Remember in the Carter-Reagan race, the polls had them almost deadlocked the night before the vote. Reagan ended up taking 10% more than Carter in the popular vote, which translated into a near-landslide in the electoral election.

The media wasn't quite as strong against Reagan as they are against Trump, but they did try to insinuate that Reagan was a war-monger, unstable, and disliked poor people and minorities. So, just like this election, there were lots of shadow voters who wouldn't admit in public or to pollsters that they liked the populist candidate better. The truth came out in the voting numbers. Same thing will happen here. The numbers will probably be similar.

I am concerned. I think this is just a small taste of the full-court & relentless attack against Trump over the next hundred days. Repetition is persuasion despite the low faith the US public has in the media. It's going to start having a demoralizing effect on Trump supporters soon too. Unless something big changes, that bitch Clinton will be POTUS.

(08-04-2016 09:35 AM)DannyAlberta Wrote:  I am concerned. I think this is just a small taste of the full-court & relentless attack against Trump over the next hundred days. Repetition is persuasion despite the low faith the US public has in the media. It's going to start having a demoralizing effect on Trump supporters soon too. Unless something big changes, that bitch Clinton will be POTUS.

The media is able to control everything, except the debates.
Oh how lovely they will be. I expect Trump to come out as a rambo-jaws-predator-goku all-guns blazing mix.

They've got to keep doing the full press in order to fend off the news (Wikileaks, CGI, $400M to Iran,...)

Trump made a mistake with the Khan thing, he should know when to counter, and when to deflect an attack judo-style. The right answer here was to say he was sorry about their loss and would not start other wars like Hillary did in Iraq that get our boys killed without helping the country's interests, and that we should use the military to address the real threat of Isis instead, which Hillary won't. Bam.

One thing I notice that the MSM does is when they show Trump at one of his rallies, they focus tightly on the podium so that viewers can't see how many people are in attendance.

Yo... Trump raised $80 million in small donations in the vacation month of july... a solid answer to Hillarys Hollywood and globalists superpacs $90 million. Plus the rebuild america now superpac is ramping up... imagine the range of factual attack ads they can run against her.

Themes like Hillary sold out and betrayed the USA then each example in Clinton Cash... Hillary is psychotic examples of smashing Bills head with flying objects in the white house etc etc... expect fact attacks against Hillary soon. How can retired Military officers support a candidate with NO HONOR? A PROVEN NEOCON NATION BUILDER WAR HAWK??? THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF THE FACT ATTACKS AGAINST Hillary that would be effective.

#FactAttacks

(08-04-2016 08:20 AM)Gmac Wrote:  All I know is I keep making money off these poll swings. Get those Trump/GOP shares while they're low fellas.

@911 - is that the rat? If I see him out in DC I don't think I'll be able to restrain myself. I just hope I have a MAGA hat with me at the time, which is likely.

What site can one use to make bets?

(08-03-2016 11:43 PM)Last Parade Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 11:30 PM)Shrodax Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 10:59 PM)Last Parade Wrote:  A Georgia elector is vowing to not vote for Trump if he wins Georgia, as electors in Georgia are not bound to vote for a candidate who wins the statewide vote there.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/03/electo...for-trump/

Also, from that article: "Georgia is one of 21 states that does not require its electors on the Electoral College to abide by the popular vote results in the states."

What the fuck? Does that mean Trump could actually win the election, but Hillary could still be installed in office by the Electoral College if enough electors switch?

The way I read it based on that article: in all states, both the Democrats and the Republicans have "x" electors and whichever party wins, their electors cast the electoral college votes. Some states require the slate of electors to vote for the person who won; others, like Georgia, leave it unbound. So Trump wins Georgia, only the Republican electors vote in the electoral college but they're not obligated to vote for him.

So a Hillary-over-270 "steal" only happens if Republican electors vote for Hillary, which yeah, sounds pretty fucking retarded. You'd think the RNC would do a better job screening and filtering their electors (good news: I just checked Utah and they're a bound state so no chance of cucking there if Trump wins it)

What's more likely is what I theorized, that enough electors throw their votes so Trump falls below 270. A moot point if he crushes it, but if it's close, say 274-264, then you just need 5 faithless electors to not vote Trump so he falls to 269 and the presidential winner decision kicked down to the House per 12th amendment. And the list of electors is widely known. You thought the "Never Trump" movement was dead, just wait....

Now imagine Trump doesn't win the popular vote but won the vote in states such that he should win by the electoral college, then stolen due to faithless electors: how does the House vote? Do Republicans flip to Hillary just because? Do the Republican delegations vote for Paul Ryan because they're cucked beyond belief?

An interesting thought experiment we, ideally, never need to worry about.

The US election system is completely fucking retarded and rigged. What's the point of the long 1-year-long nominee election process if the general election is still a clown circus of electors voting for whoever they want? The whole point of getting a nominee is to give the people, the voters, a direct voice: they choose directly who they want from the limited choices available, or if they don't like the choices then they don't vote. End of story.

(08-04-2016 08:55 AM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 08:39 AM)RexImperator Wrote:  NPR reported Hillary has a fifteen point lead over Trump in NH. I find that hard to believe.

NPR is practically a democrat propaganda outlet. So yes, you can just ignore that poll and anything else that comes from that site.

Totally. I've watched the PBS newshour the past two nights and its pure propaganda.

Night #1 they had an "in focus on the candidates" segment that was 10 min long and was all about how bad trump is. Zero Hillary

Night #2 they had a segment talking about trump again, how he's undercutting paul ryan in WI, how his campaign is over and how republicans are going to vote for Gary Johnson? They then did a segment on wikileaks, did not mention hillary's name.

The wikileaks interview was actually with Assange, and they accused him of being a trump supporter. The lady was asking about the 'hacked' emails and Assange was like 'they weren't hacked, they were given to us, the source was inside the DNC" Again, they followed the narrative of making this about Trump/hacking/russia vs. the actual content of the emails.

Propaganda all the way down.

(08-04-2016 06:23 AM)NomadofEU Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 01:18 AM)eskimobobseal Wrote:  I hate to say this, don't take it personally, but i think even some people on this board are falling victim to the prevailing media narrative that Donald is satan incarnate and that's somewhat worrying to me.

Snap out of it guys, we have an election to win.

Heh. You think this is bad?
Go back and witness some of the butthurt going around when Lyin Ted won a few states, you would have thought Trump shot someone's dog on here.

As predicted, another terrorist attack has taken place. Still waiting for the ethnicity to be confirmed but pretty sure things are gonna be back to normal with the media grasping at straws within the next 48 hours.

It's worse now, because the guys here should know better.

Remember the Mexican judge with strong ties to La Raza? That was sure to sink Trump.

Now we have a Pakistani who makes a living gaming the immigration system.

And people think Trump made a mistake here? Every time Khan talks, it helps Trump. A Muslim foreigner, telling Americans how to act, while Muslims terrorize the US and Europe, and Khan is shadily importing more foreigners.

I was having dinner with my mother and aunt, and we started talking about terrorist attacks, because how could we not right now. And I said, "We should require everyone to eat baby back ribs (pork) to enter the US."

My mom sarcastically responded, "But what about the Muslims and Jews?"

And me, "I know. What about them?"

And everyone laughed. Even housewives are fed up with this shit. We have a bunch of house guests destroying the property and shitting in the sink, and they're lecturing us about our behavior when they're just freeloading.

Nobody asked any of these people to come to the US. If you come here, you better show some respect.

This is even worse optics for the DNC/SJW/Cuck crowd than John Leibowitz lecturing Americans on how to act, because Americans did not build America.

The media scare now is not even that bad compared to when trump was up against Cruz. The leftist sites had more leverage, now they are at their lowest point ever and getting lower every day. The cannons were coming from all side, every single outlet including Fox News was hammering the Donald and yet he fucked everyone in the end.

This is nothing. His social media power+rallies + FoxNews + Breitbart/Drudge/other is more than enough to handle the storm. The alternative media trumpians are rising and getting more popular every day. This is what the MSM hates about him the most, he is helping propel a massive change in an industry which will cause a major disruption for years to come.

The same thing that happen to newspapers where they lost 80% of their wealth is now happening to the tv newsmedia. You gotta understand, the market for getting news/information is completely saturated. There is no new market. So this means that if someone on twitter has 50k follower or someone on youtube is getting hundreds of thousands of views describing current news events, those views are directly "stolen" from an MSM outlet. Meaning, someone is losing for these guys to make a living.

And the thing about these new outlets is, once you are exposed to them its very difficult to go back to MSM. Because the new outlets don't really care about what they say and couldn't care less about potential lawsuits they are far more attractive despite their low budget.

Those 'contributors' you see on TV, their career is solely based on the platform and not on their work. Without the platform they are done. The alternative media guy's success is based on what he says.
So don't worry so much about whats on the CNN website or what a panelist on Face the Nation said. They are a dying breed.

Excellent short new Paul Joseph Watson video on HRC's psych/medical/health issues and her true unsuitability and mental instability to be POTUS not to mention CiC:

https://youtu.be/OqbDBRWb63s

The Truth About Hillary's Bizarre Behavior

Seizures...

The real reason why she has not given a press conference in over 240 days... she may even refuse to debate unless she is specially medicated.

Clearly General Allen her most ardent retread feminized blue pill military defender is an SJW co-opted Globalist Cuck Commandante.

   

The below NYT article has political gravity. The Left is calling for the oppression of the Kulaks, again. The last time it ended in genocide, which shows how either tone deaf or bold the establishment Left has become.

Redirected from Breitbart:

Quote:NYT: Left Wants to Destroy Trump’s Movement, Not Just Beat Trump - Breitbart

Quote:Democrats, Looking Past Mere Victory, Hope to End the Trump Movement - NYT

David Plouffe, President Obama’s former campaign manager, proposed the idea in June. “It is not enough to simply beat Trump,” he wrote on Twitter. “He must be destroyed thoroughly. His kind must not rise again.”

The NYT printing this quote is introducing the idea into the mainstream.

Think about what it means, especially in light of the 40-50% of the nation who supports Trump.

It's gravity not only applies toward the political direction that they are proposing, but reflexively in the other direction should Trump win. If we are assuming still assuming a democratic ethic of evenly applied morality (which we aren't, of course they don't mean to apply it to themselves should they lose). But it still applies in the other direction, politically speaking, regardless of how they mean to apply their political sentiment. In short, imo the printing of this quote in the NYT sets an alarmingly aggressive political precedent in the modern United States.

The next six months should be interesting.

I wonder how Clint can stand California, but Hollywood specifically.

What you're seeing with that NYT piece is "tyranny of the majority" which the founding fathers tried to prevent to begin with. This is just the marxist version of it.

The idea that there's an end game scenario where you simply purge or reeducate people who dont' share your ideals. You can't purge or reeducate a substantial portion of the U.S. unless you want civil war.

(08-04-2016 10:37 AM)kosko Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 08:20 AM)Gmac Wrote:  All I know is I keep making money off these poll swings. Get those Trump/GOP shares while they're low fellas.

@911 - is that the rat? If I see him out in DC I don't think I'll be able to restrain myself. I just hope I have a MAGA hat with me at the time, which is likely.

What site can one use to make bets?

https://www.predictit.org/

You can bet (buy shares) on everything from favorability to fundraising to voter turnout... and of course who wins the white house. Or you can bet against certain predictions which can sometimes be cheaper. Be sure to read all the rules so you understand the fees and how it works. There's also Matchbook, but it's banned in the US.

I've been working my way through the book "Influence" and have been wondering if Donald might be laying the groundwork to ultimately make use of the Contrast Principle on himself.

I know we all see through it, but Trump has been involved in a multitude of "controversies" - the most recent one being the Khan thing. Trump knows the media wants to eat him alive. When he drops the bait, he's either doing it on purpose to get them all riled up, or is making a genuine mistake.

Trump is fully aware that a huge critique against him is that he isn't "Presidential" enough. He mentions it at rallies all the time. I think if he wanted to, he could become "Presidential" right now. Instead, he slips up and the media has a field day on him.

It's been mentioned in this thread multiple times but the real election doesn't start until after Labor Day. That's when the public truly starts paying attention, and this race will start heating up.

Could it be that Trump welcomes all the negative attention on him right now?

Come September, Trump will probably still have this negative aura about him - but then people will start paying attention. At this point, Trump can make use of the Contrast Principle. He can seriously tone it down, and start acting "Presidential". The thing is, the casual American voter will see this and think "Hmm, this guy is really cool, calm, and collected - nothing like I thought he was!". "New Trump" will look awesome compared to "Old Trump". Ultimately, people won't even remember "Old Trump". The uneducated voters will view him more favorably than they would have if he had been "Presidential" this entire time. People like us won't be affected since we've known of Trump's good side for 12+ months.

I think he can flip all this negative energy around in his favor.

(08-04-2016 11:01 AM)8ball Wrote:  The media scare now is not even that bad compared to when trump was up against Cruz. The leftist sites had more leverage, now they are at their lowest point ever and getting lower every day. The cannons were coming from all side, every single outlet including Fox News was hammering the Donald and yet he fucked everyone in the end.

This is nothing. His social media power+rallies + FoxNews + Breitbart/Drudge/other is more than enough to handle the storm. The alternative media trumpians are rising and getting more popular every day. This is what the MSM hates about him the most, he is helping propel a massive change in an industry which will cause a major disruption for years to come.

The same thing that happen to newspapers where they lost 80% of their wealth is now happening to the tv newsmedia. You gotta understand, the market for getting news/information is completely saturated. There is no new market. So this means that if someone on twitter has 50k follower or someone on youtube is getting hundreds of thousands of views describing current news events, those views are directly "stolen" from an MSM outlet. Meaning, someone is losing for these guys to make a living.

And the thing about these new outlets is, once you are exposed to them its very difficult to go back to MSM. Because the new outlets don't really care about what they say and couldn't care less about potential lawsuits they are far more attractive despite their low budget.

Those 'contributors' you see on TV, their career is solely based on the platform and not on their work. Without the platform they are done. The alternative media guy's success is based on what he says.
So don't worry so much about whats on the CNN website or what a panelist on Face the Nation said. They are a dying breed.

I would say this election is the point where the traditional TV media is viewed by less than 50% of the population.

During 2008, TV was already dying but still was watched by 75%. 8 years later it's below 50%.

The Media is still powerful, and we shouldn't underestimate it. Like a dying cornered beast, it won't go down without trying to inflict maximum damage. Even if the media can convince 40% of the population to hate Trump, that's still a lot of votes to work against.

The upshot is if Trump wins and overcomes the TV media it will die forever, as their audience will plummet and go out of business within 4 years of Trump taking power. They've put way too much on the line and their credibility will not recover.

But overall, the trends that have allowed Trump to come this far started decades ago as soon as the internet became mainstream. And guys like Roosh and MikeCF have profited directly off the death of the old media order. They're basically predators who steal viewers from the TV media. MikeCF especially does this, he goes around filming the TV media and showing their propaganda in real time.

We just need to keep doing what we're doing. Roosh you should probably hold a meetup for Hillary supporters in the DC area, get the media to waste time and energy on you instead of Trump. Bolster your brand in the process. You could say "You can no longer hold your conscience back and must let the world know why electing Hillary is so important." Then hold a live talk about how you believe Wall St is the solution to the world's problems and it will help Rape apologists like yourself make money betting on collapsing economies so you can then visit these places and get sex for food. Conclude with, "This is why Hillary will be good for men."

I'd say 80% of the polls are totally rigged, and even the 20% of unrigged polls may be slightly underestimating Trump's popular support. Every poll relies "registered voters," which undercounts Trump getting the unregistered to vote for him. Also the natural swing you see in the polls is because there is around 30% of the population (despite those who say otherwise) who will change their minds dozens of times before election day. ESPECIALLY women, we know how fickle they are. They can be on your bed and decide no more sex and just leave, or they can suddenly decide to fuck you right in public. Trying to poll women 3 months before election day is completely worthless. Men, on the other hand, are way more reliable but even the male hamster can get men to do strange things.

(08-04-2016 11:32 AM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  What you're seeing with that NYT piece is "tyranny of the majority" which the founding fathers tried to prevent to begin with. This is just the marxist version of it.

The idea that there's an end game scenario where you simply purge or reeducate people who dont' share your ideals. You can't purge or reeducate a substantial portion of the U.S. unless you want civil war.

The article, and the reality that you assert, puts second amendment rights into a refreshed light.

(08-04-2016 11:36 AM)redonion Wrote:  I've been working my way through the book "Influence" and have been wondering if Donald might be laying the groundwork to ultimately make use of the Contrast Principle on himself.

I know we all see through it, but Trump has been involved in a multitude of "controversies" - the most recent one being the Khan thing. Trump knows the media wants to eat him alive. When he drops the bait, he's either doing it on purpose to get them all riled up, or is making a genuine mistake.

Trump is fully aware that a huge critique against him is that he isn't "Presidential" enough. He mentions it at rallies all the time. I think if he wanted to, he could become "Presidential" right now. Instead, he slips up and the media has a field day on him.

It's been mentioned in this thread multiple times but the real election doesn't start until after Labor Day. That's when the public truly starts paying attention, and this race will start heating up.

Could it be that Trump welcomes all the negative attention on him right now?

Come September, Trump will probably still have this negative aura about him - but then people will start paying attention. At this point, Trump can make use of the Contrast Principle. He can seriously tone it down, and start acting "Presidential". The thing is, the casual American voter will see this and think "Hmm, this guy is really cool, calm, and collected - nothing like I thought he was!". "New Trump" will look awesome compared to "Old Trump". Ultimately, people won't even remember "Old Trump". The uneducated voters will view him more favorably than they would have if he had been "Presidential" this entire time. People like us won't be affected since we've known of Trump's good side for 12+ months.

I think he can flip all this negative energy around in his favor.

Yes. People forget that Trump is a big WWE fan, and of course has been the star of one WWE season as well.

One of the major themes of WWE is to have a bad guy who is hated for most of the season, but then near the end a foil for the bad guy is presented to show he's actually not so bad and becomes the unlikely hero. Many right wing websites are betting that this is actually Trump's major strategy all along.

Some may think WWE isn't real life, but in reality public psychology never changes no matter the setting. Many studies support this. I'm sure Scott Adams completely understands and believes in this. I'm more of a 50/50 guy; I think persuasion is half the game but you need real substance as well. I wrote about it with passive/active game.

The turning points will be the debates because that's when Hillary can no longer hide behind the propaganda machine, and that's when Trump can use Hillary as a foil to become the unlikely hero. It's what Trump did in the Republican debates as well, Trump had decent support going into the debates but after the debates Trump's numbers skyrocketed. It's going to be the same for Hillary, Trump is a master on the stage. It's scary good at how much self-control and command over language Trump has, to be honest.

(08-19-2016 10:43 AM)eskimobobseal Wrote:  It is extremely important for Trump not to get sucked into the Hillary's health issues debate, I think that whole deal is a trap that could backfire tremendously. If he goes after her for perceived health issues, the media will just frame him as a bully who is picking on a sick, old woman.

There are some arguments that are better left to his supporters.

I agree that Trump should steer clear (mostly), other than some general references to her stamina and energy. If he gets directly into it, it could look like he's bullying an ageing senior citizen who happens to be a woman to boot. The PC police will crucify him for it.

That said, I see no reason for his supporters on the Twitterverse and other social media to stay off it. #HillarysHealth away.

(08-19-2016 10:50 AM)Suits Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 10:31 AM)eradicator Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 10:29 AM)Lucky Wrote:  Trump's first campaign ad to air in 4 battleground states:





Quite strong.

It's about time. Hopefully more to come.

It's hardly late.

No point in peaking early. Aside from the nomination itself, we haven't even reached the critical point of this election cycle yet.

Why fire off all your rounds before the battle really starts?

It's pretty obvious: the battle started a while ago, on a daily basis, Trump is being painted as insane by the msm. He could have been trying to get his message out unfiltered through ads. For the most part, the people going to his rallies and watching them on youtube are already Trump supporters.

Quote:The first debate is when it will get serious. You'll see a ramping up of campaign spending as we get closer to that first debate.

It looks like he is starting to do this now. Good.

I'm actually not keen on the ads.

Remember, people know that the illegal immigration is just a symptom. The real problem is that our elected officials are corrupt and sell policy to the highest bidder which obviously includes immigration policy.

A laser-beam focus on the status quo corruption is highly effective and from what I can see has been the most effective line of attack against Dems. A number of them who have spent their whole live railing against "corporations" at least pause when people attack Hillary for being a corporate shill and no small number have hopped on the Jill Stein bandwagon.

Agreed, but I don't think Shrillery "chose" not to go to Louisiana; she is not physically able to do it. This is not some staged "rally" BS, or walking a few feet from the curb to Joe Biden's house (clutching a metal railing the entire time). Surveying flood damage requires all of the following, at least:

1. walking around
2. stepping over obstacles that are possibly several inches high
3. not slipping and falling on wet pavement (possibly bursting your colostomy bag)
4. being subjected to bright sunshine
5. helping to unload trucks with supplies, etc.

She physically cannot do any of that shit!

(08-19-2016 02:18 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  Trump visiting Louisiana was a tremendous move. The state has been threatening to turn Democrat and has an Obama buddy (John Bel Edwards) for a governor.

Obama refuses to leave his vacation and Hillary posting a FB/Tweet about how her heart is broken, will not be forgotten in November. Hillary's excuse is that she does not want to hamper the relief efforts...

It's almost like these idiots do not want to try to win. Do they not pay attention to numbers? Bobby Jindal nearly ruined the Republican party in Louisiana. It could have been the first Deep South state to turn blue in decades. Obama should have gone there for Hillary's sake if she is too broken up physically to walk a few blocks or shake hands with homeowners that lost their homes. With friends like these eh? Shows you how they really feel about each other, doesn't it. Gov. Edwards must be pissed at Obama and Hillary himself!

Also, where are all the idiotic black liberals like Kanye West, Will Smith, etc. to say Obama doesn't care about black people, when it is appropriate? They got on Bush for New Orleans, but Obama is getting a pass?

This mess could possibly boil over into next week. Red pills everywhere. Should be interesting to see how this develops.