Analysis: Trump 'rigged' vote claim may leave lasting damage

[heybruce]

7 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Basically you are taking some proposed policies and parroting a bunch of baseless speculation and far left spin. Thanks for the entertainment though. 

I provided factual comments supported by links to credible sources.  You edit all that out and accuse me of baseless speculation.  Try calling the following baseless speculation:

 

Trump has no elected office experience.

Trump has no experience working with checks and balances.

Trump has no military experience.

Trump's rambling, contradictory comments on nuclear issues show he's clueless about the subject.

Trump's repeated promise to build a wall on the border and make Mexico pay for it is BS.

Trump's promise to torture terrorists and go after their families is against international law.

 

Once you've addressed the above I'll give you some more.

[heybruce]

8 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Don't worry, Hillary supporters are not known for their mental abilities. 

Trump is the one who boasts "I love the uneducated."  The Trump supporters here are the ones editing facts out of other posts before replying to them.

[Ulysses G.]

29 minutes ago, heybruce said:

 

 

Gee Ulysses, who do you think he's referring to?

 

All the posters who quote specifically the remark they are responding to.  No need to to repeat all the extraneous insults, distortions and spin that make up so many posts. 

Edited November 1, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

29 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Try calling the following baseless speculation:

 

These things have already been addressed ad nauseum on numerous threads. This one is about Trump's claims about the rigged system. Please try to stop the baiting and stay somewhat on topic. The constant deflecting and insults are just plain boring.

Edited November 1, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[shadmo63]

 
Don't worry, Hillary supporters are not known for their mental abilities. 

Hah, statistic seem to suggest the opposite.
When it comes to demographics Trumps strongest supporters are 'white males without college degrees' with a +29% lead, only beaten by 'Republicans' +74%, 'White Evangelical Protestants' +54% and 'Conservatives' +48%.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/the-demographic-groups-fueling-the-election/



Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[Ulysses G.]

There are 3 types of lies -- lies, damn lies and STATISTICS.

 

- Disraeli 

Edited November 1, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[Linzz]

16 minutes ago, shadmo63 said:

 

Hah, statistic seem to suggest the opposite.
When it comes to demographics Trumps strongest supporters are 'white males without college degrees' with a +29% lead, only beaten by 'Republicans' +74%, 'White Evangelical Protestants' +54% and 'Conservatives' +48%.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/the-demographic-groups-fueling-the-election/



Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

 

 

Not sure what you're trying to say here. There are plenty of intelligent people without college degrees as there are intelligent evangelical protestants and conservatives. What is not smart is quoting factual statistics to arrive at another conclusion other than the statistics intended.The statistics are about demographics not mental abilities.

[MiKT]

50 minutes ago, shadmo63 said:

 

 

Hah, statistic seem to suggest the opposite.
When it comes to demographics Trumps strongest supporters are 'white males without college degrees' with a +29% lead, only beaten by 'Republicans' +74%, 'White Evangelical Protestants' +54% and 'Conservatives' +48%.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/the-demographic-groups-fueling-the-election/



Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

 

 

I don't want to be seen supporting a Trump supporter, but something is wrong with your analogies here. You can't mix these groups up.

 

You have to say for instance:

By education level, among whites

White men with college degrees

14 percent of registered voters

48  Clinton

40  Trump

 

White men without college degrees

21 percent of registered voters

29  C

58  T

 

White women with college degrees

14 percent of registered voters

48  C

33  T

 

White women without college degrees

24 percent of registered voters

28  C

59  T

 

 

Possibly what you wanted to say is "white males without college degrees are more likely to be Evangelical Protestant, Conservative Republicans".  That seems to fit Trump supporters quite well.

Edited November 1, 2016 by MiKT

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

I provided factual comments supported by links to credible sources.  You edit all that out and accuse me of baseless speculation.  Try calling the following baseless speculation:

 

Trump has no elected office experience.

Trump has no experience working with checks and balances.

Trump has no military experience.

Trump's rambling, contradictory comments on nuclear issues show he's clueless about the subject.

Trump's repeated promise to build a wall on the border and make Mexico pay for it is BS.

Trump's promise to torture terrorists and go after their families is against international law.

 

Once you've addressed the above I'll give you some more.

 

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

These things have already been addressed ad nauseum on numerous threads. This one is about Trump's claims about the rigged system. Please try to stop the baiting and stay somewhat on topic. The constant deflecting and insults are just plain boring.

 

Addressed or ignored?  They are indisputable facts.

 

Regarding "on topic", when was the last time you posted something about the rigged vote or the damage the unsupported claim causes?

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

There are 3 types of lies -- lies, damn lies and STATISTICS.

 

- Disraeli 

Gee, how does one distinguish between someone who doesn't trust statistics and someone who denies facts. 

 

I know; a factual person who doesn't trust statistics will give factual reasons why the statistics are flawed.  I don't think you or Trump fit into that category.

[Ulysses G.]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

 

 

Addressed or ignored?  They are indisputable facts.

 

 

I get it that you want to keep diverting the conversation to other issues. You certainly do not have much valid ammunition on the subject that is the topic of the thread. Most people realize that the MSM - among others - are dishonestly rigging the vote for Hillary. Unbiased media? Not a chance.

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

I provided factual comments supported by links to credible sources.  You edit all that out and accuse me of baseless speculation.  Try calling the following baseless speculation:

 

Trump has no elected office experience.

Trump has no experience working with checks and balances.

Trump has no military experience.

Trump's rambling, contradictory comments on nuclear issues show he's clueless about the subject.

Trump's repeated promise to build a wall on the border and make Mexico pay for it is BS.

Trump's promise to torture terrorists and go after their families is against international law.

 

Once you've addressed the above I'll give you some more.

 

9 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

I get it that you want to keep diverting the conversation to other issues. You certainly do not have much valid ammunition on the subject that is the topic of the thread. Most people realize that the MSM - among others - are dishonestly rigging the vote for Hillary. Unbiased media? Not a chance.

 

I take it that you concede they are indisputable facts that clearly disqualify Trump as President.  Now please give specific examples, with evidence, of the election being dishonestly rigged.  Please, no fake news s

 

[Ulysses G.]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

 

 

I take it that you concede they are indisputable facts that clearly disqualify Trump as President

 

You are incorrect as usual. Please quit the off topic baiting.

[Jingthing]

For those that think trump and HILL are equally bad, consider this:

 

Quote

 

Making the Choice

 

How should voters weigh the sins of these two uniquely corrupt candidates?

 

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/10/clinton_vs_trump_whose_crimes_are_worse.html

[Ulysses G.]

Media bias is rampant and that "rigs" the election:

 

Media justify anti-Trump bias, claim he's too 'dangerous' for normal rules

 

The media’s legions of Trump-bashers are finally acknowledging the obvious.

And trying their best to justify it.

But there’s one problem: Tilting against one candidate in a presidential election can’t be justified.

This is not a defense of Donald Trump, who has been at war with much of the press since he got in the race. Too many people think if you criticize the way the billionaire is being covered, you are somehow backing Trump. 

And it’s not about the commentators, on the right as well as the left, who are savaging Trump, since they are paid for their opinions. 

This is about the mainstream media’s reporters, editors and producers, whose credo is supposed to be fairness.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/09/media-justify-anti-trump-bias-claim-hes-too-dangerous-for-normal-rules.html

 

 

[Jingthing]

trump is an existential threat to American democracy not to mention considering his bizarre musings on nuclear weapons. 

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, heybruce said:

I provided factual comments supported by links to credible sources.  You edit all that out and accuse me of baseless speculation.  Try calling the following baseless speculation:

 

Trump has no elected office experience.

Trump has no experience working with checks and balances.

Trump has no military experience.

Trump's rambling, contradictory comments on nuclear issues show he's clueless about the subject.

Trump's repeated promise to build a wall on the border and make Mexico pay for it is BS.

Trump's promise to torture terrorists and go after their families is against international law.

 

Once you've addressed the above I'll give you some more.

 

45 minutes ago, heybruce said:

 

 

I take it that you concede they are indisputable facts that clearly disqualify Trump as President.  Now please give specific examples, with evidence, of the election being dishonestly rigged.  Please, no fake news s

 

 

43 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

You are incorrect as usual. Please quit the off topic baiting.

 

Please identify which of my statements about Trump are in dispute.    Also, please come up with some on-topic facts.

[MJP]

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Funny. Better educated more likely to vote for Hillary.

 

I'm well educated and I certainly wouldn't vote for Hillary.

[heybruce]

38 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

Media bias is rampant and that "rigs" the election:

 

Media justify anti-Trump bias, claim he's too 'dangerous' for normal rules

 

The media’s legions of Trump-bashers are finally acknowledging the obvious.

And trying their best to justify it.

But there’s one problem: Tilting against one candidate in a presidential election can’t be justified.

This is not a defense of Donald Trump, who has been at war with much of the press since he got in the race. Too many people think if you criticize the way the billionaire is being covered, you are somehow backing Trump. 

And it’s not about the commentators, on the right as well as the left, who are savaging Trump, since they are paid for their opinions. 

This is about the mainstream media’s reporters, editors and producers, whose credo is supposed to be fairness.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/09/media-justify-anti-trump-bias-claim-hes-too-dangerous-for-normal-rules.html

 

 

 

I like this part of your link:

 

" But since the conventions, and fueled by his own missteps, Trump has been hit by a tsunami of negative coverage, all but swamping the reporting on Hillary Clinton. "

 

So the media is biased for reporting Trump's missteps.  Howard Kurtz doesn't identify any errors in reporting on Trump or omissions in reporting on HRC, he just doesn't like the fact that Trump gives the media lots of negatives to report, and the media reports them.  That doesn't strike me as bias, that strikes me as the press doing its job.

 

The media's current pre-occupation with e-mails sent between a HRC aid and her estranged husband, with no evidence that these e-mails have anything to do with HRC, is bias.  The media's neglect of the fact that Trump has not released tax returns and hasn't agreed to put his holdings in a blind trust if elected is beyond bias, the media is neglecting its obligation to keep the public informed on important issues.

 

Perhaps you should use news sources other than Fox.

[heybruce]

59 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

For those that think trump and HILL are equally bad, consider this:

 

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/10/clinton_vs_trump_whose_crimes_are_worse.html

Excellent link.  I only made it through the first twenty or thirty, I'll read the rest when I have much more time.

[lannarebirth]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

For those that think trump and HILL are equally bad, consider this:

 

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/10/clinton_vs_trump_whose_crimes_are_worse.html

 

They seem to have left out the hundreds of thousands of people that have died needlessly, most of them civilians, in the wars Hillary Clinton has supported and fostered.

[lannarebirth]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

trump is an existential threat to American democracy not to mention considering his bizarre musings on nuclear weapons. 

 

I wouldn't disagree with that, but that's not the only threat to American democracy. Money politics is a threat. Captured media is a threat. Captured regulatory agencies are a threat. Unequal application of the rule of law between the elite and the governed is a threat. Vast disparities in wealth and asset ownership are a threat. Endless war is a threat. Financial bubbles are a threat. Lots of stuff.

Edited November 1, 2016 by lannarebirth

[lannarebirth]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

trump is an existential threat to American democracy not to mention considering his bizarre musings on nuclear weapons. 

 

Where was your concern for the existential threat to American democracy during the Democratic primaries?

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, lannarebirth said:

 

They seem to have left out the hundreds of thousands of people that have died needlessly, most of them civilians, in the wars Hillary Clinton has supported and fostered.

 

I assume you mean the wars started by Bush during the last Republican administration.  She was a junior Senator who went with the flow; a bit player. 

 

The Iraq war is the one that Trump insists he opposed, even though he's on record supporting it.

[lannarebirth]

8 minutes ago, heybruce said:

 

I assume you mean the wars started by Bush during the last Republican administration.  She was a junior Senator who went with the flow; a bit player. 

 

The Iraq war is the one that Trump insists he opposed, even though he's on record supporting it.

 

Pick up a newspaper sometime.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations#2010.E2.80.93present

[heybruce]

7 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

They seem to have left out the hundreds of thousands of people that have died needlessly, most of them civilians, in the wars Hillary Clinton has supported and fostered.

 

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

 

I assume you mean the wars started by Bush during the last Republican administration.  She was a junior Senator who went with the flow; a bit player. 

 

The Iraq war is the one that Trump insists he opposed, even though he's on record supporting it.

 

6 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Pick up a newspaper sometime.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations#2010.E2.80.93present

Be more specific. Do you hold HRC responsible for the operation to kill Osama Bin Laden, the support role the US played in Britain and France's operations in Libya, the drone strikes to kill Al Qaeda leaders, or some other events?  How do these events add up to hundreds of thousands?

[lannarebirth]

Just now, heybruce said:

 

 

Be more specific. Do you hold HRC responsible for the operation to kill Osama Bin Laden, the support role the US played in Britain and France's operations in Libya, the drone strikes to kill Al Qaeda leaders, or some other events?  How do these events add up to hundreds of thousands?

 

I hold her responsible for the fallout stemming from the decision to invade Libya and Syria. Both are now embroiled in civil wars that stem directly from our involvement there. It has  caused hundreds of thousands (or more) deaths and it has created millions of refugees that has created a humanitarian crisis in Europe and elsewhere.

[Ulysses G.]

8 hours ago, heybruce said:

 

Perhaps you should use news sources other than Fox.

 

Perhaps you should not be so obsessive about it. Howard Kurtz is a respected jounalist and has appeared on CNN and written for the Washington Post and the Daily Beast. He has also published numerous books about the media. Fox is simply his latest home.

Edited November 2, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[AYJAYDEE]

19 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I hold her responsible for the fallout stemming from the decision to invade Libya and Syria. Both are now embroiled in civil wars that stem directly from our involvement there. It has  caused hundreds of thousands (or more) deaths and it has created millions of refugees that has created a humanitarian crisis in Europe and elsewhere.

 

did you expect her to defy Obama?

 

[lannarebirth]

3 minutes ago, AYJAYDEE said:

did you expect her to defy Obama?

 

 

If she thought it was wrong I'd expect her to give counsel that it is wrong. But she didn't do that, on the contrary, she was cheerleader in chief of the devastation we caused to millions of people's lives.