• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

President Donald J. Trump

Started by The General, February 11, 2011, 01:33:34 AM

Gd5150

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on October 04, 2017, 09:07:55 PM
Oh, so she means dying in the sense that we're all dying, really...eventually.  ;) ;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeUAMKoU_-k

What a horrible shill!  ::)
The demokkkrat media has so desperately tried to create another Katrina, and they've succeeded. 2 unqualified mayors in over their heads, who weren't doing their jobs, and before the rain even stopped, were turning the natural disaster political, to gain favor with their demokkkrat masters in hopes of furthering their political aspirations. Unfortunately the left fails again with Trump in charge.

Puerto Rico along with the fake Russian collusion is the media's Obamacare. One big lie after another that's going to result in another huge fail for the left and add to the 1250 seats the demokkkrats have lost since 2010. Hope the lemmings have their tissues.

And while we debate the fake Trump approval polls, remember the media's trust/approval rating is consistently lower the Trump's. By double digits. For there to be any accuracy of the polls, once must 1st add 5-10% to the Republican side, and subtract 5-10% from the demokkkrat side. Then you have an accurate assessment.

Glad bellgab is back so we can enjoy our few last gasps during "the calm before the storm".





Kidnostad3

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 07, 2017, 09:00:40 AM
No election polls are taken on a monthly basis.  I don't remember that poll, but, while I completely concur that one of the reasons most election polls were off is that they had were mistaken in correctly assessing the 'likely voters' in that there were several million people who voted for Trump who had only rarely voted previously, and most polling firms tend be very suspicious of voters who say they intend to vote when they only rarely actually vote.

Two things however,
1.The degree to which the polls were incorrect has been dramatically and likely deliberately overstated by Trump supporters and those in general who bash pollsters.  There were two different aggregations of final election polls, one that gave Hillary Clinton a 3.8% lead, and another that gave her a 3.5% lead.  Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 2.2%.  So, the aggregate final polls were far from wildly off the mark.  It is true that a number of state polls of the Presidential election were well off (especially Ohio) which led most pundits to be overly confident in predicting a Hillary Clinton win.

2.It may be correct that the Los Angeles Times pollsters accurately picked up on the likelihood of these Trump voters who have previously rarely voted or it may be that they just got lucky.  To ascribe their forecasting skills to some kind of brilliant deduction when you don't know if it wasn't just luck is a logical fallacy known as the 'historian's fallacy.'  (Judging a prediction or looking back at an event based on the way it ultimately turned out, rather than judging the prediction or the event on the information that was known at the time.  Personally I'd prefer the term 'psychic's fallacy'.)


Sure you remember that poll.  I could have sworn that you and I had a discussion on that particular poll in the run-up to the election.

So what you are saying is that the LA Times/USC benefitted from serendipity whereas all the other pollsters did not.  Another shameless rationalization in the best traditions of the Clintons and Obama.

As far as Hilliary legitimately winning the popular vote is concerned, the below videos pertain.  Are we supposed to believe you and the historically corrupt Democrats and their MSM cheerleaders or the word of Judicial Watch and scores of first hand witnesses to voter fraud.   Let me think about that.........FUCK NO!

https://youtu.be/eYX0lEYqhhk

https://youtu.be/LPYskkTpBkc

https://youtu.be/qFoRQYnI1bo

https://youtu.be/OLbZCz-ADpk







136 or 142

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 07, 2017, 10:11:47 AM

Sure you remember that poll.  I could have sworn that you and I had a discussion on that particular poll in the run-up to the election.

So what you are saying is that the LA Times/USC benefitted from serendipity whereas all the other pollsters did not.  Another shameless rationalization in the best traditions of the Clintons and Obama.

As far as Hilliary legitimately winning the popular vote is concerned, the below videos pertain.  Are we supposed to believe you and the historically corrupt Democrats and their MSM cheerleaders or the word of Judicial Watch and scores of first hand witnesses to voter fraud.   Let me think about that.........FUCK NO!


We might have had a discussion, remembering names is not something I'm good at.  I didn't say the L.A Times/USC got lucky, I said 'they might have simply got lucky' and that they had no idea their vote model would be more accurate.

As to the rest, yes, Trumptards are certainly believers in idiotic conspiracy theories.

Kidnostad3

Further to my point, I think the average Dem knows that their party practices massive voter fraud. They just don’t give a shit.

https://youtu.be/wwo7ZnTvIcg


136 or 142

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 07, 2017, 10:33:22 AM
Further to my point, I think the average Dem knows that their party practices massive voter fraud. They just don’t give a shit.

More accurately, I think the average Rep knows that their party practices massive voter suppression using the false claim of massive voter fraud as justification and either doesn't give a shit, or more likely because nearly all modern Republicans are completely unethical, cheers their party on over it.

Kidnostad3

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 07, 2017, 10:38:05 AM
More accurately, I think the average Rep knows that their party practices massive voter suppression using the false claim of massive voter fraud as justification and either doesn't give a shit, or more likely because nearly all modern Republicans are completely unethical, cheers their party on over it.



Yeah, requiring voters to hold valid identification is an outrage.  If you’re referring to gerrymandering, both parties have historically practiced that maneuver and it’s legal.  Lyndon Johnson and Skip O’neal where masters at it.  The Dems only complain when it’s the Republicans who do it. 

ItsOver

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 07, 2017, 11:10:54 AM


Yeah, requiring voters to hold valid identification is an outrage.  If you’re referring to gerrymandering, both parties have historically practiced that maneuver and it’s legal.  Lyndon Johnson and Skip O’neal where masters at it.  The Dems only complain when it’s the Republicans who do it.
Oh, come on.  We know the Dems are angels, pure as the driven snow.  Who wouldn't be beating down the door to buy a car from Chuckie.


Gd5150

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 07, 2017, 10:11:47 AM

Sure you remember that poll.  I could have sworn that you and I had a discussion on that particular poll in the run-up to the election.

So what you are saying is that the LA Times/USC benefitted from serendipity whereas all the other pollsters did not.  Another shameless rationalization in the best traditions of the Clintons and Obama.

As far as Hilliary legitimately winning the popular vote is concerned, the below videos pertain.  Are we supposed to believe you and the historically corrupt Democrats and their MSM cheerleaders or the word of Judicial Watch and scores of first hand witnesses to voter fraud.   Let me think about that.........FUCK NO!

https://youtu.be/eYX0lEYqhhk

https://youtu.be/LPYskkTpBkc

https://youtu.be/qFoRQYnI1bo

https://youtu.be/OLbZCz-ADpk

How dare you present evidence of voter fraud. You should be ashamed. How could there possibly be any fraud with no borders and no voter ID.

Kidnostad3

Here is an astute, clear-headed assessment of Obama’s Presidencyâ€"not that the lefties on this thread will be interested in knowing why they are in deep shit and it’s getting deeper.

https://youtu.be/8VecswXsN08

GravitySucks

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 07, 2017, 10:38:05 AM
More accurately, I think the average Rep knows that their party practices massive voter suppression using the false claim of massive voter fraud as justification and either doesn't give a shit, or more likely because nearly all modern Republicans are completely unethical, cheers their party on over it.

Do you have to show ID when you vote?  Is it voter suppression to require a valid ID (let alone proof of citizenship, which only two states are allowed to do) when both Canada and Mexico require ID?

ItsOver

Quote from: GravitySucks on October 07, 2017, 11:47:34 AM
Do you have to show ID when you vote?  Is it voter suppression to require a valid ID (let alone proof of citizenship, which only two states are allowed to do) when both Canada and Mexico require ID?
You're being unreasonable, GS.  Damn, they already require an ID to board an airplane, buy liquor, open a bank account, apply for food stamps, apply for welfare, apply for medicaid, apply for a job, apply for a mortgage, rent a car, get married, purchase a gun, apply for a fishing license, pick up a prescription... come on, it's not like voting is anywhere as important as being able to haul in some bass.


=Schlyder=

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 07, 2017, 11:27:14 AM
Here is an astute, clear-headed assessment of Obama’s Presidencyâ€"not that the lefties on this thread will be interested in knowing why they are in deep shit and it’s getting deeper.

https://youtu.be/8VecswXsN08

There is a lot he missed too... the gun grabbing, while dealing guns to the cartels, "fast and furious" etc.  Obama was a disaster for the USA. Hopefully will end up being a disaster for the democrats for decades to come.  The last 8 years under Obama and the Dems hopefully left a bad taste in the majority's mouth, and hopefully they remember for a helluva long time.

Quote from: Gd5150 on October 07, 2017, 09:31:25 AM
... And while we debate the fake Trump approval polls, remember the media's trust/approval rating is consistently lower the Trump's. By double digits...

No, no, no, wrong, fail.

Not 12 hours ago I posted an article with news about several new polls on the media approval rating in our country, and - shock the world! - wouldn't you know it, their own polls now show their approval to be much higher than Trump's, and rising. 

Admittedly in the past they ignored and downplayed the polls showing their approval rating to be slightly behind dog shit left in your driveway, but they are very pleased to announce a newly coordinated effort to produce these fake poll results.  In case anyone is skeptical, the reason for their newfound popularity is of course their constant attacks on Trump.  You see, everyone knows Trump stole the election, and it's all because of media diligence in staying on the story.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/05/trump-media-battle-press-polls-243516 

These fake polls are the media version of Hilary's book ''What Happened''.  Of course they put out fake news, fake polls, and fake statistics, and operate as Democratic Party PR shills, but it's all in our best interest.  They're doing that for us.  That we're all too dumb to understand that is the fault of others, so they've decided to help things along by telling us we really do approve of their efforts after all.


Kidnostad3

Why California is failing (long and short versions). But then, you leftist Californians knew all this already, right?


https://youtu.be/lvlHceUe8v8


https://youtu.be/3cMV_aptTug

Swishypants

Using a black guy was their last ace-in-the-hole, but through 8 years of hard fought suffering, we've now denied them that social angle. Never again can a guy get away with what he got away with just because he's black in the public mind. They're a spent force.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 07, 2017, 09:00:40 AM
No election polls are taken on a monthly basis.  I don't remember that poll, but, while I completely concur that one of the reasons most election polls were off is that they had were mistaken in correctly assessing the 'likely voters' in that there were several million people who voted for Trump who had only rarely voted previously, and most polling firms tend be very suspicious of voters who say they intend to vote when they only rarely actually vote.

Two things however,
1.The degree to which the polls were incorrect has been dramatically and likely deliberately overstated by Trump supporters and those in general who bash pollsters.  There were two different aggregations of final election polls, one that gave Hillary Clinton a 3.8% lead, and another that gave her a 3.5% lead.  Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 2.2%.  So, the aggregate final polls were far from wildly off the mark.  It is true that a number of state polls of the Presidential election were well off (especially Ohio) which led most pundits to be overly confident in predicting a Hillary Clinton win.

2.It may be correct that the Los Angeles Times pollsters accurately picked up on the likelihood of these Trump voters who have previously rarely voted or it may be that they just got lucky.  To ascribe their forecasting skills to some kind of brilliant deduction when you don't know if it wasn't just luck is a logical fallacy known as the 'historian's fallacy.'  (Judging a prediction or looking back at an event based on the way it ultimately turned out, rather than judging the prediction or the event on the information that was known at the time.  Personally I'd prefer the term 'psychic's fallacy'.)

If you want to accuse me of not fully admitting I was wrong or something over this, that may be fair, but I remind you that in the case of the historian's fallacy, there are all sorts of Wall Street investment scammers and guests who appear on Coast to Coast who get lucky in predicting an event correctly that most people predicted would go the other way, who then claim to be geniuses when they aren't and make a lot of money over it.

TL;DR

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 07, 2017, 10:38:05 AM
More accurately, I think the average Rep knows that their party practices massive voter suppression using the false claim of massive voter fraud as justification and either doesn't give a shit, or more likely because nearly all modern Republicans are completely unethical, cheers their party on over it.

Oh, are they? Just cuz you say?  ::) ;D

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: ItsOver on October 07, 2017, 11:16:00 AM
Oh, come on.  We know the Dems are angels, pure as the driven snow.  Who wouldn't be beating down the door to buy a car from Chuckie.



Yeah, remember when he called Trump mean and then managed to squeeze out that fake tear. How can you compare that kind of sacrifice to what Trump's doing by rescuing our economy, creating prosperity and instilling confidence in the country.  ::)

Kidnostad3

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on October 07, 2017, 04:57:04 PM
Yeah, remember when he called Trump mean and then managed to squeeze out that fake tear. How can you compare that kind of sacrifice to what Trump's doing by rescuing our economy, creating prosperity and instilling confidence in the country.  ::)


Yeah, Obama gets all weepy too.  Low testosterone will do that to you.



Quote from: PaulAtreides on October 07, 2017, 09:16:03 AM
#Dotard is just trying to make certain that you "tune in next week."

''Dotard'' is a term no one heard of until North Korea's Kim Jong-un used it in response to Trump referring to him as ''Rocket Man'' last week. 

Now the people who have been losing all those elections over the past 8 years, and are now pretending they want to woo back the middle class, are smugly using terminology they learned from North Korea's Kim to disparage our president.  You can't make this stuff up.  Savage is right, Liberalism is a mental disorder.

136 or 142

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 07, 2017, 11:10:54 AM


Yeah, requiring voters to hold valid identification is an outrage.  If you’re referring to gerrymandering, both parties have historically practiced that maneuver and it’s legal.  Lyndon Johnson and Skip O’neal where masters at it.  The Dems only complain when it’s the Republicans who do it.

Like I wrote, you're a sleazy and unethical person cheerleading your sleazy and unethical party.

Make the whole identification process completely free for the voter then.  In fact, go to voter enumeration and there would be no problem.

136 or 142

Quote from: GravitySucks on October 07, 2017, 11:47:34 AM
Do you have to show ID when you vote?  Is it voter suppression to require a valid ID (let alone proof of citizenship, which only two states are allowed to do) when both Canada and Mexico require ID?

Canada does not require ID, at least it isn't enforced.  If a voter shows the vote card they received in the mail, they can vote.  People are required to bring their ID with them in case they are challenged by a poll worker or a scrutineer.

It may be the case that first time or irregular voters need to show ID.

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 08, 2017, 02:15:43 AM
Canada does not require ID, at least it isn't enforced.  If a voter shows the vote card they received in the mail, they can vote.  People are required to bring their ID with them in case they are challenged by a poll worker or a scrutineer.  In actuality, that happens on very rare occasions.

We don't have either of those requirements, but if we did, according to your previous post they would be sleazy and unethical.

Of course if we are to believe them, the Democrats aren't sleazy and unethical - they're straight up racist.  Their argument boils down to blacks being either too stupid or too lazy to get an ID.  Of course we don't believe them - we know their true intent is to make illegal voting easier.

136 or 142

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on October 08, 2017, 02:20:03 AM
We don't have either of those requirements, but if we did, according to your previous post they would be sleazy and unethical.

Of course if we are to believe them, the Democrats aren't sleazy and unethical - they're straight up racist.  Their argument boils down to blacks being either too stupid or too lazy to get an ID.  Of course we don't believe them - we know their true intent is to make illegal voting easier.

I told you to not respond to my posts.

Well, I've posted your comment here on the mostly intelligent political discussion board.  We'll see if it gets any responses.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 08, 2017, 02:15:43 AM
Canada does not require ID, at least it isn't enforced.  If a voter shows the vote card they received in the mail, they can vote.  People are required to bring their ID with them in case they are challenged by a poll worker or a scrutineer.

It may be the case that first time or irregular voters need to show ID.

FIFY  ;)


Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 08, 2017, 02:23:45 AM
I told you to not respond to my posts.

Well, I've posted your comment here on the mostly intelligent political discussion board.  We'll see if it gets any responses.

Requiring ID to vote, and proof of citizenship to register are 'sleasy and unethical''?  Really?  How so?  I'd argue just the opposite - making it easy for illegal voting is sleasy and unethical, as it cancels out the votes of actual citizens.  So stick it.  Up your ass as hard and far as you like. 

Ok, if a person is registered and they had some government issued ''card'' mailed to them for each election that they bring to the polls, like wherever you live, that would probably be ok, but we don't have that here.

I don't read your posts if they're much longer than a sentence or two, because they're tedious, boring, and full of dumb libtard sophistry.  You seem bright enough to know this, but somehow I get the idea you seriously don't.  But if you post something as inane as these, they're probably going to get responded to.  So fuck off with your little orders, general.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 08, 2017, 02:36:12 AM
Nope,  you're wrong.

Well, then you're contradicting yourself because the next thing you state is that they can show the registration they received in the mail. How did they get that?  :D

Then the very next thing you say after that is that they're required to bring ID.

So, just how retarded are you?  ;D

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod