(05-18-2016 06:17 PM)redonion Wrote:  So Trump has swung this thing 10 points in ONE month? That poll is just registered voters too.

This is huge right?

Hillary can only go down, while Trump goes up.

Notice how you'll never find a "former Trump supporter"

Someone flipped the switch at Facebook, major lol @Cuckerberg bending over to pressure so easily, Theil probably gave him a call

(05-18-2016 10:15 PM)Last Parade Wrote:  Nate Silver's mea culpa: "How I Acted Like A Pundit And Screwed Up On Donald Trump"

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-...ald-trump/

May 18, 2016. Somebody needs to update that image with the series of Nate Silver fuck-ups re: Trump to include this, I guess.

For this particular election, Nate Silver was basically the robot that collected useful information, then discarded it and smashed itself into walls.

Donald Trump's Enemies Continue To Leak Old Recordings - this one has him calling a woman a third-rate hooker.

https://www.conservativeoutfitters.com/b...-recording

And his poll number will rise again

(05-19-2016 01:18 AM)Liberty Sea Wrote:  Donald Trump's Enemies Continue To Leak Old Recordings - this one has him calling a woman a third-rate hooker.

https://www.conservativeoutfitters.com/b...-recording

And his poll number will rise again

That was released almost a full day ago, and no major media outlets even bothered to report on it. Doubt it gains traction, precisely because his supporters won't care and his detractors have already bashed him on the "he's bad towards womyn!" front with little success.

(05-18-2016 06:04 PM)Liberty Sea Wrote:  Look at the author's pen name: Pizza Party Ben.

He's one of Milo's internet 'boyfriends'.

(05-18-2016 01:26 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  Has anyone seen this?

Inside Edition (among other sources) is now reporting that ANOTHER woman quoted in the New York Times' "Trump's Women" article is claiming she was misquoted.

This time around, it's former beauty queen Carrie Prejean. This comes on the heels of Rowanne Brewer Lane saying the same thing.

I think the Times quotes eight women in that piece. Two have disputed it. I wonder if any others will.

Give Inside Edition a click for reporting this story because it'll provide incentive for more. It'd be a major blow against the Times if all the women got together to protest the article.

This is not the first time Prejean was caught in the middle of some sort of political issue, when she was in the in the pageant Perez Hilton asked some homosexual marriage question, she answered that she was raised where marriage is between men and women you can imagine what happen next, shittorm ensure.

(05-18-2016 11:48 PM)Emancipator Wrote:  Someone flipped the switch at Facebook, major lol @Cuckerberg bending over to pressure so easily, Theil probably gave him a call

People are paying attention to it, Trump influence on the conservative has made a big risk for investors to piss off the conservative, this is not 2012.

Facebook (FB) Stock Falls Ahead of Meeting With Conservatives Amid Political Bias Accusations

https://www.thestreet.com/story/13575052...tions.html

(05-18-2016 11:04 PM)Penta Sahi Wrote:  yay page 1300

Trump heika banzai, babe!

I'm actually dreading each new pre-nomination hit against Clinton. Our best chance of getting Trump elected is a contest against Hilary. I fear that a Deus-ex-machina pulling of Clinton from the race at the last minute and insertion of a Biden or god forbid Sanders will take all the momentum out of Trump's sails. We're currently running neck and neck with Clinton, and that is probably as much due to Clinton's unfavorability as it is Trump's favorability.

If somebody else becomes the Dem nominee, it's very possible the relatively large chunk of the population that is both anti-Trump and anti-Clinton will be energized and go to the polls en masse, while some of those who are teetering on the edge of voting for Trump fall for the "shiny new thing" effect and mindlessly vote for Clinton's replacement. The last thing we want is it becoming apparent by the Dem convention that Clinton would lose in a blowout, because that would basically ensure Clinton won't be the nominee. They're not going to let Trump run away with it just to fulfill the ambitions of one of their puppets (Clinton).

(05-19-2016 02:38 AM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  I'm actually dreading each new pre-nomination hit against Clinton. Our best chance of getting Trump elected is a contest against Hilary. I fear that a Deus-ex-machina pulling of Clinton from the race at the last minute and insertion of a Biden or god forbid Sanders will take all the momentum out of Trump's sails. We're currently running neck and neck with Clinton, and that is probably as much due to Clinton's unfavorability as it is Trump's favorability.

If somebody else becomes the Dem nominee, it's very possible the relatively large chunk of the population that is both anti-Trump and anti-Clinton will be energized and go to the polls en masse, while some of those who are teetering on the edge of voting for Trump fall for the "shiny new thing" effect and mindlessly vote for Clinton's replacement. The last thing we want is it becoming apparent by the Dem convention that Clinton would lose in a blowout, because that would basically ensure Clinton won't be the nominee. They're not going to let Trump run away with it just to fulfill the ambitions of one of their puppets (Clinton).

I understand that sentiment but I don't think it's warranted. Trump will destroy Clinton and he could destroy Biden, Sanders, Warren, Castro. Not long ago people worried about his chances against Hillary and now we are hoping he's running against her. For other scenarios we can trust him and his to have a plan.

He's already started attacking Warren, he has been courting Sanders voters, and who knows what he has up his sleeve. My biggest worry was Clinton swallowing her pride (she's apparently known for holding grudges and absolutely hates Sanders right now) and picking Sanders as her running mate. Would prevent many of his fans to go to Trump.

But she will be so damaged that many will not vote for that ticket, that many would see it has betrayal from anti-establishment candidate Bernie. As in: he is now endorsing the Wall St. puppet and rape enabler? Fuck him, and go Trump.

In any case, it's not that Trump needs to go up against Clinton because his chances are just good against her. He made those chances good and he can make them great against anyone.

(05-19-2016 02:38 AM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  I'm actually dreading each new pre-nomination hit against Clinton. Our best chance of getting Trump elected is a contest against Hilary. I fear that a Deus-ex-machina pulling of Clinton from the race at the last minute and insertion of a Biden or god forbid Sanders will take all the momentum out of Trump's sails. We're currently running neck and neck with Clinton, and that is probably as much due to Clinton's unfavorability as it is Trump's favorability.

If somebody else becomes the Dem nominee, it's very possible the relatively large chunk of the population that is both anti-Trump and anti-Clinton will be energized and go to the polls en masse, while some of those who are teetering on the edge of voting for Trump fall for the "shiny new thing" effect and mindlessly vote for Clinton's replacement. The last thing we want is it becoming apparent by the Dem convention that Clinton would lose in a blowout, because that would basically ensure Clinton won't be the nominee. They're not going to let Trump run away with it just to fulfill the ambitions of one of their puppets (Clinton).

Bernie would be tougher to beat because he has more gimmedat policies than Clinton, but I doubt the Dems will panic themselves into having the superdelegates change their minds. I'm sure Bernie is desperately trying to emulate Trump's outsider tactics, but I think even he realises he's only doing it to force Clinton to change her platform to something a bit more leftie, not so he can win. If so, great; it'll still be the Iron Clit's ugly ass on the campaign trail, and Clinton's too fucking old and entitled to really change her approach or suddenly come across as likeable now.

Sanders is much weaker on foreign policy and national security though. He also has no coherent response to the refugee crisis.

I think the installation of any 3rd party candidate at this point will hurt Hillary and help Trump.

(05-18-2016 08:55 PM)captain_shane Wrote:  He is right though. There are A LOT more ugly women than attractive women in America. Probably 10-15% are attractive.

No he is wrong: there are no ugly women, only lazy women.

He is a racist idiot with a hot wife thats all i know

(05-19-2016 05:12 AM)Antoin Wrote:  He is a racist idiot with a hot wife thats all i know

seriously

On a serious note, the Trump campaign finally got back to me about volunteering for him. They said right now they only want volunteers in New York and Washington D.C.

I have family in New Jersey, just outside NYC and am seriously considering taking a month off this summer to go and help Trump make America great again.

I will weigh in on tons of fat lazy ugly womynz. PUN intended.

(05-19-2016 05:12 AM)Antoin Wrote:  He is a racist idiot with a hot wife thats all i know

To your credit, you are half right.

(05-19-2016 05:14 AM)eradicator Wrote:  

(05-19-2016 05:12 AM)Antoin Wrote:  He is a racist idiot with a hot wife thats all i know

seriously

On a serious note, the Trump campaign finally got back to me about volunteering for him. They said right now they only want volunteers in New York and Washington D.C.

I have family in New Jersey, just outside NYC and am seriously considering taking a month off this summer to go and help Trump make America great again.

Wait, really? How much of a time commitment is it?

Man those legs really are incredible. She could finish off the construction without a ladder with those things.

(05-21-2016 09:10 PM)P4yn3 Wrote:  Check this out, Trump's kids are so hardworking that Ivanka has already started construction on the wall. Incredible.

(05-22-2016 03:40 AM)RaccoonFace Wrote:  Files were too large to upload, here are the pictures:

And this was a phone survey, and college grads report ten percent less Trump support over the phone than anonymously.

It also shows the stickiness of Trump support: there are no ex-Trump supporters.

This is going to be a blowout.

(05-22-2016 02:49 AM)Lucky Wrote:  Reporter "Hillary says your ban on Muslims promotes terrorism."
Trump "Yeah. Isn't that the dumbest thing you've ever heard? It's one of the dumber statements I've heard."
Reporter "Why is it dumb?
Trump "It's just the opposite. They're going to have to learn: We can't take this anymore."

The best part of the video are the looks on the three interviewers when Mr. Trump mentions "The Energizer". They all get that, "I Can't Believe You Just Said That! - (but I'm not supposed to show approval, so I'll stifle my facial expressions)" look.

I've been reading a few extreme liberal political MSM articles, comments, and forums and it appears the Democrat division is much more acrimonious than the Republican party split of Trump vs Cruz.

The reason being is that Trump easily demolished Cruz but Hillary and Sanders are at nearly a dead heat when it comes to popularity but Hillary is still being pushed through by the establishment.

This is causing the commies, neckbeards, and hipsters to go into apopletic fits of rage.

Seems like a juicy opportunity for false flagging.

Posing as a Hillary supporter online and accusing Sanders supporters of being "misogynistic" for being angry at Debbie Wasserman Schultz (DNC Chair who is completely reviled by Bernie people.) This turns the SJW political weapons against each other.

Then also going the opposite direction by posing as Sanders' supporter and accusing Hillary supporters of playing the woman card and using Schultz as an establishment puppet to control the delegation process.


Just drive a wedge right down the middle there.