[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

[Johnnypenso]

President Obama on rigged elections:
- If Democrats are in charge it helps prevent rigged elections.
- Oh wait, I'm from Chicago and it's not just Republicans that rig elections.
- Anyone in power wants to tilt things in their direction.
- We need an entirely new voting non-partisan rights division in the Justice Dept. that investigates voter fraud.

Sounds familiar. Where have I heard this before?

 

[Biggles]

I am saying that the polls will be artificially "adjusted" to show the race as closer than it really is, as a belt-and-suspenders effort to scare the public into voting Clinton in, as planned.

You are "saying"? Is that like Trump's "people say"? You can say whatever you like - in this day-&-age there's no shortage of unsubstantiated assertions being made. The question is, do you have any real evidence to back it up?

 

[McLaren]

President Obama on rigged elections:
- If Democrats are in charge it helps prevent rigged elections.
- Oh wait, I'm from Chicago and it's not just Republicans that rig elections.
- Anyone in power wants to tilt things in their direction.
- We need an entirely new voting non-partisan rights division in the Justice Dept. that investigates voter fraud.

Sounds familiar. Where have I heard this before?

The contrast between 2008 & 2016 Obama is astonishing. You'd think he was a Republican if you caught him talking like he did back then, these days.

 

[Duke]

You are "saying"? Is that like Trump's "people say"? You can say whatever you like - in this day-&-age there's no shortage of unsubstantiated assertions being made. The question is, do you have any real evidence to back it up?

For starters, how about CNN (among others) reporting all third-party voters as "undecided"?

How about polls excluding eligible voters under 30?

Also, what I'm asserting is that Hillary's margin of victory in the popular vote will be notably larger than polls suggest. Since that is more than 2 weeks in the future, no, I do not yet have proof.

 

[Tornado]

The contrast between 2008 & 2016 Obama is astonishing. You'd think he was a Republican if you caught him talking like he did back then, these days.

For example, how many nice words did him or Michelle have to say about Hilary then?

 

[huskeR32]

The establishment media has spent months building this narrative that Trump is a sexual predator.

It was especially egregious when they forced him to say that he grabs women by the 🤬 without invitation. It'd be nice if they just stopped picking on him by reporting his own words.

--

Why do the Democrats get to bash Trump as a cry baby for throwing around the word, "rigged", but the Democrats throw it around against Washington & the system?

As @TRGTspecialist already pointed out to you, you're ignoring some very important context.

When Warren talks about Washington being "rigged," she's just playing a remix of the old favorite Washington Caters to the Rich and Connected at the Expense of the Little Guy.

Trump is using that word to suggest an all-out undermining of the election process.

The two situations aren't even remotely the same, and as usual, the "hypocrisy" here disappears if even a modicum of attention is directed at what's actually being said, rather than acting like words only have one possible meaning or use.

 

[ryzno]

Ok. you win @huskeR32, there is no plausible comparison of Gore vs. Trump.

That still doesn't mean they can't rig the electoral vote. As we know our vote doesn't really count. Its the electoral vote that does. And how the electoral vote is determined is a funny system and varies state to state.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For example, here in Georgia the electoral vote goes to which ever candidate gets 50%+1 vote. In other state is distributed by the voting districts winner. So a candidate can win the state but lose the majority of the delegates. The Dem's also pushed for a voting district change again here in Metro Atlanta. The 3rd change in the last 5 elections I've voted in.(local, state, federal) They like to adjust the lines so they get the optimal vote out of the corresponding district.
As I said somewhere in the O&CE section. I used to vote in the rich neighborhood. Since they readjusted the lines I now vote in the poor district. You should have seen their face when I handed them my form asking for a Republican ticket during the primaries. Anyways as state law says, the districts only apply in local/state elections. Still a funny system IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can dismiss Bernie's case if you want, but I still think she rigged it. Bernie won a number of states but didn't get the delegates and super delegates. Go back to my voting district line. And you can say it has nothing to do with the general election. But it has a lot to do with it. The candidate the people wanted was not the one that was standing in front during the last 3 debates. And after his meeting with Obama to step aside, he gets a nice "donation", in the form of a $600k mansion in Maine. If that is not rigging the vote I don't know what is.

So you can say all you want of how it's impossible to rig the general election. You might be right. But she already rigged it. IMO... So take that how you want to.

Now in local GA news. Hillary took a crap in the "Town of Gwinnett". Funny they might want to be a town, but it's a county. It actually happened in Grayson, GA. Which is a town.

http://www.11alive.com/news/local/h...umps-sewage-on-lawrenceville-street/337579904

 

[Johnnypenso]

Speaking of voter fraud, how about the opinions of Democrat Alan Schulkin, Commissioner of the Board of Elections for NY City? Among the many highlights caught on hidden camera:
I think there's a lot of voter fraud.
In certain neighbourhoods they bus people around to vote. They put people in a bus and go from poll site to poll site.
It happens in black, hispanic and Chinese neighbourhoods.
It all happens because you can't ask for I.D.
There is lots of absentee ballot fraud. Thousands.

For the record, this conversation was recorded last Christmas, long before Donald Trump starting making noises about the election being stolen.

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Speaking of voter fraud, how about the opinions of Democrat Alan Schulkin, Commissioner of the Board of Elections for NY City? Among the many highlights caught on hidden camera:
I think there's a lot of voter fraud.
In certain neighbourhoods they bus people around to vote. They put people in a bus and go from poll site to poll site.
It happens in black, hispanic and Chinese neighbourhoods.
It all happens because you can't ask for I.D.
There is lots of absentee ballot fraud. Thousands.

For the record, this conversation was recorded last Christmas, long before Donald Trump starting making noises about the election being stolen.

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

Video doesn't work here.

 

[ryzno]

Speaking of voter fraud, how about the opinions of Democrat Alan Schulkin, Commissioner of the Board of Elections for NY City? Among the many highlights caught on hidden camera:
I think there's a lot of voter fraud.
In certain neighbourhoods they bus people around to vote. They put people in a bus and go from poll site to poll site.
It happens in black, hispanic and Chinese neighbourhoods.
It all happens because you can't ask for I.D.
There is lots of absentee ballot fraud. Thousands.

For the record, this conversation was recorded last Christmas, long before Donald Trump starting making noises about the election being stolen.

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

That's one thing I like about the digital voting down here. They have to scan the new style barcode on the back of your license or ID(good luck getting one for a dead person) something i also heard about), before they give you the chip card for the kiosk.

As @LMSCorvetteGT2 said video is broken.

 

[Biggles]

For starters, how about CNN (among others) reporting all third-party voters as "undecided"?

How about polls excluding eligible voters under 30?

Also, what I'm asserting is that Hillary's margin of victory in the popular vote will be notably larger than polls suggest. Since that is more than 2 weeks in the future, no, I do not yet have proof.

You could certainly make a rational case that over-stating Trump's support would help "scare" more voters out to vote for Clinton ... but you could also make a rational case that over-stating Trump's support would sway more people to go out & vote for Trump - a "momentum" thing.

What has struck me, is that in the last few days, rather than suggesting that the race is close, CNN has been presenting Trump's candidacy as a lost cause.

 

[Dotini]

CNN has been presenting Trump's candidacy as a lost cause.

Ritual chanting of what you wish for is akin to sympathetic magic.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

You could certainly make a rational case that over-stating Trump's support would help "scare" more voters out to vote for Clinton ... but you could also make a rational case that over-stating Trump's support would sway more people to go out & vote for Trump - a "momentum" thing.

What has struck me, is that in the last few days, rather than suggesting that the race is close, CNN has been presenting Trump's candidacy as a lost cause.

Which plays all the more into what others have said recently with the election being decided and just the end phase of it so close to voting night. The final phase is after now selling people on the fear of Trump as President is to make them believe it's over, why bother voting for the guy when Hillary is assured victory.

More importantly though why report as such, Hillary is assured I feel despite them trying so hard to sell it that way.

 

[Sanji Himura]

You could certainly make a rational case that over-stating Trump's support would help "scare" more voters out to vote for Clinton ... but you could also make a rational case that over-stating Trump's support would sway more people to go out & vote for Trump - a "momentum" thing.

What has struck me, is that in the last few days, rather than suggesting that the race is close, CNN has been presenting Trump's candidacy as a lost cause.

They have a term for that, the Bradley Effect. Sadly, that could apply to both candidates. Just take a look at the poll numbers in Utah for a great case in point (Trump is predicted to win the state but is well within the margin of error with his Independent opponent, Evan McMullin. It is a distinct possibility that there is a third-party candidate that might take some electoral votes.

 

[Milouse]

They have a term for that, the Bradley Effect.

According to your own link, the Bradley Effect has nothing to do with what you quoted. The Bradley Effect is about people not answering correctly to polls, not about media (over)statements.

 

[Biggles]

According to your own link, the Bradley Effect has nothing to do with what you quoted. The Bradley Effect is about people not answering correctly to polls, not about media (over)statements.

More precisely, it is people not answering polls truthfully because they feel self-conscious about revealing what might be construed as racial bias.

I would guess that there's a "bandwagon" effect: that a percentage of "undecided" voters will, at the last minute, break towards the candidate who appears to be leading in the polls. This would counteract the effect of driving people to the polls by suggesting the race is very close ... which is why, contrary to Duke, I don't believe the mainstream, "anti-trump" media would pretend the race is closer than it actually is.

 

[Milouse]

Yes. And beyond that, maybe mainstream medias are, in their vast majority, and besides their various flaws, as honest as they can when it comes to polls. Anti-Xxxx, but honest (honesty has to do with intents, not only bias).

 

[Johnnypenso]

Video doesn't work here.

That's one thing I like about the digital voting down here. They have to scan the new style barcode on the back of your license or ID(good luck getting one for a dead person) something i also heard about), before they give you the chip card for the kiosk.

As @LMSCorvetteGT2 said video is broken.

Not sure why it doesn't work, Liveleak is supported I believe. Here it is on YT:

 

[Chrunch Houston]

I am not sure what to think of this. I am not even sure if this is the real Anonymous' youtube channel.

Anyway, I'm still mad at them because of The Great PSN Outage of 2011.

 

[McLaren]

I am not sure what to think of this. I am not even sure if this is the real Anonymous' youtube channel.

Anyway, I'm still mad at them because of The Great PSN Outage of 2011.

Seems to be basing a lot of its data on Obama vs. Romney ending votes; not sure if even I would find that a starting point to prove Trump has a landslide. I did agree with it, though from my experience, that in the social media world, there does appear to be a growing amount of Trump supporters, even on more neutral sites.

 

[DR_SID]

Christmas with the Clintons will now be complete. Emails, Haiti, charity scams: Hilary supporters must be void from the real issues.

 

[Scaff]

Christmas with the Clintons will now be complete. Emails, Haiti, charity scams: Hilary supporters must be void from the real issues.

View attachment 600327

Based on what evidence exactly?

http://www.snopes.com/bill-clinton-illegitimate-son/

 

[Johnnypenso]

http://nypost.com/2016/10/24/clinton-ally-gave-500k-to-wife-of-fbi-agent-on-email-probe/

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a longtime Clinton confidant, helped steer $675,000 to the election campaign of the wife of an FBI official who went on to lead the probe into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email system, according to a report. The political action committee of McAuliffe, the Clinton loyalist, gave $467,500 to the state Senate campaign of the wife of Andrew McCabe, who is now deputy director of the FBI, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The report states Jill McCabe received an additional $207,788 from the Virginia Democratic Party, which is heavily influenced by McAuliffe. The money directed by McAuliffe began flowing two months after the FBI investigation into Clinton began in July 2015. Around that time, the candidate’s husband was promoted from running the Washington field office for the FBI to the No. 3 position at the bureau. Within a year, McCabe was promoted to deputy director, the second-highest position in the bureau.

 

[Sanji Himura]

More precisely, it is people not answering polls truthfully because they feel self-conscious about revealing what might be construed as racial bias.

I would guess that there's a "bandwagon" effect: that a percentage of "undecided" voters will, at the last minute, break towards the candidate who appears to be leading in the polls. This would counteract the effect of driving people to the polls by suggesting the race is very close ... which is why, contrary to Duke, I don't believe the mainstream, "anti-trump" media would pretend the race is closer than it actually is.

You misunderstand how the whole concept would apply to THIS election. I'll explain.

We have an average white male (Trump) and a woman (Clinton) seeking the Presidency. The woman is leading the polls from anywhere in the 4 to 11 point range (well outside any conceivable margin of error.) Compound that with the fact that Clinton has had a lead in the Real Clear Politics average of polls every day since the convention. It is a perfect storm to have the first woman POTUS. However, when you throw in this NBC poll from August (Link), you will find that Hillary has a 60% unfavorable rating. How would that unfavorable rating play into the election, especially when you consider that 67% of independents in that poll don't agree with any of the four statements that they ask?

Full Disclosure
That survey polled 15,179 Registered Voters

4,720 Democratic voters
4,327 Republican voters
6,132 Independent/Third Party voters

 

[Dotini]

http://nypost.com/2016/10/24/clinton-ally-gave-500k-to-wife-of-fbi-agent-on-email-probe/

Corruption within government at the highest levels.

 

[Biggles]

You misunderstand how the whole concept would apply to THIS election. I'll explain.

We have an average white male (Trump) and a woman (Clinton) seeking the Presidency. The woman is leading the polls from anywhere in the 4 to 11 point range (well outside any conceivable margin of error.) Compound that with the fact that Clinton has had a lead in the Real Clear Politics average of polls every day since the convention. It is a perfect storm to have the first woman POTUS. However, when you throw in this NBC poll from August (Link), you will find that Hillary has a 60% unfavorable rating. How would that unfavorable rating play into the election, especially when you consider that 67% of independents in that poll don't agree with any of the four statements that they ask?

Full Disclosure
That survey polled 15,179 Registered Voters

4,720 Democratic voters
4,327 Republican voters
6,132 Independent/Third Party voters

I have no idea what point you are trying to make with this post? Are you commenting on the "Bradley effect"? That the polls are manipulated by the media to encourage people to vote for HRC by underestimating Trump's support, manipulated by the media to encourage people to vote for HRC by overestimating Trump's support? That most people don't like either candidate very much?

 

[TenEightyOne]

We have an average white male (Trump) ...

You lost me at that point. The Wall-Street-dwelling self-proclaimed billionaire and celebrity misogynist is far from what many might consider to be the norm.

 

[Danoff]

You lost me at that point. The Wall-Street-dwelling self-proclaimed billionaire and celebrity misogynist is far from what many might consider to be the norm.

Quote not from Danoff.

 

[Sanji Himura]

I have no idea what point you are trying to make with this post? Are you commenting on the "Bradley effect"? That the polls are manipulated by the media to encourage people to vote for HRC by underestimating Trump's support, manipulated by the media to encourage people to vote for HRC by overestimating Trump's support? That most people don't like either candidate very much?

That's one way of looking at it. Another way is that they are hyping up Hillary's support to such a extent that it would shape up to be a political coup if Trump beats the trend and win.

You lost me at that point. The Wall-Street-dwelling self-proclaimed billionaire and celebrity misogynist is far from what many might consider to be the norm.

Outside the Washington beltway is what I was getting at. Though one could make the argument that he isn't any better because Wall Street does influence Washington.

 

[Biggles]

You lost me at that point. The Wall-Street-dwelling self-proclaimed billionaire and celebrity misogynist is far from what many might consider to be the norm.

Quote not from Danoff.

LOL. He's not really a "Wall-Street dweller" though is he?