UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
factually incorrect.Some polls showed Hillary with a 10-point lead just before the election.
factually incorrect.Some polls showed Hillary with a 10-point lead just before the election.
All the polls I saw before the election were just about neck and neck give or take a few percentage points;Pada, I respect your opinion. But consider this when it comes to polls & Trump:
The American people were lied to by pollsters who claimed that Hillary had a big lead heading into the election. The mathematics behind polling is unquestionably valid, if they are conducted properly. And networks have been conducting polls for decades, so I know they know how to conduct them. Yet polls showed Hillary with a huge just days before the election, and I don't think Comey swung voters by that wide a margin.
Some polls showed Hillary with a 10-point lead just before the election. And IMHO, that was a lie by the liberal media aligned against Trump in order to dissuade Trump supporters from going to the polls.
Not that it was such a terrible idea, but hell, they should at least admit it.
very true. hillary and bernie were un-electable i thought but either one was a better option than Trump. Like him or not, Obama left the US in a better place in his 8 years in office.Can't gerrymander the senate or executive office, I agree that explains a big part of the control of the house
Are you really equating Trump's many lies and corrupt acts with politicians in general? Really? Very cowardly of you to avoid naming anybody.How many times did X politician screw up only for their constituents who support them to look past it?
Neither side holds them accountable. If they did, you wouldn't have people clamoring about a vote for X is a vote for Y...
Huh? "some polls showed Hillary with a 10-point lead" -- lie by the liberal media. Based on what? Trump said so and you repeat it. Dude, you are missing some gears and the chain has slipped.Pada, I respect your opinion. But consider this when it comes to polls & Trump:
The American people were lied to by pollsters who claimed that Hillary had a big lead heading into the election. The mathematics behind polling is unquestionably valid, if they are conducted properly. And networks have been conducting polls for decades, so I know they know how to conduct them. Yet polls showed Hillary with a huge lead just days before the election, and I don't think Comey swung voters by that wide a margin.
Some polls showed Hillary with a 10-point lead just before the election. And IMHO, that was a lie by the liberal media aligned against Trump in order to dissuade Trump supporters from going to the polls.
Not that it was such a terrible idea, but hell, they should at least admit it.
Why does congress routinely hold a single digit approval rating while if you ask individuals if they approve of their congressman/congresswoman, the overwhelming majority do?Are you really equating Trump's many lies and corrupt acts with politicians in general? Really? Very cowardly of you to avoid naming anybody.
You are unhinged, boy.
Gerrymandering, the 18th century EC, fake news, Russians, stupid gullable people, racism, voter ID laws, antiabortion super christians, and confederate rebel flag wavers had enough impact to fuck things up.
The reason Republicans dominate government is because the Democratic party has failed beyond epic proportions to represent their constituents as a whole.
Stallone is a draft dodger. Just like Trump. Fake warriors.Best POTUS ever bombs away bitch.
So, you are equating Trump's corruption with politicians in general?Why does congress routinely hold a single digit approval rating while if you ask individuals if they approve of their congressman/congresswoman, the overwhelming majority do?
Other politicians lie just as much and are just as corrupt, they're just better at hiding it than Trump is
factually incorrect.Other politicians lie just as much and are just as corrupt, they're just better at hiding it than Trump is
What party do the pollsters belong too? China? Russia would never.The American people were lied to by pollsters who claimed that Hillary had a big lead heading into the election.
I'm gerrymandering four fingers up zarajack's butthole as I type this....Gerrymandering, the 18th century EC, fake news, Russians, stupid gullable people, racism, voter ID laws, antiabortion super christians, and confederate rebel flag wavers had enough impact to fuck things up.
If the Democrat party was exactly the way you'd like to see it, all the above would still work against it.
The 2 parties fight for a narrow band of undecideds every cycle. Appeal to them and you win.
And when you do win (by 3 million votes), you might lose anyway.
It's just a tad more complicated than: 'because the Democratic party has failed beyond epic proportions to represent their constituents as a whole.'
I still think he wears panties to get into character.I'm gerrymandering four fingers up zarajack's butthole as I type this....
I disagree. Take gerrymandering. It's a powerful tool, no doubt about it, but what just happened in the special election in Kansas where a Berniecrat was running against a TEA party Trump supporter? Trump won the district by something like 30 points against Clinton, James Thompson, the Dem, was able to close that gap by single digits 46/54. Although he lost, he proved a valuable point, along with Sanders campaign; you don't have to accept big money to win elections under the right conditions. Neither candidate had the backing of their respective national political parties, and both candidates were ignored or disparaged by the mainstream media. Estes' slim win is a preview of what Republicans can expect in coming elections.Gerrymandering, the 18th century EC, fake news, Russians, stupid gullable people, racism, voter ID laws, antiabortion super christians, and confederate rebel flag wavers had enough impact to fuck things up.
If the Democrat party was exactly the way you'd like to see it, all the above would still work against it.
Do you appeal to them by condemning the opposing party or by offering a pragmatic platform that appeals to them?The 2 parties fight for a narrow band of undecideds every cycle. Appeal to them and you win.
ted cruz, mike pence, and donald trump all campaigned for him, son.Neither candidate had the backing of their respective national political parties
Sanders and Thompson, not Estested cruz, mike pence, and donald trump all campaigned for him, son.
I'm not sure he proved a point by losing, though.I disagree. Take gerrymandering. It's a powerful tool, no doubt about it, but what just happened in the special election in Kansas where a Berniecrat was running against a TEA party Trump supporter? Trump won the district by something like 30 points against Clinton, James Thompson, the Dem, was able to close that gap by single digits 46/54. Although he lost, he proved a valuable point, along with Sanders campaign; you don't have to accept big money to win elections under the right conditions. Neither candidate had the backing of their respective national political parties, and both candidates were ignored or disparaged by the mainstream media. Estes' slim win is a preview of what Republicans can expect in coming elections.
He proved a point by closing a 30 point gap to single digits in one of the reddest districts in the country without the help of the party or the media by campaigning on policy issuesI'm not sure he proved a point by losing, though.
Also, I'm not up on the local impact of the election you mention, maybe he's popular there.
Also, Trump had less votes and managed to win.
That's one thing I always think of when you post reasons why we lost, and that the Democrats fucked up. We actually had more votes.
California is part of the US but their votes don't seem to count as much.