Who are you voting for?

[Osmia]

So I guess Donald Trump and his campaign wanted to prove that the polls were rigged against him and started his own poll to show that people agree with him? Good thing these questions aren't worded to make himself look good or anything.

Link to post: http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1263405

Link to poll questionnaire: https://gop.com/survey/mainstream-media-survey/

Blaming the MSM--last refuge of the loser^H^H^H^H^H losing candidate.

I took the poll and put in a bunch of random, bogus responses. I submitted the form and was presented with a GOP donation form, which was obviously the whole point.

 

[DFT]

Avoid tainted pools and Vote for Jill.

She's been running longer than these newcomers. Let her into the debates.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

I took the poll and put in a bunch of random, bogus responses. I submitted the form and was presented with a GOP donation form, which was obviously the whole point.

I tried to take it, but got sidetracked wondering why no-one will say "radical Islam" (or why anyone should give a shit). Then I spied a word that started with the letter "B", and I lost my freaking mind.

 

[Lexi Emerson]

Blaming the MSM--last refuge of the loser^H^H^H^H^H losing candidate.

I took the poll and put in a bunch of random, bogus responses. I submitted the form and was presented with a GOP donation form, which was obviously the whole point.

Yes, my roommate did the same and quickly realized you can't even put 0 as a dontation amount.

I just can't get over that someone his campaign said, "yep that'll convince everyone that people prefer Trump and the polls are rigged!"

 

[justjoinedtopost]

TIL polls show Herman Cain's view of Trump is correct, except when they are manipulated or just wrong.

Going to have to be more careful about which polls I base my views on. May have to do some Extreme Vetting.

 

[Admiralfoot]

most polls are garbage.

The comparisons to Kennedy and Reagan are interesting because neither of them were projected to win either. Kennedy beat Nixon in a very close race. And though Reagan won in a landslide, public support was not solidified until the end of the debates in October.

The Presidential debates haven't even started and people are making predictions... Idk if you've ever paid any attention to Hillary in a debate, but she's pretty bad at it. Obama destroyed her in 08. She's not quick enough on her feet plus now there's the addition of her record as SOS being terribad. Can't see how she's going debate her way out of that.

I recall the gubernatorial vote in NY in 1994 between Cuomo and Pataki. The day before the election, the press was predicting Cuomo would win in a landslide and the polls had him leading by double digits. Pataki ended up winning...wasn't a landslide (3-4%), but major swing from the polling numbers.

 

[Nordling]

 

[LuckySmiles]

I recall the gubernatorial vote in NY in 1994 between Cuomo and Pataki. The day before the election, the press was predicting Cuomo would win in a landslide and the polls had him leading by double digits. Pataki ended up winning...wasn't a landslide (3-4%), but major swing from the polling numbers.

Exactly, it all depends on the targeted audience of the poll, willngness to participate, polling questions, they can be skewed in any desired direction.

I mean hi... according to the current poll of members of ACF Bernie Sanders is going to win in a landslide. Derp.

 

[KBdarling]

This doesn't really answer the question of who I'm voting for, but I was drunk at a bar the other night....And next thing I know Donald Trump's face was on about 8 screens in that bar.... and there is nothing like seeing Donald Trump's face on so many screens to sober you up real quick.

 

[KBdarling]

His kids are very together , happy and many ppl mentioned extra nice. Even Ben Carson remarked his family is very warm and just the way his kids are they appear to come from a healthy loving environment. Being a good dad is who he is so he must care about someone beside himself. Ah anyway will not be buying a bridge from you cause your icon is scary lol.

Well, I guess if you can churn out a son who likes to kill animals for fun you are doing a damn good job as a father.

Unfortunately, the warmth of someone's family doesn't make them qualified to run an entire country.

P.S. - I like your picture you're adorable. Just something to think about.

 

[SexySteph]

Exactly, it all depends on the targeted audience of the poll, willngness to participate, polling questions, they can be skewed in any desired direction.

I mean hi... according to the current poll of members of ACF Bernie Sanders is going to win in a landslide. Derp.

Well the poll is who WOULD you vote for, not who ARE you voting for. So I think that definitely skews the results.

 

[LuckySmiles]

Well the poll is who WOULD you vote for, not who ARE you voting for. So I think that definitely skews the results.

Ok fine but he had the same kind of lead before he was out. That would still be a predictable result of a poll on a camgirl forum given the average age and interests of many of the members.

(Although IMO I'd expect most cammers to be Republican/Libertarian and for less laws/regulations limiting to private business but that's another can of worms)

 

[Osmia]

Listened to an interesting podcast about Hillary Clinton's trust/truthfulness issues. I found it to be more informative than just about anything I've read, because the podcast host interviewed three people who've known and worked closely with her. One was especially critical of her, especially on the email issue. Since it comes from the liberal NY Times, and features people who actually know her, it has more credibility with me than the standard right wing machine attack points.

I doubt it will change many minds, but I feel better informed, at least.

It's a half hour long
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/16/podcasts/hillary-clinton-trust.html

 

[LuckySmiles]

Since it comes from the liberal NY Times, and features people who actually know her, it has more credibility with me than the standard right wing machine attack points.

The NY Times LITERALLY FUNDS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY
how hard is this to realize.

There's a reason people like me have a penchant towards things like webcamming than MSM jobs!! Honest journalism doesn't pay very well. And the alternatives impair your ability to sleep at night.

But then again Karl Marx was a disgruntled underpaid(in his mind) journalist so watch out ya'll!!

 

[Osmia]

The NY Times LITERALLY FUNDS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY
how hard is this to realize.....

The NY Times is the establishment, whoever that happens to be at the time.

In any case, my point was that if the NY Times is being critical of Hillary, I take it more seriously because it comes from an entity that basically supports Hillary. Sort of like the concept of "admission against interest" in law.

 

[LuckySmiles]

The NY Times is the establishment, whoever that happens to be at the time.

In any case, my point was that if the NY Times is being critical of Hillary, I take it more seriously because it comes from an entity that basically supports Hillary. Sort of like the concept of "admission against interest" in law.

I get that but I don't have to even look at it to know it's going to be a soft criticism. Like "she's bad... but not that bad" with no actual investigative journalism.

 

[Osmia]

I get that but I don't have to even look at it to know it's going to be a soft criticism. Like "she's bad... but not that bad" with no actual investigative journalism.

There's really no "investigative journalism" to be done. These "scandals" have been investigated to death already.

I don't know that I would call it "soft" criticism. It's just very matter of fact and dispassionate, unlike the right wing's typical overheated, exaggerated reaction to every little scandal or mini-scandal that comes along (as long as it's against dems, that is).

 

[LuckySmiles]

There's really no "investigative journalism" to be done. These "scandals" have been investigated to death already.

That's a matter of your opinion.
And which scandals. The most recent is coming out right now with George Soros giving her advice and directives on international policy during her time as Secretary of State.

It'd be foolish to consider nothing like that has ever happened before in light of all the information continuously being exposed.

 

[Osmia]

The most recent is coming out right now with George Soros giving her advice and directives on international policy during her time as Secretary of State......

Citation?

BTW, the FBI just released Clinton's interview notes....to Congress, marked Secret. So, the Republican-controlled committees and members will be able to selectively mine the content, and oh-so-accidentally leak them. It won't make a difference to the election contest, but they can get their followers all riled up, which is all that matters.

 

[LuckySmiles]

Citation?

I posted a leaked email between them about Albania the other day...under the pic, yo.

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/28972

Important to note he's also one of her major funders in her campaign as well as the Clinton Foundation.

He was hacked just the other day (http://soros.dcleaks.com/) and people are still combing through the emails that indicate his roles in messing with government all over the world...

There's plenty of information out there all the time, but for whatever reason people don't seem to notice.

 

[SoTxBob]

Since the reception was so encouraging for the last one, here's more just for you lovely folks.


[GALLERY=media, 1824]Schultz by SoTxBob posted Aug 15, 2016 at 4:00 PM[/GALLERY][GALLERY=media, 1826]138921 by SoTxBob posted Aug 15, 2016 at 4:02 PM[/GALLERY]

 

[justjoinedtopost]

There's really no "investigative journalism" to be done. These "scandals" have been investigated to death already.

I don't know that I would call it "soft" criticism. It's just very matter of fact and dispassionate, unlike the right wing's typical overheated, exaggerated reaction to every little scandal or mini-scandal that comes along (as long as it's against dems, that is).

I come from this background.

The overheated, exaggerated views are like a drug. Once you have a taste for it, rationality completely loses its savor. Nothing else will satisfy you.

You will need to have your body counts, your rape victims, your email servers, your George Soros, your Benghazi, your Marxist leanings, your assaults on the Second Amendment, your abortion holocaust. You will need people to direct the outrage you feel at. War is pointless unless you have an enemy. And what good is an enemy if you can't demonize them?

 

[IndyMan2012]

Okay, let's just start out with saying that, politely, what we have in this election are a collection of...ahem...flawed candidates.

For me, personally? I'm not an avid Clinton fan, but I honestly consider her to be the least smelly turd in this election. Jill Stein is a conspiracy theorist, Ron Johnson is a climate change denier (among other things) and Trump is...well, he's incredibly Trump, which should not only disqualify him from holding public office, but should likely disqualify him from participation in the human race.

And being from Indiana, I could go on about the evils of Mike Pence for literally DAYS, which is also (in my book) a disqualifying factor in my book.

Clinton has her warts too, I'm in no way denying that. Anyone that tries to deny it is being foolish and naive. But when the other three choices are "wacko" "science denier" and "mentally unstable carnival barker", the choice becomes a lot easier to make.

And yes, of course, this is just my opinion.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

...Jill Stein is a conspiracy theorist...

She's my back-up candidate. As it currently stands, I'm voting Trump if it looks like that will help cripple the destructive, toxic, right wing that has undermined our government. But if Trump continues to flush himself down the toilet, there won't be much point in that.

About Jill...I'm not too worried about conspiracy theory stuff at this point. I don't think her views alone would be enough to put an end to vaccines; and if she tried to get rid of our cell-phones, there would be riots in the streets. Saw her interviewed yesterday on one of the networks; she presented herself as a lot saner than the things I have read would suggest.

More worrisome to me (assuming the GP had a chance, which they don't) is the anti-corporate talk. I am pretty anti-corporate myself, and I agree with some of what I read on the GP's platform. Some of it, though, conjures up images of Pol Pot's re-education program.

Then there is this opinion from The Hill:
"Like Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, Stein is merely interested in pointing to the angriest voice in the crowd and amplifying it, without any regard for the scientific truth."
This is pretty much the whole problem with the right/left.

 

[Lili_xo]

The NY Times is the establishment, whoever that happens to be at the time.

In any case, my point was that if the NY Times is being critical of Hillary, I take it more seriously because it comes from an entity that basically supports Hillary. Sort of like the concept of "admission against interest" in law.

Carlos Slim last time I checked pulled the strings of the puppet New York Times. He - Carlos- wants open borders cause is the way he makes money. how he makes money there I am not fully aware of other than from the phone cards illegals use but he has a lot of money must be more businesses.
Ppl with money and agenda often buy media which later brainwash ppl with slogans and various articles. A person who reads couple of articles might consider self well informed and makes statements like dude above - trump is just trump and he got to be eliminated cause he trump- or something other.
Withouth research and independent thinking and ability to draw own conclusions from many sources one is nothing more than a pawn in a game played by whoever currently is behind the media. The media not only posts writes whatever negative but withholds facts that could help draw ther right conclusions.

 

[Lili_xo]

Btw New York Times the copies that are pushed at me at Starbucks and I glance once in a while scream snoozefest headlines written in pragmatic and respectable of course language that reminds me of era behind the iron curtain when slogans ruled their world.

 

[LuckySmiles]

If you guys want another scoop of the week, it's a newer probe into the Clinton Foundation being headed up by US Attorney Preet Bharara. Look him up. He's not a republican, he has a rep for taking out corruption and he don't give a fuuug. He's one of the most renowned attorneys out there. Just check him for yourself.

He's heading this latest investigation of the Clinton Foundations shadiness into their New York office. You're not going to see this much in the news, shocking I know. But just find out who he is, know that's going on right now, and boom there's your story.

 

[Lili_xo]

Clinton Foundation? No way! Way too respectable a name! Nothing on Twitter that would be considered bad language !
Wait...is this the same organization that took money for Haiti hospital and just kept it? Was that story ever explained because can't keep up with all the Hillary scandals.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

View attachment 65028
Btw New York Times the copies that are pushed at me at Starbucks and I glance once in a while scream snoozefest headlines written in pragmatic and respectable of course language that reminds me of era behind the iron curtain when slogans ruled their world.

There are no words to describe the absurdity of posting a picture that screams "CRONY CAPITALISM", and then attempting to link that with the threat of communism (i.e. "reminds me of era behind the iron curtain").

 

[Lili_xo]

NYTimes = slogans -pure brainwashing and carefully edited propaganda - etc is what i meant