Trump - Sinking Like a Stone

[rat pack]

Liar. They didn't do that until the last few days, hoping to salvage their reputation since they knew it was bullshit all along.

You call me liar while admitting that I'm right? Fuck you.

A lot of people didn't make up their mind until last week, like for example the never-Trumpsters, most of whom ended up pulling the lever for Trump anyway.

I said they tightened up a few days before, so no. You aren't right. You're full of shit. The polling was off and deliberately so. Only retards like you give them any credibility.

BECAUSE OPINIONS TIGHTENED IN THE FINAL WEEK. When push comes to shove people tend to make up their mind.

Bullshit. People don't change candidates at the last minute.

Nonsence - this election was popularly viewed as between two bad candidates, of course there would be many undecided voters until the last moment.

And many early voters who decided who to vote for while Hillary was under investigation by the FBI.

 

[rat pack]

Trump's followers feel STUPID for voting for him.

They are turning on him because he has betrayed them and they feel dumb for getting tricked by a common huckster

Trump is a con man, just like he was when he ran Trump University.

 

[Papageorgio]

The same Polls that gave Hillary Clinton a 90% chance to be President. LOL.

You have a link to where Gallup or any other national polling "that gave Hillary Clinton a 90% chance to be President." ?

Of course you don't because it is made up bullshit by a pathetic dummy - you.

Clinton has 90 percent chance of winning: Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation

Clinton has 90% chance of beating Trump in race for White House, according to poll

HuffPost Forecasts Hillary Clinton Will Win With 323 Electoral Votes | The Huffington Post

You do realize that a candidate leading by at least 2 percentage points in the final polls does in fact win 90% of the time, right?

Tell that to antontoo, he is the dumb ass that wanted proof of what the polls said. You need reading comprehension classes.

 

[NYcarbineer]

These RWers don't realize that one of best reasons for posting these polls is the entertainment value of hearing them deny their validity.

Just like we denied them before the elections.

The raw poll were right. Hillary by 3 million votes. What was in error was how to weight the voting (electoral college) power of each voter.

That was not within the scope of what polls do. That is where the Trumptards are lying.

Besides, there is no electoral college involved in approval polls. They are 'popular vote' polls, in effect.

 

[rat pack]

The same Polls that gave Hillary Clinton a 90% chance to be President. LOL.

You have a link to where Gallup or any other national polling "that gave Hillary Clinton a 90% chance to be President." ?

Of course you don't because it is made up bullshit by a pathetic dummy - you.

Clinton has 90 percent chance of winning: Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation

Clinton has 90% chance of beating Trump in race for White House, according to poll

HuffPost Forecasts Hillary Clinton Will Win With 323 Electoral Votes | The Huffington Post

You do realize that a candidate leading by at least 2 percentage points in the final polls does in fact win 90% of the time, right?

I missed your source. That sounds like one of those rectal facts.

How often has what happened to Clinton happened before?

I believe 5 republicans made it to the oval office without receiving the most votes.

 

[Papageorgio]

The same Polls that gave Hillary Clinton a 90% chance to be President. LOL.

You have a link to where Gallup or any other national polling "that gave Hillary Clinton a 90% chance to be President." ?

Of course you don't because it is made up bullshit by a pathetic dummy - you.

Clinton has 90 percent chance of winning: Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation

Clinton has 90% chance of beating Trump in race for White House, according to poll

HuffPost Forecasts Hillary Clinton Will Win With 323 Electoral Votes | The Huffington Post

Are those POLLS? No they are not. They are ANALYSIS of the polls.

National polls ONLY reflected popular vote, not Electoral College count.

As NY said, the person ahead by 2% wins 90% of the time, take it up with him.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The same Polls that gave Hillary Clinton a 90% chance to be President. LOL.

You have a link to where Gallup or any other national polling "that gave Hillary Clinton a 90% chance to be President." ?

Of course you don't because it is made up bullshit by a pathetic dummy - you.

Clinton has 90 percent chance of winning: Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation

Clinton has 90% chance of beating Trump in race for White House, according to poll

HuffPost Forecasts Hillary Clinton Will Win With 323 Electoral Votes | The Huffington Post

You do realize that a candidate leading by at least 2 percentage points in the final polls does in fact win 90% of the time, right?

Tell that to antontoo, he is the dumb ass that wanted proof of what the polls said. You need reading comprehension classes.

The polls did not say what you posted. Those are opinions drawn from the polls. Polls are, as the other poster said, raw data.

Nice deflection of my post though, which you can't refute.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You have a link to where Gallup or any other national polling "that gave Hillary Clinton a 90% chance to be President." ?

Of course you don't because it is made up bullshit by a pathetic dummy - you.

Clinton has 90 percent chance of winning: Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation

Clinton has 90% chance of beating Trump in race for White House, according to poll

HuffPost Forecasts Hillary Clinton Will Win With 323 Electoral Votes | The Huffington Post

You do realize that a candidate leading by at least 2 percentage points in the final polls does in fact win 90% of the time, right?

I missed your source. That sounds like one of those rectal facts.

How often has what happened to Clinton happened before?

I believe 5 republicans made it to the oval office without receiving the most votes.

The polls didn't call the 2000 election for Gore.

 

[Iceweasel]

Liar. They didn't do that until the last few days, hoping to salvage their reputation since they knew it was bullshit all along.

You call me liar while admitting that I'm right? Fuck you.

A lot of people didn't make up their mind until last week, like for example the never-Trumpsters, most of whom ended up pulling the lever for Trump anyway.

I said they tightened up a few days before, so no. You aren't right. You're full of shit. The polling was off and deliberately so. Only retards like you give them any credibility.

BECAUSE OPINIONS TIGHTENED IN THE FINAL WEEK. When push comes to shove people tend to make up their mind.

Bullshit. People don't change candidates at the last minute.

Nonsence - this election was popularly viewed as between two bad candidates, of course there would be many undecided voters until the last moment.

Undecideds wouldn't be polling for one candidate or the other.

Fail.

 

[rat pack]

These RWers don't realize that one of best reasons for posting these polls is the entertainment value of hearing them deny their validity.

Just like we denied them before the elections.

The raw poll were right. Hillary by 3 million votes. What was in error was how to weight the voting (electoral college) power of each voter.

That was not within the scope of what polls do. That is where the Trumptards are lying.

Besides, there is no electoral college involved in approval polls. They are 'popular vote' polls, in effect.

Even in the popular vote, as told by the election, each vote has to be weighed against its electoral college power to get a determination of how the poll would reflect an election. Trump could have 0% approval in NY and CA, and it wouldn't effect his electability.

So the polls haven't caught up to reflecting election chances.

 

[Markle]

From what website/source are you getting that graph?

FACTS and TRUTH have never concerned Val_hombre.

 

[Iceweasel]

Trump's followers feel STUPID for voting for him.

They are turning on him because he has betrayed them and they feel dumb for getting tricked by a common huckster

Have you got anything else? You pop in, jerk off then leave.

 

[Iceweasel]

Clinton has 90 percent chance of winning: Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation

Clinton has 90% chance of beating Trump in race for White House, according to poll

HuffPost Forecasts Hillary Clinton Will Win With 323 Electoral Votes | The Huffington Post

You do realize that a candidate leading by at least 2 percentage points in the final polls does in fact win 90% of the time, right?

I missed your source. That sounds like one of those rectal facts.

How often has what happened to Clinton happened before?

I believe 5 republicans made it to the oval office without receiving the most votes.

The polls didn't call the 2000 election for Gore.

So where's your evidence a 2% lead in polling is won 90% of the time.

Next libs will be trying to prove water is not wet.

 

[NYcarbineer]

These RWers don't realize that one of best reasons for posting these polls is the entertainment value of hearing them deny their validity.

Just like we denied them before the elections.

The raw poll were right. Hillary by 3 million votes. What was in error was how to weight the voting (electoral college) power of each voter.

That was not within the scope of what polls do. That is where the Trumptards are lying.

Besides, there is no electoral college involved in approval polls. They are 'popular vote' polls, in effect.

Even in the popular vote, as told by the election, each vote has to be weighed against its electoral college power to get a determination of how the poll would reflect an election. Trump could have 0% approval in NY and CA, and it wouldn't effect his electability.

So the polls haven't caught up to reflecting election chances.

This is ALL about the Trump supporters inventing a crutch to lean on when they deny polls they don't like.
It's nothing new btw, the Right has been a hotbed of poll denialism long before this past election.

It's a conservative thing.

 

[NYcarbineer]

These RWers don't realize that one of best reasons for posting these polls is the entertainment value of hearing them deny their validity.

Just like we denied them before the elections.

The raw poll were right. Hillary by 3 million votes. What was in error was how to weight the voting (electoral college) power of each voter.

That was not within the scope of what polls do. That is where the Trumptards are lying.

Besides, there is no electoral college involved in approval polls. They are 'popular vote' polls, in effect.

Even in the popular vote, as told by the election, each vote has to be weighed against its electoral college power to get a determination of how the poll would reflect an election. Trump could have 0% approval in NY and CA, and it wouldn't effect his electability.

So the polls haven't caught up to reflecting election chances.

This is ALL about the Trump supporters inventing a crutch to lean on when they deny polls they don't like.
It's nothing new btw, the Right has been a hotbed of poll denialism long before this past election.

It's a conservative thing.

If you don't believe me, watch what these people post if/when there are polls favorable to Trump, or to conservatives in general.

 

[Iceweasel]

These RWers don't realize that one of best reasons for posting these polls is the entertainment value of hearing them deny their validity.

Just like we denied them before the elections.

The raw poll were right. Hillary by 3 million votes. What was in error was how to weight the voting (electoral college) power of each voter.

That was not within the scope of what polls do. That is where the Trumptards are lying.

Besides, there is no electoral college involved in approval polls. They are 'popular vote' polls, in effect.

Even in the popular vote, as told by the election, each vote has to be weighed against its electoral college power to get a determination of how the poll would reflect an election. Trump could have 0% approval in NY and CA, and it wouldn't effect his electability.

So the polls haven't caught up to reflecting election chances.

This is ALL about the Trump supporters inventing a crutch to lean on when they deny polls they don't like.
It's nothing new btw, the Right has been a hotbed of poll denialism long before this past election.

It's a conservative thing.

More rectal facts from Rye. The polls were wrong all along, that's the fact. How you feel about it is a matter of your own opinion.

 

[rat pack]

So where's your evidence a 2% lead in polling is won 90% of the time.

Next libs will be trying to prove water is not wet.

I think that's a historical fact. There have been over 50 presidential elections to gather data from. The Trump election is, as Donald would say "un-presidented"

 

[rat pack]

More rectal facts from Rye. The polls were wrong all along, that's the fact. How you feel about it is a matter of your own opinion.

The polls weren't wrong. Their interpretation was wrong. The assumption that a 2% lead means 90% chance of winning, while historically accurate, didn't take the exceptional nature of the election into account.

 

[Iceweasel]

So where's your evidence a 2% lead in polling is won 90% of the time.

Next libs will be trying to prove water is not wet.

I think that's a historical fact. There have been over 50 presidential elections to gather data from. The Trump election is, as Donald would say "un-presidented"

You think doesn't cut it.

 

[Iceweasel]

More rectal facts from Rye. The polls were wrong all along, that's the fact. How you feel about it is a matter of your own opinion.

The polls weren't wrong. Their interpretation was wrong. The assumption that a 2% lead means 90% chance of winning, while historically accurate, didn't take the exceptional nature of the election into account.

Problem is the lead was almost always two digits. Search the posts here and find the EXACT same libtards celebrating the lead now saying it was only 2%.