quadraginta
Becoming Beth
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Trump runs for POTUS/ Trumped Up! Part VII
- Thread starter pgwenthold
- Start date
Tony Stark
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2014
- Messages
- 9,626
He is saying that because McMuffin is a Mormon, if he swings the election to Hillary, presumably by winning Utah (not that him winning Utah could swing the election to Hillary), it will lead to a huge backlash against Mormons.
He's a deplorable piece of ****.
SezMe
post-pre-born
ABC, NBC, CBS
I see Trump back to well over the 20% mark on both the "Polls Only" and "Polls Plus" figures on fiverthirtyeight.com.
Looking at the profile of the graphs, they look similar to the last "Trump Cycle" which may indicate that the next peak in Trump support would come 3 weeks or so after the election and that on the 8th his chances of winning will be a (quite worrying to me) 1 in 3. This is of course as long as there isn't some flaw in the polls which is underestimating support for Trump.
But, you know - chicken little
Looking at the profile of the graphs, they look similar to the last "Trump Cycle" which may indicate that the next peak in Trump support would come 3 weeks or so after the election and that on the 8th his chances of winning will be a (quite worrying to me) 1 in 3. This is of course as long as there isn't some flaw in the polls which is underestimating support for Trump.
But, you know - chicken little
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2001
- Messages
- 35,094
I see Trump back to well over the 20% mark on both the "Polls Only" and "Polls Plus" figures on fiverthirtyeight.com.
Looking at the profile of the graphs, they look similar to the last "Trump Cycle" which may indicate that the next peak in Trump support would come 3 weeks or so after the election and that on the 8th his chances of winning will be a (quite worrying to me) 1 in 3. This is of course as long as there isn't some flaw in the polls which is underestimating support for Trump.
But, you know - chicken little
I like the fact that people are concerned that Trump may be tied in polling. That fact will, hopefully, keep voters from becoming complacent.
Tony Stark
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2014
- Messages
- 9,626
I see Trump back to well over the 20% mark on both the "Polls Only" and "Polls Plus" figures on fiverthirtyeight.com.
Looking at the profile of the graphs, they look similar to the last "Trump Cycle" which may indicate that the next peak in Trump support would come 3 weeks or so after the election and that on the 8th his chances of winning will be a (quite worrying to me) 1 in 3. This is of course as long as there isn't some flaw in the polls which is underestimating support for Trump.
But, you know - chicken little
Or it could just be a flaw in Silver's model. His is still the outlier. All the others are still over 90% for Hillary.
Oh, and Donald is very likely going to under perform his poll numbers.
Last edited:
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
As far as I recall, once the field got down to three (and then none) Donald actually over-performed. Let's keep our spirits up but not get too complacent. The main thing is that Donald's investments of time in NC and PA don't seem to be paying off. I don't think he can recover 6/8 points in both states with eight days to go. The daily polls, both with unknowns that prevent 538 from even counting them have not shown much action since the Comey letter.
The state polls seem to be reacting more to recent campaign thrusts rather than the news cycle. If the CNN poll is accurate and 63% of the population said there's going to be no impact from the FBI investigation, that's a pretty high number and it was before the Big Blue Machine got out there questioning Comey's action.
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
Below is a copy of part of the letter Senator Harry Reid sent to FBI Director James Comey yesterday. (You can click on the image to enlarge it.) In August Reid released a letter he wrote to Comey asking him to investigate disturbing reports about connections between the Russian Government, Donald Trump and the 2016 presidential election. In the letter Reid raised specific allegations. Is that what the letter he sent to Comey Sunday is referring to? That those allegations have some substance?
As of right now James Comey has not responded to the assertion he has "explosive information" about ties between Trump and the Russian government. But I think Comey will have to be very careful how he responds. If he were to deny the FBI found evidence Trump has been collaborating with the Russian government, and it later turns out the FBI does have that information, Comey could be in trouble. If he confirms the FBI has found some Trump-Russia links then Trump could be in trouble, legal trouble.
I think the best Comey can do is either respond to Reid privately or say something along the lines that he won't comment on an ongoing investigation. At least not if it doesn't involve Hillary Clinton.
As of right now James Comey has not responded to the assertion he has "explosive information" about ties between Trump and the Russian government. But I think Comey will have to be very careful how he responds. If he were to deny the FBI found evidence Trump has been collaborating with the Russian government, and it later turns out the FBI does have that information, Comey could be in trouble. If he confirms the FBI has found some Trump-Russia links then Trump could be in trouble, legal trouble.
I think the best Comey can do is either respond to Reid privately or say something along the lines that he won't comment on an ongoing investigation. At least not if it doesn't involve Hillary Clinton.
Attachments
Last edited:
Belz...
Fiend God
That would be pretty sweet irony. If Trump were president, Hillary would be in prison. If he's not, HE'D be in prison!
Of course it'd be spinned as a conspiracy against him.
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
It would be exactly as obvious. There isn't anything subtle about it. No Southerner and few Yankees could look at that display and not instantly understand what the intent was. Not if they are honest with themselves.
The Trump sign is just icing on the cake. The Trump campaign has had a lot to do with encouraging slime mold like the sicko who put that up to crawl out from under their rocks.
One of the most disturbing things to me about the Trump campaign is that he has used legitimizing this kind of overt bigotry to build his support. Even when he loses that lesson isn't going to be forgotten.
The next guy might not be so abysmally unqualified in every way as well as being a human pile of excrement.
Fast Eddie B
Philosopher
For some perverse reason, the image of either of them doing a "perp walk" brings a smile to my face.
Call it schadenfreude, or the personification of "How far the mighty have fallen", or a Shakespearean denouement or whatever.
Does that make me a bad person?
Tony Stark
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2014
- Messages
- 9,626
Hillary won't go to prison even if Donald wins no matter what he says.
TofuFighter
Illuminator
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2012
- Messages
- 3,455
The Trump sign, allegedly, belongs to the neighbour rather than the person who was hanging the effigies.
I can't see that the effigies are clearly meant to be black, and 'hanging a Guy' in effigy is far from being unheard of around Halloween time (Guy Fawkes) and curiously exactly where we get the word common noun 'guy' from.
That said... you don't live in Florida and hang people from a tree without knowing what you're doing.
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2010
- Messages
- 13,590
I'm a transplanted Southerner. You seem to suggest that I am lying to myself.
You wouldn't be the first. The display looks racist as hell to me, and I'm born and raised Canadian.
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2010
- Messages
- 13,590
It certainly suggests racism. It is at best grossly insensitive.
But I don't see that the figures are obviously black, as some say. The clothing doesn't look particularly urban to me, but that might say more about my fashion sense than anything. The faces are obscured by hoods and the hands are fashioned from black gloves (which is what I would do, too, since that's the color of glove I own). The pants are drooping on one, but that is plausibly due to gravity.
Here's why I am reluctant to condemn this as an intentionally racist display. First, the evidence is not conclusive to my eyes, and skepticism suggests I should withhold judgment if possible. Obviously, there is no burning need for me to have an opinion on this; nothing depends on whether I decide he's a racist or not.
Finally, publicly claiming he's a racist if he is not is, I think, a very regrettable act. Refusing to say that he's a racist without better evidence is not so regrettable, even if he is a racist.
So, skepticism strongly suggests that I withhold judgment, and moral considerations concur. Hence, I'll wait and see (or never make up my mind). No harm done by exercising caution.
Quite right, just as I'll exercise caution in judging that anything you say is even remotely skeptical.
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2010
- Messages
- 13,590
Seems as if you're trying to deny that my position is sensible, but you didn't actually say a damned thing about the argument I presented. Rather, you seem to coyly suggest that I'm being disingenuous.
Very nice.
Last edited: