On Fake News
-
Just in case does anybody think the polls are either accurate or immune from manipulation???
WSS
This is why you have to look at polling from multiple sources asking the same or similar questions and take the results in aggregate.
This is why you have to look at polling from multiple sources asking the same or similar questions and take the results in aggregate.
Sounds good until you realize you're taking the aggregate of dozens of tainted polls.
WSS
-
Sounds good until you realize you're taking the aggregate of dozens of tainted polls.
WSS
Well, only if you believe that all polls are tainted by the same poison, which I personally don't.
-
Sounds good until you realize you're taking the aggregate of dozens of tainted polls.
WSS
Well, only if you believe that all polls are tainted by the same poison, which I personally don't.
Well, only if you believe that all polls are tainted by the same poison, which I personally don't.
Possibly. I don't know many that were close to the mark. Now that doesn't mean they were all purposely incorrect but...
Even still the aggregate if many or most were tainted is going to give you a bad number.
WSS
-
Well, only if you believe that all polls are tainted by the same poison, which I personally don't.
Possibly. I don't know many that were close to the mark. Now that doesn't mean they were all purposely incorrect but...
Even still the aggregate if many or most were tainted is going to give you a bad number.
WSS
Possibly. I don't know many that were close to the mark. Now that doesn't mean they were all purposely incorrect but...
Even still the aggregate if many or most were tainted is going to give you a bad number.
WSS
Regarding the election? I think the polls were partially a problem of under-representing rural America, but more importantly, they were misinterpreted. People thought "oh well these polls mean Trump will lose", but lose what? Everyone assumed the presidency, but the polls were saying he'd lose the popular vote, which he did. Not the same thing.
"I said, 'I need someone who's going to want to get on the roller coaster with me knowing that it's not always going to be fun,'" -Paul DePodesta -
Either way, most of the important stuff isn't subject to opinion polls. Net migration, economic growth, carbon emissions, unemployment - things where it really matters, you're not asking joe six pack what he thinks the unemployment rate is.
-
even in Hollywood, admitting you voted for Trump can get you blackballed,
or harrassed, etc.
anywhere else, you can get assaulted...
it's the left that does that, and it is now going mainstream with the left.
Things are really out of hand, it's the left forcing it. and radical Muslims are happy
to help, and soros bankrolls radical groups.
It's a mess. Thank GOD for Trump.
-
-
Possibly. I don't know many that were close to the mark. Now that doesn't mean they were all purposely incorrect but...
Even still the aggregate if many or most were tainted is going to give you a bad number.
WSS
Regarding the election? I think the polls were partially a problem of under-representing rural America, but more importantly, they were misinterpreted. People thought "oh well these polls mean Trump will lose", but lose what? Everyone assumed the presidency, but the polls were saying he'd lose the popular vote, which he did. Not the same thing.
Regarding the election? I think the polls were partially a problem of under-representing rural America, but more importantly, they were misinterpreted. People thought "oh well these polls mean Trump will lose", but lose what? Everyone assumed the presidency, but the polls were saying he'd lose the popular vote, which he did. Not the same thing.
Final vote tallies from the November 8 election show that Democrat Hillary Clinton out-polled President-elect Donald Trump by 2.8 million votes while losing the contest by a wide margin in the all-important Electoral College.
Her upper hand with voters, however, came down to performances in New York and California that were far stronger than necessary.
Clinton won California by 4.2 million and took New York by more than 1.6 million. The combined 5.8 million-vote advantage in just those two states was more than twice the size of her overall edge nationwide.
When the dust settled, she lost the rest of the country by 3 million votes.
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
-
say, this is interesting...
Noncitizens, Voting Violations and U.S. Electionswww.fairus.org/issue/noncitizens-voting-violations-and-u-s-electionsDespite the fact that it is a crime for aliens to vote in federal elections, noncitizens and illegalaliens are counted when apportioning congressional districts.hmmm. no wonder the House tends to be demowhackic?
-
yep:
Illegals assisted in voting in North Carolina Election | Project Veritas ...www.projectveritasaction.com/video/ncillegalvotingFor the past week, Project Veritas Action investigators have been undercover posing as illegalimmigrants who slipped through the cracks due to Obama's ... -
So the pee pee story is or isnt real?
-
Half and half. He actually said:
"Any negative polls are fake news, just like the CNN, ABC, NBC polls in the election. Sorry, people want border security and extreme vetting."
I paraphrased it to highlight the Orwellian parallels.
Got it. Don't think you need to paraphrase for the Orwellian parallels to be obvious, though.
I am really interested to know what 'extreme vetting' means, in terms of policy details. Every time I bring up how rigorous the vetting process already is, people here don't seem interested in discussing the topic...
Got it. Don't think you need to paraphrase for the Orwellian parallels to be obvious, though.
I am really interested to know what 'extreme vetting' means, in terms of policy details. Every time I bring up how rigorous the vetting process already is, people here don't seem interested in discussing the topic...
FBI director admitted 'we cannot properly vet' Middle Easterners ...www.politifact.com/.../fbi-admitted-it-cannot-properly-vet-middle-easter...Aug 12, 2016 - Even the director of the FBI said that we cannot properly vet people ... no way to guarantee America's safety as refugees flood the United States.FBI Admits US Can't Vet All Syrian Refugees For Terror Ties | The ...dailycaller.com/.../fbi-director-admits-us-cant-vet-all-syrian-refugees-for...Oct 21, 2015 - FBI Director Admits US Can't Vet All Syrian Refugees For Terror Ties [VIDEO]. Photo of ... But many Middle Eastern countries have refused to accept refugees, putting the burden on Europe and the West. ... Defiant for America.WikiLeaks: Hillary Clinton Said Jordan 'Can't Possibly Vet All Those ...www.breitbart.com/.../wikileaks-hillary-clinton-jordan-cant-vet-refugees-...Oct 8, 2016 - WikiLeaks: Hillary Clinton Said Jordan 'Can't Possibly Vet All Those Refugees' from ... We also have to be vigilant in screening and vetting refugees from Syria, .... The average America can't see how Clinton could be more ...BREAKING WIKILEAKS: Hillary Admits U.S. Can't Possibly Vet Muslim ...100percentfedup.com/breaking-wikileaks-hillary-admits-u-s-cant-possibl...Oct 10, 2016 - βThey can't possibly vet all those refugeesβ β Hillary Clinton speaking to a ... βrefugeesβ enter America who βcouldβ be jihadis who want to kill us.Trump's executive order on refugees closes America to those who ...www.vox.com/2017/1/27/14370854/trump-refugee-ban-order-muslimJan 27, 2017 - While the refugee program is paused, that vetting cannot go forward. ... Instead of the US blacklisting countries whose residents can't come to ...FBI Director Admits US Will Have No Basis to Vet Some Syrian Refugeeswww.cnsnews.com/.../fbi-director-admits-us-will-have-no-basis-vet-some...Oct 21, 2015 - βYou can't account for what you don't know, and that goes to the .... Yes, German Jews were among the refugees who also came to America.A look at how Syrian refugees were vetted before Trump - CBS Newswww.cbsnews.com βΊ 60 Minutes βΊ NewsmakersJan 29, 2017 - Syrian refugees are barred indefinitely, pending a review of the screening process. ... So, what has the vetting process been? ... Bill Whitaker: You know there are manyAmericans who don't trust government to fix the roads ... She says she can't work, she can'teducate her children, she has no opportunity.FBI admits there's no way to screen all Syrian refugees coming into US ...www.dailymail.co.uk/.../FBI-admits-s-no-way-screen-Syrian-refugees-O...Oct 21, 2015 - FBI Director James Comey testifies on Syrian refugees ... the US would allow 10,000 Syrian refugees into America, although it ... 'A lot of us are concerned about whether you have enough information available to you to do an accurate vetting,' .... 'Can't win them all': Patriots patron Mark Wahlberg consoles ...Ex-DHS head: We can't vet Syrian refugees | TheHillthehill.com/policy/.../264268-ex-dhs-head-we-cant-vet-syrian-refugeesDec 27, 2015 - The former head of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) says the U.S. does not have the capabilities to vet Syrian refugees seeking ...Hillary in 2013: βThey can't possibly vet all those refugeesβ - Jihad Watchhttps://www.jihadwatch.org/.../hillary-in-2013-they-cant-possibly-vet-all-...Oct 10, 2016 - Hillary in 2013: βThey can't possibly vet all those refugeesβ ... welcoming 55 thousand Syrian refugees every year into America and accusing ...Searches related to america can't vett refugees -
Search Results
Why the U.S. Can't Immediately Resettle Syrian Refugees | US Newswww.usnews.com/.../why-the-us-cant-immediately-resettle-syrian-refuge...
Sep 15, 2015 - Security concerns and an intense vetting process leave many hopefuls waiting for months. ... Why the U.S. Can't Immediately Resettle Syrian Refugees ... and President Barack Obama last week pledged that America would ...
Homeland Security Chairman Warns U.S. Doesn't Have Proper Vetting ...townhall.com/.../house-homeland-security-chairman-warns-us-doesnt-ha...
Sep 11, 2015 - Franklin Graham Defends "Deplorable" Americans ... βThe President wants to surge thousands of Syrian refugees into the United States, ... that we do not have the intelligence needed to vet individuals from the conflict zone. -
Steve - from a moderation standpoint at what point do we politely ask cal to refrain from cluttering up the forum by just dumping a seemingly incessant torrent of google searches?
-
Steve - from a moderation standpoint at what point do we politely ask cal to refrain from cluttering up the forum by just dumping a seemingly incessant torrent of google searches?
Steve - from a moderation standpoint at what point do we politely ask cal to refrain from cluttering up the forum by just dumping a seemingly incessant torrent of google searches?
One more reason why I put him on ignore. I only wish the ignore feature on this board was a true ignore where you couldn't even see that the person posted. I don't condone censorship but I would like the ability to have a true ignore feature on the board.
-
Steve - from a moderation standpoint at what point do we politely ask cal to refrain from cluttering up the forum by just dumping a seemingly incessant torrent of google searches?
Steve - from a moderation standpoint at what point do we politely ask cal to refrain from cluttering up the forum by just dumping a seemingly incessant torrent of google searches?
My personal take?
I would just skip reading them. That should be fairly simple and not take a big chunk out of your day.
Frankly, while Cal is a friend of mine (and don't tell him this) but I don't read 99% of them.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
Steve - from a moderation standpoint at what point do we politely ask cal to refrain from cluttering up the forum by just dumping a seemingly incessant torrent of google searches?
My personal take?
I would just skip reading them. That should be fairly simple and not take a big chunk out of your day.
Frankly, while Cal is a friend of mine (and don't tell him this) but I don't read 99% of them.
WSS
My personal take?
I would just skip reading them. That should be fairly simple and not take a big chunk out of your day.
Frankly, while Cal is a friend of mine (and don't tell him this) but I don't read 99% of them.
WSS
I have him on ignore - as it seems a lot of people do now - but it still clogs things up. You get half as many actual replies, and interesting threads as you should per page. Makes fluid conversation difficult.
-
Just in case does anybody think the polls are either accurate or immune from manipulation???
WSS
This is why you have to look at polling from multiple sources asking the same or similar questions and take the results in aggregate.
-
My personal take?
I would just skip reading them. That should be fairly simple and not take a big chunk out of your day.
Frankly, while Cal is a friend of mine (and don't tell him this) but I don't read 99% of them.
WSS
I have him on ignore - as it seems a lot of people do now - but it still clogs things up. You get half as many actual replies, and interesting threads as you should per page. Makes fluid conversation difficult.
-
A. I wish you liberals would. Your pantswetting temper tantrums are annoying.
Ignore me. But when you say really stupid stuff, I'll post them because just the titles
of the links show you liberal muddobbers are throwing false narratives around like
a food fight. You lost the election. You are pissy and you be angry. Have a nice day.,
B. Every time, in the past, liberals lose, they get mad, and try despeately to control the narrative.
Stop the lying and maneuvering. You won't though, because your attack mode
comes off as an unfunny SNL crap.
C. I wish you liberals would stop the changing of subjects out of spite, the name calling, that
even osiris did because I contradicted him, the attacking of any subject you didn't start,
and don't politically like. It doesn't bother me, but it also clutters up the board.
D. I'm good at truces, but it takes two sides. But like in Congress, when they aren't in control,
they demand bi-partisanship. But when they are, they arrogantly go "for the jugular"
and laugh. Case in point - Hairy Reid, that ass, changed the rules and they
went for the nuclear option, after warning the reps in the past to not go there,
it would be bad for the workings of Congress.
Of course, now, they don't want the reps to use the nuclear option...
E. Everybody should be able to come to this board and just be whatever politics they want.
I don't get into it with people that don't start it with me.
F. The left goes after conservative opinion posters with personal insults. That is a glaring
part of their totally emotionally-based way of looking at the world. The first time you
disagree with them, they go apecrap and get angry and start the belligerent garbage
at a person, or the person's family, etc etc.
G. Just like the election, starting antagonisms because you lose the election, lose the "argument"
should tell you that elections have consequences.
H. I remember some terrific posters on this board who were conservative who just left
because of the antagonistic garbage. So, it just amuses me that the people
who won't respect other's views when they don't share them, that they
try to quelch those views, even to try to get someone banned for no good reason.
I. I post my dumb "walls" of lins to show antagonist false narratives for what they are.
The left doesn't get to own the board, which they always want to do. They don't
get to censor. What's kinda funny, is that I never used to do the links posting,
but antagonisct asswipe liberals bitched that they were right, and I couldn't even
provide a link to contest their contentions. So, when the occasion was valid imho,
I started with a whole bunch of links and they STFU. haha.
J. This leftwing attack mode screws up this board. So does angry insults, including
mine, in response. The constant smart ass one liners from the woodpecker
are pretty notorious, screw up the works, but liberals don't care about that.
Anything goes if it fits THEIR narrative.
K. Back in the day, certain libs went nuts over being disagreed with. They got mad.
The libs wanted to have "serious discussions" about mmgw and elections etc...
until they lost an election, or they were wrong, and you civily tried to explain
why you disagreed. And just like osiris, it's immediate hell week, personal
insults, blah blah blah.
L. The left thrives on false narratives. Now, you can't discuss anything bad about obamao
or the left without antagonistic personal crap being thrown everywhere. If you want that,
hey, I'm good at it. But I would rather not have that, it takes two.
But seriously? A kid gets beaten up for wearing a Trump hat, and you bash the hell
out of the story in attack mode? How is anybody supposed to have that genuine
conservation about politics?
M. The libs are fine with a bunch of crap as long as it's THEIR crap. haha. that's funny.
Because they get it back, and it's whining about banning, censoring, links,
"oh, poor us, our statements get lost in the translation because of Cal's links"
How many times has interpersonal antagonism from the left completely
ruined threads?
N. Now go and have a nice day.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better π
Register Login