If American - which presidential candidate will you vote for? (Nov Edition) If

[DTEJD1997]

What this means is that a good percentage of the women were younger...in their 20's and 30's.  Some of them were fit & trim, well dressed.  A lot of them looked "prosperous".  Some of them looked like "preppies", some were professional looking.

 

Some of them were older...grandmotherly types.

 

Some of them looked bedraggled...but in general it was a "normal" group of people.

 

A lot of times, political activists look like "hippies" and look like they've "been sleeping in a ditch", or they simply look "rough".  Probably not the type of people that board members would want to associate with.  Other times, political activists look like "rent a mob" type people.  There are many, many stories of unions and other political protestor groups going to the local "labor ready" day laborer offices and renting people to demonstrate.  These are "fakes".

 

I very much doubt that was the case in what I witnessed.  I believe that the women & others I saw yesterday were GENUINE Trump supporters and were GENUINELY enthusiastic to be there...

 

I have seen NO Hillary demonstrations like this...

 

Oh well this election is over. Some dude in Detroit saw a rally of women, Gave them a grade on looks and class scale and is convinced Trump's crowd is high energy.

 

While you are over there in Detroit, do you mind visiting the car companies and let us know how do they look energywise ?

 

I'm getting more than a little tired of the tone of discussion on this & other threads.

 

I am reporting on something that I saw....something I've never seen before for any candidate in any election.  Maybe things are different in your corner of the world.

 

It is fine if you disagree....that makes a discussion.  I can do without the snarkiness & sarcasm.

 

I am about ready to leave this board far behind...

 

[rb]

I'm getting more than a little tired of the tone of discussion on this & other threads.

 

I am reporting on something that I saw....something I've never seen before for any candidate in any election.  Maybe things are different in your corner of the world.

 

It is fine if you disagree....that makes a discussion.  I can do without the snarkiness & sarcasm.

 

I am about ready to leave this board far behind...

Chill out dude, at times like these sarcasm and a sense of humor is what gets you through to the other side. Gotta hang in there. Not that much longer to go.

[rb]

Well it seems like this election is gonna go down to the wire and it's gonna split along partisan lines and be decided by GOTV ops. Based on anecdotal evidence that means that Clinton is still likely to win a close election. But it's close to a coin flip.

 

All of this means that the evangelicals voted for Trump. I know I've railed against them and their hypocrisy on this thread in the past. However that wasn't very fair of me. I mean it felt good and they were an easy target. But everyone knew it was gonna break this way with evangelicals cause everyone knows they're full of shit despite all the preaching and self righteousness.

 

However if Trump wins will be because women voted for him. Even if he doesn't, the close result he will get will be due to the fact that loads of women supported him. Not just the "typical trump women" depicted in pictures here. Side note, take it easy DTEJD while his polling methods may not be scientific he does have a point.

 

Now Trump may be as close as you can get to a perfect anti-woman candidate. So roughly half the women said basically, yea I'm cool with that. To put it another way, very few republican women said I'm not with him. So what weight does this assign now to women's gender grievances? My whole life, whether in a social or professional setting I've stood up for women and spoke up when i saw a guy try to pull some sort of crap. But if women aren't willing to stand up for themselves why should i?

 

P.S. I guess this is one of my un-PC posts. Who knows, maybe tomorrow I'll tackle Latinos for Trump (unlikely)  :).

[ccplz]

What this means is that a good percentage of the women were younger...in their 20's and 30's.  Some of them were fit & trim, well dressed.  A lot of them looked "prosperous".  Some of them looked like "preppies", some were professional looking.

 

Some of them were older...grandmotherly types.

 

Some of them looked bedraggled...but in general it was a "normal" group of people.

 

A lot of times, political activists look like "hippies" and look like they've "been sleeping in a ditch", or they simply look "rough".  Probably not the type of people that board members would want to associate with.  Other times, political activists look like "rent a mob" type people.  There are many, many stories of unions and other political protestor groups going to the local "labor ready" day laborer offices and renting people to demonstrate.  These are "fakes".

 

I very much doubt that was the case in what I witnessed.  I believe that the women & others I saw yesterday were GENUINE Trump supporters and were GENUINELY enthusiastic to be there...

 

I have seen NO Hillary demonstrations like this...

 

Oh well this election is over. Some dude in Detroit saw a rally of women, Gave them a grade on looks and class scale and is convinced Trump's crowd is high energy.

 

While you are over there in Detroit, do you mind visiting the car companies and let us know how do they look energywise ?

 

I'm getting more than a little tired of the tone of discussion on this & other threads.

 

I am reporting on something that I saw....something I've never seen before for any candidate in any election.  Maybe things are different in your corner of the world.

 

It is fine if you disagree....that makes a discussion.  I can do without the snarkiness & sarcasm.

 

I am about ready to leave this board far behind...

 

Go ahead.

 

You won't be missed.

[onyx1]

What this means is that a good percentage of the women were younger...in their 20's and 30's.  Some of them were fit & trim, well dressed.  A lot of them looked "prosperous".  Some of them looked like "preppies", some were professional looking.

 

Some of them were older...grandmotherly types.

 

Some of them looked bedraggled...but in general it was a "normal" group of people.

 

A lot of times, political activists look like "hippies" and look like they've "been sleeping in a ditch", or they simply look "rough".  Probably not the type of people that board members would want to associate with.  Other times, political activists look like "rent a mob" type people.  There are many, many stories of unions and other political protestor groups going to the local "labor ready" day laborer offices and renting people to demonstrate.  These are "fakes".

 

I very much doubt that was the case in what I witnessed.  I believe that the women & others I saw yesterday were GENUINE Trump supporters and were GENUINELY enthusiastic to be there...

 

I have seen NO Hillary demonstrations like this...

 

Oh well this election is over. Some dude in Detroit saw a rally of women, Gave them a grade on looks and class scale and is convinced Trump's crowd is high energy.

 

While you are over there in Detroit, do you mind visiting the car companies and let us know how do they look energywise ?

 

I'm getting more than a little tired of the tone of discussion on this & other threads.

 

I am reporting on something that I saw....something I've never seen before for any candidate in any election.  Maybe things are different in your corner of the world.

 

It is fine if you disagree....that makes a discussion.  I can do without the snarkiness & sarcasm.

 

I am about ready to leave this board far behind...

 

Go ahead.

 

You won't be missed.

 

Speak for yourself, Speech Policeman.  I appreciate DTE's anecdotal evidence. 

[DooDiligence]

Go ahead.

 

You won't be missed.

 

Speak for yourself, Speech Policeman.  I appreciate DTE's anecdotal evidence.

 

I too have found DTE's thoughts to be useful for many years!

[petec]

Go ahead.

 

You won't be missed.

 

Speak for yourself, Speech Policeman.  I appreciate DTE's anecdotal evidence.

 

I too have found DTE's thoughts to be useful for many years!

 

+1

[rkbabang]

Go ahead.

 

You won't be missed.

 

Speak for yourself, Speech Policeman.  I appreciate DTE's anecdotal evidence.

 

I too have found DTE's thoughts to be useful for many years!

 

As have I.  Haters gonna hate.  DTEJD1997, don't let a few rude comments get you down on the whole board.  You have to have a bit of a sense of humor about these things some times.  Even if 100 people quietly agree with you and appreciate what you wrote there will be that one person who publicly calls you an idiot.  Believe me, I know this well.  Try not to let it bother you.

 

[DonFanucci]

Go ahead.

 

You won't be missed.

 

Speak for yourself, Speech Policeman.  I appreciate DTE's anecdotal evidence.

 

I too have found DTE's thoughts to be useful for many years!

 

+1

 

+1

 

Why are you guys so rude?

[onyx1]

Go ahead.

 

You won't be missed.

 

Speak for yourself, Speech Policeman.  I appreciate DTE's anecdotal evidence.

 

I too have found DTE's thoughts to be useful for many years!

 

+1

 

+1

 

Why are you guys so rude?

 

 

Chapter One of the left's playbook: "If you can't refute the message, attack the messenger."

[rkbabang]

OK, now back to our regularly scheduled candidate bashing.  These are awesome.  If political ads were honest:

 

http://www.snopes.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/hashtag-draftourdaughters.jpg

 

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cv2qZ_pXEAAU9Sk.jpg

 

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cv0-LaQUMAAaiUv.jpg

 

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cv3bBfmUkAEVBbX.jpg

 

http://thepeoplescube.com/images/DraftOurDaughters_Hillary_War.jpg

 

http://www.trump-conservative.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/hillary-clinton-draft-women-3.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jurgis]

Now Trump may be as close as you can get to a perfect anti-woman candidate. So roughly half the women said basically, yea I'm cool with that. To put it another way, very few republican women said I'm not with him. So what weight does this assign now to women's gender grievances? My whole life, whether in a social or professional setting I've stood up for women and spoke up when i saw a guy try to pull some sort of crap. But if women aren't willing to stand up for themselves why should i?

 

Human beings in general are screwed up in the head. Politics may just be the place where this shows up most.

[onyx1]

Now Trump may be as close as you can get to a perfect anti-woman candidate. So roughly half the women said basically, yea I'm cool with that. To put it another way, very few republican women said I'm not with him. So what weight does this assign now to women's gender grievances? My whole life, whether in a social or professional setting I've stood up for women and spoke up when i saw a guy try to pull some sort of crap. But if women aren't willing to stand up for themselves why should i?

 

Human beings in general are screwed up in the head. Politics may just be the place where this shows up most.

 

 

Spot on.  Humans aren't close to being rational, but they are universally certain it's just the other guy who is irrational.  Once you understand this, you become the One-Eyed King in the land of the blind.

[TorontoRaptorsFan]

Go ahead.

 

You won't be missed.

 

Speak for yourself, Speech Policeman.  I appreciate DTE's anecdotal evidence.

 

I too have found DTE's thoughts to be useful for many years!

 

+1

 

+1

 

Why are you guys so rude?

 

Just CCPLZ, he's COBF resident keyboard warrior.

[Tim Eriksen]

Now Trump may be as close as you can get to a perfect anti-woman candidate. So roughly half the women said basically, yea I'm cool with that. To put it another way, very few republican women said I'm not with him. So what weight does this assign now to women's gender grievances? My whole life, whether in a social or professional setting I've stood up for women and spoke up when i saw a guy try to pull some sort of crap. But if women aren't willing to stand up for themselves why should i?

 

Human beings in general are screwed up in the head. Politics may just be the place where this shows up most.

 

Maybe these women think differently than you.  Maybe they are smarter.  Maybe they compared both candidates and decided that a corrupt, serial liar, who supports the killing of unborn children at any time for any reason is worse in their mind than Trump.  It doesn't mean they love Trump, or even like Trump.  Nor does it mean they don't care about sexual harassment or the disabled.  It means they believe HRC is a worse choice in their minds.  You can rip on them or respect their choice even if you don't agree.

[rkbabang]

Now Trump may be as close as you can get to a perfect anti-woman candidate. So roughly half the women said basically, yea I'm cool with that. To put it another way, very few republican women said I'm not with him. So what weight does this assign now to women's gender grievances? My whole life, whether in a social or professional setting I've stood up for women and spoke up when i saw a guy try to pull some sort of crap. But if women aren't willing to stand up for themselves why should i?

 

Human beings in general are screwed up in the head. Politics may just be the place where this shows up most.

 

It is simply a system setup with improper incentives leading to crazy outcomes.  You are dealing with a system where the people who make the mistakes are not the ones who suffer the consequences.  And these people are chosen by a method where your vote counts so little that it doesn't make much sense to spend real time and effort to educate yourself.  You have a better chance of winning powerball then you do casting the deciding vote in this election. If you spent a lot of time on how you are going to vote, was that really an intelligent use of your limited time on this planet?  They say the lottery is a tax on those who are bad at math. An election is a way to give those bad at math a false illusion of control.  The perverse incentives are everywhere, at every level, in every step of the process, from the government policing itself to printing its own money, to the lack of oversight, you name it.  You could never run a successful company this way: Start by letting the public vote on your management (everyone gets 1 vote whether they are customers or shareholders or not)...

 

People aren't completely irrational, but they do respond to incentives (both good and bad).

 

 

[valcont]

It is simply a system setup with improper incentives leading to crazy outcomes.  You are dealing with a system where the people who make the mistakes are not the ones who suffer the consequences.  And these people are chosen by a method where your vote counts so little that it doesn't make much sense to spend real time and effort to educate yourself.  You have a better chance of winning powerball then you do casting the deciding vote in this election. If you spent a lot of time on how you are going to vote, was that really an intelligent use of your limited time on this planet?  They say the lottery is a tax on those who are bad at math. An election is a way to give those bad at math a false illusion of control.  The perverse incentives are everywhere, at every level, in every step of the process, from the government policing itself to printing its own money, to the lack of oversight, you name it.  You could never run a successful company this way: Start by letting the public vote on your management (everyone gets 1 vote whether they are customers or shareholders or not)...

 

People aren't completely irrational, but they do respond to incentives (both good and bad).

 

I am becoming a fan of your thought process even though you post some crazy sh**t from time to time. Just the other day, me and the wife were discussing if people should go through a test before voting and weather their test results should determine how much their vote would count. Would that be a fair system? Probably not because it will disenfranchise some segment of population. Would that be better for the country? The closest thing to that system is China( Believe it or not, their  politburo is extremely meritorious) and the jury is out if its working or not.

[rb]

Maybe these women think differently than you.  Maybe they are smarter.  Maybe they compared both candidates and decided that a corrupt, serial liar, who supports the killing of unborn children at any time for any reason is worse in their mind than Trump.  It doesn't mean they love Trump, or even like Trump.  Nor does it mean they don't care about sexual harassment or the disabled.  It means they believe HRC is a worse choice in their minds.  You can rip on them or respect their choice even if you don't agree.

 

Wow! In one paragraph in one post you managed to lecture about respecting women's choices and railed against abortion. That's just a complete new level of bs right there.

 

And no, I don't have to respect people's choices when they are bad choices. It's not like you're ordering something for dinner - well that looks gross but I respect your choice. When it comes to corruption and lies there are actually metrics and facts they can look at. So they either didn't compare, did bad research, or did good research but they still didn't care. None of that is worthy of respect.

 

Now here Cardboard is as partisan and ideological as they come. But even he went like "C'mon man, this guy Trump is too much". Now he and I probably disagree on a lot of things and will probably continue to disagree on a lot of things. But that is worthy of respect.

 

In addition, if you guys are so worried about the number of abortions then why are the anti-abortion people so against contraception and sex education which are the biggest factors in decreasing the number of abortions?

 

 

[onyx1]

Maybe these women think differently than you.  Maybe they are smarter.  Maybe they compared both candidates and decided that a corrupt, serial liar, who supports the killing of unborn children at any time for any reason is worse in their mind than Trump.  It doesn't mean they love Trump, or even like Trump.  Nor does it mean they don't care about sexual harassment or the disabled.  It means they believe HRC is a worse choice in their minds.  You can rip on them or respect their choice even if you don't agree.

 

And no, I don't have to respect people's choices when they are bad choices. When it comes to corruption and lies there are actually metrics and facts they can look at.

 

 

Here's corruption and lies metric:

 

Which candidate is under criminal investigation by the FBI with a highly likely indictment forthcoming?

 

Clinton ...... YES

Trump ....... NO

[Tim Eriksen]

Maybe these women think differently than you.  Maybe they are smarter.  Maybe they compared both candidates and decided that a corrupt, serial liar, who supports the killing of unborn children at any time for any reason is worse in their mind than Trump.  It doesn't mean they love Trump, or even like Trump.  Nor does it mean they don't care about sexual harassment or the disabled.  It means they believe HRC is a worse choice in their minds.  You can rip on them or respect their choice even if you don't agree.

 

Wow! In one paragraph in one post you managed to lecture about respecting women's choices and railed against abortion. That's just a complete new level of bs right there.

 

And no, I don't have to respect people's choices when they are bad choices. It's not like you're ordering something for dinner - well that looks gross but I respect your choice. When it comes to corruption and lies there are actually metrics and facts they can look at. So they either didn't compare, did bad research, or did good research but they still didn't care. None of that is worthy of respect.

 

Now here Cardboard is as partisan and ideological as they come. But even he went like "C'mon man, this guy Trump is too much". Now he and I probably disagree on a lot of things and will probably continue to disagree on a lot of things. But that is worthy of respect.

 

In addition, if you guys are so worried about the number of abortions then why are the anti-abortion people so against contraception and sex education which are the biggest factors in decreasing the number of abortions?

 

So you actually believe that when it comes to lies and corruption that Trump is a worse choice than Hillary.  Are you trolling me?  Seriously, you have to be joking or blind to reality.         

[Tim Eriksen]

Maybe these women think differently than you.  Maybe they are smarter.  Maybe they compared both candidates and decided that a corrupt, serial liar, who supports the killing of unborn children at any time for any reason is worse in their mind than Trump.  It doesn't mean they love Trump, or even like Trump.  Nor does it mean they don't care about sexual harassment or the disabled.  It means they believe HRC is a worse choice in their minds.  You can rip on them or respect their choice even if you don't agree.

 

And no, I don't have to respect people's choices when they are bad choices. When it comes to corruption and lies there are actually metrics and facts they can look at.

 

 

Here's corruption and lies metric:

 

Which candidate is under criminal investigation by the FBI with a highly likely indictment forthcoming?

 

Clinton ...... YES

Trump ....... NO

 

It appears to be multiple investigations - the misuse of classified information (email server) and the Foundation. 

[onyx1]

Maybe these women think differently than you.  Maybe they are smarter.  Maybe they compared both candidates and decided that a corrupt, serial liar, who supports the killing of unborn children at any time for any reason is worse in their mind than Trump.  It doesn't mean they love Trump, or even like Trump.  Nor does it mean they don't care about sexual harassment or the disabled.  It means they believe HRC is a worse choice in their minds.  You can rip on them or respect their choice even if you don't agree.

 

And no, I don't have to respect people's choices when they are bad choices. When it comes to corruption and lies there are actually metrics and facts they can look at.

 

 

Here's corruption and lies metric:

 

Which candidate is under criminal investigation by the FBI with a highly likely indictment forthcoming?

 

Clinton ...... YES

Trump ....... NO

 

It appears to be multiple investigations - the misuse of classified information (email server) and the Foundation.

 

And if your choice of media is CNN, you wouldn't even know it.

[Liberty]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8U0IaMsRf4

[rb]

Well Onyx, the FBI didn't say that they've reopened the investigation into Clinton, nor has anyone talked about an indictment, nor about its probability. But if you have a credible source from DOJ that says that Hillary is highly likely to be indicted please post it so I can stand corrected.

 

Tim, I'm not trolling you. On Hillary's side you have conspiracy theories about the Clinton foundation.

 

On Trump's side he is on video basically talking about how he bribes politicians. He has improperly contributed to political campaigns and has a history of investigations into his business going away shortly after making large political donations to state AGs - exactly how he bragged on video. I don't know if the pending RICO fraud and racketeering case falls under corruption or another category.

[wachtwoord]

I opened this thread afraid to be disappointed again but I'm pleasantly surprised :)