User Controls
Dump idiot Trump
-
2020-02-11 at 2:50 PM UTCI do admit I suck at communication because I am misunderstood or simply brushed aside. But I often know of things that will happen before they do but people dont take me seriously. This is why I hate to and really cant last in the corporate structure because they dont take me seriously or lie and never take blame for things that were their faults. Agree star trek?
-
2020-02-11 at 3:06 PM UTC
-
2020-02-11 at 3:55 PM UTClol such cringe
-
2020-02-11 at 4:47 PM UTC
-
2020-02-11 at 9:27 PM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-02-11 at 10:30 PM UTC
-
2020-02-11 at 11:09 PM UTC
Originally posted by Bill Krozby I'm not sure if it was a joke or not.. like their some kinda hipsters.. but even joe biden looks even more confused than normal.. its like hey grandpa blow out the candles now!
Biden just laughs inside at these idiots. Even he's amazed at how dumbed-down they really are.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-02-11 at 11:15 PM UTC
-
2020-02-11 at 11:26 PM UTC
-
2020-02-11 at 11:37 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL He's now just a lowly DNC bag man, who is just there to collect dollars from the useful idiots for the DNC. Sad, but true.
its really mind blowing how someone like that can get that far. My boss I see him as a good guy and he's really successful and we're cool but hes totally a huge liberal, and while he doesn't talk about it too much he will say "anyone but trump, cloverbar, warren" just anyone like that.
When beto orouke was running against ted cruz a year ago or whenever he was like are you going to vote for beto Doug? And I was like no.. because I can't even vote..
weird thing is he actually knew the number cruncher for beto and told me theres no way he's going to win in texas even though I want him too. And we have all these liberals here in austin driving around with his sticker on the back of their car today, and if you were to mention that he's not going to win they would get pissed off like you're running the show or something. -
2020-02-11 at 11:50 PM UTC
-
2020-02-18 at 12:21 PM UTC
-
2020-02-20 at 1:06 PM UTCJust a lil FYI all you silly DEMwits
go ahead... all you mainstream media hags-continue to haggle over TRUMP this, TRUMP that, TRUMP's pardoning this person, that person?!! 😡
Please, be typically OUTRAGED!
all the while...behind the scenes, yet right in front of you dumb liberal's faces- President TRUMP continues getting chit done, ever slowly draining the democrat-bureaucratic bs swamp! Putting things in motion/place for many years to come!! 👍🏻
So yes.. continue to be distracted by what's all over/in the MAINSTREAM media news.
I'm sure it's just where team TRUMP wants you demo-dummies!!
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-02-20 at 2:08 PM UTCya hear that???
those crickets...
-
2020-02-20 at 2:12 PM UTC
Originally posted by Netflxchillr Just a lil FYI all you silly DEMwits
go ahead… all you mainstream media hags-continue to haggle over TRUMP this, TRUMP that, TRUMP's pardoning this person, that person?!! 😡
Please, be typically OUTRAGED!
all the while…behind the scenes, yet right in front of you dumb liberal's faces- President TRUMP continues getting chit done, ever slowly draining the democrat-bureaucratic bs swamp! Putting things in motion/place for many years to come!! 👍🏻
So yes.. continue to be distracted by what's all over/in the MAINSTREAM media news.
I'm sure it's just where team TRUMP wants you demo-dummies!!
"pay no attention to Trump's specific actions. Instead direct your attention to these vague bumper sticker claims of accomplishment"
Yeah we got it, Miss Ain't Got AssThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-02-20 at 2:50 PM UTC
insults...
yep, it's all you got
for lunch.
😄 -
2020-02-20 at 3:54 PM UTC
Originally posted by RottenRobert
Fifty two percent of Americans support removing President Trump from office through impeachment, according to a new poll by Gallup.
This is the highest level of support found for removing Trump since the Ukraine scandal broke. In fact, backing for Trump’s impeachment has far surpassed the public support for the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, and is edging into territory not seen since the 1970s, when Nixon stepped down from the presidency after support for impeachment spiked at 58 percent. “The level of support for Trump being impeached and removed,” Gallup reports, “is higher than it was for Nixon in all but the final poll before he resigned.”
Just re-read the OP and had to chuckle as I had just read this.Gallup has never been very good at presidential polling
October 7, 2015
Tim Fernholz
Senior reporter
The political world is aghast today that Gallup has yet to start polling the 2016 presidential primary and seem unlikely to do so during the 2016 general election, apparently because it lacks faith in its methodology.
While Gallup’s name recognition will inevitably spur speculation that public opinion polling is inherently broken, it’s important to remember that the venerable firm has never actually been that accurate in calling presidential races.
Consider the work of 538’s Nate Silver, who compares pollsters to the results at the end of every presidential cycle. Currently, Gallup gets a C+. In 2012, Gallup was the least accurate of all polls he analyzed, with an average error of 7.2 percentage points. In 2008, Gallup was in the bottom half of the list, with an average error of 2.4 percentage points.
Here’s a chart that shows the poll’s own self-reported deviation after each election for the last eight presidential cycles. While 2012 is the first election where the poll incorrectly predicted the winner (in 2000, its final poll was a tie between the candidates in one of the closest elections in US history), it’s clear that the Gallup poll is not gospel. Indeed, larger deviations in the early nineties were masked by landslide wins that allowed Gallup to be “right” about the race while inaccurately predicting the result.
There’s no doubt that public opinion polling has become more difficult. In part that’s because fewer people have land-line phones, and those who do are less willing to respond to pollsters, making the construction of a representative sample a challenge. But the bigger issue for Gallup and other pollsters is the difficulty of creating an accurate mathematical model, to adjust survey responses based on their predictions for who will actually vote. Making that prediction isn’t easy.
During the 2012 election, Gallup was criticized by the Obama campaign for over-weighting Republican voters and under-counting minorities, renters, and young voters. In a post-mortem after election day, the company essentially admitted that the criticisms were accurate. Based on its decision to sit out 2016, the organization still isn’t confident in its new approach.
It’s this failure of modeling that contributes most to inaccurate polling. Mitt Romney’s campaign staff were surprised to lose in 2012 because they thought that minorities would not turn out in large numbers, and weighted their polling accordingly. The Obama campaign’s internal model turned out to be correct, and his aides knew that he won hours before voting ended.
In the 2014 legislative election, pollsters made the opposite error by over-weighting Democratic turn-out. But they still were able to effectively call the winner of the race. In fact, the average polling error today is much lower than it was in the nineties and early 2000s.
Pollsters are still figuring out how to first figure out who the electorate is, and just as importantly, get in touch with them. Some public opinion firms and news organizations seem to be figuring out the right mix, and efforts by data-focused journalists at 538, Huffington Post, and Real Clear Politics, among others, to aggregate and average these polls has likely increased the accuracy of public opinion polling compared to previous decades.
If Gallup—and the similarly prestigious public opinion research institution Pew—continue to back away from head-to-head candidate polls, it might actually be a good thing. There are many, many pollsters out their trying to gauge who will win. But it might be nice to get away from the horse-race for a while to think (and poll) about more substantive issues.
Source: https://qz.com/519196/gallup-has-never-been-very-good-at-presidential-polling/ -
2020-02-20 at 10:42 PM UTCAll these corrupt polling entities, including Gallop, had Hillary with a 95% approval rating and favorability to win the 2016 election, for months straight. Guess we all saw how poor and dishonest and clueless their poling was then. Yeah, same as now. Nothing has changed. You'd be better off reading tea leaves that giving any of these so-called "polsters" even an ounce of credibility.
-
2020-02-20 at 10:49 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL All these corrupt polling entities, including Gallop, had Hillary with a 95% approval rating and favorability to win the 2016 election, for months straight. Guess we all saw how poor and dishonest and clueless their poling was then. Yeah, same as now. Nothing has changed. You'd be better off reading tea leaves that giving any of these so-called "polsters" even an ounce of credibility.
At least Gallup admitted by their actions that it lacks faith in its methodology. -
2020-02-21 at 1:13 AM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL All these corrupt polling entities, including Gallop, had Hillary with a 95% approval rating and favorability to win the 2016 election, for months straight. Guess we all saw how poor and dishonest and clueless their poling was then. Yeah, same as now. Nothing has changed. You'd be better off reading tea leaves that giving any of these so-called "polsters" even an ounce of credibility.
In the last episodes of Narcos Mexico, season 2, what the Narcos were doing was fixing their election. They used a fraudulent counting machine for the real time televised results to be fake. They figured if their opponent had no hope of winning, people would stay home, shifting the election slightly but just enough in their favour.
This is what the media was attempting to do with Hillary. Make Trump supporters stay home because it wouldn't matter voting anyways. That will not work this time around. I wouldn't be surprised of Trump gained 60% of popular vote.
America should let in Russian inspectors to monitor and certify that their elections are fair, if anything.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
