Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 60

Thread: If crowd size and crowd enthusiasm were a better indicator than polling data....

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    93,650
    Thanks
    9,766
    Thanked 33,619 Times in 21,482 Posts
    Groans
    290
    Groaned 5,632 Times in 5,140 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default If crowd size and crowd enthusiasm were a better indicator than polling data....

    If crowd size and crowd enthusiasm were a better indicator than polling data Beto O'Rourke would win in a HUGE landslide.
    4,487

    18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
    44 U.S.C. 2202 - The United States shall reserve and retain complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records; and such records shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.


    LOCK HIM UP!

  2. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    If polling data was correct, Hillary would be President having won by a landslide. When it comes to what is actually used to pick a President, 304 wins and 227 loses.

    If most first downs, most total yards, etc. were what was used to determine the winner, NE would be Superbowl 52 champs instead of Philly.

  3. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    24,892
    Thanks
    4,196
    Thanked 15,334 Times in 9,321 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,825 Times in 2,563 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    If polling data was correct, Hillary would be President having won by a landslide.
    Hillary got 3,000,000 more votes dullard

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to reagansghost For This Post:

    iolo (11-03-2018)

  5. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    24,892
    Thanks
    4,196
    Thanked 15,334 Times in 9,321 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,825 Times in 2,563 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default Obama destroys MAGA heckler, sign of the times

    https://www.politicususa.com/2018/11...p-florida.html

    Posted on Fri, Nov 2nd, 2018 by Jason Easley
    Obama Destroys Trump After A MAGA Heckler Interrupts Him In Florida


    A heckler interrupted Obama who was campaigning for Democrats in Florida, so the former president responded by destroying the mentality and anger incited by Trump.

    Obama said, “Hold on a second. There’s an interesting observation I want to make. Why is it that — hold on, hold on, hold on. Why is it — why is it that the folks that won the last election are so mad all the time? It’s an interesting question. I mean, like, when I won the presidency at least my side felt pretty good. You know, I don’t know why — it tells you something interesting. That even the folks who are in charge are still mad. Because they’re getting ginned up to be mad. That’s the mindset.”

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to reagansghost For This Post:

    christiefan915 (11-02-2018), Frank Apisa (11-02-2018)

  7. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    134,846
    Thanks
    13,245
    Thanked 40,785 Times in 32,151 Posts
    Groans
    3,661
    Groaned 2,865 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarod View Post
    If crowd size and crowd enthusiasm were a better indicator than polling data Beto O'Rourke would win in a HUGE landslide.
    actually, demmycrats would lose all their seats.....

  8. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,713
    Thanks
    1,054
    Thanked 5,657 Times in 4,437 Posts
    Groans
    295
    Groaned 184 Times in 180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    If polling data was correct, Hillary would be President having won by a landslide. When it comes to what is actually used to pick a President, 304 wins and 227 loses.

    If most first downs, most total yards, etc. were what was used to determine the winner, NE would be Superbowl 52 champs instead of Philly.
    Polls can't show electoral vote. Most were just the national popular vote total and they were very accurate.

  9. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reagansghost View Post
    Hillary got 3,000,000 more votes dullard
    When overall popular vote is what determines the winner, that will matter. Since the CONSTITUTION says what it takes is a majority of electoral votes, 304 beats 227.

    Keep crying.

  10. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    24,892
    Thanks
    4,196
    Thanked 15,334 Times in 9,321 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,825 Times in 2,563 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    When overall popular vote is what determines the winner, that will matter. Since the CONSTITUTION says what it takes is a majority of electoral votes, 304 beats 227.

    Keep crying.
    the polls were correct dullard, Hillary won by 3,000,000 votes

    wow

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to reagansghost For This Post:

    iolo (11-03-2018)

  12. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    Polls can't show electoral vote. Most were just the national popular vote total and they were very accurate.
    Wouldn't any poll that views a type of vote that isn't used to determine the winner be irrelevant? That would be like focusing on first downs, total yards, etc. when it comes to who wins a football game when the final score is the ONLY thing that counts.

    As for you claim, polls can predict electoral vote if you view the popular vote with how it applies to electoral vote. Anyone trying to do otherwise proves they don't understand how the system works. Popular vote in California has absolutely nothing to do with the popular votes in Florida when it comes to picking the winner.

  13. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    134,846
    Thanks
    13,245
    Thanked 40,785 Times in 32,151 Posts
    Groans
    3,661
    Groaned 2,865 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reagansghost View Post
    Hillary got 3,000,000 more votes dullard
    there are six lib'ruls here that deny you exist.......they refuse to believe people can be that stupid.....

  14. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reagansghost View Post
    the polls were correct dullard, Hillary won by 3,000,000 votes

    wow
    The polls nor overall popular vote determine the winner. Electoral votes do and according to how the CONSTITUTION outlines the process, Trump won 304 - 227. The rest of it is just fodder for you whiners to use because you got your political asses kicked using the manner that has been used to pick every President since and including G. Washington. If you don't like the system, start the process to amend the Constitution.

  15. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    24,892
    Thanks
    4,196
    Thanked 15,334 Times in 9,321 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,825 Times in 2,563 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    Wouldn't any poll that views a type of vote that isn't used to determine the winner be irrelevant? That would be like focusing on first downs, total yards, etc. when it comes to who wins a football game when the final score is the ONLY thing that counts.

    As for you claim, polls can predict electoral vote if you view the popular vote with how it applies to electoral vote. Anyone trying to do otherwise proves they don't understand how the system works. Popular vote in California has absolutely nothing to do with the popular votes in Florida when it comes to picking the winner.
    check this out dimwit


  16. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Prairieville
    Posts
    27,356
    Thanks
    2,896
    Thanked 10,626 Times in 7,127 Posts
    Groans
    331
    Groaned 2,985 Times in 2,707 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    If polling data was correct, Hillary would be President having won by a landslide. When it comes to what is actually used to pick a President, 304 wins and 227 loses.

    If most first downs, most total yards, etc. were what was used to determine the winner, NE would be Superbowl 52 champs instead of Philly.

    I know you're pretty thick and I know this has been explained on here before and you've been too stupid to follow it but actually the polling data was correct Clinton won the vote.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to katzgar For This Post:

    iolo (11-03-2018)

  18. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reagansghost View Post
    https://www.politicususa.com/2018/11...p-florida.html

    Posted on Fri, Nov 2nd, 2018 by Jason Easley
    Obama Destroys Trump After A MAGA Heckler Interrupts Him In Florida


    A heckler interrupted Obama who was campaigning for Democrats in Florida, so the former president responded by destroying the mentality and anger incited by Trump.

    Obama said, “Hold on a second. There’s an interesting observation I want to make. Why is it that — hold on, hold on, hold on. Why is it — why is it that the folks that won the last election are so mad all the time? It’s an interesting question. I mean, like, when I won the presidency at least my side felt pretty good. You know, I don’t know why — it tells you something interesting. That even the folks who are in charge are still mad. Because they’re getting ginned up to be mad. That’s the mindset.”
    Someone should have explained to the dumbass nigger that he's confusing being mad with wondering why those that lost can't accept that they lost. I thought he was smart. Not so much.

  19. #15 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by katzgar View Post
    I know you're pretty thick and I know this has been explained on here before and you've been too stupid to follow it but actually the polling data was correct Clinton won the vote.
    I've explained to you that you can't win something that isn't part of the process. Polls that predict something that is irrelevant makes the polls irrelevant.

Similar Threads

  1. Trump says 'fake news' won't show rally crowd as CNN shows shot of crowd
    By FUCK THE POLICE in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-16-2018, 04:39 PM
  2. Replies: 95
    Last Post: 09-02-2017, 10:26 AM
  3. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-28-2017, 04:20 AM
  4. When was the last time the pro-war crowd was right?
    By Cancel 2020.1 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 06-06-2016, 09:37 AM
  5. Polling Data...
    By Damocles in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 09-07-2008, 06:18 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •