there were far more reasons to not vote for Clinton than to vote for Trump
It is a statement coming from a poll, a statistical poll that is not based on fact. Therefore, there is no evidence to support or contradict, that is why it is wrong for you to spread it as fact. I am not saying that what I say is fact, either.
It self defeated Clinton, it did not help her to call half the country deplorable, it made them dislike her even more. If people were on the fence, this probably put many in the Trump category. I don't know why I had to explain that.
That was an assumption based on his uneducated base position.
Why would anyone choose to measure that statistic?
The analytics crew, or polling crew made a hypothesis and distorted findings or picked and chose ways to make that hypothesis seem feasible.
The left says they do not judge people by their beliefs, yet you are doing exactly that. Putting people in the dumb group. That is hypocritical.
And what I am saying is your researchers are biased, and nothing they say should be taken seriously, including that "quote" above.
This was just a side note, not proof of anything.
I agree, they will not stop, but sooner or later, people will catch on, and they will be, and have been losing a lot of viewership due to that fact. They will soon go the way of the National Enquirer, reading things they want to believe to keep themselves entertained.
CNN and MSNBC have been focused on Barr and Mueller non stop for 24 hours, and not reporting on anything else that is happening in or outside of the country.... unless it has to do with "Trump is bad"
I'm sure there are dumb (gullible and inability to critically think) people on both sides of the isle.
No they are not, they are stats from a sample size.... They are not like fact, like gravity is a fact.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
I am comparing N8 calling half the country stupid to Clinton calling half the country deplorable.
Are you saying that what she said wasn't self defeating? It is one thing that contributed to losing the race for Presidency. And she said it during her campaign, not before.
That was an assumption based on his uneducated base position.A person can be uneducated without being an inbred who has no social skills. You basically made a remark that is not logical to what the person who made this topic brought up. Even this assumption is far-fetched.Why would anyone choose to measure that statistic?You can find reasons why the data is like that. That is why people try to find reasons in data. You make it seem as though every single data is not used to find out why this occurs.
Because that is what they do. They say things and report things that support their agenda. This applies to all MSM.I don't want to talk about generalisations when this is about one specific topic. Can you prove the data here was distorted?The left says they do not judge people by their beliefs, yet you are doing exactly that. Putting people in the dumb group. That is hypocritical.This does not matter too much but evidence?And what I am saying is your researchers are biased, and nothing they say should be taken seriously, including that "quote" above.Biased doesn't mean wrong. The burden is on you to state that this bias is impacting their research so much that it is distorting data like you said earlier on.This was just a side note, not proof of anything.1 out 4 paragraphs were dedicated to a "side note". You could have easily removed that if you are incapable of defending your stance but you didn't. Do you want to change what your anecdote represents?
No I don't. I am saying I hope they do.
It is not news, it is more speculation, some "news" outlets do it more than others.
He is talking about a hardly comprehensive test that concluded "is considered a good indicator of general cognitive ability," the researchers note.This is not fact, yet he is taking it as fact, and spreading it around. I don't need research and people to tell me what to believe, backing it up by crap research projects, and statistics that have been skewed so people like N8 can spread this around and try to make people feel like they are in the dumb category. This is the same thing that Russia did, only the other way around. Might as well include him in the Russian interference.
The details are pretty much the same as Trump. Neither WANTED to separate children, but a court ruling by an activist liberal judge made it illegal to keep children with the parents when the parents criminally invaded the country with child in tow.Afterwards "journalists" took some images from the Obama era with kids in cages and attempted to say Trump, and only Trump was responsible.
I don't need to look anything up or prove anything.
The fact that someone did, what I would call, opposition research on who's supporters are smart and who's are dumb is what is nonsensical, and then reporting it to further divide the country is what makes me mad, and it should upset you too. These people are so far up their own asses that they have to do research to try and understand who these people are that did the unthinkable, which to them is voting for Trump.
The minds of a group of Never Trumpers:How can people be so dumb? Lets do a dumb test and pick a state or an area that we know will work in our favor. Give them some survey questions and some basic elementary educational questions. Then we will ask them if they voted for Hillary or Trump. Then if the evidence supports our hypothesis, we will post it for all to see, and it will get reported by MSM. If it does not support our hypothesis, we just won't post it.
Whatever this test was is biased, just like the polls.
I know this because everything that never Trumpers do is skew things to make Trump look bad and further divide the country.
They did this in 2016, and it contributed to their own demise, and they have not learned their lesson.
Here is the photo of the caged kids.
When I said self defeating, what I meant was, she defeated herself by saying that.
She thought that most of the country would see things her way, but she was wrong in the electoral vote, which democrats are now trying to get rid of.
The electoral vote makes sense though, and just because they lost, they believe it doesn't make sense and are spinning things to try and prove it.
They said Trump would not accept the results of the election if he lost and chastised him for it, but guess who is not accepting it now?
Any way they can they are trying to undo the 2016 election.
Do you think republicans would have acted this way? Not on your life.
Now they are saying that they cannot charge the President because you cannot indict a sitting president
while I think that is true for some weird reason..,.
2016 was the year of the basket of deplorables.
I said if he did not quit he would be have been kicked out.Nixon was not impeached! He resigned before it happened.
This is why I don't want to look up everything for you. Just take my word for it on the narrative.
The electoral college takes into account states with a smaller population that have very different needs.
Believe me, our founding fathers were much smarter than anyone we have in congress today.
But you would say, No, they are immoral and dumb because they owned slaves!
Every news station talks about impeachment if they want their candidate in. That is why we have opposing sides. But no one took Obama impeachment banter seriously.
I'm saying that republicans would not have fought this hard to try and prove that Hillary was voted in illegitimately if it were the other way around. They would continue to try to get her out of office, but not to these extremities.
We wouldn't be going around saying "Not my President" like delusional idiots.
They would not have questioned the results.
Hillary got more of the peoples vote, as did Obama. 70% of Trumps winning was do to Putins meddling/interfering influence of the USA peoples.She thought that most of the country would see things her way, but she was wrong in the electoral vote, which democrats are now trying to get rid of.
you said he was impeached, I can understand if you mistyped, my apologies. I do know what actually occurred. You are fighting me on everything when you mistyped your post.
This is a complete joke. Nixon was impeached and he stepped because both Republicans and Democrats impeached him and if he did they would have removed him anyway.
Im for a republic, which the United States is... a Federal Republic, not a democracy. I guess you need evidence of that?
Because Congress sucks these days.. They are beholden to the party and special interests too much. Our Founding fathers could have structured something way off base to give someone, anyone, the upper hand, they put in checks and balances, they did unbelievably well considering the experience they had. You can’t account for everything, but amendments were necessary.
Their writing skills are beyond beautiful, and capture what they wanted the new world to be like, using a vocabulary that surpasses some of the most educated (not intelligent), people of our time. I guess you need evidence of that?
you are right, I made an assumption based on your arguments in the past about the statues and monuments that you say glorify slave owners, and I say, regardless, they are still a part of United States history.
If they took Obama being born outside the US seriously, then proceedings would have happened, a full blown investigation would have taken place, but it was too ridiculous to proceed, regardless if it was true or not..
Dems and the administration started a full blown investigation right away when Trump said in his campaign , “Wouldn’t it be nice if we got along with Russia?” Or before that. I guess you need evidence for that.
There are radicals in the Republican Party and they can all kiss my ass. Another reason why I say our four fathers are smarter than congress.
President Obama was my president, I had no qualms with that. I hoped for change as well, he won the Presidency which gives him the title of President Obama, which I would and should type out every time I write that name... but unfortunately I get lazy. I’m not delusional.. I live here, and not to admit who the president of the USA is, is just crazy. That is living in a non reality. I don’t know about you, but I think it is best to acknowledge reality, it’s pretty much the definition of crazy if you don’t.
i really don’t consider twitter as evidence of anything.
The whole point of them asking Trump, during the debates, if he would accept defeat is because of these allegations of voter fraud, which is much worse than Russia starting some Facebook accounts. But they still can’t accept defeat when that is the issue.... but wait, where is my evidence? I don’t need it. If you have paid attention the past three years, you would understand why I shouldn’t have to post evidence of any of this.
