Invade Venezuela now?

[CosmicCowboy]

What the fuck?

[Reck]

Good thread.

I want to hear all Trump's supporters take on this. Will they spin it or be concerned for once.

[Pavlov]

HE HAS A PLAN

[CosmicCowboy]

HE HAS A PLAN
No, he has MANY options. Get it right, chump. 😁

[Chris]

Let's see what happens.

[Pavlov]

No, he has MANY options. Get it right, chump. ��I posted some members' early spin.

But yeh -- options....

[CosmicCowboy]

Trumps a total tool but im ok with a do nothing congress.

[Thread]

HE HAS A PLAN

GD right. Just like "Brain" in "Escape From New York." He had a plan to take everybody to freedom over the 69th Street bridge. Did it work? Not exactly. But, his heart was in the right place.

Trump's heart? It's a good heart, a beating heart.

[Pavlov]

GD right. Just like "Brain" in "Escape From New York." He had a plan to take everybody to freedom over the 69th Street bridge. Did it work? Not exactly. But, his heart was in the right place.

Trump's heart? It's a good heart, a beating heart.Nope. There is no plan except wagging the jong.

[CosmicCowboy]

The dumbass just cant resist his stream if consciousness shit when he gets behind a hot mic.

[Thread]

Nope. There is no plan except wagging the jong.

Well, you all know how I make my living. I'll catch this fish for ya, but, I value my hide a lot more than $3,000. I'll catch him for 3 and I'll skin him and mount him for 10. For that you get the head, the tail, the whole damn thing. Too many chiefs on this message board. Make up minds and pony up, or, be on welfare all winter with Splits & Clammy.

[AaronY]

Wtf are you rambling about you old fossil?

[CosmicCowboy]

And my initial suspicions of trump having been confirmed i still wouldnt have voted for that kunt hillary. You guys realize she is already getting ready to run in 2020, right?

[Pavlov]

Well, you all know how I make my living. I'll catch this fish for ya, but, I value my hide a lot more than $3,000. I'll catch him for 3 and I'll skin him and mount him for 10. For that you get the head, the tail, the whole damn thing. Too many chiefs on this message board. Make up minds and pony up, or, be on welfare all winter with Splits & Clammy.That made exactly no sense.

[baseline bum]

So Donald wants to fight a two front war?

[Thread]

The dumbass just cant resist his stream if consciousness shit when he gets behind a hot mic.

He's having the time of his life. Where he has (them) is he genuinely enjoys ruckus, pandemonium, cacophony, mayhem. 99% of people don't. They want strife to end. They want to live in contentment even if it's temporary and comes in fits and bits. Some portend to enjoy it, but, they're fake. Trump is in glory like this. That's to (our) benefit.

[Pavlov]

hillary*ding*

[AaronY]

And my initial suspicions of trump having been confirmed i still wouldnt have voted for that kunt hillary. You guys realize she is already getting ready to run in 2020, right?

Yeah sadly enough

[CosmicCowboy]

So Donald wants to fight a two front war?
Three if you count afghanistan

[Thread]

So Donald wants to fight a two front war?

& he won't fuck it up like Hitler screwin' around on the Eastern Front.

[AaronY]

Hillary might lose every four or eight years for the rest of her life at this point.. wouldn't put it past her

[Thread]

That made exactly no sense.

That's because your asshole is water tight right now. I couldn't drag a straight pin outta there with a 20 mule team.

[Pavlov]

That's because your asshole is water tight right now. I couldn't drag a straight pin outta there with a 20 mule team.It genuinely made no sense. Maybe try rephrasing it.

[Thread]

It genuinely made no sense. Maybe try rephrasing it.

It was just an aside from "Jaws." You didn't recognize it?

[CosmicCowboy]

Hillary might lose every four or eight years for the rest of her life at this point.. wouldn't put it past her
Bill and Hill know where all the bodies are buried. They still own the party.

[Pavlov]

It was just an aside from "Jaws." You didn't recognize it?Oh.

[CosmicCowboy]

The dem players learned their lesson. They will never let bernie run as a democrat again. Hillary will kill elizabeth warren before she lets another crusty vagina get in the white house before her.

[AaronY]

Oh.

That's that movie that came out in 1974 back when cubby was in his mid-sixties age-wise

[boutons_deux]

Invade VZ.

Then what? What's the exit plan?

How many Americans and $10Bs wasted trying to unfail a horribly failed state?

Reagan dicking around in Central America destabilized that region which is still now sending seekers of asylum from the gang violence to the USA

[Chris]

I'm ready. I got flat feet but two hands and two eyes. Let's shoot some Socialists!

[Pavlov]

I'm ready. I got flat feet but two hands and two eyes. Let's shoot some Socialists!:lol "Let's"

[AaronY]

Do the feet have bone spurs though.. that's the question

[AaronY]

Haha bone spurs I forgot about that for a second :lmao

[Chris]

:lol "Let's"

Let us.. still works grammar nazi

[Pavlov]

Let us.. still works grammar naziThere was nothing wrong with the grammar -- it was just a stupid thing to act like you were ready to fight in Venezuela. :lol

[baseline bum]

& he won't fuck it up like Hitler screwin' around on the Eastern Front.

Hitler screwed around by fighting a war on the western front. Taking down the Soviet Union was always his big goal.

[baseline bum]

There was nothing wrong with the grammar -- it was just a stupid thing to act like you were ready to fight in Venezuela. :lol

Might be worth it just for the war rape considering how hot bitches are in Venezuela. Caracas could be like Berlin circa May 1945.

[Chris]

There was nothing wrong with the grammar -- it was just a stupid thing to act like you were ready to fight in Venezuela. :lol

I was being facetious :lol I don't want to kill Venezuelans :lol

[CosmicCowboy]

Might be worth it just for the war rape considering how hot bitches are in Venezuela. Caracas could be like Berlin circa May 1945.
True. Venezuelas pre crash obsession with beauty pageants is legendary. Thousands of extreme hotties down there lusting after an american passport.

[baseline bum]

True. Venezuelas pre crash obsession with beauty pageants is legendary. Thousands of extreme hotties down there lusting after an american passport.

American passport? Nah man, I'm talking the classic gang-rape + headshot way tbh.

[Reck]

And my initial suspicions of trump having been confirmed i still wouldnt have voted for that kunt hillary. You guys realize she is already getting ready to run in 2020, right?

What are the tell tale signs that she's getting ready to run again? Do tell.

Because even if she does, it's clear the people dont want her. She will never get the nomination again.

[Thread]

What are the tell tale signs that she's getting ready to run again? Do tell.

Becuase even if she does, it's clear the people dont want her. She will never get the nomination again.

She only needed to turn 35K votes in that rust belt, Recky.

[Reck]

She only needed to turn 35K votes in that rust belt, Recky.

What's to stop that from happening again? She cant even hold realibly blue states. She cannot be depended upon.

That said, I dont want Bernie either. LOL

It's time for a fresh face...say Adam Schiff.

[spurraider21]

invading venezuela will trigger the libs

sounds like a good plan

[TSA]

What's to stop that from happening again? She cant even hold realibly blue states. She cannot be depended upon.

That said, I dont want Bernie either. LOL

It's time for a fresh face...say Adam Schiff.

Adam Schiff won't be running, and you'll still vote Hillary in 2020 if she runs.

[Reck]

Adam Schiff won't be running, and you'll still vote Hillary in 2020 if she runs.

That would be a shame as I think he's pretty solid.

I would vote for her...when and how?

I dont take part in primaries. I didn't vote for her in the primaries last year and I wouldn't vote for her in the primaries if she ran again.

My voting record isn't even that long. I voted for Obama in 2012. That was my first time ever voting.

[TSA]

That would be a shame as I think he's pretty solid.

I would vote for her...when and how?

I dont take part in primaries. I didn't vote for her in the primaries last year and I wouldn't vote for her in the primaries if she ran again.

My voting record isn't even that long. I voted for Obama in 2012. That was my first time ever voting.

I don't even know why I'm bothering to ask you this but I'm sure your answer will at least be entertaining. Besides the sound bites you've got of Schiff during the Russia investigation, what makes Schiff "pretty solid"?

[Reck]

I don't even know why I'm bothering to ask you this but I'm sure your answer will at least be entertaining. Besides the sound bites you've got of Schiff during the Russia investigation, what makes Schiff "pretty solid"?

He seems pretty fairly in the middle. He has equally shit on hillary for her email scandal as he has taken shots at Obama and Trump for his shadiness.

Coming from a realibly safe blue state he seems to favor bipartisanship over party favoritism.

[Thread]

What's to stop that from happening again? She cant even hold realibly blue states. She cannot be depended upon.

That said, I dont want Bernie either. LOL

It's time for a fresh face...say Adam Schiff.

Yeah, but, she did not finish that campaign last November. I don't know why, but, she backed away at the end. Probably fear of not winning and thus leaving a reason to fall back on if that loss took place. It's human.

Given another chance she may be over such a mental block. The loss she feared actually took place. It happened, and she lived despite it. The end of the world did not take place.

I'd hate losing to Schiff more than I would Hillary. I detest that bugged eyed bastard.

[Thread]

I don't even know why I'm bothering to ask you this but I'm sure your answer will at least be entertaining. Besides the sound bites you've got of Schiff during the Russia investigation, what makes Schiff "pretty solid"?

He owns a portion of (our) shit, of our rapt attention. He ain't buckled since they set him out by himself on the point.

That doesn't mean he can go the whole route, but, he ain't no country preacher.

[Reck]

Yeah, but, she did not finish that campaign last November. I don't know why, but, she backed away at the end. Probably fear of not winning and thus leaving a reason to fall back on if that loss took place. It's human.

Given another chance she may be over such a mental block. The loss she feared actually took place. It happened, and she lived despite it. The end of the world did not take place.

I'd hate losing to Schiff more than I would Hillary. I detest that bugged eyed bastard.

The fact he scares you more is good enough for me, cub.

That means the threat is real.

[clambake]

The fact he scares you more is good enough for me, cub.

That means the threat is real.

the only threat is how annoying he is.

[Thread]

the only threat is how annoying he is.

But, he is not a shrinking violet. It's early, but, I do not want to see him in '20. I do not believe Trump could wise guy him like he did Hillary.

[Reck]

But, he is not a shrinking violet. It's early, but, I do not want to see him in '20. I do not believe Trump could wise guy him like he did Hillary.

It's a man's game. Right Cul?

[clambake]

It's a man's game. Right Cul?

so far, yes

[Thread]

It's a man's game. Right Cul?

No. She just couldn't close the deal. She did not figure Trump to attack her like he did. And it threw her for a loop. It exhausted her physically and mentally. So, when she got into the home stretch she just wanted it to end and she slowed up in hopes that disaster wouldn't strike and she'd just drop into the Presidency. Happens to guys too, regular guys, it's happened to me, probably to you, Recky. It's normal.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Bill and Hill know where all the bodies are buried. They still own the party.

It's more like they and the Kerry cabal have an alliance and control Dem establishment cash flow.

[boutons_deux]

The Pentagon Just Responded To Trump’s Threat To Attack Venezuela

a Department of Defense spokesperson saying, “any insinuations by the Maduro regime that we are planning an invasion are baseless.”

http://washingtonjournal.com/2017/08/11/pentagon-just-responded-trumps-threat-attack-venezuela/

[Spurtacular]

You'll get no spin from me. Venezuela may be the most corrupt p.o.s. in the western hemisphere. Don't see how that's our problem, though. Let's right our own ship. Ron Paul was right; the media military complex wants wars.

[Spurtacular]

Invade VZ.

Then what? What's the exit plan?

How many Americans and $10Bs wasted trying to unfail a horribly failed state?

Reagan dicking around in Central America destabilized that region which is still now sending seekers of asylum from the gang violence to the USA

Yea, Pinochet and Noriega and these other dictators were because of Reagan :fishing

[Thread]

You'll get no spin from me. Venezuela may be the most corrupt p.o.s. in the western hemisphere. Don't see how that's our problem, though. Let's right our own ship. Ron Paul was right; the media military complex wants wars.

Spurts

[boutons_deux]

Yea, Pinochet and Noriega and these other dictators were because of Reagan :fishing

WTF?

[hater]

Yea, Pinochet and Noriega and these other dictators were because of Reagan :fishing

Not sure if serious? Pinochet had US help to get rid of Allende

US giftwrapped Pinochet and his 10s of thousands of kills to south america

[Spurtacular]

Not sure if serious? Pinochet had US help to get rid of Allende

US giftwrapped Pinochet and his 10s of thousands of kills to south america

And in 1973, Reagan was president?

[AaronY]

Battle of the intellectual Titans incoming here..

Wait till hater hits him his barrage of emoticons

[hater]

Go back to your outhouse Cletus. You are way out of your league.

Probably think we are talking about a Chile cookoff :lmao

[Pavlov]

You'll get no spin from me. Venezuela may be the most corrupt p.o.s. in the western hemisphere. Don't see how that's our problem, though. Let's right our own ship. Ron Paul was right; the media military complex wants wars.So does Trump.

[AaronY]

Wrong thread

[Canyonero]

A country with a lot of natural resources. Surprised USA hasn't invaded yet tbh.

[SnakeBoy]

That made exactly no sense.


Oh.

:lol

It proves that you wealthy college boys don't have the education enough to admit when you're wrong.

[Pavlov]

:lol

It proves that you wealthy college boys don't have the education enough to admit when you're wrong.Wrong about what?

[SnakeBoy]

Wrong about what?

:lol

Fucking watch Jaws Chump!

[apalisoc_9]

USA is the biggest terrorist in the world

[Pavlov]

:lol

Fucking watch Jaws Chump!Seen it. Thread's post still doesn't make much sense to me in context tbh, but if that's a proxy win for you, OK.

[SnakeBoy]

Seen it. Thread's post still doesn't make much sense to me in context tbh, but if that's a proxy win for you, OK.

lol win

You're always wound to tight

[hater]

USA is the biggest terrorist in the world

Truth Kim Jong Nuke

[Spurtacular]

So does Trump.

Suddenly the approval ratings are magically up because the media always pretends that war is a popular option.

[Pavlov]

Suddenly the approval ratings are magically up because the media always pretends that war is a popular option.wut

[Spurtacular]

wut

That's a pretty straight-forward statement, assuming you understand that 'magically' is figurative language.

[Pavlov]

That's a pretty straight-forward statement, assuming you understand that 'magically' is figurative language.It doesn't make any sense tho.

[Spurtacular]

It doesn't make any sense tho.

Translation: 'I perceive it goes against my agenda and I'm going to argue it.'

If you were actually smart enough to understand it's for your bot purpose, you wouldn't be being a dumb ass right now. The media makes up the presidential poll numbers based on what they want to sell. They like war, so Trump's numbers are now up. They didn't like the other shit, so his numbers were down.

Next time, don't make me spoon feed you, son.

[Pavlov]

Translation: 'I perceive it goes against my agenda and I'm going to argue it.'

If you were actually smart enough to understand it's for your bot purpose, you wouldn't be being a dumb ass right now. The media makes up the presidential poll numbers based on what they want to sell. They like war, so Trump's numbers are now up. They didn't like the other shit, so his numbers were down.

Next time, don't make me spoon feed you, son.:lmao "son"

[Spurtacular]

^^^

So, your contention is that the media is honest?

[Pavlov]

^^^

So, your contention is that the media is honest?My contention is that you are just precious.

[Spurtacular]

My contention is that you are just precious.

Is this all you got; cos if it is, I probably won't bother replying next time.

[Pavlov]

Is this all you got; cos if it is, I probably won't bother replying next time.Tell me how and why every polling entity that is not a media outlet fakes their polls too.

[Spurtacular]

Tell me how and why every polling entity that is not a media outlet fakes their polls too.

They all are subsidized and/or corporate entities who are unabashedly in line with liberal dogma. Do the math. But their lies didn't stop America from putting in Trump. People woke up; they get how the game is played.

[Pavlov]

They all are subsidized and/or corporate entities who are unabashedly in line with liberal dogma.How are Fox News, Rasmussen and Zogby in line with liberal dogma?

Do the math.No, you tell me exactly how it all works.
But their lies didn't stop America from putting in Trump. People woke up; they get how the game is played.:lol How is the game played?

[Spurtacular]

How are Fox News, Rasmussen and Zogby in line with liberal dogma?
No, you tell me exactly how it all works.:lol How is the game played?

They're corporate. I didn't break it down into liberal/conservative. You think I trust those fuckers just cos they tickle the ears of their conservative viewership?

Phony news is the norm; that's how the game is played. Money, that's how the game is played.

[Pavlov]

They're corporate. I didn't break it down into liberal/conservative. You think I trust those fuckers just cos they tickle the ears of their conservative viewership? You said they were all in line with liberal dogma.


Phony news is the norm; that's how the game is played. Money, that's how the game is played.And people voted for Trump because they wanted a phony with money.

[Spurtacular]

You said they were all in line with liberal dogma.

And people voted for Trump because they wanted a phony with money.

That's actually a fair point. Okay, then I overstated it a bit. But FNC does largely benefit from the controversies created by the liberal dogma, regardless of whether they are squarely lining up with it. They'll be the opposition narrative but only in a very moderate capacity.

People voted for Trump for various reasons; but I'd say the overarching reason is that they saw he at least had the potential to not be the status quo Washington politician fucking them in the ass. I get that you most certainly don't accept him as such; but I'm telling you what the honest to God reason, all the same.

[Pavlov]

That's actually a fair point. Okay, then I overstated it a bit. But FNC does largely benefit from the controversies created by the liberal dogma, regardless of whether they are squarely lining up with it. They'll be the opposition narrative but only in a very moderate capacity.:lol


People voted for Trump for various reasons; but I'd say the overarching reason is that they saw he at least had the potential to not be the status quo Washington politician fucking them in the ass. I get that you most certainly don't accept him as such; but I'm telling you what the honest to God reason, all the same.Actually his past actions make him the MOST likely to fuck you up the ass.

[Spurtacular]

:lol

Actually his past actions make him the MOST likely to fuck you up the ass.

Hillarys' a career criminal who literally became a billionaire by being in the govt. Only idiots thought that was the clear way to go in that regard.

[Pavlov]

Hillarys' a career criminal who literally became a billionaire by being in the govt. Only idiots thought that was the clear way to go in that regard.And yet, here's Trump -- fucking you right up the ass. And you're loving it.

[Chris]

fucking you right up the ass.

You've been on grindr again haven't you :lol

[Pavlov]

You've been on grindr again haven't you :lolIt's his phrase.

[Spurtacular]

And yet, here's Trump -- fucking you right up the ass. And you're loving it.

How has Trump fucked you in the ass?

[Pavlov]

How has Trump fucked you in the ass?I didn't vote for him.

[Spurtacular]

I didn't vote for him.

So, cos you didn't vote for him, he's not fucking you in the ass?

[Pavlov]

So, cos you didn't vote for him, he's not fucking you in the ass?If it has become my metaphor, sure. I'm pleased his Presidency is paralyzed and completely impotent right now. It's the most I can hope for.

[Spurtacular]

If it has become my metaphor, sure. I'm pleased his Presidency is paralyzed and completely impotent right now. It's the most I can hope for.

And to bring it full circle, so is the media. They're about advocacy and obstruction, which is in line with the liberal agenda. Thanks for making my point for me, dude.

[Pavlov]

And to bring it full circle, so is the media. They're about advocacy and obstruction, which is in line with the liberal agenda. Thanks for making my point for me, dude.You just said they wanted war. Thanks for destroying your point, dude.

[Spurtacular]

You just said they wanted war. Thanks for destroying your point, dude.

I said the media wanted war at the start, dude.

[Pavlov]

I said the media wanted war at the start, dude.At the start of what?

[Spurtacular]

At the start of what?

This exchange of dialogue. In fact, IIRC, it was literally the first post.

[Pavlov]

This exchange of dialogue. In fact, IIRC, it was literally the first post.Exactly, and you contradicted yourself. Wanting war doesn't fit any liberal agenda about advocacy and obstruction. In fact it does just the opposite with this President.

[Spurtacular]

Exactly, and you contradicted yourself. Wanting war doesn't fit any liberal agenda about advocacy and obstruction. In fact it does just the opposite with this President.

I didn't contradict myself. I said straight up that once Trump pushed war, the media put his approval rating up. This shit's not that hard to get, dude.

[Pavlov]

I didn't contradict myself. I said straight up that once Trump pushed war, the media put his approval rating up. This shit's not that hard to get, dude.If they are there to obstruct him, why raise his approval rating?

[Spurtacular]

If they are there to obstruct him, why raise his approval rating?

Their aim is not to merely obstruct Trump. They serve the needs of the media military complex. War and the threat of war is in their interest.

[Pavlov]

Their aim is not to merely obstruct Trump. They serve the needs of the media military complex. War and the threat of war is in their interest.So they are there to obstruct Trump except when they are not.

[spurraider21]

So they are there to obstruct Trump except when they are not.
https://i.gyazo.com/87ac72a3af86d4172c8c264c336fafac.png

[Spurtacular]

So they are there to obstruct Trump except when they are not.

What do you think their endgame is, dude? Even Bill Maher called out that Trump still had the war card in his pocket to boost popularity. This isn't a novel construct.

[Pavlov]

What do you think their endgame is, dude? Even Bill Maher called out that Trump still had the war card in his pocket to boost popularity. This isn't a novel construct.

He didn't mean polling companies.

[Spurtacular]

He didn't mean polling companies.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

[Pavlov]

I have no idea what you're talking about.Of course you don't. Stay in your bubble.

[Spurtacular]

Of course you don't. Stay in your bubble.

It's not my fault you can't adequately express yourself.

[boutons_deux]

Invade VZ was just another Trash attempt to deflect from Mueller's train picking up speed.

10Ms, a 100M?, fucked up Americans think bombing, invading other countries is Presidential. America has been at war or dicking around in other countries for 200 years.

[boutons_deux]

Another deflection this morning is Trash making big noise about going after China over trade.

US corps with $100Bs invested in China must be pissed.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-trade-china-idUSKBN1AS04O?mc_cid=9f2e45e4c0&mc_eid=47e367557b

But he's surely not concerned by his and Ivanka's overseas sweat shops

[Pavlov]

It's not my fault you can't adequately express yourself.It's your fault you can't understand simple sentences, bubble boy.

[pgardn]

Invade VZ was just another Trash attempt to deflect from Mueller's train picking up speed.

10Ms, a 100M?, fucked up Americans think bombing, invading other countries is Presidential. America has been at war or dicking around in other countries for 200 years.

He can deflect now all he wants to.

In the end, we will find out what kind of transgressions took place.
I expect they will be financial.

[Spurtacular]

It's your fault you can't understand simple sentences, bubble boy.

Whatevs. I brought it full circle on you, and you ran out of steam.

[Pavlov]

Whatevs. I brought it full circle on you, and you ran out of steam.You brought your contradiction full circle and still don't understand why it's a contradiction.

[Spurtacular]

You brought your contradiction full circle and still don't understand why it's a contradiction.

I understand you're just talking out of your ass.

[Pavlov]

I understand you're just talking out of your ass.The media obstructs Trump unless it doesn't and Rassmussen fakes its poll numbers the exact same way liberal pollsters do as a reaction against liberal pollsters.

[Spurtacular]

The media obstructs Trump unless it doesn't and Rassmussen fakes its poll numbers the exact same way liberal pollsters do as a reaction against liberal pollsters.


Is that supposed to be my viewpoint? Is it supposed to prove something?

It doesn't matter, because I still brought it full circle on your ass; and you were like, oh shit. Give up the ghost, dude.

[Pavlov]

[QUOTE=Spurtacular;9115749]Is that supposed to be my viewpoint?/QUOTE]It was what you claimed. If your conspiracy theory is different, explain it.

[Spurtacular]

It was what you claimed. If your conspiracy theory is different, explain it.

"Conspiracy theory" :lmao

It's been explained, brah.

[Pavlov]

"Conspiracy theory" :lmao

It's been explained, brah.And you don't think it's a conspiracy theory? :lmao

Brah? :lmao

[Spurtacular]

And you don't think it's a conspiracy theory? :lmao

Brah? :lmao

'Conspiracy theory' is a loaded term that the CIA popularized to diminish solid analysis as mere fringe thoughts. Frankly, more 'conspiracy theories' have merit than the dross the media shovels to us.

And no, I would not qualify it as a conspiracy theory rather than solid analysis. And it's not even a fringe notion that presidential ratings go up with the advent of war or the prospect of war. So, the question you have to ask yourself is are Americans that blood thirsty; or does the media push a narrative that propels the military complex?

[Pavlov]

'Conspiracy theory' is a loaded term that the CIA popularized to diminish solid analysis as mere fringe thoughts. Frankly, more 'conspiracy theories' have merit than the dross the media shovels to us.

And no, I would not qualify it as a conspiracy theory rather than solid analysis. And it's not even a fringe notion that presidential ratings go up with the advent of war or the prospect of war. So, the question you have to ask yourself is are Americans that blood thirsty; or does the media push a narrative that propels the military complex?You have a theory.

About a conspiracy.

Americans tend to rally round the flag. Especially those who would compare Robert E. Lee to Obi-Wan Kenobi.

[RandomGuy]

HE HAS A PLAN

He will handle it.

It will be handled.

[RandomGuy]

The dem players learned their lesson. They will never let bernie run as a democrat again. Hillary will kill elizabeth warren before she lets another crusty vagina get in the white house before her.

:rolleyes

[RandomGuy]

The media makes up the presidential poll numbers based on what they want to sell. They like war, so Trump's numbers are now up. They didn't like the other shit, so his numbers were down.



LOL "the media made it up"

You do realize there is a rather marked effect that sees leaders' approval tick up when they focus people on foreign enemies, right?

Feel free to provide a link showing evidence that this was "made up", as opposed to actually representative of underlying reality. Your claim, your burden of proof.

[RandomGuy]

Hillarys' a career criminal who literally became a billionaire by being in the govt. Only idiots thought that was the clear way to go in that regard.


Hillary Clinton's net worth is in the range of $11 million to $53 million, giving her an average net worth of $32 million with no apparent liabilities, according to federal records. Hillary says she and Bill Clinton were “dead broke” after they left the White House in 2001.Aug 29, 2016

Literally, she didn't.

[SpursforSix]

Literally, she didn't.

You literally quoted the side bar from "Hillary Clinton's Net Worth".
While she's certainly not a billionaire, she's likely worth close to $100,000,000.
And LOL at her being almost dead broke. Surely you know the difference between her (or any other elite) being dead broke and a "normal" person.

[Spurtacular]

LOL "the media made it up"

You do realize there is a rather marked effect that sees leaders' approval tick up when they focus people on foreign enemies, right?

Feel free to provide a link showing evidence that this was "made up", as opposed to actually representative of underlying reality. Your claim, your burden of proof.

You do realize that's exactly what I said, right? But that doesn't mean because the average American is for it. It means that the media advocates for the trillions dollar war industry.

[Spurtacular]

LOL "the media made it up"

You do realize there is a rather marked effect that sees leaders' approval tick up when they focus people on foreign enemies, right?

Feel free to provide a link showing evidence that this was "made up", as opposed to actually representative of underlying reality. Your claim, your burden of proof.

2012 election, 2016 election.....

You think Gallup, the biggest polling outfit got out of presidential polling for why? Cos the establishment didn't want legitimate polls out there undermining their gaslighting efforts. Brah, fake news is the norm. I wouldn't try to convince you of shit. If you want to be willfully ignorant, that's not my problem.

[Spurtacular]

Literally, she didn't.

And you know this because you go over Hillary's books? You keep up with all the offshore accounts?

As a matter of just a conservative estimate, she's a hundreds-millionaire. But this doesn't count all the dirty money. And frankly, I would think that her own personal assets are more than a billion.

[Pavlov]

You think Gallup, the biggest polling outfit got out of presidential polling for why? Cos the establishment didn't want legitimate polls out there undermining their gaslighting efforts.So polling companies support the liberal dogma except when they don't.

And polling companies aren't legitimate unless they are.

Do you believe Gallup's poll tracking Trump's approval rating is legitimate?

[Spurtacular]

Do you believe Gallup's poll tracking Trump's approval rating is legitimate?

Nope. It's political engineering.

[Pavlov]

Nope. It's political engineering.OK, you need to make a flowchart describing your conspiracy decision process because you are making zero sense.

[Spurtacular]

OK, you need to make a flowchart describing your conspiracy decision process because you are making zero sense.

I watched week after week, Obama fucking shit up and his approval rating not dipping below 39. The second their was a modicum of good news, his approval rating would jump to 46. It can't even be said that this is because Obama has a loyal base, because statistical variation is an inevitability. I didn't go to college so that I could just chuck what I learned. I know rigging when I see it.

[Th'Pusher]

Could everyone stop talking to spurtacular? I think everyone agrees he's a complete moron. Maybe he'll stop posting if you stop responding.

It' eventually becomes boring fucking stupid people, right?

[Pavlov]

Could everyone stop talking to spurtacular? I think everyone agrees he's a complete moron. Maybe he'll stop posting if you stop responding.

It' eventually becomes boring fucking stupid people, right?It's just so funny when someone is so completely wrong and so sure he's right.
I watched week after week, Obama fucking shit up and his approval rating not dipping below 39. The second their was a modicum of good news, his approval rating would jump to 46. It can't even be said that this is because Obama has a loyal base, because statistical variation is an inevitability. I didn't go to college so that I could just chuck what I learned. I know rigging when I see it.You do know this isn't a measure of your personal approval of a president, right?

[Spurtacular]

You do know this isn't a measure of your personal approval of a president, right?

You know this is a shitty rebuttal, right?

[Pavlov]

You know this is a shitty rebuttal, right?It's a serious question. The polls didn't go the way your emotions wanted, so you concluded they were fake.

[Spurtacular]

It's a serious question. The polls didn't go the way your emotions wanted, so you concluded they were fake.

No, it wasn't. It was shit. You're just arguing something I'm not saying cos you're piling on shit.

[Pavlov]

No, it wasn't. It was shit.See, you're still all emotional about it. Once you accept that not everyone thinks like you and you are not always right, you can really function in a society. Otherwise you're Trump without the money.

[Spurtacular]

See, you're still all emotional about it. Once you accept that not everyone thinks like you and you are not always right, you can really function in a society. Otherwise you're Trump without the money.

I'm not emotional, whatsoever. If you're argue dumb shit that I wasn't arguing, then it's not something I'll devote energy to, chump.

[Pavlov]

I'm not emotional, whatsoever. If you're argue dumb shit that I wasn't arguing, then it's not something I'll devote energy to, chump.There's no other way to explain your argument. Outliers and biases aside, the basic trends in well constructed polls are proved and repeated by the many disparate polling companies that put the work in. You say they are shit because, well, because you say so. It's a lazy and arrogant argument that is easily dismissed. You haven't devoted any energy to this at all.

[Spurtacular]

There's no other way to explain your argument. Outliers and biases aside, the basic trends in well constructed polls are proved and repeated by the many disparate polling companies that put the work in. You say they are shit because, well, because you say so. It's a lazy and arrogant argument that is easily dismissed. You haven't devoted any energy to this at all.

Am I arguing that polling can't be done well? No. You suck at debating, dude.

[Pavlov]

Am I arguing that polling can't be done well? No. You suck at debating, dude.You are arguing that all the polls are fake.

[Spurtacular]

You are arguing that all the polls are fake.

I'm arguing that they're rigged, not merely that their methodology is faulty. At any rate, you're just boring me at this point, chump.

[Pavlov]

I'm arguing that they're rigged, not merely that their methodology is faulty. At any rate, you're just boring me at this point, chump.Yeah, your evidence that they are rigged is your own incredulity. That doesn't cut it. It's lazy and boring and wrong.

[Spurtacular]

Yeah, your evidence that they are rigged is your own incredulity.

I don't need you to believe it. I'm telling you what I have deduced through years of observation. If you think the world is such an honorable place, then that's your world view.

[Spurtacular]

That doesn't cut it. It's lazy and boring and wrong.

Take a look at the last presidential debates, virtually every place of social interaction had Trump winning in a landslide. The "scientific" polls were telling a completely different story. The media complex has too many trillions of dollars flowing to be worried about sticking to the facts and not selling narratives. Frankly, I find your denial of reality, "lazy and boring and wrong."

[Pavlov]

I don't need you to believe it. I'm telling you what I have deduced through years of observation. If you think the world is such an honorable place, then that's your world view.Yes, you keep telling me your incredulity is your only evidence. "Because I say so" is simply not an effective argument.


Take a look at the last presidential debates, virtually every place of social interaction had Trump winning in a landslide. The "scientific" polls were telling a completely different story. The media complex has too many trillions of dollars flowing to be worried about sticking to the facts and not selling narratives. Frankly, I find your denial of reality, "lazy and boring and wrong."Social media isn't remotely scientific and your reliance on it speaks volumes about how lazy your "analysis" is. You looked at a few websites -- probably ones that reflect your pro-Trump views -- and concluded that has to be true.

I can't say you're the only one who thinks that way, but that doesn't make it correct.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Take a look at the last presidential debates, virtually every place of social interaction had Trump winning in a landslide. The "scientific" polls were telling a completely different story. The media complex has too many trillions of dollars flowing to be worried about sticking to the facts and not selling narratives. Frankly, I find your denial of reality, "lazy and boring and wrong."

:lol what are you talking about.

You know rigging when you see it and you are not familiar with social media trolls and bots? You are comfortable using twitter polls and your facebook as indicators of actual US opinion?

Trump was shit on for bad debate performances and went into the toilet. Two weeks before the election Comey stated he was reopening the email investigation and the 3rd quarter employment figures came in and they were bad. Hillary's poll numbers tanked to the point that the first week in November they were at a statistical dead heat.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/

Trump lost the general by 2 points, well within the margin for error and spot on for the aggregate. Silver who champions the polls had been telling anyone who would listen that it was not a slam dunk for Clinton. I can remember talking to MannyIsGod about it that week telling him that the trend in the polls was obvious and a Trump win was well within probabilites.

[Spurtacular]

Yes, you keep telling me your incredulity is your only evidence. "Because I say so" is simply not an effective argument.

Social media isn't remotely scientific and your reliance on it speaks volumes about how lazy your "analysis" is. You looked at a few websites -- probably ones that reflect your pro-Trump views -- and concluded that has to be true.

I can't say you're the only one who thinks that way, but that doesn't make it correct.

I wouldn't say I'm intent on being "effective." I think you've been lazy in your own right to count the system as trustworthy; why would I make this a matter to be "effective?"

I didn't say that social media is scientific; however, when one side/postition/etc consistently gets support and the other doesn't and the media consistently sells the losing side, then one has to figure what their reasons are and how they're manipulating the narrative. Frankly, you don't have to look much further than CNN's tweets and the low level of retweets relative to other factions. Gaslighting is how shit gets done. Time to grow up, dude.

[Spurtacular]

:lol what are you talking about.

You know rigging when you see it and you are not familiar with social media trolls and bots? You are comfortable using twitter polls and your facebook as indicators of actual US opinion?

Trump was shit on for bad debate performances and went into the toilet. Two weeks before the election Comey stated he was reopening the email investigation and the 3rd quarter employment figures came in and they were bad. Hillary's poll numbers tanked to the point that the first week in November they were at a statistical dead heat.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/

Trump lost the general by 2 points, well within the margin for error and spot on for the aggregate. Silver who champions the polls had been telling anyone who would listen that it was not a slam dunk for Clinton. I can remember talking to MannyIsGod (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=76) about it that week telling him that the trend in the polls was obvious and a Trump win was well within probabilites.

Hillary blew chunks in the three debates. She got her ass beat according to every non-corporate/establishment poll as well as many of the establishment polls. And the gaslighting media then gave her "the bump" after the fact IIRC.

[Pavlov]

I wouldn't say I'm intent on being "effective." I think you've been lazy in your own right to count the system as trustworthy; why would I make this a matter to be "effective?"Well, if your goal is to be ineffective, you've succeeded.

tweets

Time to grow up, dude.:lmao

[Spurtacular]

Well, if your goal is to be ineffective, you've succeeded.

:lmao

I had no goal based upon "effectiveness" as far as you and I are concerned. Your argumentation tactics are weak and you're clearly obstinate in your own right. And if we want to speak of "effectiveness," you've accomplished nothing other than to seemingly prove that you blindly accept the system's findings. You beg for "evidence" and then laugh like a little school girl when it is presented. So, let's be real, you're arguing for the sake of arguing. That's what you do, chump. It's no secret. I don't get anything out of it other than making you look like a bitch. Now, that's as "effective" as it gets, chump.

[Pavlov]

I had no goal based upon "effectiveness" as far as you and I are concerned. Your argumentation tactics are weak and you're clearly obstinate in your own right. And if we want to speak of "effectiveness," you've accomplished nothing other than to seemingly prove that you blindly accept the system's findings. You beg for "evidence" and then laugh like a little school girl when it is presented. So, let's be real, you're arguing for the sake of arguing. That's what you do, chump. It's no secret. I don't get anything out of it other than making you look like a bitch. Now, that's as "effective" as it gets, chump.I laugh at your "evidence" because your "evidence" is laughable.

I saw some retweets, therefore all polls are rigged.

Where did you go to school that made you think this is the way to make a winning point? The reason I keep going is because I find this display of arrogant faith in your own ignorance fascinating. I do the same with truthers and birthers.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Hillary blew chunks in the three debates. She got her ass beat according to every non-corporate/establishment poll as well as many of the establishment polls. And the gaslighting media then gave her "the bump" after the fact IIRC.

You don't recall correctly. Online nonscientific polls? Sure? Scientific polls? Nope.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-won-the-debate-which-means-shes-likely-to-gain-in-the-polls/

And you need to learn what gaslighting means.

[Spurtacular]

You don't recall correctly. Online nonscientific polls? Sure? Scientific polls? Nope.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-won-the-debate-which-means-shes-likely-to-gain-in-the-polls/

And you need to learn what gaslighting means.

Go ahead and tell me what gaslighting mean, and then I'll tell you you're an idiot.

And 538 :lmao


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrqlkDilyhA

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Go ahead and tell me what gaslighting mean, and then I'll tell you you're an idiot.

And 538 :lmao


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrqlkDilyhA

Gaslighting means to try and convince someone that they are insane to take advantage of them. It's based on a movie by that name. Nobody is doing that, dim.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslight_(1944_film)

Finding Silver's take from September is cute but here is his article from Nov 5:


Hillary Clinton is ahead in most national polls, as you can find every number from a 1-percentage-point Clinton lead to a 6-point lead in recent national surveys. There are also a couple of polls that still show a tied race or — in one case — Trump ahead. Overall, the range of national polls has narrowed a bit, although it remains wider than what we saw over the past few campaigns, with Clinton ahead by about 3 points on average.

One could argue about whether Clinton’s still ahead in the Electoral College, however. New Hampshire, Florida, North Carolina, Nevada and the 2nd Congressional District of Maine are all extremely competitive in recent polls. (Our forecast still has Clinton ahead in New Hampshire — by about 2 points — but there’s plenty of polling to support the notion of a small Trump lead there instead.) That means Clinton has 268 electoral votes in states where she’s clearly ahead in the polls — two short of the 270 she needs.

Thus, while Clinton’s a 76 percent favorite to win the popular vote according to our polls-only forecast, her odds are more tenuous — 64 percent — to win the Electoral College. (Her chances in the polls-plus forecast are identical.) It would not necessarily require a major polling error for Trump to be elected, though he would have to do so with an extremely narrow majority in the Electoral College.

.........................

6. Does one candidate appear to be doing better in the Electoral College than in the popular vote?
Yes, Trump. Our model has thought so all year, and it’s because Clinton’s gains relative to Obama are concentrated among demographic groups — Hispanics, college-educated whites, Mormons — that are under-represented in swing states relative to their overall share of the population. Now that has become more apparent in the polling, and roughly a third of Trump’s 35 percent chance of victory reflects cases where he just barely gets over the hump in the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote.

Could the reverse happen instead — Clinton winning the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote? Our model considers it to be a remote possibility — an 0.5 percent chance — but it doesn’t account for the prospect that Clinton’s ground game or her late advertising blitz could improve her margins in swing states relative to the country overall. So a split either way is plausible, but it’s a lot more likely to be in Trump’s favor.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-the-campaign-is-almost-over-and-heres-where-we-stand/

You're an ignorant fool who depends on poorly edited and ambiguous youtubes. Clinton won the national by 2 points. Trump won the electoral college right in line with what Silver was saying on 11/5. Deal with it.

[Spurtacular]

I laugh at your "evidence" because your "evidence" is laughable.

I saw some retweets, therefore all polls are rigged.

Where did you go to school that made you think this is the way to make a winning point? The reason I keep going is because I find this display of arrogant faith in your own ignorance fascinating. .

You clearly misread what I said about retweets. You're not even in the ballpark on that. Actually, you've done that a few times now.

And the reason you keep going is because this is you're drug. You couldn't walk away, chump.

[Spurtacular]

I do the same with truthers and birthers.

You a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat?

[Spurtacular]

Gaslighting means to try and convince someone that they are insane to take advantage of them. It's based on a movie by that name. Nobody is doing that, dim.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslight_(1944_film)

Finding Silver's take from September is cute but here is his article from Nov 5:



https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-the-campaign-is-almost-over-and-heres-where-we-stand/

You're an ignorant fool who depends on poorly edited and ambiguous youtubes. Clinton won the national by 2 points. Trump won the electoral college right in line with what Silver was saying on 11/5. Deal with it.

I'll grant you that that was the origin of gaslighting and even a listed definition. When (non-clinical) people use the term gaslighting, they aren't referring to mental health visa vie sanity vs. insanity.

Nice article. Silver admits what everyone knows; there was a "major polling error." Sorry though; a "major polling error" is just too mightily convenient. The reality is that polls were being rigged; and shit went down on election night. This is nothing new. The pollsters once had Dukakis up by 17 points; that butt wipe was never ahead, though. He was amateur hour.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'll grant you that that was the origin of gaslighting and even a listed definition. When (non-clinical) people use the term gaslighting, they aren't referring to mental health visa vie sanity vs. insanity.

Nice article. Silver admits what everyone knows; there was a "major polling error." Sorry though; a "major polling error" is just too mightily convenient. The reality is that polls were being rigged; and shit went down on election night. This is nothing new. The pollsters once had Dukakis up by 17 points; that butt wipe was never ahead, though. He was amateur hour.

Gaslighting is not a term shrinks use. It's a term from popular culture. You are using it wrong.

You cannot read for shit. He says it wouldn't require a major polling error for Trump to win, dim. There is nowhere in that article where he says there is one.

[Pavlov]

You clearly misread what I said about retweets. You're not even in the ballpark on that. Actually, you've done that a few times now.Nope, it's accurate. You gave anecdotes about social media that made you think all polls are rigged.


You a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat?As long as Republicans actively work to suppress the vote, they won't get mine.

[Pavlov]

I'll grant you that that was the origin of gaslighting and even a listed definition. When (non-clinical) people use the term gaslighting, they aren't referring to mental health visa vie sanity vs. insanity.

Nice article. Silver admits what everyone knows; there was a "major polling error." Sorry though; a "major polling error" is just too mightily convenient. The reality is that polls were being rigged; and shit went down on election night. This is nothing new. The pollsters once had Dukakis up by 17 points; that butt wipe was never ahead, though. He was amateur hour.I thought Dukakis bad so polls rigged!

[Spurtacular]

Gaslighting is not a term shrinks use. It's a term from popular culture. You are using it wrong.

You cannot read for shit. He says it wouldn't require a major polling error for Trump to win, dim. There is nowhere in that article where he says there is one.

Gaslighting as a modern colloquial term is not typically a matter of sanity vs. insanity.

And you're a moron:

"It would not necessarily require a major polling error for Trump to be elected, though he would have to do so with an extremely narrow majority in the Electoral College."

Trump did not win my a narrow electoral margin; thus "a major polling error," occurred according to Nate Silver.

It's always the fucking idiots going around saying "you cannot read" right before shit gets flung back in their face. You're no exception, shit face.

[Spurtacular]

As long as Republicans actively work to suppress the vote, they won't get mine.

So, you're very much a hardcore Democrat is what you're having a problem fully admitting to.

[Pavlov]

So, you're very much a hardcore Democrat is what you're having a problem fully admitting to.What part of "As long as Republicans actively work to suppress the vote, they won't get mine" do you not understand. If they abandon that I would consider voting for some of them -- but I've got principles that transcend party worship.

[Spurtacular]

What part of "As long as Republicans actively work to suppress the vote, they won't get mine" do you not understand. If they abandon that I would consider voting for some of them -- but I've got principles that transcend party worship.

Oh, you're worshiping a party. Dems cheat way more hardcore than Repubs do (Yet you're not calling them out). The last time the Repubs cheated better is arguably 2004; and at the end of the day W was a necon Democrat anyhow.

[Pavlov]

Oh, you're worshiping a party.I told you exactly what it would take for me to consider voting Republican and you're having trouble handling it.


Dems cheat way more hardcore than Repubs do (Yet you're not calling them out). The last time the Repubs cheated better is arguably 2004; and at the end of the day W was a necon Democrat anyhow.Show me all the "hardcore" Democrat cheating. Not personal anecdotes. I accept all the findings of W's justice department when it investigated vote fraud for three years. Tell me what you remember about that.

[Spurtacular]

I told you exactly what it would take for me to consider voting Republican and you're having trouble handling it.

Show me all the "hardcore" Democrat cheating. Not personal anecdotes. I accept all the findings of W's justice department when it investigated vote fraud for three years. Tell me what you remember about that.

If by trouble handling it, you mean calling you out on your bull shit, then yea, I'm "having trouble handling it."

I'm not surprised that you want to accept the government whitewash. Par for the course.

[Pavlov]

If by trouble handling it, you mean calling you out on your bull shit, then yea, I'm "having trouble handling it."Get your party to stop the suppression and tell me when it happens.


I'm not surprised that you want to accept the government whitewash. Par for the course.Give me all your evidence of massive vote fraud. Don't be shy.

[Spurtacular]

Give me all your evidence of massive vote fraud. Don't be shy.

"Give me your evidence of massive voter fraud. Don't be shy."

:lmao Gimp. You're the one claiming you're too gimpy to vote for a party cos they allegedly cheat too much (and apparently Dems don't by that logic). I'd say you're the one who should be making the case.

[Quadzilla99]

Silver came out looking really good from this election tbh

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Gaslighting as a modern colloquial term is not typically a matter of sanity vs. insanity.

And you're a moron:

"It would not necessarily require a major polling error for Trump to be elected, though he would have to do so with an extremely narrow majority in the Electoral College."

Trump did not win my a narrow electoral margin; thus "a major polling error," occurred according to Nate Silver.

It's always the fucking idiots going around saying "you cannot read" right before shit gets flung back in their face. You're no exception, shit face.

I see a lot of alt right types using it wrong but that does not make it valid. Every dictionary I have seen has the insane manipulation as the first definition. You should look up typical too.

He won the battleground states by a couple of points on average ie narrow victories. You also suck at logic.

[Pavlov]

"Give me your evidence of massive voter fraud. Don't be shy."

:lmao Gimp. You're the one claiming you're too gimpy to vote for a party cos they allegedly cheat too much (and apparently Dems don't by that logic). I'd say you're the one who should be making the case.I can give you evidence of vote suppression if you ask -- the elimination of polling stations in selected ares and restriction of early voting are two. I don't think you can provide any examples of massive vote fraud which is why you are stalling.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

"Give me your evidence of massive voter fraud. Don't be shy."

:lmao Gimp. You're the one claiming you're too gimpy to vote for a party cos they allegedly cheat too much (and apparently Dems don't by that logic). I'd say you're the one who should be making the case.

So no evidence. Thanks for playing.

[Spurtacular]

I see a lot of alt right types using it wrong but that does not make it valid. Every dictionary I have seen has the insane manipulation as the first definition. You should look up typical too.

He won the battleground states by a couple of points on average ie narrow victories. You also suck at logic.

The reality is that gaslighting is the institutional presentation of false information to create the perception that something is true. Do you have a better word for it?

[Spurtacular]

I can give you evidence of vote suppression if you ask -- the elimination of polling stations in selected ares and restriction of early voting are two. I don't think you can provide any examples of massive vote fraud which is why you are stalling.

That's not fraud. That's just measures that you don't like be cause they are counter to your party's interest. I think the reality is that these aren't big enough issues to not vote for Republicans across the board; they're just dumb excuses that you're trying to sell because you don't want to admit that you're a Democrat. Maybe, you have some shame after all for wanting to avoid that.

[Pavlov]

The reality is that gaslighting is the institutional presentation of false information to create the perception that something is true. Do you have a better word for it?"the Trump administration"

And seriously, that is in no way the definition of gaslighting. You just need to give that up and never speak of it again.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The reality is that gaslighting is the institutional presentation of false information to create the perception that something is true. Do you have a better word for it?

misinform, falsify, deceive, doublespeak, mislead, duplicitous, etc.

All you are doing is revealing you use alt-right sources.

[Pavlov]

That's not fraud.I didn't say it was fraud. I said it was suppression.

Why can't you understand even the most basic concepts presented in simple sentences?

And where is your evidence of massive vote fraud?

[Spurtacular]

"the Trump administration"

And seriously, that is in no way the definition of gaslighting. You just need to give that up and never speak of it again.

Seriously, give me a better word for it. If you don't have one, then you're beef is weak.

[Pavlov]

Seriously, give me a better word for it. If you don't have one, then you're beef is weak.You just used words that were better than gaslighting, genius.

Where's that evidence of massive vote fraud?

[Spurtacular]

I didn't say it was fraud. I said it was suppression.

Why can't you understand even the most basic concepts presented in simple sentences?

And where is your evidence of massive vote fraud?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4p4mXCn470s


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQNjXkSeawM

[Pavlov]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4p4mXCn470s


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQNjXkSeawM:lmao

You call this evidence?

Gregg Phillips.

[Pavlov]

Even Phillips himself is now backing off the original 3 million number that sparked the president’s demand for an investigation
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/gregg-phillips-trump-voter-fraud/515046/

:lmao

[Spurtacular]

:lmao

You call this evidence?

Gregg Phillips.

That hackers made easy work of the voting machines is not evidence? Well, if you want to classify it is "anecdotal," then okay. But I live in the real world where people pull shit when the balance of world power is at stake. You obviously don't. And Democrats don't even make a secret of their efforts to get out the illegal vote:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t01Jyd_hoUQ


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUN6FsQFOkY

[Pavlov]

During Phillips’s decades of work in the area, no conclusive evidence of widespread voter fraud has been found, despite numerous investigations. A 2014 investigation from researchers at Loyola Law School found 31 instances of voter impersonation out of a billion total votes cast in 15 years, and noted that some of those could be technical errors, and not fraud.

Even investigations by Republicans have come up short in proving that voter fraud is a regular occurrence. The Justice Department under President George W. Bush “turned up virtually no evidence of any organized effort to skew federal elections,” according to The New York Times, and found that the few convictions for fraud were often simply the result of people making mistakes on voter forms. A similar investigation in Iowa under Republican officials also found scant evidence.But it's all gaslighting!

:lmao

[Pavlov]

That hackers made easy work of the voting machines is not evidence? Well, if you want to classify it is "anecdotal," then okay. But I live in the real world where people pull shit when the balance of world power is at stake. You obviously don't.You live in a echo chamber of rumors and stupidity.

[Spurtacular]

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/gregg-phillips-trump-voter-fraud/515046/

:lmao

How many anchor babies from the 80's and 90's did Dems get votes for?

And I have no doubt that illegals voted in the hundreds of thousands if not millions, tbh.

[Spurtacular]

You live in a echo chamber of rumors and stupidity.

You live in a safe house, where big brother will make sure everything is okay.

[Pavlov]

How many anchor babies from the 80's and 90's did Dems get votes for?:lol How many votes from American citizens did Dems get?


And I have no doubt that illegals voted in the hundreds of thousands if not millions, tbh.Of course you have no doubts that millions of illegals voted with no evidence whatsoever. If you only believe it hard enough, it must be true.

xlbDHejQFV4

[Pavlov]

You live in a safe house, where big brother will make sure everything is okay.Nah, I live in a rational world where allegations are proved with evidence, not rumors and innuendo.

[Spurminator]

For 3 million illegal immigrants to have voted in the 2016 election, that would mean that almost 30% of illegals voted.

30%, despite the fact that they can't register, and that being caught could result in their deportation.

30% of them said, "you know what, I know more of us were deported under President Obama than any other President before him, but dammit we want Hillary Clinton in that White House and fuck the risk."

That anyone, especially the President of the United States, thinks this is in any way likely or consistent with a realistic view of the world is mind-bogglingly stupid.

[Spurtacular]

:lol How many votes from American citizens did Dems get?

Of course you have no doubts that millions of illegals voted with no evidence whatsoever. If you only believe it hard enough, it must be true.



Where in the Constitution does it say that illegals can go into our country and shit out kids and they're citizens?

But it's a shitload of illegal votes either way. Democrats don't give a fuck about respecting the rights of the citizen. In California, some towns have made it "legal" to have illegals be paid for city council positions. In Maryland, they're trying to make it legal for illegals to vote. That is what you're Democrats do. Don't give me your sanctimony about voter suppression when it's clear that your party is doing everything possible to get votes from illegals.

[Spurtacular]

For 3 million illegal immigrants to have voted in the 2016 election, that would mean that almost 30% of illegals voted.



Yea, because that 11 million figure which hasn't changed for like a decade is the real number of illegals. :lmao

[Thread]

Yea, because that 11 million figure which hasn't changed for like a decade is the real number of illegals. :lmao

That number fluctuates as Media deems necessary.

[Spurminator]

Yea, because that 11 million figure which hasn't changed for like a decade is the real number of illegals. :lmao

It changed from 12 million in 2009.

Unless you have better data. Or is this another one of those things you just "have no doubt about"?

Let's even say there's 30 million illegals. That's still 10% who decided to risk being caught in order to criminally cast a vote. It's still beyond stupid to believe it was even that high.

[Pavlov]

Where in the Constitution does it say that illegals can go into our country and shit out kids and they're citizens?"Natural born citizen" is all over the Constitution. Take it up with the founders.


But it's a shitload of illegal votes either way. Democrats don't give a fuck about respecting the rights of the citizen. In California, some towns have made it "legal" to have illegals be paid for city council positions. In Maryland, they're trying to make it legal for illegals to vote. That is what you're Democrats do. Don't give me your sanctimony about voter suppression when it's clear that your party is doing everything possible to get votes from illegals.Hey, moar anecdotes!

[Spurtacular]

It changed from 12 million in 2009.

Unless you have better data. Or is this another one of those things you just "have no doubt about"?

Let's even say there's 30 million illegals. That's still 10% who decided to risk being caught in order to criminally cast a vote. It's still beyond stupid to believe it was even that high.

What risk? There's more risk they'll be bitten by a snake. Go ahead and show me the cases in California in which illegals were prosecuted for voting.

[Spurtacular]

"Natural born citizen" is all over the Constitution. Take it up with the founders.


Natural born when the parents are citizens of another country? <Shakes head>

[Pavlov]

Natural born when the parents are citizens of another country? <Shakes head>Yep, that's the law. Change it if you believe you can.

[Spurtacular]

Yep, that's the law. Change it if you believe you can.

It's allegedly the law.

[Spurminator]

What risk? There's more risk they'll be bitten by a snake. Go ahead and show me the cases in California in which illegals were prosecuted for voting.

:lol You want me, a person who believes there is almost zero incidence of alien voting in America, to find a court case of an alien voting.

The burden of proof is on you.

[Pavlov]

It's allegedly the law.No. It's the law. You can't just deny states of being. The natural born citizen law is the law.

[Pavlov]

:lol You want me, a person who believes there is almost zero incidence of alien voting in America, to find a court case of an alien voting.

The burden of proof is on you.:lol Go ahead! Prove my case for me! I dare you!

[Spurtacular]

:lol You want me, a person who believes there is almost zero incidence of alien voting in America, to find a court case of an alien voting.

The burden of proof is on you.

No, it's not. You made the claim that there is great risk to an illegal voting. You can't even show me one case in California of an illegal being prosecuted for voting. Thus, your claim is obviously bull shit.

[Spurminator]

No, it's not. You made the claim that there is great risk to an illegal voting. You can't even show me one case in California of an illegal being prosecuted for voting. Thus, your claim is obviously bull shit.

Me: There is great risk when it comes to removing your own appendix.

You: Bullshit, show me someone who has died from removing his own appendix.

[Spurtacular]

No. It's the law. You can't just deny states of being. The natural born citizen law is the law.

It's a gray area at a minimum.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/25/donald-trump/trump-many-scholars-say-anchor-babies-arent-covere/

[Pavlov]

No, it's not. You made the claim that there is great risk to an illegal voting. You can't even show me one case in California of an illegal being prosecuted for voting. Thus, your claim is obviously bull shit.:lol seriously, what university taught you how to make an argument?

[Spurtacular]

Me: There is great risk when it comes to removing your own appendix.

You: Bullshit, show me someone who has died from removing his own appendix.

Give me a fucking break, dude. That's not even close to applicable, unless you just don't believe in math and you think zero illegals vote.

[Pavlov]

It's a gray area at a minimum.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/25/donald-trump/trump-many-scholars-say-anchor-babies-arent-covere/It's the de facto law. Change it if you think you can.

[Spurminator]

Give me a fucking break, dude. That's not even close to applicable, unless you just don't believe in math and you think zero illegals vote.

You think millions vote. That is the goal post we're discussing.

Would you like to change your claim to "more than zero illegals voted" or are you going to stick with millions?

[Pavlov]

Give me a fucking break, dude. That's not even close to applicable, unless you just don't believe in math and you think zero illegals vote.I believe it's so close to zero there would be at best a handful of prosecutions. These are the same people who avoid calling the cops because they think they will be deported. Why would they register with the government in order to commit an illegal act?

[Thread]

I believe it's so close to zero there would be at best a handful of prosecutions. These are the same people who avoid calling the cops because they think they will be deported. Why would they register with the government in order to commit an illegal act?

Like I said from get go:::Trump is only doing this to tamp down & cleanse the vote in '18 & '20. By keeping this pot on low heat he'll accomplish that to an extent. And he doesn't have to spend any of his money on the thing. It's our money being spent.

[Spurtacular]

You think millions vote. That is the goal post we're discussing.

Would you like to change your claim to "more than zero illegals voted" or are you going to stick with millions?

The goal post was that the risk is great for illegals to vote; and in California among other states, that is clearly not the case.

[Spurtacular]

I believe it's so close to zero there would be at best a handful of prosecutions. These are the same people who avoid calling the cops because they think they will be deported. Why would they register with the government in order to commit an illegal act?

Oh, give me a break. I swear you buy the media narratives about as well as any other useful idiot. Illegal aliens have been holding protests in mass numbers and been quite brazen.

[Pavlov]

The goal post was that the risk is great for illegals to vote; and in California among other states, that is clearly not the case.I can't find any examples of illegal aliens voting, therefore millions of illegal aliens must have voted!

[Spurminator]

The goal post was that the risk is great for illegals to vote; and in California among other states, that is clearly not the case.

Apparently in all 50 states it's not the case seeing as there is a total dearth of legal cases on the subject

[Spurtacular]

I can't find any examples of illegal aliens voting, therefore millions of illegal aliens must have voted!

Bro, you'll find literally millions of illegals on the rolls. Oh, but that's all just a big coincidence. :lmao

Dumbass.

[Pavlov]

Bro, you'll find literally millions of illegals on the rolls.OK, show them to me, bro.

[Spurtacular]

OK, show them to me, bro.

Show me it's not.

[Pavlov]

Show me it's not.:lmao demanding I prove a negative.

Seriously, where did you go to college?

[Spurtacular]

:lmao demanding I prove a negative.

Seriously, where did you go to college?

Well, seeing as how liberals allegedly believe in govt. in the sunshine, this shouldn't be a challenge for you. As it is, you know the voter rolls are filled with illegal aliens and you most certainly won't be proving it otherwise.

[Pavlov]

Well, seeing as how liberals allegedly believe in govt. in the sunshine, this shouldn't be a challenge for you. As it is, you know the voter rolls are filled with illegal aliens and you most certainly won't be proving it otherwise.:lmao demanding I prove a negative again.

Seriously, where did you go to college? I do want to know.

[Spurtacular]

:lmao demanding I prove a negative again.

Seriously, where did you go to college? I do want to know.

I want to know why you only have aspersions.... Actually, I don't because I know that answer. But it seems that you love your "evidence" until you don't have what suits you in hand.

[Pavlov]

I want to know why you only have aspersions.... Actually, I don't because I know that answer. But it seems that you love your "evidence" until you don't have what suits you in hand.You haven't provided any evidence to back your claim.

You made the claim. Back it up.

[Spurtacular]

You haven't provided any evidence to back your claim.

You made the claim. Back it up.

Come on, dude. Show me the evidence that those voter rolls aren't filled with illegal voters. Show me the audits that any self respecting country would have.

[Pavlov]

Come on, dude. Show me the evidence that those voter rolls aren't filled with illegal voters. Show me the audits that any self respecting country would have.:lmao Demanding I prove a negative a third time!

Going for the record.

Where did you go to college?

[Spurtacular]

:lmao Demanding I prove a negative a third time!

Going for the record.

Where did you go to college?

You can't show me; because you know that your Democrats obstructed the efforts to get them done. You rail against voter suppression (hang your hat on it, even) and then advocate through omission for illegal voter activation. Good job, lefty cuck.

[Pavlov]

You can't show me; because you know that your Democrats obstructed the efforts to get them done. You rail against voter suppression (hang your hat on it, even) and then advocate through omission for illegal voter activation. Good job, lefty cuck.You made the claim.

You failed to back it up.

You demanded I prove a negative.

Three times.

Where did you go to college?

[Spurtacular]

You made the claim.

You failed to back it up.

You demanded I prove a negative.

Three times.

Where did you go to college?

You love evidence 'til you don't have any.

[Pavlov]

You love evidence 'til you don't have any.You're the one who has no evidence.

I would love to see your evidence.

Evidence to back up your claim.

You have no evidence.

You cannot back up your claim.

Because you have no evidence.

Where did you go to college?

[Spurtacular]

You're the one who has no evidence.

I would love to see your evidence.

Evidence to back up your claim.

You have no evidence.

You cannot back up your claim.

Because you have no evidence.

Where did you go to college?

Come on, lefty cuck. Show me the evidence that illegals weren't filling the voter rolls. Any worthwhile system would be able to provide such elemental assurance. Are you going to not vote for Democrats on principle now? Nah; then, you wouldn't be a lefty cuck.

[Pavlov]

Come on, lefty cuck. Show me the evidence that illegals weren't filling the voter rolls. :lmao demands I prove a negative four times!

Where did you go to college?

[Spurtacular]

:lmao demands I prove a negative four times!

Where did you go to college?

Awww. Lefty cuck can't support the legitimacy of the system after his Democrat overlords obstructed efforts to purge the records of illegal voters.

[Pavlov]

Awww. Lefty cuck can't support the legitimacy of the system after his Democrat overlords obstructed efforts to purge the records of illegal voters.You made the claim.

You need to back up your claim with evidence.

Where did you go to college?

[Spurtacular]

You made the claim.

You need to back up your claim with evidence.

Where did you go to college?

The govt. owes citizenry accountability. None has came from the subversive left. Sorry, but you lost the argument, lefty cuck.

[Pavlov]

The govt. owes citizenry accountability. None has came from the subversive left. Sorry, but you lost the argument, lefty cuck.:lmao Declares victory after failing to back up claim.

Where did you go to college?

[Spurtacular]

:lmao Declares victory after failing to back up claim.

Where did you go to college?

It's high school civics, bro. You want to trust the govt. and then give them a pass when they're not accountable. That's an oxymoron; and you lost, lefty cuck. It was an inevitability.

[Pavlov]

It's high school civics, bro. You want to trust the govt. and then give them a pass when they're not accountable. That's an oxymoron; and you lost, lefty cuck. It was an inevitability.You made the claim.

You failed to provide any evidence to back your claim.

Where did you go to college?

[Chucho]

I can't find any examples of Russian collusion, therefore Russia must've colluded with the Trump campaign!

.