MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,648
|
Post by MDDad on Nov 6, 2019 12:56:02 GMT -8
they are trying (and, so far, failing) to stack the deck against him in the voters minds because they know with surety no one currently in the race or expected to enter the race can beat him on a level playing field. I think that's the only strategy that makes sense. Biden, Warren and Sanders each have too many negatives to win the election (e.g. too many skeletons in the closet, incomprehensible fumbling with words, too old, not healthy enough, too far left, too angry all the time, etc.). But if an impeachment inquiry can be made to last another year right up to the election, without ever suffering the crushing defeat of a Senate vote, their chances are slightly better.
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Nov 6, 2019 13:15:34 GMT -8
Dear trump lover: Ok...your opinions about whether the whistleblower should be outed are irrelevant at this point....and?
You're getting ahead of the game here...the investigation by the House is still underway. When it goes to the Senate you'll get your chance to hear sworn testimony. Also, it won't be by the whistleblower or Schiff...you'll have to badmouth and smear much more honorable people than that...worry not, I'm sure you're up to the task.
On the contrary the partial transcript of the call released by the WH directly corroborates the whistleblowers report. That's why we're here...because trump is so stupid he thinks that transcript exonerates him when it does the opposite.
Perhaps you should just say nothing...but you won't. You'll continue trotting out these feeble excuses.
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Nov 6, 2019 13:23:09 GMT -8
I'm not sure how you explain the poll numbers but: NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll:
Biden leads Trump, 50% to 41% Warren leads Trump, 50% to 42%
Fox News poll:
Biden leads Trump, 51% to 39% Sanders leads Trump, 49% to 41% Warren leads Trump, 46% to 41%
Washington Post/ABC News poll:
Biden leads Trump, 56% to 39% Warren leads Trump, 55% to 40% Sanders leads Trump, 55% to 41% Buttigieg leads Trump, 52% to 41% Harris leads Trump, 51% to 42%www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/latest-polls-bring-2020-race-sharper-focusSo...fake news? Or maybe your views on the candidates don't reflect the thinking of many.
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Nov 6, 2019 13:28:07 GMT -8
they are trying (and, so far, failing) to stack the deck against him in the voters minds because they know with surety no one currently in the race or expected to enter the race can beat him on a level playing field. I think that's the only strategy that makes sense. Biden, Warren and Sanders each have too many negatives to win the election (e.g. too many skeletons in the closet, incomprehensible fumbling with words, too old, not healthy enough, too far left, too angry all the time, etc.). But if an impeachment inquiry can be made to last another year right up to the election, without ever suffering the crushing defeat of a Senate vote, their chances are slightly better. They are trying everything they can think of and so far, nothing is gelling. stand by for Hillary Clinton to enter the race as Plan G (albeit, “Plan A” in her mind)...
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Nov 6, 2019 13:33:21 GMT -8
When you can't explain something just ignore it...maybe it doesn't mean anything after all.
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Nov 6, 2019 15:30:05 GMT -8
When you can't explain something just ignore it...maybe it doesn't mean anything after all.
Exactly.
Someone here hasn't figured out yet that he's being ignored.
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Nov 6, 2019 15:35:19 GMT -8
So it turns out that Mark S. Zaid, the attorney for the whistleblower Eric Ciaramella, has been part of the impeachment coup effort for over two years now. And the "whistleblower" worked with V.P. Biden while at the NSC, was tasked to Ukraine issues, and also worked with members of Adam Schiff's staff who were recruited from the NSC. Yeah, this is totally on the up and up..... Sen. Ted Cruz: Mr. Ciaramella, did you directly hear the call between President Trump and President Zelinsky? If not, how did you come to hear about it?
Why did you first contact Rep. Adam Schiff's office with your concerns over President Trump's call? Why did you wait 18 days after that contact before filing your complaint--and with whose assistance?
And who suggested to you to retain the legal counsel of Mark Zaid?Eric Ciaramella:
|
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,225
|
Post by RSM789 on Nov 6, 2019 19:02:36 GMT -8
I'm not sure how you explain the poll numbers but: So...fake news? Or maybe your views on the candidates don't reflect the thinking of many. First off, how many polls have to be wrong before people stop relying on them as some kind of sacred truth? So many polls are skewed based on the questions asked, who is asked, etc. that they really have become nothing more than attempts at persuading the public. Second, national polls are as useless to predict who will win a presidential election as passing yards are to determine who will win an NFL game. When you have a state like California that leans so far left, it skews the effect of the smaller margins leaning right found in most of the rest of the country. Experts said Hillary had an 85% chance of winning. Those are the kind of odds that you bet the house on. Yet not only were they wrong, they were way wrong. Paying attention to polls will be worthwhile as soon as they become accurate and not partisan.
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Nov 6, 2019 20:51:12 GMT -8
I see you couldn't respond to what I actually wrote so you made up some bullshit. Not very convincing or very adult. I see you couldn't respond to what I actually wrote so you made up some bullshit.
Why you presume to think that I have any desire or obligation to respond to you is beyond me. (You can BOOKMARK this for future reference.) Not very convincing or very adult.
Says a guy who throws around phrases like "ROFL" and "you make baby Jesus cry."
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Nov 6, 2019 22:33:14 GMT -8
William Taylor, "star witness" against Donald Trump, has never spoken to Donald Trump.
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Nov 7, 2019 4:34:28 GMT -8
Where did you get the idea that I thought you were obligated to respond to me? From your fevered imagination that's where.
You may respond to my posts or not as you see fit, but if you don't want to look totally clueless, perhaps you should respond to what I write rather than whatever you imagine I might have said, or should have said or something you make up that makes an easier response for you.
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Nov 7, 2019 4:36:39 GMT -8
Is this supposed to be some kind of important point? Any kind of point at all?
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Nov 7, 2019 8:09:26 GMT -8
I'm not sure how you explain the poll numbers but: So...fake news? Or maybe your views on the candidates don't reflect the thinking of many. First off, how many polls have to be wrong before people stop relying on them as some kind of sacred truth? So many polls are skewed based on the questions asked, who is asked, etc. that they really have become nothing more than attempts at persuading the public. Second, national polls are as useless to predict who will win a presidential election as passing yards are to determine who will win an NFL game. When you have a state like California that leans so far left, it skews the effect of the smaller margins leaning right found in most of the rest of the country. Experts said Hillary had an 85% chance of winning. Those are the kind of odds that you bet the house on. Yet not only were they wrong, they were way wrong. Paying attention to polls will be worthwhile as soon as they become accurate and not partisan. Everything you said is accurate, but irrelevant. those conducting the polls believe they influence the elections. Something like “if we build it, they will come” these pollsters believe if they show a given candidate will win, then the given candidate wins. Trouble is, the uneducated lemmings that somehow find their way into a voting booth are just the suckers who believe that: “we’ll, CNN said Hillary will win, and I want to go with a winner, so I have to vote for Hillary” or similar. And all this is BEFORE the voting machines have a “calibration error” that turns GOP votes into Democrat votes (as just happened Tuesday here in IL), or boxes of uncounted ballots are magically discovered in a warehouse.
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,648
|
Post by MDDad on Nov 7, 2019 9:15:36 GMT -8
As recently as the 1990's, polls were almost exclusively conducted by nonpartisan mathematicians with expertise in statistical analysis, quantitative methods and sampling theory. Now they have political agendas, and almost all of them have become propaganda arms for the particular political ideology that the majority of the poll's "leaders" prefer. Whereas they used to be an indicator of public preference, they are now a weapon for swaying and manipulating that same public. They have become no different from the nation's many "news" outlets.
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Nov 7, 2019 9:44:02 GMT -8
Yes, I'm sure that's what "pollsters" think...because we all know that all pollsters think alike.
|
|