• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:386]The President Is Trapped

ObamacareFail said:
The reality is that the pollsters and pundits predicted that the hildabeast would wing the 2016 election based on state by state polls.
Click to expand...

Please support this claim with verifiable evidence that national pollsters did state by state polling and that is what they used to make their predictions.
 
haymarket said:
Please support this claim with verifiable evidence that national pollsters did state by state polling and that is what they used to make their predictions.
Click to expand...

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? You are misstating my claim. Read it again.
 
Lursa said:
That you cant read well, that you fail to characterize my posting accurately, and that you didnt understand what was contained in the 3 links I posted.
Click to expand...

Nothing in your 3 links supported the point you were attempting to make.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Do you have a reading comprehension problem? You are misstating my claim. Read it again.
Click to expand...

I did and repeated your words in my post. Here it is again

Quote Originally Posted by ObamacareFail View Post
The reality is that the pollsters and pundits predicted that the hildabeast would wing the 2016 election based on state by state polls.
Click to expand...

So show me the pollsters predicted the Clinton win by using state by state polls. You should be able to find that in the explanation of their methodology.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Nothing in your 3 links supported the point you were attempting to make.
Click to expand...

We've been all over this: just because you didnt understand what was written, doesnt mean it's not true.
 
haymarket said:
I did and repeated your words in my post. Here it is again



So show me the pollsters predicted the Clinton win by using state by state polls. You should be able to find that in the explanation of their methodology.
Click to expand...

Quote posted originally by haymarket: "Please support this claim with verifiable evidence that national pollsters did state by state polling and that is what they used to make their predictions."

The following is my post that you responded to: "The reality is that the pollsters and pundits predicted that the hildabeast would wing the 2016 election based on state by state polls."

Either you did not comprehend what I posted or you do not understand the difference between "based on state by state polls"(my post) and "did state by state polling"(your post). As you have claimed to have taught in a university in the past, I would like to assume that you can comprehend that difference. I would also like to assume that you have a clue about opinion polling in general. The vast majority of national polls in the lead up to any campaign do not predict winners and loses, they simply claim snapshots in time, claiming that this candidate or that candidate leads in popular opinion at the time. There are primarily registered voter polls, not likely voter polls. In the final weeks of a campaign, a smaller group of pollsters attempt to predict outcome with likely voter polls and they are not limiting those predictions to the national popular vote. Those predictions include state by state polls, based on which, for instance realpolitics.com gave Trump a 16% chance of winning the election, all the way to election day. The pollsters afterwards admitted that they failed to catch onto the surge in support for Trump as they were using weighted polling methods based on previous elections that did not serve them well in the 2016 election. But go ahead and continue using the national popular vote polls as an emotional crutch. You will be blindsided again in November 2020.
 
Lursa said:
We've been all over this: just because you didnt understand what was written, doesnt mean it's not true.
Click to expand...

Just because you dig up something on a web site does not necessarily make it true.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Nice try, however both of your links concern lawsuits, not criminal acts. Getting sued does not make one a criminal.
Click to expand...

"shocking pattern of illegality involving the Trump Foundation – including unlawful coordination with the Trump presidential campaign,"

"persistent” violations of charities law."

Fraud, swindle, $25M settlement, $2M fine, judges don't use that kind of language and apply those kinds of penalties if you've done nothing illegal. The charity was also closed and It's remaining funds ordered disbursed and a judge couldn't order that if you've done nothing illegal.
Your boy is a fraud and a swindler. That's been proven in court. Just a few short years ago this stuff would be political suicide but you lot have set the bar so low that even a slimy con artist like Donald Trump can still be supported and voted for.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Just because you dig up something on a web site does not necessarily make it true.
Click to expand...

3 websites, neutral mainstream sites.

You are a lovely example of denial...but that also wont make the facts conform to your beliefs.
 
Grand Mal said:
"shocking pattern of illegality involving the Trump Foundation – including unlawful coordination with the Trump presidential campaign,"

"persistent” violations of charities law."

Fraud, swindle, $25M settlement, $2M fine, judges don't use that kind of language and apply those kinds of penalties if you've done nothing illegal. The charity was also closed and It's remaining funds ordered disbursed and a judge couldn't order that if you've done nothing illegal.
Your boy is a fraud and a swindler. That's been proven in court. Just a few short years ago this stuff would be political suicide but you lot have set the bar so low that even a slimy con artist like Donald Trump can still be supported and voted for.
Click to expand...

Give it up.....Civil lawsuits do not make your case. Trump has not been accused of any criminal activity.
 
Lursa said:
3 websites, neutral mainstream sites.

You are a lovely example of denial...but that also wont make the facts conform to your beliefs.
Click to expand...

Not every mainstream web site posts the truth. CNN for instance is now known as "fake news" the same goes with mainstrean sites such as New York Times and The Washington Post.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Give it up.....Civil lawsuits do not make your case. Trump has not been accused of any criminal activity.
Click to expand...

He was fined 2 million for doing something legal? Is that your position here?
 
ObamacareFail said:
Not every mainstream web site posts the truth. CNN for instance is now known as "fake news" the same goes with mainstrean sites such as New York Times and The Washington Post.
Click to expand...

Oh please, that's just your bias speaking. And it was 3 sources. Your denial is pathetic.

The occasional mistake happens in any media source. "Fake news" is propaganda from The Donald to get followers to turn off what little critical thinking they're capable of. In your case..try turning it on.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Quote posted originally by haymarket: "Please support this claim with verifiable evidence that national pollsters did state by state polling and that is what they used to make their predictions."

The following is my post that you responded to: "The reality is that the pollsters and pundits predicted that the hildabeast would wing the 2016 election based on state by state polls."

Either you did not comprehend what I posted or you do not understand the difference between "based on state by state polls"(my post) and "did state by state polling"(your post). As you have claimed to have taught in a university in the past, I would like to assume that you can comprehend that difference. I would also like to assume that you have a clue about opinion polling in general. The vast majority of national polls in the lead up to any campaign do not predict winners and loses, they simply claim snapshots in time, claiming that this candidate or that candidate leads in popular opinion at the time. There are primarily registered voter polls, not likely voter polls. In the final weeks of a campaign, a smaller group of pollsters attempt to predict outcome with likely voter polls and they are not limiting those predictions to the national popular vote. Those predictions include state by state polls, based on which, for instance realpolitics.com gave Trump a 16% chance of winning the election, all the way to election day. The pollsters afterwards admitted that they failed to catch onto the surge in support for Trump as they were using weighted polling methods based on previous elections that did not serve them well in the 2016 election. But go ahead and continue using the national popular vote polls as an emotional crutch. You will be blindsided again in November 2020.
Click to expand...

Again, nothing you said there changes the responsibility upon you to prove your initial statement - that pollsters made their predictions based on state by state polls.

Lets see proof of that.
 
Grand Mal said:
He was fined 2 million for doing something legal? Is that your position here?
Click to expand...

I was once fined fined for violating the speed limit on an interstate. Does that make me criminal?
 
haymarket said:
Again, nothing you said there changes the responsibility upon you to prove your initial statement - that pollsters made their predictions based on state by state polls.

Lets see proof of that.
Click to expand...

But then your first response was "Please support this claim with verifiable evidence that national pollsters did state by state polling and that is what they used to make their predictions." Translation: You claimed that I said that national pollsters and pundits did state by state polling. That is not what I said. I said that they predict presidential elections based on state by state polling. As for proof, use a little common sense. How the hell else would they predict which states Hillary was going to win and which states Trump was going to win? How the hell else would RealClearPolitics.com and others predict how many electoral college votes each candidate will end up with? Do you not watch television coverage leading up to elections and on election day? I would like to assume that you are just playing dumb rather then the alternative.
 
ObamacareFail said:
I was once fined fined for violating the speed limit on an interstate. Does that make me criminal?
Click to expand...

Don't be an ass. Trump was fined $2,000,000 for breaking the law. He was ordered to pay $25,000,000 in restitution for having defrauded victims of an illegal scam. No amount of spin-doctoring, back-pedalling or false equivalents will make the uncomfortable truth go away.
 
Cardinal said:
Besides lead two of his followers to eat fish tank cleaner, what has he done during this pandemic that has had any measurable impact?
Click to expand...

well he called it a Democratic hoax that led to people not thinking this was that serious...compared it to the flu and bam we have almost 6,000 dead and over 200,000 infected..and that is a conservative number...because I know for a fact that South Carolina is only testing those that are intubated ...or hospitilized with the virus, because they do not have enough tests.
 
ObamacareFail said:
But then your first response was "Please support this claim with verifiable evidence that national pollsters did state by state polling and that is what they used to make their predictions." Translation: You claimed that I said that national pollsters and pundits did state by state polling. That is not what I said. I said that they predict presidential elections based on state by state polling. As for proof, use a little common sense. How the hell else would they predict which states Hillary was going to win and which states Trump was going to win? How the hell else would RealClearPolitics.com and others predict how many electoral college votes each candidate will end up with? Do you not watch television coverage leading up to elections and on election day? I would like to assume that you are just playing dumb rather then the alternative.
Click to expand...

It is always the same with your view... when you hit the word TRANSLATON it all falls apart.

Simply back up your original claim with VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE from national pollsters who predicted a Clinton first place finish that they used state polling and used it to make their predictions of Clintons win .

Let us see it.
 
haymarket said:
It is always the same with your view... when you hit the word TRANSLATON it all falls apart.

Simply back up your original claim with VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE from national pollsters who predicted a Clinton first place finish that they used state polling and used it to make their predictions of Clintons win .

Let us see it.
Click to expand...
You have to put on the special glasses, you know... Check your CrackerJack box.
 
Grand Mal said:
Don't be an ass. Trump was fined $2,000,000 for breaking the law. He was ordered to pay $25,000,000 in restitution for having defrauded victims of an illegal scam. No amount of spin-doctoring, back-pedalling or false equivalents will make the uncomfortable truth go away.
Click to expand...

Get back to me when you understand the difference between a civil case and a criminal case. Paying fines related to a civil case does not make one a criminal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom