Trump has a 97 percent chance of beating Hillary Clinton in the general election

moon2012 said:
As I said- and I'll say it again for the slower ships of the convoy- there is no visible differentiation between the writings of the journalist and any comment that our resident Daily Mail sandwich-board twazzock might have added.
In short you have no way of knowing what the twat has written or what the twat has copied-and-pasted- unless you assume that he doesn't have an opinion and has therefore posted naff-all- or that he is so tightly in lock-step with the journalist quoted that his own mind is rendered redundant.
This is a debate forum after all- not a Daily Mail Internet outlet.
Click to expand...
Fuck me rigid, you're like a dog with a bone and rabid to boot. Do shut up now child, it is getting rather boring.
 
moon2012 said:
As I said- " It's convention to signify other people's comments by means of quotation marks or the use of the ' quote ' box. Not doing so implies that the OP is the author of the text- and he ain't. His own comments don't exist. "

As things stand , readers, in passing. might think that the text accompanying your frequent Daily Mail links is penned by you- and therefore be misled as to your actual level of intelligence. It's an annoyance- so I'll continue to draw your attention to it.
Click to expand...

LMFAO. You're one dumb monkey. Not even Yahoo or any repeater of a news story does that. LMFAO.
 
moon2012 said:
Just take a look at yourself, Fool. Where is your contribution to this place ?
Click to expand...

did the fucking idiot with 1,027 posts just ask the guy with 27,752 posts "where is your contribution to this place"?.........face it moon, you fucked up.....by anyone's conventions it was obviously pasted......just admit you were wrong and stop digging your hole deeper........
 
PostmodernProphet said:
did the fucking idiot with 1,027 posts just ask the guy with 27,752 posts "where is your contribution to this place"?.........face it moon, you fucked up.....by anyone's conventions it was obviously pasted......just admit you were wrong and stop digging your hole deeper........
Click to expand...

No - no - no!!

Let's see how deep he intends to dig!! :D
 
moon2012 said:
As I said- and I'll say it again for the slower ships of the convoy- there is no visible differentiation between the writings of the journalist and any comment that our resident Daily Mail sandwich-board twazzock might have added.
In short you have no way of knowing what the twat has written or what the twat has copied-and-pasted- unless you assume that he doesn't have an opinion and has therefore posted naff-all- or that he is so tightly in lock-step with the journalist quoted that his own mind is rendered redundant.
This is a debate forum after all- not a Daily Mail Internet outlet.
Click to expand...
In spite of you attempting to turn JPP into a mouthpiece for Daesh.
 
Polling consistency shows that Kasich, Rubio, Cruz, and even Carson can all beat Hillary. Kasich can do it handily. Trump has never out-polled Hillary, and he's the only candidate with a higher unfavorable rating.
 
Konono said:
LMFAO. You're one dumb monkey. Not even Yahoo or any repeater of a news story does that. LMFAO.
Click to expand...

PostmodernProphet said:
did the fucking idiot with 1,027 posts just ask the guy with 27,752 posts "where is your contribution to this place"?.........face it moon, you fucked up.....by anyone's conventions it was obviously pasted......just admit you were wrong and stop digging your hole deeper........
Click to expand...

USFREEDOM911 said:
No - no - no!!

Let's see how deep he intends to dig!! :D
Click to expand...

Borboletta said:
In spite of you attempting to turn JPP into a mouthpiece for Daesh.
Click to expand...

As I said- and I'll say it again for the slower ships of the convoy- there is no visible differentiation between the writings of the journalist and any comment that our resident Daily Mail sandwich-board twazzock might have added.
In short you have no way of knowing what the twat has written or what the twat has copied-and-pasted- unless you assume that he doesn't have an opinion and has therefore posted naff-all- or that he is so tightly in lock-step with the journalist quoted that his own mind is rendered redundant.
This is a debate forum after all- not a Daily Mail Internet outlet.
 
Eno L. Camino said:
Polling consistency shows that Kasich, Rubio, Cruz, and even Carson can all beat Hillary. Kasich can do it handily. Trump has never out-polled Hillary, and he's the only candidate with a higher unfavorable rating.
Click to expand...

Polls all said Romney could beat Obama handily.

POlls had Jimmy Carter ahead of Reagan on election day.

Seriously?
 
  • Norpoth's model has accurately predicted the winner of every national election since 1912, The Statesman reports, except the election of 1960
Click to expand...

Norpoth's model did not exist in 1912, so it cannot be said to have "predicted" the election. You can very easily throw together a bunch of variables to create a model that fits past data. This model, however, cannot be said to predictive of future results.
 
balllllllsssss said:
those are ridiculous numbers and flies in the face of what almost every other head to head match up poll that is out there right now.
Click to expand...

Any sensible model should show Trump as the least electable candidate. Again, the professor here just threw together a bunch of variables until they fit past data and confirmed his wishes. I could do the same and show a 100% chance of Bernie Sanders winning.
 
reason10 said:
Polls all said Romney could beat Obama handily.

POlls had Jimmy Carter ahead of Reagan on election day.

Seriously?
Click to expand...

By election day Obama was well, well ahead of Romney. You were probably paying attention to rightist wishful-thinking sites. I was paying attention to fivethirtyeight and betting markets, so I was in tune with reality.
 
Furthermore, Ronald Reagan led in all October/November polls before the election:

rkPQO9R.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top