Trump mocks critics: I'll accept election results... if I win

[ilostmypassword]

3 minutes ago, Merzik said:

 

If I sat next to a super-model on a flight 30 years ago I would probably remember her. If I sat next to an ordinary woman in her 40's (like Ms Leed ) she would not be remembered 3 decades later. This isn't sexist. I doubt anyone who sat next to me 30 years ago would remember me either. I am not ugly but no super-model either. 555

 

I have read quite a bit what the people of Syria, Lybia and Serbia think about our interventions and bombings and of the Clintons. I do not speak for them but I am certain the vast majority do not feel they were "liberated" and better off from our bombings or our supporting of a mercenary jihad of wahhabbist nutters. Most hate the Clintons and Obama and with good reason. 

And they just love Trump?

[CharlieK]

24 minutes ago, attrayant said:

 

Is that a popular vote lead or an electoral vote lead?

 

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-clinton-carry-campaign-barbs-york-charity-dinner-144612198.html

 

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump gained on his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton among American voters this week, cutting her lead nearly in half, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling released on Friday.

[tonray]

2 hours ago, pattayalover said:

with 300 millions Americans, they didn't find any better candidates.

it shows you how dumb this country is.

No it just shows how smart the other 298,999,998 of us are not to subject our lives to outrageous scrutiny for a crappy 7x24 job.

[Chicog]

44 minutes ago, CharlieK said:

IMO any country that seems to feel threatened by the idea of a candidate suggesting the vote is fixed means it is fixed.

 

How did you decide the country feel threatened by it?

 

Most people don't believe it.

I doubt Trump does either.

It's a desperate tactic to try and get him back in the game.

It won't work.

 

 

[Merzik]

56 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

No, I think most of us are quite used to ill advised American foreign policy efforts over the last several decades.

 

Our genuine fear is that you might actually select Trump who is obviously a boorish oaf!

 

Are you male or female? Fine photo but I don't believe any woman could support Trump!

 

If we get into a war with Russia under Clinton with her no-fly zone over Syria you may change your priorities.

 

I am a male.

[CharlieK]

34 minutes ago, attrayant said:

 

Really?  Care to show your electoral math?  To even have a shot, Trump needs to win:

 

AZ (D+1%)

NV (D+3%)

NC (D+3%)

FL (D+4%)

PA (D+5%)

 

And this is what has been happening in the markets since the debates began.  If you really think that, you could win BIGLY by putting your money where your mouth is:

 

 

He's struggling to hold on to GA and OH as it is.  These are averages of all major polls and the trends are holding steady.  Can you explain what Trump is going to do to turn all of these states around?

 

Could it ever enter your mind that the polls might be wrong. Sky news had an interesting survey. They say that if it were just women voters 85% would vote for Hillary. If it were only male voters then 95% would vote for Trump, that being across the nation as a whole. 

 

At the end of the day are people voting on sound bites or policy. All we are hearing is soundbites, He said she said. So just like in the UK where the polls and betting platforms all predicted a remain vote. They got it very wrong.  

[ilostmypassword]

Just now, CharlieK said:

 

Could it ever enter your mind that the polls might be wrong. Sky news had an interesting survey. They say that if it were just women voters 85% would vote for Hillary. If it were only male voters then 95% would vote for Trump, that being across the nation as a whole. 

 

At the end of the day are people voting on sound bites or policy. All we are hearing is soundbites, He said she said. So just like in the UK where the polls and betting platforms all predicted a remain vote. They got it very wrong.  

The polls did not predict a remain vote. The aggregate had them virtually tied. Remain was up by .5 percent. It was the pundits who disregarded the polls who got it wrong.

[attrayant]

4 minutes ago, CharlieK said:

 

Could it ever enter your mind that the polls might be wrong.

 

Of course there are always aberrations - pollsters know that.  That's why the market still shows a huge lead for Clinton.  You don't bet on a single poll that shows you what you want to see, you bet on the average of many polls instead.

 

There is a decent chance that any single poll could be wrong.  There is a astonishingly tiny chance that ALL the other polls are wrong.

Edited October 22, 2016 by attrayant

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, attrayant said:

 

Of course there are always aberrations - pollsters know that.  That's why the market still shows a huge lead for Clinton.  You don't bet on a single poll that shows you what you want to see, you bet on the average of many polls instead.

 

There is a decent chance that any single poll could be wrong.  There is a astonishingly tiny chance that ALL the other polls are wrong.

Well, to be fair, some polls do show Trump ahead by a little bit on the national level. But when you get down to the state level polls, which at this stage are far better determinants of the outcome -especially considering that it's electoral votes and not popular votes that determine the outcome, there it's clear that clinton has a huge lead at this point.

[CharlieK]

2 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

especially considering that it's electoral votes and not popular votes that determine the outcome

 

So it is fixed. 

[Jingthing]

5 minutes ago, CharlieK said:

 

So it is fixed. 

No, that's called the electoral college system. That's how we elect presidents in the USA. Ask Al Gore all about it. 

 

[CharlieK]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

No, that's called the electoral college system. That's how we elect presidents in the USA. Ask Al Gore all about it. 

 

 

So could there be a situation where a state votes for one candidate, but because the electoral college is stronger the opposition could win the state? 

[Merzik]

1 hour ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

27 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

And they just love Trump?

 

 

Neither loved or hated because he has not done anything to affect their lives yet.  A change in our foreign policy would be most welcomed however. The Serbs and Syrians would be especially delighted with better relations between Russia and the US under Trump.  Of course Trump will be judged by what he actually does as president. Clinton is already hated for what she has already done. She is a war criminal.

 

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, CharlieK said:

 

So could there be a situation where a state votes for one candidate, but because the electoral college is stronger the opposition could win the state? 

No. 

That's not how it works at all.

There are 50 separate state elections. 

Each state has their specific number of electoral college votes based on population. 

The electoral college vote based on the 50 state elections is done at the NATIONAL level.

 

 

Edited October 22, 2016 by Jingthing

[Publicus]

1 hour ago, JLCrab said:

Maybe the above is right that Trump would be a better President for world peace and a thriving US economy. Doesn't look right now that we're going to get to find out.

 

Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown.

[ilostmypassword]

6 minutes ago, Merzik said:

 

 

Neither loved or hated because he has not done anything to affect their lives yet.  A change in our foreign policy would be most welcomed however. The Serbs and Syrians would be especially delighted with better relations between Russia and the US under Trump.  Of course Trump will be judged by what he actually does as president. Clinton is already hated for what she has already done. She is a war criminal.

 

After his comments about Moslems he's neither loved nor hated?  Really?

[CharlieK]

4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

No. 

That's not how it works at all.

There are 50 separate state elections. 

Each state has their specific number of electoral college votes based on population. 

The electoral college vote based on the 50 state elections is done at the NATIONAL level.

 

 

thanks

[CharlieK]

A British view of the presidential election. The first 15 minutes.

Edited October 22, 2016 by CharlieK

[Merzik]

1 hour ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

10 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

After his comments about Moslems he's neither loved nor hated?  Really?

 

 

I think they are far more concerned about the people who bombed them or are supporting the Wahhabist jihad than any statements by Trump about limiting Muslim immigration.  A change in US foreign policy would be welcomed almost everywhere.

Edited October 22, 2016 by Merzik

[ilostmypassword]

5 minutes ago, Merzik said:

 

 

I think they are far more concerned about the people who bombed them or are supporting the Wahhabist jihad than any statements by Trump about limiting Muslim immigration.  A change in US foreign policy would be welcomed almost everywhere.

You mean like seizing their oil fields? Which Trump has proposed several times.

[Publicus]

10 minutes ago, CharlieK said:

 

So could there be a situation where a state votes for one candidate, but because the electoral college is stronger the opposition could win the state? 

 

The candidate who wins the popular vote of the state wins the electors to the Electoral College of the state. 

 

Each candidate has a slate of pledged electors of his/hers to the Electoral College in each state. The candidate who wins the popular vote of the state gets to appoint the electors of the state's electoral college. So the slate of pledged electors belonging the candidate who wins the popular vote become the state's Electoral College members. 

 

The electors of each state convene in a Joint Session of Congress January 6th to cast their Electoral Votes. The Vice-President (Joe Biden) presides over the Electoral College of 538 electors from the 50 states. Then comes the vote, by state, alphabetically.

 

When a candidate gets 270 electors, she is declared the President of the United States, effective at noon, January 20, at which time she must take the oath of office. Everything else is razzmatazz.  

[attrayant]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

No. 

That's not how it works at all.

There are 50 separate state elections. 

Each state has their specific number of electoral college votes based on population. 

The electoral college vote based on the 50 state elections is done at the NATIONAL level.

 

1 hour ago, CharlieK said:

thanks

 

 

Real Clear Politics can be a bit overwhelming at times, so here's a site where you can watch the state-by-state polls and see what that all bubbles-up to in the electoral total: http://www.electoral-vote.com/

 

[boomerangutang]

5 hours ago, attrayant said:

Don't forget Katrina Pierson's iron-clad rebuttal: the arm rests don't go up in first class!  If that's not a solid debunking, well... ooh look - something shiny!

 

That's as soggy a rebuttle as the ridiculously soggy claim by an Englishman.  It's been shown clearly that 1st class seats on that flight had foldable middle armrests.  Did you see the photos?  Also, the woman later claimed "it felt like 15 minutes, rather than it being exactly 15 minutes."   When people are in dire situations (sexually attacked, for example) they may say things like, "it felt like forever" ....which obviously is an over-statement.   Also, people have said, "if an assault was taking place, why didn't a stewardess intervene?"   For starters, the woman being attacked may not have summoned a stewardess to come to her aid. She may have thought that her repeated efforts to stop the pervert would get him to desist.  Secondly, if a stewardess had noticed the sexual advances, she may have thought they were a couple, and it was just lewd hanky panky by two lovers.

 

Mark Cuban is a billionaire who was formerly in favor of Trump and is now completely opposed to Trump.  He says he personally knows two people who were sexually preyed upon by Trump, but neither of them want to disrupt their lives by coming out and rekindling their stories of Trump's predations.   source

 

3 hours ago, JLCrab said:

Maybe the above is right that Trump would be a better President for world peace and a thriving US economy. Doesn't look right now that we're going to get to find out.

 

I disagree completely that Trump would be better for peace or the economy if he were prez.  Too many reasons to list here.  He would be disastrous on many levels.

 

1 hour ago, CharlieK said:

So could there be a situation where a state votes for one candidate, but because the electoral college is stronger the opposition could win the state? 

 

Whichever candidate gets the most votes in a particular state gets that state's entire # of electorial votes.  The slight exceptions are Nebraska and Maine.  There are no individuals nor entity ('electorial college included') which can override or tweak the # of votes for each candidate.  If a candidate wins by 1 vote, he/she gets that state's entire enchilada. 

[Chicog]

Well it looks like brand Trump is taking a beating.

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/trump-hotels-getting-beat-trump-campaign-n670266

[GinBoy2]

6 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

Hillary Clinton will be an excellent Potus.

 

 

Excellent, well not so sure. An OK POTUS for sure.

Problem with this election cycle is that we have been given the options of;

 

1. A run of the mill politician

2. Narcissistic Psychopath

 

HRC may be wrong on a whole host of topics, but at least she won't capsize the boat trying to achieve the Holy Grail of self adoration

[Ulysses G.]

39 minutes ago, GinBoy2 said:

 

Problem with this election cycle is that we have been given the options of;

 

 

 1. A serial liar and criminal who has escaped prosecution because of wealth, power, friends in high places and political considerations.

2. Not a  professional politician and not good at it. Great family man. Great business man with many defects.

[bendejo]

On 10/21/2016 at 0:15 PM, pattayalover said:

men don't complain when women touch us...
I will vote for a woman who touch me.

where is the problem?

 

What if it were this woman?

 

 

[JLCrab]

I posted this following a rant which concluded that Trump was a better path to world peace than Clinton:

Quote

 

Maybe the above is right that Trump would be a better President for world peace and a thriving US economy. Doesn't look right now that we're going to get to find out.

 

 

 

Maybe I should have said THANKFULLY it seems we're not going to ever get to find out.

 

 

 

Edited October 22, 2016 by JLCrab

[Skywalker69]

[ilostmypassword]

4 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

 1. A serial liar and criminal who has escaped prosecution because of wealth, power, friends in high places and political considerations.

2. Not a  professional politician and not good at it. Great family man. Great business man with many defects.

REally? A great family man?  His wife Ivana said she raised the children until they were 21 and then turned them over to him. He himself has said he had little to do with his kids when they were young. As for being a great business man? He destroyed the business his father left him.  Failed in many others. His credit was so bad that banks refused to deal with him.  What he does have is a genius for self promotion. He took great advantage of the opportunity offered to him by The Apprentice to sell himself to the world as a great businessman. The show itself was not his. He was just a hired hand.