives. She voted for the bailouts. She works backroom deals with big banks. You dont give 600,000 dollar speeches to Goldman Sachs so they can hear your opinion on abortion. Wake the F up. Thats merely a drop in the bucket of what she has done, and what she is up to. She doesnt represent the common man.

Also, you cant out of one side of your mouth tell us that if Trump is elected that the world will end, and then out the other that he will not get anything he has promised done.
 
Computer said:
Who gives a rats *** if the KKK supports Trump. They represent well below .01% of the population. Why does this even matter?

Here is the problem you are having. You think if someone questions Hillary that automatically makes them support the KKK. That is absurd. How can you not see that?

I have said on my many occasions that I dont approve of Trump. The only thing I like about his message is calling out corrupt government. Thats it. But no, you connect these dots, Dont like Hillary = Supports Trump = Racist. With nothing inbetween. Its ridiculous and immature.

If you think Hillary is some angel, you are sadly mistaken. I remind you that she voted for the Iraq war that costs many American lives and innocent Iraqi lives. She voted for the bailouts. She works backroom deals with big banks. You dont give 600,000 dollar speeches to Goldman Sachs so they can hear your opinion on abortion. Wake the F up. Thats merely a drop in the bucket of what she has done, and what she is up to. She doesnt represent the common man.

Also, you cant out of one side of your mouth tell us that if Trump is elected that the world will end, and then out the other that he will not get anything he has promised done.
Click to expand...

I've been pretty clear that I don't think someone questioning Hillary Clinton makes them racist.

That's not what I think.

That's not what I've said.

I have never, not once, not even sort of, called you a racist. At the very worst of it I asked if you were indifferent to racism. You cannot understand anything so complex.

I'm done talking to you. You are clearly uninformed, unintelligent and uninteresting.

Back on ignore. What was I thinking taking you off ignore in the first place?
 
Am I the only person on this forum who voted Trump?
 
I'll be voting for Evan McMullin. I tried going in on Friday for early voting, but there was a 2.5 hour line so I bailed. Hopefully the line tomorrow isn't as long!
 
for the last couple months I've thought that this was a shoe-in for Hillary. Beginning to question my confidence.
 
Boris said:
I love Bill Maher. Here is what he has to say to liberal bullies like [MENTION=40]Siro[/MENTION]



No doubt Siri will throw a fit by neg bullying me about my stance on an issue. This is what these anti Trump people do.
Click to expand...

As expected the liberal bully [MENTION=40]Siro[/MENTION] performed his expected American Jihadism. He cannot stand free speech. You an the race baiters have plenty in common. You have ex convict prison mentality "what you say bitch I will kick your ***". You are like the KKK trying to suppress. You are the JF bully an I feel pity for you.
 
colton said:
I'll be voting for Evan McMullin. I tried going in on Friday for early voting, but there was a 2.5 hour line so I bailed. Hopefully the line tomorrow isn't as long!
Click to expand...

this **** simply doesn't make sense to me. Do people realize that voting shouldn't take this long? I've never waited longer than 30 minutes to vote in any election.
 
Computer said:
[MENTION=26]Gameface[/MENTION]

Again, here is the sequence of events.

What the hell does your response have to do with what I said?

Quit avoiding it. How cowardly are you?
Click to expand...

Trump is just as crooked.
 
colton said:
I'll be voting for Evan McMullin. I tried going in on Friday for early voting, but there was a 2.5 hour line so I bailed. Hopefully the line tomorrow isn't as long!
Click to expand...

Why didn't you mail in your ballot?
 
Sort of want to vote for Trump just to see the ****show that would be the next four years.

But alas, I have too much of a conscience and will vote for just the second time in my life and it will be for Clinton. Clinton will slaughter him in the electoral college.
 
dalamon said:
this **** simply doesn't make sense to me. Do people realize that voting shouldn't take this long? I've never waited longer than 30 minutes to vote in any election.
Click to expand...

I have never waited more then 5 minutes. Could be higher than average voter turnout. IIRC [MENTION=14]colton[/MENTION] is a Utah resident an this place is charged up right now. It is such an interesting story here cause Utah could possibly vote democrat or we can give Hillary the presidency by voting 3rd party. My guess is Utah is hyper get out the vote. Everyone has there agendas an this year your vote in Utah may actually matter.

All my social media is blowed up with political propaganda. I feel like a Iowa resident.
 
The reason the line was long is because this year it's supposed to be all mail-in voting. They have some places where you can vote in-person, but not as many as they would normally have. I've never waited even close to 5 min to vote. This year I didn't wait at all, I mailed in my ballot a couple weeks ago.
 
Cunning Linguist said:
Sort of want to vote for Trump just to see the ****show that would be the next four years.

But alas, I have too much of a conscience and will vote for just the second time in my life and it will be for Clinton. Clinton will slaughter him in the electoral college.
Click to expand...

I've been following the polls and EC map closely. If he sweeps the "battle grounds" he wins narrowly in the EC. If she sweeps the "battle grounds" she wallops him in the EC.

If Utah and N.M go third party and Trump pulls most of the other battlegrounds it might go to congress. Highly unlikely but mathematically possible.

I think they split the "battle grounds" and she wins solidly in the EC.
 
Gameface said:
The reason the line was long is because this year it's supposed to be all mail-in voting. They have some places where you can vote in-person, but not as many as they would normally have. I've never waited even close to 5 min to vote. This year I didn't wait at all, I mailed in my ballot a couple weeks ago.
Click to expand...
There is not mail in voting in Utah county where Colton is. That was just SLC county.
 
One day before the election. Can the Never Trump people finally relax? With one notable exception, the best aggregators now put Clinton anywhere from an 85 to 99 percent favorite to win the presidency. If Trump wins it will be the biggest upset in modern presidential history. Much more surprising, for example, than Truman/Dewey way back in 1948.

Still, there is some nagging doubt. Nate Silver of 538, easily the most popular and one of the most accurate of the aggregators, has Clinton at only a 65 percent favorite. Silver’s relatively favorable outlook for Trump has caused considerable controversy and angst amongst Trump detractors. Some even accuse him of a bad faith adjustment to his calculations in order to make the race seem more competitive and thereby increase traffic to his ESPN sponsored website.

In contrast to Silver is Sam Wang of the Princeton Election Consortium, which now puts Clinton at a greater than 99 percent win probability. While not nearly as well known or popular, the Princeton Election Consortium has been even more accurate over the last two presidential elections than 538. Wang essentially called the election for Clinton weeks ago.

It’s easy for conformation bias to seep into our search for answers, which is probably why I give more credence to Wang than Silver, but he does have a more academic approach and a much less volatile model over the last few months.

Here is a recent article, in fairly technical detail, on the Princeton model:

https://election.princeton.edu/2016/11/06/is-99-a-reasonable-probability/
 
Jonah said:
One day before the election. Can the Never Trump people finally relax? With one notable exception, the best aggregators now put Clinton anywhere from an 85 to 99 percent favorite to win the presidency. If Trump wins it will be the biggest upset in modern presidential history. Much more surprising, for example, than Truman/Dewey way back in 1948.

Still, there is some nagging doubt. Nate Silver of 538, easily the most popular and one of the most accurate of the aggregators, has Clinton at only a 65 percent favorite. Silver’s relatively favorable outlook for Trump has caused considerable controversy and angst amongst Trump detractors. Some even accuse him of a bad faith adjustment to his calculations in order to make the race seem more competitive and thereby increase traffic to his ESPN sponsored website.

In contrast to Silver is Sam Wang of the Princeton Election Consortium, which now puts Clinton at a greater than 99 percent win probability. While not nearly as well known or popular, the Princeton Election Consortium has been even more accurate over the last two presidential elections than 538. Wang essentially called the election for Clinton weeks ago.

It’s easy for conformation bias to seep into our search for answers, which is probably why I give more credence to Wang than Silver, but he does have a more academic approach and a much less volatile model over the last few months.

Here is a recent article, in fairly technical detail, on the Princeton model:

https://election.princeton.edu/2016/11/06/is-99-a-reasonable-probability/
Click to expand...

I'll relax when I wake up on Wednesday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top