Post: #33476

At the risk of being banned under the nohomo statutes...

(06-03-2016 11:18 PM)Latinopan Wrote:  

...is it just me or is Captain Longdong VanBurro getting a little excited?

My cover story is that I only noticed while trying to identify the make and model of the guns they were carrying.

Post: #33477

(06-04-2016 11:03 AM)philosophical_recovery Wrote:  Good compilation of some of the attacks. There are two versions, I'm linking the one without the background music:

Good choice. Here is the one with the background music. It totally trivializes a historically significant event. It reminds me of when Rachel had a baby on "Friends" and they used that annoying Enya song to make sure we knew it was "important."

Another person who ruins his videos with music is Colin Flaherty, author of "White Girl Bleed a Lot." He'll make a video showing extreme racial violence but he'll be playing fucking Sousa marches in the background. It almost comes off as unintentionally satirical -- not the effect he should be going for.

There's no better way for conservatives to appear out-of-touch than to use music like this in their videos. Attaching yourself to spaced-out female singer-songwriters or the goddamn 19th century when society is crumbling is a sure-fire way to lose an audience. Man, this put me in a bad mood.

Post: #33478

Good data on Trump's strength in the primaries.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/06/...nevitable/

Quote:As our data here show, Donald Trump’s primary victories on his way to the nomination were not simply a result of a crowded field. Among our national sample of likely Republican primary voters, Trump was favored over every other Republican candidate in one-on-one matchups. Moreover, he was viewed as the most electable candidate by a majority of Republican primary voters, and on his distinctive issues involving immigration even those favoring other candidates overwhelmingly agreed with him.

Post: #33479

   

Post: #33480

I was wrong: Trump WILL be the next president

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/01/i-was-wro...ntary.html

Commentary by Jake Novak, supervising producer of CNBC's "Power Lunch."

Post: #33481

Jake Tapper's interview with Trump on CNN was almost painful to watch. The mental Gymnastics that Jake went through to try and make Trump jump through the hoop labeled Racist was ludicrous. The Judge was of Mexican Heritage, labeled himself as a proud Mexican-American, delivered a very unfair ruling against Trump and Trump simply said that he had to recuse himself due to his conflict of interests as being Mexican causing his bias against Trump.

Questions for Jake Tapper that I want to see him jump through while attempting to stay coherent:
Is Mexican a Race or a Nationality?
If you declare yourself a Mexican-American isn't that by definition an exclusion of being labeled the term simply American?
Do you disregard the possible effects of having parents that identify strongly with a culture and nation different from the one you are raised in?
So is America really a boiling pot where everyone comes and loses their previous identity?
Or do you keep your personal heritage with you? In which case being of Mexican heritage would cause you to harbor sympathies for Mexico.
Should you allow people who have interests in Mexico to pass Judgement on a man who is willing to do what is best for America at the expense of Mexico?
Isn't supporting Mexico over America the definition of being a Traitor, a hostile invader, an act of sabotage?

Post: #33482

Just saw this on Breitbart, one of the only places I go to for news anymore. What do you guys make of it? I don't see how this can possibly be true. The bitch is being investigated by the FBI and she's up 11 points?! I don't buy it. She can't even beat Crazy Bernie!

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...11-points/

Quote:A new poll from Reuters shows Hillary Clinton regaining a solid lead over Republican Donald Trump. Clinton is backed by 46 percent of likely voters, while 35 percent back Trump. Clinton’s 11-point lead is a sharp reversal from last month, when Clinton and Trump were tied.

That Reuters survey from mid-May showed a sizable bump for the Republican, as Trump clinched his nomination fight. Hillary Clinton was still experiencing a string of primary losses against Vermont socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders. While that contest continues through Tuesday, a break in primary contests has spared Clinton another round of negative headlines.

After peaking at just over 40 percent of the vote on May 12th, Trump has shed support over the past two weeks, according to Reuters new poll. Trump has lost 5 points of support, while Clinton has gained 6 points. Since then, Trump has fielded questions over allegations surrounding Trump University as well as donations to veterans’ groups following a January fundraiser.

Clinton leads Trump among women by 15 points. More surprisingly, perhaps, Clinton now also leads Trump among male voters. In mid-May, Trump led Clinton by 7 points among men. Currently, though, Clinton leads Trump by 8 points among men, a 15-point swing.

Trump continues to lead Clinton among seniors. Voters older than 60 prefer Trump by 6 points, 43-37. Clinton dominates among young voters, though. She leads among voters younger than 35 by 30 points, 54-24. Clinton currently enjoys a bigger margin among young voters than President Obama did in 2012 against Mitt Romney.

The Reuters data, in fact, suggests that Donald Trump has a long way to go to reach Romney’s numbers in a number of key groups. Trump currently leads Clinton by just 3 points among white voters. Romney won white voters by 20 points. Trump leads among white working class voters by just 6 points.

One of the political narratives of a Trump candidacy is that he could bring white, working class voters to the Republican party. It is debatable how many of these voters aren’t already voting Republican. In any case, though, Trump is only narrowly leading Clinton among these voters.

Among white evangelicals, Trump leads Clinton by 26 points. This is far lower, though, than the 57 point margin Romney enjoyed in 2012.

Despite the fact that Clinton is still fighting a primary against Sanders, she seems to have a more unified Democrat party behind her than Trump has of Republicans. Against Clinton, Trump has the support of just 71 percent of Republicans. Just over 12 percent of Republican voters are currently supporting Clinton.

Among Democrats, though, Clinton has just over 78 percent support. Only 7 percent of Democrats are supporting Donald Trump. Even among white Democrats, Trump only pulls 9 percent support.

This latest Reuters poll, surveying 1,421 likely voters, was conducted May 30-June 3. The race has changed dramatically since its last survey in mid-May. It will likely change again, several times, before November. The general election campaign hasn’t even officially begun. It is likely to be a roller-coaster.

I think Crooked Hillary is fudging numbers. The recent attacks by illegal immigrants on U.S. citizens during Trump rallies have GOT to be costing her votes. I think this poll is fake. I believe it was faked for the purpose of trying to discourage superdelegates from jumping ship to Crazy Bernie's side. The only way people were going to continue supporting Crooked Hillary is if they thought she had a lead over Trump. I'm calling bullshit on this whole thing.

Post: #33483

^I thought the same thing, Reuters poll is dog shit.

Post: #33484

The Reuters poll wildly oversampled democrats. The republican plus independent vote in that poll still didn't equal the dems which is totally inaccurate. The latest Gallup party affiliation poll showed dems only +3% over republicans with a majority being independent. Not to mention the higher republican voter turnout we saw in the primaries and the enthusiasm gap going on this year. So yeah, they know that they were messing with the numbers but they don't care probably until we get closer to the election and they want to be able to say that they were accurate. As of now though, if the numbers in their poll reflected a more accurate party affliation spread, Trump is actually winning based on his doing better with independents. At the very minimum, it would be within the margin of error or tied.

Post: #33485

One of the reasons there are so many Obamunist supported hostile emboldened illegals attacking Patriotic Americans.

DHS Quietly Moving, Releasing Vanloads of Illegal Aliens Away from Border
JUNE 03, 2016
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2016/0...ay-border/

Post: #33486

These are the latest Trump vs Clinton polls:

While the Reuters poll is bogus we shouldn't dismiss every poll that has Clinton leading, Obama lead most polls in 2012 and he won quite comfortably. He actually outperformed most statewide polls.

Post: #33487

There is no fucking chance Clinton leads Trump among male voters. I can't believe whatever sample was used to take that survey.

Even if it's a fudged survey result, it's still disturbing.

Post: #33488

Well, the worst part is -- even if it is bogus as hell, that poll will still be touted as absolute truth and the sheep will believe Trump is losing ground. I don't know what we can do to help refute that. We know the media is rallying against The Donald because he's exposing them for their dishonesty. Any poll result released via the media should be looked upon with extreme skepticism. They clearly have a dog in the fight.

Post: #33489

Just do what Donald does: Mock them.

The Failing Mainstream Media: Poor ratings because of all the poor accuracy.
Losers!
Biased!
Sad!

I prefer the short zingers myself.

Only naive people still believe the MSM. Don't be a rube!

Post: #33490

(06-04-2016 07:46 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  This would give us our best shot at purging socialism entirely. The last few years have shown us their arrogant endgame, and exactly the fascist tyrants they will be and how hellish and hysterical an existence would result. This isn't an election for America, this is the election.

Agreed.

At all times socialism must be shown for the hateful, crushing, energy-sapping, unnatural ideology that it really is. I don't want it banned. I want it to be utterly discredited, the sort of idea that no one even raises an eyebrow at it because the notion that we ever entertained such an idea is so unbelievable - like slavery.

Post: #33491

John Michael Kane, that's solid advice. I recently heard the media has a current approval rate of 6%. That's partly why they have such a strong liberal bias -- they'd never be able to survive in a free market with such dismal ratings so they rely on government subsidies to stay afloat. Handouts are obviously a trademark of the left.

Then there's the whole functioning as a propaganda arm of the elite, which is another reason they never go under. Their purpose clearly isn't just to inform their readers/viewers but to indoctrinate them into certain ideologies and persuade them to act in ways supportive of those ideologies.

I would hope the public's distrust of the media combined with Trump's public indictment of the media's dishonesty would be a major asset to his campaign.

Post: #33492

   

Post: #33493

(06-04-2016 02:37 PM)Dusty Wrote:  

One of the very most enraging pics I've seen of her.

Post: #33494

(06-04-2016 02:11 PM)Last Parade Wrote:  There is no fucking chance Clinton leads Trump among male voters.

Fuck you Hillary. Makes my blood boil. Now I have to do the breathing exercises recommended in this thread: How to fall asleep fast : The 4-7-8 breathing method

Edit: Thank you, Dusty. I have now calmed down.

Post: #33495

As others have said, to claim women are the primary victims of war makes about as much sense as saying men have been the primary victims of rape. Such an idiotic statement -- but could we really expect anything else to come from Crooked Hillary?

Post: #33496

Roger Stone warns of new Washington Post hit piece on Trump in the form of a new 'sex scandal':

Post: #33497

(06-04-2016 03:06 PM)Praetor Lupus Wrote:  Roger Stone warns of new Washington Post hit piece on Trump in the form of a new 'sex scandal':

I hope they do accuse Trump of sleeping with lots of hot women. It will only raise his profile more.

Post: #33498

Interesting that the WP is going to spin a "Trump does cocaine" angle, especially since there is that report floating around of Hillary being addicted to cocaine (I believe Deepdiver posted it a few pages back).

Post: #33499

(06-04-2016 07:38 AM)RedPillUK Wrote:  ...why can't the Trump campaign themselves hire much more security and put them outside the venue, guarding the metal fences and the way in? Is that not allowed?...

Your idea is good in theory, but not in practice.


In practice it would look something like this:



Trump is having a speech at a venue, which is surrounded by security, walls and whatnot. And of course, there are a million of low life scumbags (they are not protestors, they are scumbags) waiting to pounce at someone.

Of course, there are MSM SOB's covering these scumbags.

Eventually, these scumbags suddenly start attacking Trump's supporters and destroying their property (cars for example).

Security steps in an takes care of them, while being filmed all the time by the MSM idiots.



In an ideal world, the MSM would write articles which tell 100% truth - that the security protected Trump's supporter's lives and property.

But...guess what?

It won't be like that . Oh nonononononono.


It will be usual pile of lies:

Quote:TRUMP ATTACKS!!!

Quote:TRUMP'S ELITE GUARD ATTACKS PEACEFUL PEOPLE!
(Trump's security in brown shirts, with German WW2 era helms)

EDIT:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...d-fascism/

Quote: HERR DONALD VON DRUMPF TERRORIZES CALIFORNIA!!!
(Trump in a SS general uniform)

In the news, an EDITED (!!) footage will show up, in which you will see security using violence against the protesters.

But the parts which prove that the PROTESTORS STARTED FIRST will not be shown up.


After all the Goebbels style propaganda, many people, which are moderate, might leave (or refuse to enter) the Trump train. Trump, and us...do not want that. Security will help Trump win in the short term, but, in the long term, it will be his undoing.


tldr: Security will cause more harm than good.

Post: #33500

Some guys over on reddit have caught Google apparently rigging autocomplete by preventing "crooked" and even "crooked h" from autocompleting to "crooked hillary".

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/trump-s...d-election

I might be missing something here, but it seems like a pretty compelling case. And I guess it shouldn't come as a surprise, given that Facebook was caught purging pro-conservative stories from its trending news section.

The Executive Chairman of Google, Eric Schmidt, is also a major supporter of Hillary, and has been involved in providing technology services for the campaign:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...y-clinton/

Not only is Trump up against the political, media, academic, and business establishments - he is also up against Silicon Valley, which wields enormous power in today's world. I normally abhor government regulation, but the likes of Google and Facebook are monopolies and they are abusing their power. Something needs to be done.

[I am well short of 250 posts, so someone please let me know if the rule against participation in political discussions is strictly enforced, in which case I will refrain from posting here again. I like to think Trump is bigger than politics...]