Trump up 34% in early Florida voting

[Frankfooter]

No kidding fuji, is that how things work??

You fail to understand their ads would sell just as well if they bombarded the airwaves with all of Hillary's scandals instead of Trump's scandals. But because most MSM is corporate owned, who dont want Trump as POTUS, they chose to run with the Trump "scandals" and turned a blind eye to Hillary's emails, her wikileaks....etc...etc

Its time for you to admit that most of the US doesn't want Trump as POTUS, not just the media.
Trump has had an amazing ability to piss of people, from Mexicans, Muslims, women, immigrants, people of colour.
Who's going to want to put their money behind that?

 

[Bud Plug]

Its time for you to admit that most of the US doesn't want Trump as POTUS, not just the media.
Trump has had an amazing ability to piss of people, from Mexicans, Muslims, women, immigrants, people of colour.
Who's going to want to put their money behind that?

Those who are so sure of where the public really sit should admit the following:

1. African Americans make up less than 15% of the vote. Polls have shown Trump getting between 10% and 20% of that vote - compared to Romney (3%) and McCain (1%). Trump is pissing off far fewer black voters than any Republican candidate in recent history. However, it should also be noted that African American voters have a poor turnout record compare to other voters.

2. Hispanics make up 17% of the US population. Of course, this includes, in addition to Mexican Americans, Cuban Americans, Puerto Rican Americans as well as other Hispanic groups. Trump is doing better with this group. He polls at about 33%. That compares to the 27% Romney got (again, he's pissing off fewer Hispanics than Romney). Again, this is a group that has, historically, voter registration and turnout problems compared to other groups. Illegal Mexican Americans, of course, can't vote.

3. Muslims? 1% of the population. Not relevant to the election.

4. Immigrants? Who are they? Everybody in the US comes from an immigrant family. I think there is not an identifiable constituency here. People who emigrated from Poland are not going to be offended about Trump had to say about illegal immigrants from Mexico. The might even be attracted to it.

5. Women. It all comes down to this. Trump is clearly trailing with women, as you would expect, running against the first female candidate. The more amazing thing is that he's not trailing by more.

So let's push all the extraneous nonsense off the table and admit - women will decide this election. However, it appears that Trump is doing a lot better with married women than with unmarried - and the married ones tend to be older and vote more reliably.

 

[Frankfooter]

Those who are so sure of where the public really sit should admit the following:

1. African Americans make up less than 15% of the vote. Polls have shown Trump getting between 10% and 20% of that vote - compared to Romney (3%) and McCain (1%). Trump is pissing off far fewer black voters than any Republican candidate in recent history. However, it should also be noted that African American voters have a poor turnout record compare to other voters.

2. Hispanics make up 17% of the US population. Of course, this includes, in addition to Mexican Americans, Cuban Americans, Puerto Rican Americans as well as other Hispanic groups. Trump is doing better with this group. He polls at about 33%. That compares to the 27% Romney got (again, he's pissing off fewer Hispanics than Romney). Again, this is a group that has, historically, voter registration and turnout problems compared to other groups. Illegal Mexican Americans, of course, can't vote.

3. Muslims? 1% of the population. Not relevant to the election.

4. Immigrants? Who are they? Everybody in the US comes from an immigrant family. I think there is not an identifiable constituency here. People who emigrated from Poland are not going to be offended about Trump had to say about illegal immigrants from Mexico. The might even be attracted to it.

5. Women. It all comes down to this. Trump is clearly trailing with women, as you would expect, running against the first female candidate. The more amazing thing is that he's not trailing by more.

So let's push all the extraneous nonsense off the table and admit - women will decide this election. However, it appears that Trump is doing a lot better with married women than with unmarried - and the married ones tend to be older and vote more reliably.

Which leaves Trump representing uneducated white males.
You've got your champion, too bad for you, he's the leader you deserve.

 

[oldjones]

This argument is misleading, and trotted out far too often.

In any allegation of misconduct, you never start out with all the proof. You start out with enough proof to give credence to the allegation to justify full investigation. Calling for concerns to be silenced because a full investigation has yet to be conducted that fully proves the allegation just denies this reality.

There are some historically proven cases of voting fraud. There are other cases where there was strong evidence to suspect voting fraud, but those cases were not pursued as they were not material to the result of the election (e.g. Romney getting 0 votes in certain Philadelphia precincts). There is evidence of weaknesses in the voter registration system and in certain voting machines that could be exploited (deceased voter registrations that have not been updated, weak voter identification requirements, voting systems in some states that don't incorporate paper backups). Now, there is some evidence that contractors of the DNC have at least said (whether fairly edited or not) things that indicate people are planning to exploit weaknesses of the system to defraud the election results.

None of this is unequivocal proof that there has ever been widespread election fraud which was material to the result of an election, or that such widespread fraud will occur in this election. However, a reasonable person would consider this information seriously, and would be attentive to whether any of this occurs during this election, because many people feel that the vote may be close enough for voting fraud to materially impact the result.

The call of the Trump camp is to be watchful of the election process. I can't think why that would ever be an inappropriate or unfounded message.

Now, if either camp tries to make something out of nothing after the election, then you'll find me on board with the notion that you should put the integrity of the democratic process ahead of poor loser excuse making.

Very reasonable, and nothing like the harebrained hysteria of the poster I replied to. Thanks for your response to me, but it would have be better directed to the evidence-free conclusion-jumping by him and his like.

Their fondness for preconception clearly deafens them to what you say is the true call of the Trump camp and they need your wise counsel.

 

[fuji]

No kidding fuji, is that how things work??

You fail to understand their ads would sell just as well if they bombarded the airwaves with all of Hillary's scandals instead of Trump's scandals. But because most MSM is corporate owned, who dont want Trump as POTUS, they chose to run with the Trump "scandals" and turned a blind eye to Hillary's emails, her wikileaks....etc...etc

Nope. The Clinton email thing is a tired old story that people have already heard a zillion times. It's not news.

I bet you can't find a single American who doesn't already know all about it.

Trump bragging about sexually assaulting women and his victims coming forward to corroborate that brag is real news.

You just don't like it. Trump was not properly vetted and he is a catastrophe.

 

[Bud Plug]

Which leaves Trump representing uneducated white males.
You've got your champion, too bad for you, he's the leader you deserve.

Not that I'm American, but do you think I'm an uneducated white male? And if not, do you really think that no one like me is supporting Trump in the US?

Also, reality check, TODAY's seven national polls are Trump +1, Tie, Tie, Clinton +3, Clinton +4, Clinton +4, and Clinton +9. That averages to Clinton +2.71. A statistical tie, and a closing of her previous lead.

 

[SuperCharge]

Very reasonable, and nothing like the harebrained hysteria of the poster I replied to. Thanks for your response to me, but it would have be better directed to the evidence-free conclusion-jumping by him and his like.

Their fondness for preconception clearly deafens them to what you say is the true call of the Trump camp and they need your wise counsel.

Thanks for all those compliments there oldjones..Yes I agree, a lot of people needs Buds council, he's a voice of reason in this political cesspool

 

[oldjones]

Thanks for all those compliments there oldjones..Yes I agree, a lot of people needs Buds council, he's a voice of reason in this political cesspool

Sweet talk, from the harebrained hysteric himself, I hope you take his counsel to heart. Please do stick to calling for vigilance, as he suggests, instead of wasting bandwidth posting lengthy videos that carry exaggerated labels, but establish nothing concrete.

 

[AK-47]

Its time for you to admit that most of the US doesn't want Trump as POTUS, not just the media

Most?? Hillary only has a slight lead in the polls.
If you take the margin of error out of the equation they are tied

EDIT: Bud Plug beat me to it

Trump has had an amazing ability to piss of people, from Mexicans, Muslims, women, immigrants, people of colour

Says the biggest anti-semite on this board :spit:

 

[AK-47]

Nope. The Clinton email thing is a tired old story that people have already heard a zillion times. It's not news

She got off easy cause she's too big to jail. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it

Trump bragging about sexually assaulting women and his victims coming forward to corroborate that brag is real news

If he's guilty why no charges?? Ever think those women could be lying??
Remember Jian Ghomeshi??

 

[SuperCharge]

Sweet talk, from the harebrained hysteric himself, I hope you take his counsel to heart. Please do stick to calling for vigilance, as he suggests, instead of wasting bandwidth posting lengthy videos that carry exaggerated labels, but establish nothing concrete.

I think you need his council way more Mr.18,000 posts..Who has time for that?? lmao, oldfart and Fuji that's who?!

 

[AK-47]

I think you need his council way more MR. 18,000 posts..Who has time for that?? lmao, oldfart and Fuji that's who?!

Quoted for truth

 

[shack]

Again with the ifs.

There are no ifs as to what he is claiming. It is dangerous. Is that fine with you since you've agreed there is no rigging.

 

[shack]

Newsflash: The media has a huge influence on how people think, especially Liberal sheeple.

The media is not a part of the official process. They cannot be considered a part of any rigging.

Newsflash: Democratic nomination is a form of election itself, and Sanders said it was rigged.

But the democratic nomination has completely different parameters than the general election and involves different parties of interest. They are not comparable.

 

[shack]

I also wanna add, the news media isnt in the business of reporting the news anymore, they are in the business of telling us what to think,

So you would vigorously object if they supported any candidate or discussed one more than the other.

 

[Frankfooter]

Not that I'm American, but do you think I'm an uneducated white male? And if not, do you really think that no one like me is supporting Trump in the US?

Also, reality check, TODAY's seven national polls are Trump +1, Tie, Tie, Clinton +3, Clinton +4, Clinton +4, and Clinton +9. That averages to Clinton +2.71. A statistical tie, and a closing of her previous lead.

The largest demographic supporting Trump are uneducated white males, feel free to include yourself in that group or not.

Your reality check sounds like you read it off of a Trump tweet.
The national polls are putting Hillary up by 7 on average, not 2.7.

Feel free to continue to claim that Trump is only behind by 2.7%, though, it also is a good representation on your grasp on reality. And while you're at it, you can explain how you think Trump is up when the majority of women think he committed sexual assault.
http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/10/most-women-voters-believe-trump-committed-sexual-assault.html

 

[Butler1000]

There are no ifs as to what he is claiming. It is dangerous. Is that fine with you since you've agreed there is no rigging.

And there are no ifs as to what Democrat operatives are DOING.

What's more dangerous, ifs or already done? When you speak of dangerous subversion of Democracy, and ignore the Clinton tactics, it's a joke.

 

[Frankfooter]

And there are no ifs as to what Democrat operatives are DOING.

What's more dangerous, ifs or already done? When you speak of dangerous subversion of Democracy, and ignore the Clinton tactics, it's a joke.

From dangling chads, to gerrymandering, to dubious vote machines, to making it harder for poor people to vote, the US has had its share of dirty tricks in campaigns.
Most of those have been at the hands of the republicans, but not all.
The question is whether the Trumpsters here think that there enough dead voters on the roll to really change the outcome of an election that has a 7% spread.
'Cuz it really does sound like whining and preparing your excuses because you know you're going to lose.

 

[fuji]

She got off easy cause she's too big to jail. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it

No. She didn't actually break the law. That's why. You have to show that information got into the hands of an unauthorized person and the FBI concluded that didn't happen.

Hilariously you then next wrote this:

If he's guilty why no charges??

Hypocrite much?

 

[shack]

And there are no ifs as to what Democrat operatives are DOING.

And what you're DOING is deflecting. Not enough guts to answer a simple question.

The question was about Trump's claims of rigging. Let's see you give a direct answer. Speak to the dangers of this kind of talk.

Then we can change the topic.