First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply Results of the 1st 2016 Debate
27741 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/28/16
it is actually not a presidential election, it is a big survey for the rest of the world on the
matter of actually how much percentage of the USA is retarded.
28192 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/28/16

PhantomGundam wrote:
In regards to online polls, this is nothing new. Trump's supporters always swarm online polls right after every debate. All it takes is posting the link on some place like reddit and every person there will fanatically rush to the poll. Also, anyone can vote in those so there's no way of knowing how many of those people are even U.S. citizens eligible to vote. I found an online poll a while ago for New York that had a 3-way race (Trump, Hillary, and Gary Johnson). The results at the time showed Trump winning NY with over 70%. The results were obviously skewed. I have yet to see a single online poll that doesn't overestimate Trump's support.


Hell, its not even supporters at this point. Its 4chan for the lulz. The first full polls conducting should be interesting though. No one is leaving either side's camp at this point. This election is too bitter and polarizing. That leaves mainly undecided voters ( ie morons ) and independents ( who don't typically like extremes ) as up for grabs.

But I mean, even some folks of Stormfront thought Trump lost this one. If even the white supremacists think he fucked this up... -.-

16729 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 9/28/16

qwueri wrote:



The closest he comes to opposition in that clip is 'I wish Bush would wait on the coalition'.


Thus at the time he would be considered anti-iraq because he was delaying it. Its no different from any potential war where those for the war want to attack and those who get labeled against the war are either against it, stall it, or want to wait for others till the issue dies down.
16729 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 9/28/16

SirWilburn wrote:


Rujikin wrote:


SirWilburn wrote:


Ocale wrote:


Savagely69 wrote:

Hillary a lier but I don't get why trump supporters are saying he won, from the looks of it he was struggling last night (not a hillary supporter im actually a trump supporter)


Look at the OP. He struggled because they barraged him with way more questions while Hilary got extra time to think and stay composed.


If you mean to imply the debate was bias said questions were given to Trump due to his conflicting statements such as his claim he was against war where it's documented he was for the war. I'd like to think that's something you as a voter would want to be aware of.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/27/2003-clip-backs-up-trump-on-iraq-war-opposition.html


Even if you ignore the Howard Stern interview, "do it or don't do it" is not taking a stance against the war, at best he can claim he was disinterested at that time. In any case neither response paints the man in a positive light.


He was a businessman. Businessmen are more interested in their business than some foreign affairs. It paints him as not a politician at the time.
7547 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Ark-La-Tex
Offline
Posted 9/28/16
We now have a few scientific polls out.



16729 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 9/28/16

geauxtigers1989 wrote:

We now have a few scientific polls out.





CNN... Scientific.... ROFL so I suppose that that last big foot spotting was performed by a "reputable scientist" that proves the existence of big foot! CNN is literally a multimillion dollar cable tv "rag mag".
5318 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 9/28/16

SirWilburn wrote:


Punk_Mela wrote:


SirWilburn wrote:


Ocale wrote:


Savagely69 wrote:

Hillary a lier but I don't get why trump supporters are saying he won, from the looks of it he was struggling last night (not a hillary supporter im actually a trump supporter)


Look at the OP. He struggled because they barraged him with way more questions while Hilary got extra time to think and stay composed.


If you mean to imply the debate was bias said questions were given to Trump due to his conflicting statements such as his claim he was against war where it's documented he was for the war. I'd like to think that's something you as a voter would want to be aware of.


This was undoubtedly a biased debate, those questions weren't given because he flip flopped on the war, if that was the case Hillary would have been grilled on the same thing as she initially supported the war. Main talking points against Hillary were left out and wholly unnecessary talking points such as birtherism were lingered on entirely too long for Trump in a deliberate bias. This too Hillary is entirely implicated in and yet Trump was undoubtedly the one being attacked on both subjects. Meanwhile talk over certain felonious emails was pretty much non existent (you would think it would come up more seeing how both candidates spoke so intensely about cyber security) biased debate is biased, we all expected it no need to act shocked. Hillary Clinton undoubtedly has established mainstream media backing her.


There's nothing to grill Clinton on about the Iraq war, she admitted to supporting the war and called it a mistake, there's nothing more to go into. She was also asked about the emails and again said it was a mistake to delete them, again there's nothing more you can go into after that. Anything else said about the emails that doesn't come from Hillary or her campaign teams mouth can only be considered gossip. Sorry, but whatever evidence of the crime she's thought to have committed in those emails is gone, so I guess you can say she got away with it. I guess it just goes to show that sometimes the truth really does set you free.



I can see your point with Iraq, I think for the questioner avoiding grilling her about it makes sense, but in the context of her discussion she was calling Trump out not for flip flopping but for bad policy. She should have been called on it IMO. As for the emails I entirely disagree, she did get away but the evidence is not gone, there is plenty of video evidence of her lying to congress and the people. If Trump is called on a lie about Iraq why was she not grilled for a lie about emails? Aside from that there are about a million questions regarding the emails that should have been asked that were not solely relevant to trying to indict her. Cyber Security was a major issue in the debate, why were the emails not brought up during this, extremely relevant and an important issue, if she was ignorant of computer systems and cyber security how does she plan to deal with cyber warfare specifically? If she was simply neglectful knowing the compromising position she left classified material in (this one being what actually happened) why should she be trusted on her cyber security policies? Issue at the forefront of the discussion completed glossed over.
172 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / M / MI
Offline
Posted 9/29/16
I honestly think that both of them didn't do that well. None of them "won" by a lot, maybe Trump just slightly.
172 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / M / MI
Offline
Posted 9/29/16

bensonc120 wrote:

The interesting part on the polls is that Trump has a distinct advantage in getting support from voters without a college education while Hilary polls better with college or higher educated voters.


And a lot of people at colleges are SJW's who would vote for Hillary any day of the week without second thought. So of course they'd vote for Hillary.
qwueri 
16404 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 9/29/16

Rujikin wrote:

Thus at the time he would be considered anti-iraq because he was delaying it. Its no different from any potential war where those for the war want to attack and those who get labeled against the war are either against it, stall it, or want to wait for others till the issue dies down.


Sorry, as much as you may want it to be so, waiting to build a coalition to go to war with Iraq is still going to war with Iraq. Trump has yet to claim in the past year something that nuanced, he's doubled down that he opposed the war fullstop.


FuruBoks wrote:


bensonc120 wrote:

The interesting part on the polls is that Trump has a distinct advantage in getting support from voters without a college education while Hilary polls better with college or higher educated voters.


And a lot of people at colleges are SJW's who would vote for Hillary any day of the week without second thought. So of course they'd vote for Hillary.



Most people with college degrees are no longer at colleges.
31059 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Los Angeles, CA
Offline
Posted 9/29/16

FuruBoks wrote:


bensonc120 wrote:

The interesting part on the polls is that Trump has a distinct advantage in getting support from voters without a college education while Hilary polls better with college or higher educated voters.


And a lot of people at colleges are SJW's who would vote for Hillary any day of the week without second thought. So of course they'd vote for Hillary.


Not talking about people currently in college but the people who have a degree. They may have been done with college years ago.
18680 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / F
Online
Posted 9/29/16

namealreadytaken wrote:

the debate certainly felt biased in favor of Clinton. i like how in virtually all polls, except CNN, Trump appears to be ahead of Hillary.
i suspect a poll by NY Times will also show Hillary as leading.

"people with college education are voting Hillary"
i loled.


I did some college, am changing majors due to medicial issues I thought long and hard about...
I wanted to go into the vetinary field




and I am voting trump
18680 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / F
Online
Posted 9/29/16

Punk_Mela wrote:


SirWilburn wrote:


Punk_Mela wrote:


SirWilburn wrote:


Ocale wrote:


Savagely69 wrote:

Hillary a lier but I don't get why trump supporters are saying he won, from the looks of it he was struggling last night (not a hillary supporter im actually a trump supporter)


Look at the OP. He struggled because they barraged him with way more questions while Hilary got extra time to think and stay composed.


If you mean to imply the debate was bias said questions were given to Trump due to his conflicting statements such as his claim he was against war where it's documented he was for the war. I'd like to think that's something you as a voter would want to be aware of.


This was undoubtedly a biased debate, those questions weren't given because he flip flopped on the war, if that was the case Hillary would have been grilled on the same thing as she initially supported the war. Main talking points against Hillary were left out and wholly unnecessary talking points such as birtherism were lingered on entirely too long for Trump in a deliberate bias. This too Hillary is entirely implicated in and yet Trump was undoubtedly the one being attacked on both subjects. Meanwhile talk over certain felonious emails was pretty much non existent (you would think it would come up more seeing how both candidates spoke so intensely about cyber security) biased debate is biased, we all expected it no need to act shocked. Hillary Clinton undoubtedly has established mainstream media backing her.


There's nothing to grill Clinton on about the Iraq war, she admitted to supporting the war and called it a mistake, there's nothing more to go into. She was also asked about the emails and again said it was a mistake to delete them, again there's nothing more you can go into after that. Anything else said about the emails that doesn't come from Hillary or her campaign teams mouth can only be considered gossip. Sorry, but whatever evidence of the crime she's thought to have committed in those emails is gone, so I guess you can say she got away with it. I guess it just goes to show that sometimes the truth really does set you free.



I can see your point with Iraq, I think for the questioner avoiding grilling her about it makes sense, but in the context of her discussion she was calling Trump out not for flip flopping but for bad policy. She should have been called on it IMO. As for the emails I entirely disagree, she did get away but the evidence is not gone, there is plenty of video evidence of her lying to congress and the people. If Trump is called on a lie about Iraq why was she not grilled for a lie about emails? Aside from that there are about a million questions regarding the emails that should have been asked that were not solely relevant to trying to indict her. Cyber Security was a major issue in the debate, why were the emails not brought up during this, extremely relevant and an important issue, if she was ignorant of computer systems and cyber security how does she plan to deal with cyber warfare specifically? If she was simply neglectful knowing the compromising position she left classified material in (this one being what actually happened) why should she be trusted on her cyber security policies? Issue at the forefront of the discussion completed glossed over.


imo , when I saw the video of him saying to if we was for Iraq and responding with "i dont know....I guess "

that is exactly how I answer things im reluctant to answer because its neither yes or no , to me it was that, so it couldn't truly be "trump was for Iraq"
28192 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/29/16
Speaking of, it looks like the FBI director is getting pretty pissed at being pointlessly hauled before congress over and over for political theatre. But, then, we all knew this would be Benghazi 2.0: This Time Fore Sure!

If they really feel so passionate about email security all of a sudden can we haul Bush back in? I mean, the RNC itself literally ran a private email server for the Bush admin and millions of emails were deleted. Oh, and Powell and Rice too. They used private email accounts. So lets haul them back in too. I mean, its not like any Republican leaked classified information and publicly endangered a CIA agent but got away with no charge-oh wait. Or that any other republican lied under oath in regards to it but had his sentence commuted by the Presiden-oh wait.

Unless, of course, its only important when Clinton does it. -.-





13127 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Online
Posted 9/29/16

geauxtigers1989 wrote:

We now have a few scientific polls out.





While it seems certain people want to ignore this post, it looks pretty unanimous. All the scientific polls I've seen have given Clinton a clear lead in this debate (PS: Scientific refers to the methodology. It doesn't matter how you feel about the host.).

As for how this actually affected voters, if you look at the fivethirtyeight election forecast, on the day of the debate the odds were 54.8% Clinton to 45.2% Trump, and now they are at 62.4% Clinton and 37.5% Trump. Clinton looks like she got a solid uptick from this debate.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.