Even if Russia helped Trump beat Hillary, it was fair and square

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha
a reply to: Greggers

What's the difference where the propaganda comes from?

We have the right to vote for our favorite propaganda, or against the one we find most distasteful.

Yes, you do. Notice I said Trump won the election fair and square. The behavior of the voters was above board in this regard, whether the propaganda came from Russia, America, or Mars.

None of that changes what I said.

originally posted by: JeremySun
a reply to: eluryh22


She won the popular vote by 2.1 percent, just as the polls predicted. She was more popular than Donald Trump.

It was proven in areas where recounts happened that her numbers were inflated, Im betting that if recounts happened everywhere and if you removed dead people, multiple votes and Illegal alien voting she would have lost the popular vote as well.

If the elctoral college vote had of been closer Id say you have a valid point but the truth is even with her inflated numbers she was smashed, democrats all over the country were and it had nothing to do with Russia

originally posted by: Leonidas
a reply to: JeremySun

Common, not legal.

You're missing the point.

The point is that National polls predict the national vote. Those polls turned out to be pretty damned accurate. Well within the margin of error, certainly, and some of them spot on.

A handful of statewide polls were wrong. I'll bet very few people here can even name those polls or how much they were off without looking, unless they lived in that state.

originally posted by: JeremySun

originally posted by: Leonidas
Nice to know you are fine with a foreign power interfering in the democratic process as long as your candidate wins.

Not sure that is how patriotism works, but you do you.

France helped Americans in the revolution war against Britain, which British regarded as a civil war between the government and rebels. It was foreign intervention that helped America become a state.

Then we should praise Russia.

All Hail the foreign interventionists.

They are the "corner stone" of our nations founding.

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Leonidas
a reply to: JeremySun

Common, not legal.

You're missing the point.

The point is that National polls predict the national vote. Those polls turned out to be pretty damned accurate. Well within the margin of error, certainly, and some of them spot on.

A handful of statewide polls were wrong. I'll bet very few people here can even name those polls or how much they were off without looking, unless they lived in that state.

Yet those same polls that your quoting had Hillary winning in a landslide, somehow the exact opposite happened and you still consider them correct?

Did WikiLeaks affect the voters' perspectives and influence the vote? Trump sure used WikiLeaks, by name, for talking points at least 22 times during his campaign.

a reply to: JeremySun

That's a bit like saying a lie is not a lie if you believe it.

originally posted by: JeremySun
Trump and Hillary were political rivals in the election. A foreign state often sides with one faction against another faction in a domestic conflict. France helped Henry Tudor kill Richard III at the battle of Bosworth Field, and it was all fair and square.

en.wikipedia.org...

Well I usually don't use the term, but that is a decidedly "Anti America" position to take.

I think it is contrary to our nation and it's values.

originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Leonidas
a reply to: JeremySun

Common, not legal.

You're missing the point.

The point is that National polls predict the national vote. Those polls turned out to be pretty damned accurate. Well within the margin of error, certainly, and some of them spot on.

A handful of statewide polls were wrong. I'll bet very few people here can even name those polls or how much they were off without looking, unless they lived in that state.

Yet those same polls that your quoting had Hillary winning in a landslide, somehow the exact opposite happened and you still consider them correct?

You're confusing two different things.

The national polls predicted the national vote. They did not predict the electoral vote. The electoral vote was predicted by the state-by-state polls. I don't recall any specific poll (or set of polls) predicting what I would consider to be a landslide, but certainly the state-by-state polls predicted a victory by Hillary with multiple paths to victory and far fewer paths for Trump.

Generally speaking, the EC follows the national vote. But not this time, and not in Gore v. Bush.

Given this, I think people will start looking more at the state polls and less at the national polls.

But yes, the national polls that everyone said were wrong, were in fact pretty damned accurate.

originally posted by: windword
Did WikiLeaks affect the voters' perspectives and influence the vote? Trump sure used WikiLeaks, by name, for talking points at least 22 times during his campaign.

Wikileaks was America's only unbiased news agency, so to speak. They gave America the news that the others wouldn't since they were in the tank for Hillary. It was either the news from Wikileaks, or the pathetically biased other news that influenced voters, or both together.

The TRUTH is what affected the election. The truth about corruption queen Hillary. Something not a single liberal can admit or take responsibility for. And today's news proves this beyond any doubt to everyone (except for liberals).

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: windword
Did WikiLeaks affect the voters' perspectives and influence the vote? Trump sure used WikiLeaks, by name, for talking points at least 22 times during his campaign.

Wikileaks was America's only unbiased news agency, so to speak. They gave America the news that the others wouldn't since they were in the tank for Hillary. It was either the news from Wikileaks, or the pathetically biased other news that influenced voters, or both together.

The TRUTH is what affected the election. The truth about corruption queen Hillary. Something not a single liberal can admit or take responsibility for. And today's news proves this beyond any doubt to everyone (except for liberals).

It may be true that the TRUTH effected the election, but that had very little to do with wikileaks or Russian hacking.

Hillary was an unappealing candidate. She always was, even before the hacked emails. She did not inspire. Plus, she ran a campaign without a message during a year when the state of the economy did not favor a member of the incumbent's party. Plus, she took the rust belt for granted.

The rust belt swung the election. And that had nothing to do with wikileaks and everything to do with every President since Bill Clinton screwing over the blue collar workers there.

originally posted by: JeremySun
Even if Russia helped Trump beat Hillary, it was fair and square

Sounds like the same idiot statement that Trump would say!
If it's for him, it's 'fair', against? Unfair! Spoiled little rich kid.
And that's your role model for ethics and intellect?

originally posted by: cuckooold

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: JeremySun

Hillary Clinton helped Trump defeat Hillary Clinton, Russia comes a very distant 2nd place when it comes to Hillarys epic loss.

And it wasn't fair because she shafted Bernie and had CNN spreading disinformation - and with all that she still lost........to Donald Trump.

And if you don't think the absolute falsehoods, fabrications, and disinformation put forth by Breitbart, with Trump's Chief Strategist, Stephen K Bannon at the helm had a effect, you are either extremely deluded, or lying.

So, again, your retort is to deflect via baseless comparisons and then proceed to assume full knowledge about the internal workings of my psychology, arriving that I am deluded and/or lying because I didn't mention Breitbart being the political rights equivalent of CNN when I posted to the OP about CNN, dodgy Hillary and Putins hackers?

This is why I have never taken any of your posts seriously. Consider this the one and only time you'll get a response from me.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Not baseless at all.

Generally you appear to play to the Trump/authoritarian crowd, but when confronted by others, you will usually respond with such banal generalities to try as to make whatever statements you are making as if they are bipartisan, but are anything but.

This is why I have never taken any of your posts seriously. Consider this the one and only time you'll get a response from me.

I care not whether you take my posts seriously or not, and you generally avoid responding to anyone who challenges you. Your approval or lack thereof is of no consequence at all, but I will call out hypocrisy where I see it.

Your supposed claims of being in favour of some sort of truth and justice are at odds with your support of authoritarian murderers like Duterte, and your blinkered partisan worldview (unless again you are just playing to the crowd).

If engaging in intellectual dishonesty is your MO, go for it, and I'll continue to call it out as I see fit.

There were no propaganda from the Trump side. The only propaganda were from the Hillary side with the dozen women lying about Trump doing sexual assault on them. Complete fabrication. Even CNN interviewed the first woman who blatantly lied about the plane encounter. CNN is almost FAKE NEWS at this point.

The Podesta emails were all unaltered. Not even Podesta himself ever denied their authenticity.

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: eluryh22

Or are you one of "them" that suddenly thinks the electoral college should be banished and NY and California should choose all future presidents moving forward....?

Total straw man argument. Try getting the people from Ny and CA to vote the same way everytime.

Why would I have to try when, with almost no exception, they already do?

Thank you for proving my point for me.

originally posted by: JeremySun
a reply to: eluryh22


She won the popular vote by 2.1 percent, just as the polls predicted. She was more popular than Donald Trump.

Yeah. So?

What is your point exactly.

The Buffalo Bills may gain more yards and have a longer time of possession then the Miami Dolphins..... but if the Dolphins score more points.....

Again, what exactly is your point?

I voted for Hillary and I think she lost fair and square. She should have lied a lot more like Trump did. His cabinet picks do not put forth his campaign promises. He suckered millions of educated people who wear the veil.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Side step, deflect. Repeat and rinse.

originally posted by: JeremySun
Trump and Hillary were political rivals in the election. A foreign state often sides with one faction against another faction in a domestic conflict. France helped Henry Tudor kill Richard III at the battle of Bosworth Field, and it was all fair and square.

en.wikipedia.org...

Hitler helped Stalin and mousillini lol