[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Where the heck is Hillary Clinton?
Author Thread
Welpee
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239

11/18/2016  10:48 AM    LAST EDITED: 11/18/2016  10:54 AM
arkrud wrote:
Welpee wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:I think its silly to be making such a huge fuss over 1mil extra votes out of 150mil votes. Again thank the lord for electorate. Thank you to our forefathers for having the incredible level of foresight to make sure All of America is represented. Not just Bonn but Dean out in Wyoming who is barely just getting by and can't provide for his family. The Electorate and the level of foresight is one of the reasons why we the United States of America are what we are. And why everyone around the globe wants to be here. It sure isn't to spend quality time with Bonn
So explain again why the voter in Wyoming should have their vote carry 362% more weight than the voter in California? And as far as representation, why is it that the residents of D.C. have zero voting representation in the house or senate in spite of having a larger population than Vermont or Wyoming? And finally please spare us yet another myth about "foresight" when this electoral college system was designed. The system was designed because they didn't trust the citizens and added an extra layer to the process to override the will of the people when appropriate (convenient).

Yet, nobody is trying to duplicate our presidential voting process (because it's absurd). Again, I encourage you to read about the John Quincy Adams vs Andrew Jackson election in 1824 and then lecture us about the "foresight" of the electoral college. Jackson won the popular vote and got the most electoral votes and STILL lost the election.

The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Winston Churchill

Average voter absolutely should not be trusted.
Welpee - you are a good example - you are not listening to any arguments and your views is basically some kind of political fate.
gunsnewing - it is no point to debate with people who have faith. Faith is believe which do not required logic an cannot be changed.

Once again, I have no idea what you're trying to say. It makes zero sense.

And tell me what arguments you are listening to. Convince me that you are remotely objective and not just another koolaid drinker.

AUTOADVERT
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/18/2016  10:50 AM
smackeddog wrote:

At this point, what is the difference between Earthmansurfer and David Duke?


Maybe the Senate will be able to stop some of this. We will have 48 or 49 Dems, which means we need a couple of principled Republicans to join us.
Welpee
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239

11/18/2016  10:50 AM
smackeddog wrote:

At this point, what is the difference between Earthmansurfer and David Duke?

Duke knows what he is. Earthmansurfer? Not so much.
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081

11/18/2016  10:57 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
smackeddog wrote:

At this point, what is the difference between Earthmansurfer and David Duke?


Maybe the Senate will be able to stop some of this. We will have 48 or 49 Dems, which means we need a couple of principled Republicans to join us.

And they wonder why minorities are afraid...

Welpee
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239

11/18/2016  10:58 AM    LAST EDITED: 11/18/2016  10:59 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
smackeddog wrote:

At this point, what is the difference between Earthmansurfer and David Duke?


Maybe the Senate will be able to stop some of this. We will have 48 or 49 Dems, which means we need a couple of principled Republicans to join us.
And the Trump supporters have no concern that racist are overwhelmingly supporting their candidate. As if they just pretend that David Duke doesn't exist. And before they throw the Robert Byrd talking point out there, dude was a KKK member in the 1940s when he was in his 20s and in his 30s he turned away from it and has repeatedly apologized and denounced his past views. Duke is an active racist in 2016. Slight difference.
DrAlphaeus
Posts: 23751
Alba Posts: 10
Joined: 12/19/2007
Member: #1781

11/18/2016  11:03 AM
earthmansurfer wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
markvmc wrote:So the proof that Clinton rigged the polls is that she lost, and that she hasn't asked for a recount.

I've heard it all now.

No, more this regarding the fraud:

Expert of voter fraud in Bev Harris says Hillary tried to steal election but lost. Start at 3:30 mark:: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is5GrQwevhg
Votes were held back in Detroit, Wisconson, Michigan and Milwaukee, PE, and a bit more.
13% of illegals admit they vote, and quite a few were caught this election. http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/poll-13-of-illegal-aliens-admit-they-vote/
Soros connected to voting machine in 16 States.
5 or so States are still not releasing the scanned images of the ballots as required by law. (Indiana, Virginia, Washington st., Utah, Kansas)
There is evidence Hillary Stole 5 States but still lost (and yeah, MSM is dying now -The NY Times have issued and apology for their coverage)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrqZvzGZuCo

I asked you if you were illegal on a sports site hidden behind anonymity and you basically accused me of being reckless and asked me why would you incriminate yourself like that and if I was a cop?

So I don't understand this 13% of illegals vote stat. What does it have to do with the 2016 presidential election? The figure assumes you first of all know the number of illegals to begin with, and then these illegals are admitting to pollsters that they not only are here illegally but voted illegally on top of that? I don't get why they would even do that.

The URL you posted refers to this article from the Daily Signal where he asserts this 13% figure: http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/02/poll-shows-noncitizens-can-shape-elections/

In that article there is a link to the poll: http://www.mclaughlinonline.com/lib/sitefiles/National_Hispanic_Presentation_06-21-13_-_FOR_RELEASE.pdf The methodology of this poll says: "This bi-lingual national survey of 800 Hispanics was conducted from June 5th through June 16th, 2013."

As I've said before, I'm not a stats guy. But I don't understand how the Daily Signal writer is getting this 13% figure. Can you look through that poll data and show me how he's getting that?

So to recap: I'm not sure how an article from 2015 about a poll from 2013 of 800 people can lead you to say with confidence "13% of illegals admit they vote". Because of what 800 Hispanics said on the phone to someone in 2013?

You know that "illegal immigrants" isn't synonymous with "Hispanics".

I'm honestly confused. Help me out earthmansurfer.

I've had too many people in this thread suddenly get friendly and then try to corner me, lol. It started getting old and then you ask me if I'm here legally? lol, seriously?
Hidden behind anonymity? They have my email. I'm not on TOR. Childs play easy; I think you know that...

The point with that article was that if they voted in the past (and since some were caught this last election - Was a video feed on the news online though I don't know which one now, it was live.) that it is likely to continue. There are many many articles out there on illegals voting. I'm not going to do stats now as it is bedtime.

Another quote, but different article and also from the past(but there are many many more.) If it is a concern to you, really, just do a search, the result list is long.

In 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called for jury duty from voter registration rolls over a two-year period in just one U.S. district court were not U.S. citizens. While that may not seem like many, just 3 percent of registered voters would have been more than enough to provide the winning presiden­tial vote margin in Florida in 2000. Indeed, the Cen­sus Bureau estimates that there are over a million illegal aliens in Florida, and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has prosecuted more non-citizen voting cases in Florida than in any other state.
http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=691

The big deal is Bev Harris and the voting machines. Even though it is Alex Jones interviewing her, as I told Martin, listen to her words. Don't let the Alex part stop the message. This is a bit of a problem with Mainstream, they have certain boundries due to their deep ties with the establishment. Some things they won't touch till they have to.

So you didn't answer my questions about that 13% stat. I can't figure how a poll of 800 Hispanics in 2013 gives you any insight on the illegal immigrant population as a whole. Do you still want to stand behind it? I'm not going to waste my time following your links until you answer what I think are fair queries about that 13% stat. Did you even take the time to glance at the poll data like I did?

You want me to go through a 63 page study and answer a question for you? I'm not a stats guy either. That stuff burns me out. The original article makes sense and is not anything really shocking. They extrapolated out, is all it looks like, regarding polling 800 hispanics in 2013 and applying it to a larger sample. If you want answers on stats, really, ask a stats guy.

If you want your standard of judging me and my posts, to be based on that one article, that is fine. No offense taken.

The original article didn't make that much sense to me. It made sense to you because of confirmation bias.

A 2013 poll of 800 Hispanics can't tell you about illegal alien population patterns as a whole because not all undocumented aliens are Hispanics. You don't need to be a stats guy to figure that out.

You should spend more time reading studies and original research. Why cite something if you aren't going to stand behind it when questioned?

You are just on to the next tweets in your timeline to feed your confirmation bias.

Perhaps you are right. But like many Americans, I am distrustful of the corrupt media as they have lied to us too many times and reported biased news. Like many Americans I am distrustful of a corrupt system.

When you lie to and steal from people for years, eventually there will be blowback, right or wrong. We are a part of a bigger system and it seems to be self correcting right now.

The lies are getting tiring...

Hillary had a lot on her side and still lost

If your news station didn't mention Hillary Clinton and Robert Byrd, it was probably fake news.

And there you go again. More cute image macros and a flurry of Reddit tangents. Instead of addressing my specific questions about data and the assumptions made.

If you are tired of the mainstream media, why are you copying their game book? Just because you've lied to by them doesn't mean you have license to lie to me and think I'm gonna put butter on it and eat it.

Baba Booey 2016 — "It's Silly Season"
markvmc
Posts: 21996
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/6/2008
Member: #1797

11/18/2016  11:04 AM
earthmansurfer wrote:
markvmc wrote:In case anyone is still inclined to take the Soros voting machine nonsense seriously, see here. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/31/sean-duffy/wisconsin-congressman-fuels-soros-voting-machine-r/

EMS, why don't you apply any of your media skepticism towards the sources you cite?

Your argument is one of semantics. I stand corrected, he doesn't outright own them, he just has influence over the owner, lol.

InSmartmatic, the troubled Venezuelan-linked voting company recent partnered up (late 2014) with a firm called SGO. SGO is headed up by one Lord Mark Malloch-Brown. Brown, as it turns out, is a rather curious and troubling figure. Brown, you should know, has close ties to George Soros and rents a Soros owned house in New York. Brown gets a sweetheart deal at only $10,000 a month. He also serves as the VP of Soros’ hedge fund the Quantum Fund. In

the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States:
Arizona California Colorado District of Columbia Florida Illinois Louisiana Michigan Missouri New Jersey Nevada Oregon Pennsylvania Virginia Washington Wisconsin


http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/george-soros-hillary-clinton-voter-fraud/

So, my question to you is, why didn't you notice this?

Why didn't I notice the story from the webpage with the big picture of Clinton as a puppet on strings?

Why didn't I notice the site that says "here is the proof "(where proof is hyperlinked), and says this:

"Smartmatic, the troubled Venezuelan-linked voting company recent partnered up (late 2014) with a firm called SGO. SGO is headed up by one Lord Mark Malloch-Brown. Brown, as it turns out, is a rather curious and troubling figure. Brown, you should know, has close ties to George Soros and rents a Soros owned house in New York. Brown gets a sweetheart deal at only $10,000 a month. He also serves as the VP of Soros’ hedge fund the Quantum Fund. In

the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States:
Arizona California Colorado District of Columbia Florida Illinois Louisiana Michigan Missouri New Jersey Nevada Oregon Pennsylvania Virginia Washington Wisconsin"

But when you click on the link to see the source of this information, you just get sent to other right wing sites running the same story, with no documentation for these claims. Are they true? I have no idea. But you're willing to believe them just because some non-mainstream right wing website says they are.

Why didn't I notice these? Because they present zero actual evidence for their preconceived views, and because they spread claims without checking them for truth, once those claims fit their agenda.

DrAlphaeus
Posts: 23751
Alba Posts: 10
Joined: 12/19/2007
Member: #1781

11/18/2016  11:31 AM
gunsnewing wrote:
NumberTwoPencil wrote:I should know to never click on this thread but, sigh, I did. My bad.

I used to smile when I saw politics discussed on UK. I'd think, well, some people think rather differently than I do. Some people are completely hoodwinked. Some people just aren't paying attention. But . . . but . . . overall, as a group, Ultimate Knicks folks are a bit more sensible than the rest of the country--maybe just because they are New Yorkers, but I'll take it--and sometimes it sounds to me like people here listen to each other once in a while and maybe, just maybe, in the long run, it will all be okay. Politics that showed up in UK once in a while made me happier than running into politics elsewhere. (And, whoa, since I basically work in politics, I try pretty hard to ignore politics when I'm not on the clock.)

But, okay, I just read the last 50 pages here and . . . I'm not sure I'm going to do that again any time soon. I just waded through some pretty crazy s**t, stuff that makes wonder if anyone in the whole city has a clue about how the city, the state, the nation run. I mean, yeah, okay, we can argue about Trump but, yo!, the level of complaint here makes me wonder if anyone knows, oh, who's on their community board, what the NY state senate voted on this year, or who our lt. governor might be. I mean so, so, so much energy is spent here on the crazy that I wonder if any is left over for the day-to-day politics that effect our lives (well, at least effect mine) in very direct ways. I mean, yeah, okay, we vote every couple of years for president, senator, and congresspersons but that takes, what?, an hour or two of our time every year?

From my point of view, all this extra energy spent arguing over national politics is a waste all around. Spend even a fraction of that energy on local politics . . . and you'll make a difference in a direct way. Yeah, sure, I get wound up over Trump but beyond voting what can I do about him? Protest, yes. Write letters, yes. But . . . if you feel that what's going on with Trump (for or against) is worth days of your time getting bend out of shape about then . . . spend those days getting appointed to a community board and fight him or help him. Campaign for a congressperson who will help him or fight him. I care--I'd fight Trump--but, whew, my energy, what I have left over outside of the office, is spent on politics and politicians and institutions that I can see and hear, at least once in a while, with my own eyes and ears.

Carry on. Just my two cents. I'm sticking with Knicks ball. As sad as the Knicks are, they aren't quite as sad as reading through this thread :)

Excellent advice. Thankfully Trump won so I don't have to join any community boards at the moment

Yea nice post NumberTwo. You are right. A lot of folks on the board aren't in the Tri-State and this election season... well... it's been something else.but good advice about local involvement, I agree.

Baba Booey 2016 — "It's Silly Season"
earthmansurfer
Posts: 24005
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2005
Member: #858
Germany
11/18/2016  11:33 AM
markvmc wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
markvmc wrote:In case anyone is still inclined to take the Soros voting machine nonsense seriously, see here. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/31/sean-duffy/wisconsin-congressman-fuels-soros-voting-machine-r/

EMS, why don't you apply any of your media skepticism towards the sources you cite?

Your argument is one of semantics. I stand corrected, he doesn't outright own them, he just has influence over the owner, lol.

InSmartmatic, the troubled Venezuelan-linked voting company recent partnered up (late 2014) with a firm called SGO. SGO is headed up by one Lord Mark Malloch-Brown. Brown, as it turns out, is a rather curious and troubling figure. Brown, you should know, has close ties to George Soros and rents a Soros owned house in New York. Brown gets a sweetheart deal at only $10,000 a month. He also serves as the VP of Soros’ hedge fund the Quantum Fund. In

the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States:
Arizona California Colorado District of Columbia Florida Illinois Louisiana Michigan Missouri New Jersey Nevada Oregon Pennsylvania Virginia Washington Wisconsin


http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/george-soros-hillary-clinton-voter-fraud/

So, my question to you is, why didn't you notice this?

Why didn't I notice the story from the webpage with the big picture of Clinton as a puppet on strings?

Why didn't I notice the site that says "here is the proof "(where proof is hyperlinked), and says this:

"Smartmatic, the troubled Venezuelan-linked voting company recent partnered up (late 2014) with a firm called SGO. SGO is headed up by one Lord Mark Malloch-Brown. Brown, as it turns out, is a rather curious and troubling figure. Brown, you should know, has close ties to George Soros and rents a Soros owned house in New York. Brown gets a sweetheart deal at only $10,000 a month. He also serves as the VP of Soros’ hedge fund the Quantum Fund. In

the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States:
Arizona California Colorado District of Columbia Florida Illinois Louisiana Michigan Missouri New Jersey Nevada Oregon Pennsylvania Virginia Washington Wisconsin"

But when you click on the link to see the source of this information, you just get sent to other right wing sites running the same story, with no documentation for these claims. Are they true? I have no idea. But you're willing to believe them just because some non-mainstream right wing website says they are.

Why didn't I notice these? Because they present zero actual evidence for their preconceived views, and because they spread claims without checking them for truth, once those claims fit their agenda.

Well, looking at Hillary's connections (only partly due to Wikileaks), I can see how she is a puppet on a string for the corporate world. Getting 250,000 USD an hour to speak (or something crazy like that). Getting donations of 25 million from States that fund terrorism. And Hillary's buddy George Soros being trending on Twitter because of "possible" ties to the riots.
I think Puppet on a String is an apt picture actually.

The problem with Mainstream media is they lure you in with (some) respectability, but rarely speak out against something (important) when it hurts their parent company, or shareholders, or politicians they favor, etc.

Looks like MILLIONS are looking for new sources of information, because we are tired of the lies. Now, if any false information hurt Hillary, they basically created the problem. And that is no admission of guilt here.

The Wikileaks are interesting facts and they are probably the straw that broke Clintons back.

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. Albert Einstein
meloshouldgo
Posts: 26565
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/3/2014
Member: #5801

11/18/2016  11:54 AM
markvmc wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
markvmc wrote:In case anyone is still inclined to take the Soros voting machine nonsense seriously, see here. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/31/sean-duffy/wisconsin-congressman-fuels-soros-voting-machine-r/

EMS, why don't you apply any of your media skepticism towards the sources you cite?

Your argument is one of semantics. I stand corrected, he doesn't outright own them, he just has influence over the owner, lol.

InSmartmatic, the troubled Venezuelan-linked voting company recent partnered up (late 2014) with a firm called SGO. SGO is headed up by one Lord Mark Malloch-Brown. Brown, as it turns out, is a rather curious and troubling figure. Brown, you should know, has close ties to George Soros and rents a Soros owned house in New York. Brown gets a sweetheart deal at only $10,000 a month. He also serves as the VP of Soros’ hedge fund the Quantum Fund. In

the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States:
Arizona California Colorado District of Columbia Florida Illinois Louisiana Michigan Missouri New Jersey Nevada Oregon Pennsylvania Virginia Washington Wisconsin


http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/george-soros-hillary-clinton-voter-fraud/

So, my question to you is, why didn't you notice this?

Why didn't I notice the story from the webpage with the big picture of Clinton as a puppet on strings?

Why didn't I notice the site that says "here is the proof "(where proof is hyperlinked), and says this:

"Smartmatic, the troubled Venezuelan-linked voting company recent partnered up (late 2014) with a firm called SGO. SGO is headed up by one Lord Mark Malloch-Brown. Brown, as it turns out, is a rather curious and troubling figure. Brown, you should know, has close ties to George Soros and rents a Soros owned house in New York. Brown gets a sweetheart deal at only $10,000 a month. He also serves as the VP of Soros’ hedge fund the Quantum Fund. In

the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States:
Arizona California Colorado District of Columbia Florida Illinois Louisiana Michigan Missouri New Jersey Nevada Oregon Pennsylvania Virginia Washington Wisconsin"

But when you click on the link to see the source of this information, you just get sent to other right wing sites running the same story, with no documentation for these claims. Are they true? I have no idea. But you're willing to believe them just because some non-mainstream right wing website says they are.

Why didn't I notice these? Because they present zero actual evidence for their preconceived views, and because they spread claims without checking them for truth, once those claims fit their agenda.

There's a language barrier here. Some people have no appreciation for what "facts" and "evidence" truly mean. You are talking to a person whose single biggest issue was Hillary declaring war on Russia!!!! Facts be damned. I mean once they see something on Fox it must be true. Go back a couple of pages and see him making the case against Hillary where he can't even articulate what she did wrong but he is convinced of her guilt. HILARIOUS. And if you ask for evidence you'll get youtube links and then he'll ask you to do the research.

I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only try to make them think - Socrates
DrAlphaeus
Posts: 23751
Alba Posts: 10
Joined: 12/19/2007
Member: #1781

11/18/2016  1:28 PM    LAST EDITED: 11/18/2016  1:53 PM
earthmansurfer wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
markvmc wrote:So the proof that Clinton rigged the polls is that she lost, and that she hasn't asked for a recount.

I've heard it all now.

No, more this regarding the fraud:

Expert of voter fraud in Bev Harris says Hillary tried to steal election but lost. Start at 3:30 mark:: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is5GrQwevhg
Votes were held back in Detroit, Wisconson, Michigan and Milwaukee, PE, and a bit more.
13% of illegals admit they vote, and quite a few were caught this election. http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/poll-13-of-illegal-aliens-admit-they-vote/
Soros connected to voting machine in 16 States.
5 or so States are still not releasing the scanned images of the ballots as required by law. (Indiana, Virginia, Washington st., Utah, Kansas)
There is evidence Hillary Stole 5 States but still lost (and yeah, MSM is dying now -The NY Times have issued and apology for their coverage)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrqZvzGZuCo

I asked you if you were illegal on a sports site hidden behind anonymity and you basically accused me of being reckless and asked me why would you incriminate yourself like that and if I was a cop?

So I don't understand this 13% of illegals vote stat. What does it have to do with the 2016 presidential election? The figure assumes you first of all know the number of illegals to begin with, and then these illegals are admitting to pollsters that they not only are here illegally but voted illegally on top of that? I don't get why they would even do that.

The URL you posted refers to this article from the Daily Signal where he asserts this 13% figure: http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/02/poll-shows-noncitizens-can-shape-elections/

In that article there is a link to the poll: http://www.mclaughlinonline.com/lib/sitefiles/National_Hispanic_Presentation_06-21-13_-_FOR_RELEASE.pdf The methodology of this poll says: "This bi-lingual national survey of 800 Hispanics was conducted from June 5th through June 16th, 2013."

As I've said before, I'm not a stats guy. But I don't understand how the Daily Signal writer is getting this 13% figure. Can you look through that poll data and show me how he's getting that?

So to recap: I'm not sure how an article from 2015 about a poll from 2013 of 800 people can lead you to say with confidence "13% of illegals admit they vote". Because of what 800 Hispanics said on the phone to someone in 2013?

You know that "illegal immigrants" isn't synonymous with "Hispanics".

I'm honestly confused. Help me out earthmansurfer.

I've had too many people in this thread suddenly get friendly and then try to corner me, lol. It started getting old and then you ask me if I'm here legally? lol, seriously?
Hidden behind anonymity? They have my email. I'm not on TOR. Childs play easy; I think you know that...

The point with that article was that if they voted in the past (and since some were caught this last election - Was a video feed on the news online though I don't know which one now, it was live.) that it is likely to continue. There are many many articles out there on illegals voting. I'm not going to do stats now as it is bedtime.

Another quote, but different article and also from the past(but there are many many more.) If it is a concern to you, really, just do a search, the result list is long.

In 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called for jury duty from voter registration rolls over a two-year period in just one U.S. district court were not U.S. citizens. While that may not seem like many, just 3 percent of registered voters would have been more than enough to provide the winning presiden­tial vote margin in Florida in 2000. Indeed, the Cen­sus Bureau estimates that there are over a million illegal aliens in Florida, and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has prosecuted more non-citizen voting cases in Florida than in any other state.
http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=691

The big deal is Bev Harris and the voting machines. Even though it is Alex Jones interviewing her, as I told Martin, listen to her words. Don't let the Alex part stop the message. This is a bit of a problem with Mainstream, they have certain boundries due to their deep ties with the establishment. Some things they won't touch till they have to.

So you didn't answer my questions about that 13% stat. I can't figure how a poll of 800 Hispanics in 2013 gives you any insight on the illegal immigrant population as a whole. Do you still want to stand behind it? I'm not going to waste my time following your links until you answer what I think are fair queries about that 13% stat. Did you even take the time to glance at the poll data like I did?

You want me to go through a 63 page study and answer a question for you? I'm not a stats guy either. That stuff burns me out. The original article makes sense and is not anything really shocking. They extrapolated out, is all it looks like, regarding polling 800 hispanics in 2013 and applying it to a larger sample. If you want answers on stats, really, ask a stats guy.

If you want your standard of judging me and my posts, to be based on that one article, that is fine. No offense taken.

The original article didn't make that much sense to me. It made sense to you because of confirmation bias.

A 2013 poll of 800 Hispanics can't tell you about illegal alien population patterns as a whole because not all undocumented aliens are Hispanics. You don't need to be a stats guy to figure that out.

You should spend more time reading studies and original research. Why cite something if you aren't going to stand behind it when questioned?

You are just on to the next tweets in your timeline to feed your confirmation bias.


+1 on both points. EMS, you seem to just post anything good your hear about Trump and anything bad you hear about Clinton or Obama. You don't seem to care if it's accurate or not. The problem is that anyone can write anything on Twitter or other internet sites. You will find a virtually infinite number of negative tweets about any national political figure. Don't you want your beliefs to be shaped by *accurate* information?

Wow, the Clergy agreeing with the preacher, should I be offended?

I tried talking about Trumps policies but no one wanted to actually discuss going forward, most people just posted negative stuff against Trump.
Some things might be true, some false. Just like MSM and I can't fact check every little thing but I do read the articles I post. Other things are tongue in cheek.
You reap what you sow.

I think "preaching to the choir" is the idiom you are grasping for.

We reap what we sow...

So you are punishing U.K. posters for the sins of the mainstream media by posting crappy articles that reference Heritage Foundation funded hit jobs that reference polls funded by wineries in 2013 to help explain how illegal aliens (i.e. Hispanics) and George Soros are corrupting the vote in 2016? But regardless of this widespread corruption, we should all accept the result and marvel in the prowess of the President-Elect.

The MSM traffics in BS to your mind, and you are gonna give as good as you got it. But when I challenge one of your claims to fact, I've missed the bigger point based on the aforementioned "fact", or need to do my own research and find some other click farm article based on the same shoddy assumptions... and failing that, you can't actually be bothered to answer the question, and can't ever say "wow I didn't notice that, you are right" so you'll say it was a joke or bombard us with cute memes from Reddit that made you chuckle in your other browser tab. Because mainstream media!

Anyway... have fun with all that. Say hi to Clint Eastwood for us.

To BRIGGS' original observation of Where (was) Hillary... a critique from the far left:

Baba Booey 2016 — "It's Silly Season"
Welpee
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239

11/18/2016  1:34 PM
meloshouldgo wrote:
markvmc wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
markvmc wrote:In case anyone is still inclined to take the Soros voting machine nonsense seriously, see here. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/31/sean-duffy/wisconsin-congressman-fuels-soros-voting-machine-r/

EMS, why don't you apply any of your media skepticism towards the sources you cite?

Your argument is one of semantics. I stand corrected, he doesn't outright own them, he just has influence over the owner, lol.

InSmartmatic, the troubled Venezuelan-linked voting company recent partnered up (late 2014) with a firm called SGO. SGO is headed up by one Lord Mark Malloch-Brown. Brown, as it turns out, is a rather curious and troubling figure. Brown, you should know, has close ties to George Soros and rents a Soros owned house in New York. Brown gets a sweetheart deal at only $10,000 a month. He also serves as the VP of Soros’ hedge fund the Quantum Fund. In

the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States:
Arizona California Colorado District of Columbia Florida Illinois Louisiana Michigan Missouri New Jersey Nevada Oregon Pennsylvania Virginia Washington Wisconsin


http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/george-soros-hillary-clinton-voter-fraud/

So, my question to you is, why didn't you notice this?

Why didn't I notice the story from the webpage with the big picture of Clinton as a puppet on strings?

Why didn't I notice the site that says "here is the proof "(where proof is hyperlinked), and says this:

"Smartmatic, the troubled Venezuelan-linked voting company recent partnered up (late 2014) with a firm called SGO. SGO is headed up by one Lord Mark Malloch-Brown. Brown, as it turns out, is a rather curious and troubling figure. Brown, you should know, has close ties to George Soros and rents a Soros owned house in New York. Brown gets a sweetheart deal at only $10,000 a month. He also serves as the VP of Soros’ hedge fund the Quantum Fund. In

the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States:
Arizona California Colorado District of Columbia Florida Illinois Louisiana Michigan Missouri New Jersey Nevada Oregon Pennsylvania Virginia Washington Wisconsin"

But when you click on the link to see the source of this information, you just get sent to other right wing sites running the same story, with no documentation for these claims. Are they true? I have no idea. But you're willing to believe them just because some non-mainstream right wing website says they are.

Why didn't I notice these? Because they present zero actual evidence for their preconceived views, and because they spread claims without checking them for truth, once those claims fit their agenda.

There's a language barrier here. Some people have no appreciation for what "facts" and "evidence" truly mean. You are talking to a person whose single biggest issue was Hillary declaring war on Russia!!!! Facts be damned. I mean once they see something on Fox it must be true. Go back a couple of pages and see him making the case against Hillary where he can't even articulate what she did wrong but he is convinced of her guilt. HILARIOUS. And if you ask for evidence you'll get youtube links and then he'll ask you to do the research.

Yeah, his M.O. is prove his info wrong versus him proving what he posts is accurate. Basically prove the martians haven't invaded the earth.
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081

11/18/2016  2:04 PM    LAST EDITED: 11/18/2016  2:05 PM
Dupont ending matching contributions to pension plans in 2018 and health insurance for retirees..No doubt this will pick up steam under this administration...So when they repeal Obamacare and these companies are leaving employees and former employees high and dry in terms of health insurance, whats going to happen to them?..Elections have consequences..
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
11/18/2016  2:08 PM

coming together, stronger than ever.

meloshouldgo
Posts: 26565
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/3/2014
Member: #5801

11/18/2016  2:12 PM
Welpee wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:
markvmc wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
markvmc wrote:In case anyone is still inclined to take the Soros voting machine nonsense seriously, see here. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/31/sean-duffy/wisconsin-congressman-fuels-soros-voting-machine-r/

EMS, why don't you apply any of your media skepticism towards the sources you cite?

Your argument is one of semantics. I stand corrected, he doesn't outright own them, he just has influence over the owner, lol.

InSmartmatic, the troubled Venezuelan-linked voting company recent partnered up (late 2014) with a firm called SGO. SGO is headed up by one Lord Mark Malloch-Brown. Brown, as it turns out, is a rather curious and troubling figure. Brown, you should know, has close ties to George Soros and rents a Soros owned house in New York. Brown gets a sweetheart deal at only $10,000 a month. He also serves as the VP of Soros’ hedge fund the Quantum Fund. In

the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States:
Arizona California Colorado District of Columbia Florida Illinois Louisiana Michigan Missouri New Jersey Nevada Oregon Pennsylvania Virginia Washington Wisconsin


http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/george-soros-hillary-clinton-voter-fraud/

So, my question to you is, why didn't you notice this?

Why didn't I notice the story from the webpage with the big picture of Clinton as a puppet on strings?

Why didn't I notice the site that says "here is the proof "(where proof is hyperlinked), and says this:

"Smartmatic, the troubled Venezuelan-linked voting company recent partnered up (late 2014) with a firm called SGO. SGO is headed up by one Lord Mark Malloch-Brown. Brown, as it turns out, is a rather curious and troubling figure. Brown, you should know, has close ties to George Soros and rents a Soros owned house in New York. Brown gets a sweetheart deal at only $10,000 a month. He also serves as the VP of Soros’ hedge fund the Quantum Fund. In

the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States:
Arizona California Colorado District of Columbia Florida Illinois Louisiana Michigan Missouri New Jersey Nevada Oregon Pennsylvania Virginia Washington Wisconsin"

But when you click on the link to see the source of this information, you just get sent to other right wing sites running the same story, with no documentation for these claims. Are they true? I have no idea. But you're willing to believe them just because some non-mainstream right wing website says they are.

Why didn't I notice these? Because they present zero actual evidence for their preconceived views, and because they spread claims without checking them for truth, once those claims fit their agenda.

There's a language barrier here. Some people have no appreciation for what "facts" and "evidence" truly mean. You are talking to a person whose single biggest issue was Hillary declaring war on Russia!!!! Facts be damned. I mean once they see something on Fox it must be true. Go back a couple of pages and see him making the case against Hillary where he can't even articulate what she did wrong but he is convinced of her guilt. HILARIOUS. And if you ask for evidence you'll get youtube links and then he'll ask you to do the research.

Yeah, his M.O. is prove his info wrong versus him proving what he posts is accurate. Basically prove the martians haven't invaded the earth.

Very elegantly stated!!

I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only try to make them think - Socrates
earthmansurfer
Posts: 24005
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2005
Member: #858
Germany
11/18/2016  2:15 PM
meloshouldgo wrote:
markvmc wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
markvmc wrote:In case anyone is still inclined to take the Soros voting machine nonsense seriously, see here. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/31/sean-duffy/wisconsin-congressman-fuels-soros-voting-machine-r/

EMS, why don't you apply any of your media skepticism towards the sources you cite?

Your argument is one of semantics. I stand corrected, he doesn't outright own them, he just has influence over the owner, lol.

InSmartmatic, the troubled Venezuelan-linked voting company recent partnered up (late 2014) with a firm called SGO. SGO is headed up by one Lord Mark Malloch-Brown. Brown, as it turns out, is a rather curious and troubling figure. Brown, you should know, has close ties to George Soros and rents a Soros owned house in New York. Brown gets a sweetheart deal at only $10,000 a month. He also serves as the VP of Soros’ hedge fund the Quantum Fund. In

the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States:
Arizona California Colorado District of Columbia Florida Illinois Louisiana Michigan Missouri New Jersey Nevada Oregon Pennsylvania Virginia Washington Wisconsin


http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/george-soros-hillary-clinton-voter-fraud/

So, my question to you is, why didn't you notice this?

Why didn't I notice the story from the webpage with the big picture of Clinton as a puppet on strings?

Why didn't I notice the site that says "here is the proof "(where proof is hyperlinked), and says this:

"Smartmatic, the troubled Venezuelan-linked voting company recent partnered up (late 2014) with a firm called SGO. SGO is headed up by one Lord Mark Malloch-Brown. Brown, as it turns out, is a rather curious and troubling figure. Brown, you should know, has close ties to George Soros and rents a Soros owned house in New York. Brown gets a sweetheart deal at only $10,000 a month. He also serves as the VP of Soros’ hedge fund the Quantum Fund. In

the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States:
Arizona California Colorado District of Columbia Florida Illinois Louisiana Michigan Missouri New Jersey Nevada Oregon Pennsylvania Virginia Washington Wisconsin"

But when you click on the link to see the source of this information, you just get sent to other right wing sites running the same story, with no documentation for these claims. Are they true? I have no idea. But you're willing to believe them just because some non-mainstream right wing website says they are.

Why didn't I notice these? Because they present zero actual evidence for their preconceived views, and because they spread claims without checking them for truth, once those claims fit their agenda.

There's a language barrier here. Some people have no appreciation for what "facts" and "evidence" truly mean. You are talking to a person whose single biggest issue was Hillary declaring war on Russia!!!! Facts be damned. I mean once they see something on Fox it must be true. Go back a couple of pages and see him making the case against Hillary where he can't even articulate what she did wrong but he is convinced of her guilt. HILARIOUS. And if you ask for evidence you'll get youtube links and then he'll ask you to do the research.

Is this pic below accurate? I know it is hindsight. Is it fake news? This is the kind of stuff we got to see from Mainstream for months, in one way or another.
You can put out factual stories, but when you bombard people with Hillary is winning for 2 months, it has an effect. Many say Polling doesn't measure public opinion, it helps to create it.

Imagine if MSM was Pro Trump in their polls, that would have motivated more people as it was an expressive movement. Hillary, like her or not, she just came across as more of the same, another politician. Her strongest point was being the first woman president. That isn't anything to rest your laurels on, she needed to show people something special and there were just the Wikileaks. That is her defining moment. Years of politics and you go out as the woman who Wikileaks took down.

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. Albert Einstein
GoNyGoNyGo
Posts: 23559
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/29/2003
Member: #411
USA
11/18/2016  2:16 PM
Welpee wrote:
GoNyGoNyGo wrote:
Welpee wrote:How about this: since more than half of the states don't require delegates to vote for a pledged candidate, what if the Trump electors decided to vote for Clinton instead? How would Trump supporters feel? It would be totally legal. Nothing to prevent it from happening other than their conscious. It's how the system is set up. Would they take their own advice and not whine and just accept it? Hmmmmm...this has been an unusual election so far. This election is not finalized YET.

How would you feel if the opposite had happened? Hillary wins only by electoral college and then the Elector voters give it to Trump?

The ones that are protesting are the same groups of people that hounded Trump for saying he "might not" have accepted the results of the election. It seems they should act like adults and accept the results of the election and stop trying to find ways to steal it because that is certainly not democratic.

The USA is a representative republic and the EC keeps everyone's votes as valuable as their neighbors. It works pretty darn well in that way. The framers were pretty smart to design in this way.

Nice dodge and redirect, but you still haven't answered the question.

The point of the dodge is that if it was Hillary who won and the electorates voted for Trump, you would see worse than what you are seeing now in the streets. Is there any doubt seeing what we see now?

To answer your question, I would respect that it is legal in some states and if it happened, yes, it would make me angry. However, I would not be rioting or calling for anyone's assassination. Unlike what is happening now on the progressive side. I would respect the law of the land and learn how to win the next election the right way.

holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081

11/18/2016  2:38 PM
"Head of Household" provision in danger as Trump try to justify tax cut for the rich...
earthmansurfer
Posts: 24005
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2005
Member: #858
Germany
11/18/2016  2:41 PM
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
markvmc wrote:So the proof that Clinton rigged the polls is that she lost, and that she hasn't asked for a recount.

I've heard it all now.

No, more this regarding the fraud:

Expert of voter fraud in Bev Harris says Hillary tried to steal election but lost. Start at 3:30 mark:: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is5GrQwevhg
Votes were held back in Detroit, Wisconson, Michigan and Milwaukee, PE, and a bit more.
13% of illegals admit they vote, and quite a few were caught this election. http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/poll-13-of-illegal-aliens-admit-they-vote/
Soros connected to voting machine in 16 States.
5 or so States are still not releasing the scanned images of the ballots as required by law. (Indiana, Virginia, Washington st., Utah, Kansas)
There is evidence Hillary Stole 5 States but still lost (and yeah, MSM is dying now -The NY Times have issued and apology for their coverage)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrqZvzGZuCo

I asked you if you were illegal on a sports site hidden behind anonymity and you basically accused me of being reckless and asked me why would you incriminate yourself like that and if I was a cop?

So I don't understand this 13% of illegals vote stat. What does it have to do with the 2016 presidential election? The figure assumes you first of all know the number of illegals to begin with, and then these illegals are admitting to pollsters that they not only are here illegally but voted illegally on top of that? I don't get why they would even do that.

The URL you posted refers to this article from the Daily Signal where he asserts this 13% figure: http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/02/poll-shows-noncitizens-can-shape-elections/

In that article there is a link to the poll: http://www.mclaughlinonline.com/lib/sitefiles/National_Hispanic_Presentation_06-21-13_-_FOR_RELEASE.pdf The methodology of this poll says: "This bi-lingual national survey of 800 Hispanics was conducted from June 5th through June 16th, 2013."

As I've said before, I'm not a stats guy. But I don't understand how the Daily Signal writer is getting this 13% figure. Can you look through that poll data and show me how he's getting that?

So to recap: I'm not sure how an article from 2015 about a poll from 2013 of 800 people can lead you to say with confidence "13% of illegals admit they vote". Because of what 800 Hispanics said on the phone to someone in 2013?

You know that "illegal immigrants" isn't synonymous with "Hispanics".

I'm honestly confused. Help me out earthmansurfer.

I've had too many people in this thread suddenly get friendly and then try to corner me, lol. It started getting old and then you ask me if I'm here legally? lol, seriously?
Hidden behind anonymity? They have my email. I'm not on TOR. Childs play easy; I think you know that...

The point with that article was that if they voted in the past (and since some were caught this last election - Was a video feed on the news online though I don't know which one now, it was live.) that it is likely to continue. There are many many articles out there on illegals voting. I'm not going to do stats now as it is bedtime.

Another quote, but different article and also from the past(but there are many many more.) If it is a concern to you, really, just do a search, the result list is long.

In 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called for jury duty from voter registration rolls over a two-year period in just one U.S. district court were not U.S. citizens. While that may not seem like many, just 3 percent of registered voters would have been more than enough to provide the winning presiden­tial vote margin in Florida in 2000. Indeed, the Cen­sus Bureau estimates that there are over a million illegal aliens in Florida, and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has prosecuted more non-citizen voting cases in Florida than in any other state.
http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=691

The big deal is Bev Harris and the voting machines. Even though it is Alex Jones interviewing her, as I told Martin, listen to her words. Don't let the Alex part stop the message. This is a bit of a problem with Mainstream, they have certain boundries due to their deep ties with the establishment. Some things they won't touch till they have to.

So you didn't answer my questions about that 13% stat. I can't figure how a poll of 800 Hispanics in 2013 gives you any insight on the illegal immigrant population as a whole. Do you still want to stand behind it? I'm not going to waste my time following your links until you answer what I think are fair queries about that 13% stat. Did you even take the time to glance at the poll data like I did?

You want me to go through a 63 page study and answer a question for you? I'm not a stats guy either. That stuff burns me out. The original article makes sense and is not anything really shocking. They extrapolated out, is all it looks like, regarding polling 800 hispanics in 2013 and applying it to a larger sample. If you want answers on stats, really, ask a stats guy.

If you want your standard of judging me and my posts, to be based on that one article, that is fine. No offense taken.

The original article didn't make that much sense to me. It made sense to you because of confirmation bias.

A 2013 poll of 800 Hispanics can't tell you about illegal alien population patterns as a whole because not all undocumented aliens are Hispanics. You don't need to be a stats guy to figure that out.

You should spend more time reading studies and original research. Why cite something if you aren't going to stand behind it when questioned?

You are just on to the next tweets in your timeline to feed your confirmation bias.


+1 on both points. EMS, you seem to just post anything good your hear about Trump and anything bad you hear about Clinton or Obama. You don't seem to care if it's accurate or not. The problem is that anyone can write anything on Twitter or other internet sites. You will find a virtually infinite number of negative tweets about any national political figure. Don't you want your beliefs to be shaped by *accurate* information?

Wow, the Clergy agreeing with the preacher, should I be offended?

I tried talking about Trumps policies but no one wanted to actually discuss going forward, most people just posted negative stuff against Trump.
Some things might be true, some false. Just like MSM and I can't fact check every little thing but I do read the articles I post. Other things are tongue in cheek.
You reap what you sow.

I think "preaching to the choir" is the idiom you are grasping for.

We reap what we sow...

So you are punishing U.K. posters for the sins of the mainstream media by posting crappy articles that reference Heritage Foundation funded hit jobs that reference polls funded by wineries in 2013 to help explain how illegal aliens (i.e. Hispanics) and George Soros are corrupting the vote in 2016? But regardless of this widespread corruption, we should all accept the result and marvel in the prowess of the President-Elect.

The MSM traffics in BS to your mind, and you are gonna give as good as you got it. But when I challenge one of your claims to fact, I've missed the bigger point based on the aforementioned "fact", or need to do my own research and find some other click farm article based on the same shoddy assumptions... and failing that, you can't actually be bothered to answer the question, and can't ever say "wow I didn't notice that, you are right" so you'll say it was a joke or bombard us with cute memes from Reddit that made you chuckle in your other browser tab. Because mainstream media!

Anyway... have fun with all that. Say hi to Clint Eastwood for us.

To BRIGGS' original observation of Where (was) Hillary... a critique from the far left:

LOL, I know "Preaching to the choir" but I was being creative. Give another credit.

LOL, Really, you got me laughing out loud. Man, I don't want to punish UK posters! Really, I wanted to look deeper into things and for a time I felt like a Hillary antagonist (in part because of the Trump bashing) and then I thought to start looking at what Trump was saying. Was actually implied by someone here to me and I took that advice to heart, so to speak. When I looked into a lot of Trump, I felt hope, like there was a chance. We need a big change, we are in a rough situation in many peoples minds.

IT is like the Collective conscience (or the like) is doing something. The Brexit, the problems in the EU, banking crisis all over, Trump victory and all the intense things happening in the world lately. I can't chalk this Trump thing up to chance. We "had this coming". The corruption was just getting too heavy. I have no evidence of it, but I wouldn't be shocked to hear that the CIA leaked those emails to Wikileaks to save the country from what they saw as a danger. I mean those weeks up to the election were like Watergate. That was intense for everyone, like a soap opera.

But no, I honestly was not trying to give bull****. No way. I may have my moments like any human of not being... at the top of my game, but I don't intentionally lie. To find an article, read it and get something useful from it is nice. Then to read what people are saying and look at the different opinions. I did that on Reddit and got to experience Hillaries "Correct the Record" take place on the r/politics sub forum. (http://www.factcheck.org/2016/01/correct-the-record/) Correct the Record literally changes things to their narrative if need be and targets Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, and Instagram.

That was when it hit me, how much of an influence the political system can have on information. If you care to there are tons of stories on this, but I experienced it, more blatantly than one can imagine. New moderators were deleting anything anti-Hillary or pro-Trump. I mean to the point where the front page was ALL pro Hillary and Anti trump. The stats showed that forum had more deleted posts than any other on reddit subforum. That was/is a well funded social campaign and it is admitted to. It is a Super Pac driven thing. That experience was a turning point. They literally closed down politics forum (Reddit is the #3 largest social site behind Facebook and Youtube).

I think this time right now will go down big in American History, perhaps beautifully or not. Whomever came in right now has to take over a huge debt and a broken economy and a kind of or almost insolvent banking system (lol). Just seems like we are in a special time, I don't lost sight of that. Through the arguing/talks, it seems like something much much bigger is going on and we all are in the middle of it. I honestly feel, as do many others, relieved that we avoided war, a big one.

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. Albert Einstein
DrAlphaeus
Posts: 23751
Alba Posts: 10
Joined: 12/19/2007
Member: #1781

11/18/2016  3:15 PM    LAST EDITED: 11/18/2016  3:16 PM
earthmansurfer wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
markvmc wrote:So the proof that Clinton rigged the polls is that she lost, and that she hasn't asked for a recount.

I've heard it all now.

No, more this regarding the fraud:

Expert of voter fraud in Bev Harris says Hillary tried to steal election but lost. Start at 3:30 mark:: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is5GrQwevhg
Votes were held back in Detroit, Wisconson, Michigan and Milwaukee, PE, and a bit more.
13% of illegals admit they vote, and quite a few were caught this election. http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/poll-13-of-illegal-aliens-admit-they-vote/
Soros connected to voting machine in 16 States.
5 or so States are still not releasing the scanned images of the ballots as required by law. (Indiana, Virginia, Washington st., Utah, Kansas)
There is evidence Hillary Stole 5 States but still lost (and yeah, MSM is dying now -The NY Times have issued and apology for their coverage)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrqZvzGZuCo

I asked you if you were illegal on a sports site hidden behind anonymity and you basically accused me of being reckless and asked me why would you incriminate yourself like that and if I was a cop?

So I don't understand this 13% of illegals vote stat. What does it have to do with the 2016 presidential election? The figure assumes you first of all know the number of illegals to begin with, and then these illegals are admitting to pollsters that they not only are here illegally but voted illegally on top of that? I don't get why they would even do that.

The URL you posted refers to this article from the Daily Signal where he asserts this 13% figure: http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/02/poll-shows-noncitizens-can-shape-elections/

In that article there is a link to the poll: http://www.mclaughlinonline.com/lib/sitefiles/National_Hispanic_Presentation_06-21-13_-_FOR_RELEASE.pdf The methodology of this poll says: "This bi-lingual national survey of 800 Hispanics was conducted from June 5th through June 16th, 2013."

As I've said before, I'm not a stats guy. But I don't understand how the Daily Signal writer is getting this 13% figure. Can you look through that poll data and show me how he's getting that?

So to recap: I'm not sure how an article from 2015 about a poll from 2013 of 800 people can lead you to say with confidence "13% of illegals admit they vote". Because of what 800 Hispanics said on the phone to someone in 2013?

You know that "illegal immigrants" isn't synonymous with "Hispanics".

I'm honestly confused. Help me out earthmansurfer.

I've had too many people in this thread suddenly get friendly and then try to corner me, lol. It started getting old and then you ask me if I'm here legally? lol, seriously?
Hidden behind anonymity? They have my email. I'm not on TOR. Childs play easy; I think you know that...

The point with that article was that if they voted in the past (and since some were caught this last election - Was a video feed on the news online though I don't know which one now, it was live.) that it is likely to continue. There are many many articles out there on illegals voting. I'm not going to do stats now as it is bedtime.

Another quote, but different article and also from the past(but there are many many more.) If it is a concern to you, really, just do a search, the result list is long.

In 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called for jury duty from voter registration rolls over a two-year period in just one U.S. district court were not U.S. citizens. While that may not seem like many, just 3 percent of registered voters would have been more than enough to provide the winning presiden­tial vote margin in Florida in 2000. Indeed, the Cen­sus Bureau estimates that there are over a million illegal aliens in Florida, and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has prosecuted more non-citizen voting cases in Florida than in any other state.
http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=691

The big deal is Bev Harris and the voting machines. Even though it is Alex Jones interviewing her, as I told Martin, listen to her words. Don't let the Alex part stop the message. This is a bit of a problem with Mainstream, they have certain boundries due to their deep ties with the establishment. Some things they won't touch till they have to.

So you didn't answer my questions about that 13% stat. I can't figure how a poll of 800 Hispanics in 2013 gives you any insight on the illegal immigrant population as a whole. Do you still want to stand behind it? I'm not going to waste my time following your links until you answer what I think are fair queries about that 13% stat. Did you even take the time to glance at the poll data like I did?

You want me to go through a 63 page study and answer a question for you? I'm not a stats guy either. That stuff burns me out. The original article makes sense and is not anything really shocking. They extrapolated out, is all it looks like, regarding polling 800 hispanics in 2013 and applying it to a larger sample. If you want answers on stats, really, ask a stats guy.

If you want your standard of judging me and my posts, to be based on that one article, that is fine. No offense taken.

The original article didn't make that much sense to me. It made sense to you because of confirmation bias.

A 2013 poll of 800 Hispanics can't tell you about illegal alien population patterns as a whole because not all undocumented aliens are Hispanics. You don't need to be a stats guy to figure that out.

You should spend more time reading studies and original research. Why cite something if you aren't going to stand behind it when questioned?

You are just on to the next tweets in your timeline to feed your confirmation bias.


+1 on both points. EMS, you seem to just post anything good your hear about Trump and anything bad you hear about Clinton or Obama. You don't seem to care if it's accurate or not. The problem is that anyone can write anything on Twitter or other internet sites. You will find a virtually infinite number of negative tweets about any national political figure. Don't you want your beliefs to be shaped by *accurate* information?

Wow, the Clergy agreeing with the preacher, should I be offended?

I tried talking about Trumps policies but no one wanted to actually discuss going forward, most people just posted negative stuff against Trump.
Some things might be true, some false. Just like MSM and I can't fact check every little thing but I do read the articles I post. Other things are tongue in cheek.
You reap what you sow.

I think "preaching to the choir" is the idiom you are grasping for.

We reap what we sow...

So you are punishing U.K. posters for the sins of the mainstream media by posting crappy articles that reference Heritage Foundation funded hit jobs that reference polls funded by wineries in 2013 to help explain how illegal aliens (i.e. Hispanics) and George Soros are corrupting the vote in 2016? But regardless of this widespread corruption, we should all accept the result and marvel in the prowess of the President-Elect.

The MSM traffics in BS to your mind, and you are gonna give as good as you got it. But when I challenge one of your claims to fact, I've missed the bigger point based on the aforementioned "fact", or need to do my own research and find some other click farm article based on the same shoddy assumptions... and failing that, you can't actually be bothered to answer the question, and can't ever say "wow I didn't notice that, you are right" so you'll say it was a joke or bombard us with cute memes from Reddit that made you chuckle in your other browser tab. Because mainstream media!

Anyway... have fun with all that. Say hi to Clint Eastwood for us.

To BRIGGS' original observation of Where (was) Hillary... a critique from the far left:

LOL, I know "Preaching to the choir" but I was being creative. Give another credit.

LOL, Really, you got me laughing out loud. Man, I don't want to punish UK posters! Really, I wanted to look deeper into things and for a time I felt like a Hillary antagonist (in part because of the Trump bashing) and then I thought to start looking at what Trump was saying. Was actually implied by someone here to me and I took that advice to heart, so to speak. When I looked into a lot of Trump, I felt hope, like there was a chance. We need a big change, we are in a rough situation in many peoples minds.

IT is like the Collective conscience (or the like) is doing something. The Brexit, the problems in the EU, banking crisis all over, Trump victory and all the intense things happening in the world lately. I can't chalk this Trump thing up to chance. We "had this coming". The corruption was just getting too heavy. I have no evidence of it, but I wouldn't be shocked to hear that the CIA leaked those emails to Wikileaks to save the country from what they saw as a danger. I mean those weeks up to the election were like Watergate. That was intense for everyone, like a soap opera.

But no, I honestly was not trying to give bull****. No way. I may have my moments like any human of not being... at the top of my game, but I don't intentionally lie. To find an article, read it and get something useful from it is nice. Then to read what people are saying and look at the different opinions. I did that on Reddit and got to experience Hillaries "Correct the Record" take place on the r/politics sub forum. (http://www.factcheck.org/2016/01/correct-the-record/) Correct the Record literally changes things to their narrative if need be and targets Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, and Instagram.

That was when it hit me, how much of an influence the political system can have on information. If you care to there are tons of stories on this, but I experienced it, more blatantly than one can imagine. New moderators were deleting anything anti-Hillary or pro-Trump. I mean to the point where the front page was ALL pro Hillary and Anti trump. The stats showed that forum had more deleted posts than any other on reddit subforum. That was/is a well funded social campaign and it is admitted to. It is a Super Pac driven thing. That experience was a turning point. They literally closed down politics forum (Reddit is the #3 largest social site behind Facebook and Youtube).

I think this time right now will go down big in American History, perhaps beautifully or not. Whomever came in right now has to take over a huge debt and a broken economy and a kind of or almost insolvent banking system (lol). Just seems like we are in a special time, I don't lost sight of that. Through the arguing/talks, it seems like something much much bigger is going on and we all are in the middle of it. I honestly feel, as do many others, relieved that we avoided war, a big one.

I get that you are excited about the possibilities of Trump. I understand your issues with Reddit moderation and don't doubt Clinton supporters would do some heavy-handed nonsense like that. Remember, I supported Sanders.

By the way, you know Reddit is owned by Advance Publications, the same company that owns the Staten Island Advance and Conde Nast — Vogue, The New Yorker, GQ, etc. I reckon Reddit is itself part of the mainstream media.

The Daily Signal was created in 2014 by the Heritage Foundation, a right wing DC think tank. Its bias was evident in that 13% article. That Daily Signal article seems legit — like your MSM tactic — linking to that poll while referencing "13%" — but he doesn't show how he got that data, and does he have to? Is any average Joe or Jill Reader really going to go through 60-something pages of charts to figure out how this guy came up with it? Then that article gets referred to by another article, and that article gets tweeted or put on Facebook and Reddit with a headline that doesn't have anything to do with the poll it is now 4 degrees away from.

UK however is a passion project by average citizens. You don't have to be the Trump version of Correct the Record with us.

You really don't seem to be taking my critique to heart. It's not about you not being "at the top of [your] game". It's obvious you have a serious confirmation bias. Sure, most everyone suffers from it, I have one as well. But we should all struggle against it and try to have a critical eye to all sorts of information, especially when using it in arguments and discussions. That 13% I keep harping about I'm sure you see as just one cracked brick, and you want me to look at the whole house — the "big picture". I'm saying maybe your house is built with a bunch of cracked bricks and has a faulty foundation.

Equating "Hispanics" with "immigrants" and extrapolating 800 people into representing a population no one even knows the real number of reveals some very poor thinking and bad assumptions. An occasional occurrence or the very foundation of your beliefs? That's for you to examine.

Baba Booey 2016 — "It's Silly Season"
Where the heck is Hillary Clinton?

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy