Why all the panic on the Left?

[rightwinger]

How did your polls work out for ya in 2016?

Polls were remarkably accurate.

They predicted a Hillary electoral landslide.

Oops!

Uh, no, they didn't. They predicted Hillary would win the popular vote by 3.2 points. She won by 2.2 points.

As always, you rightards prove to be too stupid to know the difference between polls and pollsters.

Once again you demonstrate you are completely ignorant of the subject you are attempting to debate.

There is a 95 percent chance Hillary Clinton wins the Electoral College by 118 votes: poll

ELECTORAL MAP: Hillary Clinton is on track for a blowout win in November

Should Clinton Play For An Electoral College Landslide?

Electoral College Map Update: Pollster Predicts Hillary Clinton Landslide, Winning All Swing States Except Iowa, Ohio

Hillary Clinton Will Win The 2016 Election By A Landslide: FiveThirtyEight’s Poll Guru Nate Silver Predicted Obama, Will The Trump Prediction Be True?

Hillary Clinton Will Win by a Landslide Against Donald Trump

LOLOL

You brain-dead cons crack me up. Dumbfuck, there is no such thing as an electoral college poll. What there is, are individual state polls. Swing states are too close to call and what happened in 2016 was pollsters, not polls, assign those states to Hillary's column. Pollsters were wrong. Polls were remarkably close.

You cult freaks never learn.

Shows the problem with how we conduct polls
We do a nationwide poll and use it to predict presidential results
We saw how wrong that can be

Major polling agents need to ignore California, New York and the flyover states. We know how they will turn out.

For 2020, polling only needs to be done in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida, North Carolina with other swing states done less often.

That will tell you how the election will probably turn out

 

[Wry Catcher]

LOL

As if we needed more evidence that conservatism is a brain defect.

By, "the vast majority of Americans are behind the president," you mean the plurality to majority, based on the poll, want Trump impeached; and the 54% average of polls showing disapproval of Trump.

How did your polls work out for ya in 2016?

Polls were remarkably accurate.

They predicted a Hillary electoral landslide.

Oops!

Uh, no, they didn't. They predicted Hillary would win the popular vote by 3.2 points. She won by 2.2 points.

As always, you rightards prove to be too stupid to know the difference between polls and pollsters.

There is no national popular vote contest to win or lose.

Duh. There is no mandate when the President wins and lost the popular vote. The people know best, proved by Bush II and Trump who lost the popular vote, and both were total fuck ups.

 

[peach174]

There is no national popular vote contest to win or lose.

Well you prove again that you're an idiot. Of course there is. That's why the popular vote count is known for every presidential election. If just doesn't decide who wins the election.

If it is an actual thing, what does someone do with it?

Brag. Like Trump did when he bragged he had actually won it -- even though he didn't.

He did.
He won 30 States over Hillary's 20.

LOL

You dumbshit. He bragged he won the popular vote.

No he didn't.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-he-would-have-lost-a-popular-vote-election/
Donald J. Trump on Twitter

 

[Nostra]

How did your polls work out for ya in 2016?

Polls were remarkably accurate.

They predicted a Hillary electoral landslide.

Oops!

Uh, no, they didn't. They predicted Hillary would win the popular vote by 3.2 points. She won by 2.2 points.

As always, you rightards prove to be too stupid to know the difference between polls and pollsters.

Once again you demonstrate you are completely ignorant of the subject you are attempting to debate.

There is a 95 percent chance Hillary Clinton wins the Electoral College by 118 votes: poll

ELECTORAL MAP: Hillary Clinton is on track for a blowout win in November

Should Clinton Play For An Electoral College Landslide?

Electoral College Map Update: Pollster Predicts Hillary Clinton Landslide, Winning All Swing States Except Iowa, Ohio

Hillary Clinton Will Win The 2016 Election By A Landslide: FiveThirtyEight’s Poll Guru Nate Silver Predicted Obama, Will The Trump Prediction Be True?

Hillary Clinton Will Win by a Landslide Against Donald Trump

LOLOL

You brain-dead cons crack me up. Dumbfuck, there is no such thing as an electoral college poll. What there is, are individual state polls. Swing states are too close to call and what happened in 2016 was pollsters, not polls, assign those states to Hillary's column. Pollsters were wrong. Polls were remarkably close.

You cult freaks never learn.

You really are a moron. Those pollsters use their state by state polls showing who is ahead in each one, and then calculate the electoral outcome.

I proved you wrong, idiot. Deal with it.

 

[Nostra]

How did your polls work out for ya in 2016?

Polls were remarkably accurate.

They predicted a Hillary electoral landslide.

Oops!

Uh, no, they didn't. They predicted Hillary would win the popular vote by 3.2 points. She won by 2.2 points.

As always, you rightards prove to be too stupid to know the difference between polls and pollsters.

Once again you demonstrate you are completely ignorant of the subject you are attempting to debate.

There is a 95 percent chance Hillary Clinton wins the Electoral College by 118 votes: poll

ELECTORAL MAP: Hillary Clinton is on track for a blowout win in November

Should Clinton Play For An Electoral College Landslide?

Electoral College Map Update: Pollster Predicts Hillary Clinton Landslide, Winning All Swing States Except Iowa, Ohio

Hillary Clinton Will Win The 2016 Election By A Landslide: FiveThirtyEight’s Poll Guru Nate Silver Predicted Obama, Will The Trump Prediction Be True?

Hillary Clinton Will Win by a Landslide Against Donald Trump

LOLOL

You brain-dead cons crack me up. Dumbfuck, there is no such thing as an electoral college poll. What there is, are individual state polls. Swing states are too close to call and what happened in 2016 was pollsters, not polls, assign those states to Hillary's column. Pollsters were wrong. Polls were remarkably close.

You cult freaks never learn.

If those polls were remarkably close, how did they get so many states wrong.

Oops!

 

[peach174]

Well you prove again that you're an idiot. Of course there is. That's why the popular vote count is known for every presidential election. If just doesn't decide who wins the election.

If it is an actual thing, what does someone do with it?

Brag. Like Trump did when he bragged he had actually won it -- even though he didn't.

He did.
He won 30 States over Hillary's 20.

LOL

You dumbshit. He bragged he won the popular vote.

No he didn't.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-he-would-have-lost-a-popular-vote-election/
Donald J. Trump on Twitter

Nov. 15 th 2016

If the election were based on total popular vote I would have campaigned in N.Y. Florida and California and won even bigger and more easily

 

[Billiejeens]

How did your polls work out for ya in 2016?

Polls were remarkably accurate.

They predicted a Hillary electoral landslide.

Oops!

Uh, no, they didn't. They predicted Hillary would win the popular vote by 3.2 points. She won by 2.2 points.

As always, you rightards prove to be too stupid to know the difference between polls and pollsters.

There is no national popular vote contest to win or lose.

Duh. There is no mandate when the President wins and lost the popular vote. The people know best, proved by Bush II and Trump who lost the popular vote, and both were total fuck ups.

Completely false

 

[Ame®icano]

Well... all these poor little unhinged demtrash snowflakes in this thread... yep... you can SMELL the ANGER and HATE, despite the smell of their DESPERATION.

They know the vast majority of Americans are behind the president, and despite all the 24/7 smearing, lies and bashing of him by the democrats and their propaganda wing, ever since he was elected, he now has MORE support than he did BEFORE, and the democraps can't wrap their heads around it, and they're too STUPID to know when to QUIT.

I say fine, all good and dandy. The DEMOCRATS are ENSURING President Trump will be elected by what THEY ARE DOING, they are HELPING... so... THANKS FOR ALL THE HELP DEMTARDS.

LOL

As if we needed more evidence that conservatism is a brain defect.

By, "the vast majority of Americans are behind the president," you mean the plurality to majority, based on the poll, want Trump impeached; and the 54% average of polls showing disapproval of Trump.

How did your polls work out for ya in 2016?

Polls were remarkably accurate.

They predicted a Hillary electoral landslide.

Oops!

Uh, no, they didn't. They predicted Hillary would win the popular vote by 3.2 points. She won by 2.2 points.

As always, you rightards prove to be too stupid to know the difference between polls and pollsters.

"They" all predicted Hillary winning. "They" were all wrong.

Yet, lefties still claim... "she won".

 

[BULLDOG]

Again, that is not a transcript. It says on the document that it is not a transcript.

Again... You've got nobody that disputes its accuracy.

The impeachment is based on 2nd hand information of someone that didn't "feel" it was proper.

Like all Fascists, you've got an investigation looking for a crime.

Vindman was present at the conversation, and he testified that key points of the conversation were left out of what the white house released. A first hand witness disputes it's accuracy.

Vindman's boss said he saw nothing wrong with the conversation or the transcript, and nothing was omitted. In other words Vindman is a deep state hack that was activated after Mueller's collusion lunacy fell flat.

Was Vindman's boss present at the conversation?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Polls were remarkably accurate.

They predicted a Hillary electoral landslide.

Oops!

Uh, no, they didn't. They predicted Hillary would win the popular vote by 3.2 points. She won by 2.2 points.

As always, you rightards prove to be too stupid to know the difference between polls and pollsters.

There is no national popular vote contest to win or lose.

Duh. There is no mandate when the President wins and lost the popular vote. The people know best, proved by Bush II and Trump who lost the popular vote, and both were total fuck ups.

Completely false

A Damn Lie ^^^

 

[Billiejeens]

They predicted a Hillary electoral landslide.

Oops!

Uh, no, they didn't. They predicted Hillary would win the popular vote by 3.2 points. She won by 2.2 points.

As always, you rightards prove to be too stupid to know the difference between polls and pollsters.

There is no national popular vote contest to win or lose.

Duh. There is no mandate when the President wins and lost the popular vote. The people know best, proved by Bush II and Trump who lost the popular vote, and both were total fuck ups.

Completely false

A Damn Lie ^^^

That's what I indicated.

 

[Billiejeens]

Vindman's boss said he saw nothing wrong with the conversation or the transcript, and nothing was omitted. In other words Vindman is a deep state hack that was activated after Mueller's collusion lunacy fell flat.



You are correct.
Plus the inevitable disaster to the State Dept. lurking in Ukraine has them all in a panic.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Polls were remarkably accurate.

They predicted a Hillary electoral landslide.

Oops!

Uh, no, they didn't. They predicted Hillary would win the popular vote by 3.2 points. She won by 2.2 points.

As always, you rightards prove to be too stupid to know the difference between polls and pollsters.

There is no national popular vote contest to win or lose.

Duh. There is no mandate when the President wins and lost the popular vote. The people know best, proved by Bush II and Trump who lost the popular vote, and both were total fuck ups.

Completely false

mandate: In politics, a mandate is the authority granted by a constituency to act as its representative.

The constituency is the entire voting public.

The concept of a government having a legitimate
mandate to govern via the fair winning of a democratic election is a central idea of representative democracy.

 

[Ame®icano]

Ya sure, the deep state protecting Trump. Good joke!

Well at least you admit that Vindmans superior contradicted his testimony.

Yes, Trump is now deep state. He is the swamp. See how that works?

Actually considering all the evidence that the deep state mastubated the Left into thinking that "Trump colluded" and therefore will be impeached for the last three years, your statement is yet more evidence of the mental illness that has taken over the Left.

The left did no such thing. Mueller is Republican. He was appointed Special Counsel by a Republican. That Republican was filling in for another Republican who recused himself. And that Republican was appointed by a Republican president who was elected by mostly Republicans.

Idiots blame the left for that.

If Mueller is truly Republican, and guy who appointed him, how come they hired only Democrats to their phony investigation of Trump-Russia collusion.

According to DNA testing, Mueller is only 1/1024 Republican.

Well now you're simply lying again. Mueller did not hire only Democrats.

Like I always say, if conservatives didn't lie, they'd have absolutely nothing to say.

Sure he didn't. Every single one wanted to overthrow Trump and actively work on that.

Most of them are registered Democrats. The rest are Democrat donors, Trump haters, Hillary supporters etc.

No bias there, right?

 

[BULLDOG]

Again, that is not a transcript. It says on the document that it is not a transcript.

Again... You've got nobody that disputes its accuracy.

The impeachment is based on 2nd hand information of someone that didn't "feel" it was proper.

Like all Fascists, you've got an investigation looking for a crime.

Vindman was present at the conversation, and he testified that key points of the conversation were left out of what the white house released. A first hand witness disputes it's accuracy.

Vindman (for the millionth time) didn't agree with the political policy -
If he wants to set political policy, he should run for the office that sets political policy
Right now, and for the foreseeable future, that is Donald J. Trump.

The political policy of Trump extorting Ukraine for his own political gain is wrong. That doesn't make Vindman a liar.

 

[Billiejeens]

They predicted a Hillary electoral landslide.

Oops!

Uh, no, they didn't. They predicted Hillary would win the popular vote by 3.2 points. She won by 2.2 points.

As always, you rightards prove to be too stupid to know the difference between polls and pollsters.

There is no national popular vote contest to win or lose.

Duh. There is no mandate when the President wins and lost the popular vote. The people know best, proved by Bush II and Trump who lost the popular vote, and both were total fuck ups.

Completely false

mandate: In politics, a mandate is the authority granted by a constituency to act as its representative.

The constituency is the entire voting public.

The concept of a government having a legitimate
mandate to govern via the fair winning of a democratic election is a central idea of representative democracy.

You're just an idiot
Hard to believe that you were able to actually be a successful groundskeeper

 

[Billiejeens]

Again, that is not a transcript. It says on the document that it is not a transcript.

Again... You've got nobody that disputes its accuracy.

The impeachment is based on 2nd hand information of someone that didn't "feel" it was proper.

Like all Fascists, you've got an investigation looking for a crime.

Vindman was present at the conversation, and he testified that key points of the conversation were left out of what the white house released. A first hand witness disputes it's accuracy.

Vindman (for the millionth time) didn't agree with the political policy -
If he wants to set political policy, he should run for the office that sets political policy
Right now, and for the foreseeable future, that is Donald J. Trump.

The political policy of Trump extorting Ukraine for his own political gain is wrong. That doesn't make Vindman a liar.

It is less that he is a liar and more that he is simply irrelevant.
President's set political policy
Presidents empower people to carry out that policy
They can empower anyone.

I get that the little deviants over at State don't like normal people getting in their pond - But Fuck them.

 

[Faun]

Well you prove again that you're an idiot. Of course there is. That's why the popular vote count is known for every presidential election. If just doesn't decide who wins the election.

If it is an actual thing, what does someone do with it?

Brag. Like Trump did when he bragged he had actually won it -- even though he didn't.

He did.
He won 30 States over Hillary's 20.

LOL

You dumbshit. He bragged he won the popular vote.

No he didn't.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-he-would-have-lost-a-popular-vote-election/
Donald J. Trump on Twitter

Yes, he did...

 

[Faun]

Polls were remarkably accurate.

They predicted a Hillary electoral landslide.

Oops!

Uh, no, they didn't. They predicted Hillary would win the popular vote by 3.2 points. She won by 2.2 points.

As always, you rightards prove to be too stupid to know the difference between polls and pollsters.

Once again you demonstrate you are completely ignorant of the subject you are attempting to debate.

There is a 95 percent chance Hillary Clinton wins the Electoral College by 118 votes: poll

ELECTORAL MAP: Hillary Clinton is on track for a blowout win in November

Should Clinton Play For An Electoral College Landslide?

Electoral College Map Update: Pollster Predicts Hillary Clinton Landslide, Winning All Swing States Except Iowa, Ohio

Hillary Clinton Will Win The 2016 Election By A Landslide: FiveThirtyEight’s Poll Guru Nate Silver Predicted Obama, Will The Trump Prediction Be True?

Hillary Clinton Will Win by a Landslide Against Donald Trump

LOLOL

You brain-dead cons crack me up. Dumbfuck, there is no such thing as an electoral college poll. What there is, are individual state polls. Swing states are too close to call and what happened in 2016 was pollsters, not polls, assign those states to Hillary's column. Pollsters were wrong. Polls were remarkably close.

You cult freaks never learn.

You really are a moron. Those pollsters use their state by state polls showing who is ahead in each one, and then calculate the electoral outcome.

I proved you wrong, idiot. Deal with it.

^^^ A dumbfuck who doesn't understand MoE in a poll too close to call.

 

[Faun]

Polls were remarkably accurate.

They predicted a Hillary electoral landslide.

Oops!

Uh, no, they didn't. They predicted Hillary would win the popular vote by 3.2 points. She won by 2.2 points.

As always, you rightards prove to be too stupid to know the difference between polls and pollsters.

Once again you demonstrate you are completely ignorant of the subject you are attempting to debate.

There is a 95 percent chance Hillary Clinton wins the Electoral College by 118 votes: poll

ELECTORAL MAP: Hillary Clinton is on track for a blowout win in November

Should Clinton Play For An Electoral College Landslide?

Electoral College Map Update: Pollster Predicts Hillary Clinton Landslide, Winning All Swing States Except Iowa, Ohio

Hillary Clinton Will Win The 2016 Election By A Landslide: FiveThirtyEight’s Poll Guru Nate Silver Predicted Obama, Will The Trump Prediction Be True?

Hillary Clinton Will Win by a Landslide Against Donald Trump

LOLOL

You brain-dead cons crack me up. Dumbfuck, there is no such thing as an electoral college poll. What there is, are individual state polls. Swing states are too close to call and what happened in 2016 was pollsters, not polls, assign those states to Hillary's column. Pollsters were wrong. Polls were remarkably close.

You cult freaks never learn.

If those polls were remarkably close, how did they get so many states wrong.

Oops!

Only 1 state was wrong.

Learn about MoE, cultist.