Printable View
[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2663615]2 fake impeachments and a Hilliary fabricated Russian collusion will not send Trump to jail. The DNC with their illegal dealings will be more likely in jail than Trump.[/QUOTE]What clear thinking Cali Guy demonstrates.
Has the DNC been indicted yet? HaHaHaHaHa.
[QUOTE=Canada;2663612]History will show that Hillary and DNC committed more crimes in 2 years than Rudy and Trump did in their lifetime.[/QUOTE]HaHaHaHaHa.
Rudy has been voluntarily admitting to a different felony each and every week.
So he has a head start.
HaHaHaHaHa.
[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2663615]2 fake impeachments and a Hilliary fabricated Russian collusion will not send Trump to jail. The DNC with their illegal dealings will be more likely in jail than Trump.[/QUOTE]The only thing Trump did wrong was crash the party. They can't let another candidate get away with that. Just like they can't let The People choose who they want to represent their interests. 21st century American Democracy is for oligarchs, big money, and corporations only.
[QUOTE=Golfinho;2663639]The only thing Trump did wrong was crash the party. They can't let another candidate get away with that. Just like they can't let The People choose who they want to represent their interests. 21st century American Democracy is for oligarchs, big money, and corporations only.[/QUOTE]That's exactly what they want you to believe and accept!
Don't be perpetuating their lies for them.
[QUOTE=AxelHeyst;2663477]Reliable pols show Trump with a 6 point lead over Biden and a double digit lead over the Kasmella. Dems read reliable pols too. This is why Clinton is indicating she would run again.[/QUOTE]What "reliable" polls? Care to share?
Seriously, man, if you have nothing, like zilch, zip, zero facts to back up your own statements, why even bother saying anything at all?
Would you post such generic, unsubstantiated BS in Brazil forum?
If not, ask yourself why.
[QUOTE=Xpartan;2663723]What "reliable" polls? Care to share?[/QUOTE]Sure, glad to.
[URL]https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/joe-biden-administration-approval-ratings-and-hypothetical-voting-intention-6-february-2022/[/URL]
[URL]https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/us/general-election-trump-vs-biden-7383.html[/URL]#!
[URL]https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president-biden-job-approval-7320.html[/URL]
[URL]https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/biden_administration/prez_track_feb15[/URL]
[URL]https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2022/50_support_biden_s_impeachment[/URL]
[URL]https://www.thetrafalgargroup.org/news/nat-issues-biden-approval-0120/[/URL]
[QUOTE=AxelHeyst;2663745]Sure, glad to.
[URL]https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/joe-biden-administration-approval-ratings-and-hypothetical-voting-intention-6-february-2022/[/URL]
[URL]https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/us/general-election-trump-vs-biden-7383.html[/URL]#!
[URL]https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president-biden-job-approval-7320.html[/URL]
[URL]https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/biden_administration/prez_track_feb15[/URL]
[URL]https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2022/50_support_biden_s_impeachment[/URL]
[URL]https://www.thetrafalgargroup.org/news/nat-issues-biden-approval-0120/[/URL][/QUOTE]For the head to head hypothetical poll question, only the ridiculous Harris Opt-in Online poll is from this year, January, when Trump began yammering on the campaign trail and Rasmussen's Daily Tracking Poll, which is notorious for oversampling Repubs and fairly consistently falls within the "outlyer" category among polling trends.
I don't know what the Trafalgar Poll was about, another Repub oversampler, because that link didn't open for me.
[QUOTE=AxelHeyst;2663745]Sure, glad to.
[URL]https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/joe-biden-administration-approval-ratings-and-hypothetical-voting-intention-6-february-2022/[/URL]
[URL]https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/us/general-election-trump-vs-biden-7383.html[/URL]#!
[URL]https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president-biden-job-approval-7320.html[/URL]
[URL]https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/biden_administration/prez_track_feb15[/URL]
[URL]https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2022/50_support_biden_s_impeachment[/URL]
[URL]https://www.thetrafalgargroup.org/news/nat-issues-biden-approval-0120/[/URL][/QUOTE]Dude, this is an equivalent of a "document dump," LOL. None of these links confirm that "Reliable pols show Trump with a 6 point lead over Biden".
Seriously, even if we forget how biased Rasmussen is, I haven't found any polls comparing Biden and Trump. I found the one from Redfield & Wilton (never heard of them) that marks them "neck to neck". So where is your 6 point lead? Other polls are just showing poor Biden's job performance, which is unfortunate, but has nothing to do with your claim.
But tell you what: if I miss something in your link barrage, my apologies. Please point me to a SPECIFIC document that backs it up. Should be easy.
[QUOTE=Xpartan;2663848]Dude, this is an equivalent of a "document dump," LOL. None of these links confirm that "Reliable pols show Trump with a 6 point lead over Biden".
Seriously, even if we forget how biased Rasmussen is,[/QUOTE]Seriously? I get that you don't like Rasmussen, the Left hates Rasmussen because Rasmussen does not give them what they want, but you outside of politics seem to be a reasonable fellow punter, more or less, KKK, so maybe should reconsider your bias against the company. I trust Rasmussen because it has had the best track record for the last 2 elections. Trafalgar is also a very reliable, unbiased poll. These 2 pols were the only ones that got 2016 right the day before the election and they were the most accurate pols in 2020 as well.
Anyway, Rasmussen for at least the last 2 months has consistently put Biden between 40% & 43% likely voter favorability & 59% to 56% likely voter unfavorable and I think this accurately reflects how likely voters feel at the present time. But if you don't like or trust either one of these polls then Real Clear Politics is the one for you, but Biden doesn't do very to well with the averages either.
Down to cases: I remember seeing about 10 days ago a reliable pol with Trump up on average 6 pts or so over Biden & 10 pts over Kasmella. I am not making this up. If you want to a call me a liar go ahead, but here is the real clear politics link to that poll.
[URL]https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/us/general-election-trump-vs-biden-7383.html[/URL]#!
Meanwhile, I have not checked or verified the sampling proportions of the OP's poll, so I am not sure about it's accuracy or bias. I am not knocking it, just saying I haven't checked it out yet to make sure it is reliable. I am sure you are aware that pollsters can pretty much come up with any result they want based on their sampling technique and proportions. In addition, polls vary day to day so if the poll linked by the OP and other polls begin to show Biden ahead of Trump in a one on one, I will make note of it because I am into accuracy and want to know the truth as much as that is possible in these insane political times.
[QUOTE=Canada;2663612]History will show that Hillary and DNC committed more crimes in 2 years than Rudy and Trump did in their lifetime.[/QUOTE]History will not show anything close to that.
What history [B]will show[/B] is that the Mango Mussolini incited an insurrection at the Capitol on January 6th and that the RNC called the insurrection "legitimate political discourse".
What history [B]will show[/B] is the the one-term, twice-impeached, fake-POTUS former guy [B]ripped up[/B] documents that should have been sent [B]whole[/B] to the Archives. This is a criminal offence according to US law.
What history [B]will show[/B] is the he also [B]stole[/B] boxes of documents, some classified, and took them with him when he got kicked to the curb by real Americans. This is a criminal offence according to US law.
What history [B]will show[/B] is that he lied about the documents at Mar-a-Lago. An advisor will step forward and testify, under oath, that the Orange Buffoon packed some of the boxes himself and wouldn't let anybody see what was in them.
Even though history will show all of this, the Teflon Don won't spend a day in jail.
What history [B]will show[/B] is that the Orange Doofus used the cell phones of aides, his Secret Service protection detail, etc. To make political phone calls. Exactly as he has accused Hillary Clinton of doing.
What history [B]will show[/B] is that he made over 30,000 false, misleading or otherwise BS statements during the time he was running for office and during the time he occupied the White House.
What history [B]will show[/B] is that the Orange Fruitcake played golf for more days while "president" that any other President in US history, after he lied to the American people and said he'd be too busy working to play golf.
[B]History will also show[/B] that all of this is just the "tip of the iceberg".
[B]History will also show[/B] that all of the above will make no difference to supporters of the OTTIFPFG. They'll just keep drinking orange koolaid and think that the OTTIFPFG was the greatest "president" ever.
[QUOTE=AxelHeyst;2663944]Seriously? I get that you don't like Rasmussen, the Left hates Rasmussen because Rasmussen does not give them what they want, but you outside of politics seem to be a reasonable fellow punter, more or less, KKK, so maybe should reconsider your bias against the company. I trust Rasmussen because it has had the best track record for the last 2 elections. Trafalgar is also a very reliable, unbiased poll. These 2 pols were the only ones that got 2016 right the day before the election and they were the most accurate pols in 2020 as well.
Anyway, Rasmussen for at least the last 2 months has consistently put Biden between 40% & 43% likely voter favorability & 59% to 56% likely voter unfavorable and I think this accurately reflects how likely voters feel at the present time. But if you don't like or trust either one of these polls then Real Clear Politics is the one for you, but Biden doesn't do very to well with the averages either.
Down to cases: I remember seeing about 10 days ago a reliable pol with Trump up on average 6 pts or so over Biden & 10 pts over Kasmella. I am not making this up. If you want to a call me a liar go ahead, but here is the real clear politics link to that poll.
[URL]https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/us/general-election-trump-vs-biden-7383.html[/URL]#!
Meanwhile, I have not checked or verified the sampling proportions of the OP's poll, so I am not sure about it's accuracy or bias. I am not knocking it, just saying I haven't checked it out yet to make sure it is reliable. I am sure you are aware that pollsters can pretty much come up with any result they want based on their sampling technique and proportions. In addition, polls vary day to day so if the poll linked by the OP and other polls begin to show Biden ahead of Trump in a one on one, I will make note of it because I am into accuracy and want to know the truth as much as that is possible in these insane political times.[/QUOTE]I must apologize. This link was the second one in your original post, but I somehow missed the Biden vs. Trump poll. So, my bad. Whether or not I agree with that evaluation (I don't), you've sufficiently backed up your claim, LOL.
Now, like it or don't like it, but Rasmussen is incredibly biased and was actually caught with their pants down by 538 if memory serves me. I mean, come on they gave Trump 13 points, and you don't think that's a tiny little bit too much?
Anyway, the reason why I disagree with your findings is because they're old. There are newer polls and they are painting a very different picture.
[URL]https://nypost.com/2022/01/26/joe-biden-would-beat-donald-trump-in-2024-poll-shows[/URL]
[URL]https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/591590-biden-leading-trump-desantis-by-similar-margins-in-new-poll[/URL]
And a simple timed Google search will show there are more recent polls that have come to the same conclusion.
While no one is sugarcoating Biden's current unpopularity, it seems the Blood Orange is getting less and less relevant with every passing day.
[QUOTE=AxelHeyst;2663745]Sure, glad to.[/QUOTE]Axel, I found this poll in 2 seconds: [URL]https://www.newsweek.com/trump-widens-lead-over-biden-6-points-hypothetical-2024-matchup-poll-1662708[/URL].
Whenever a Democratic asks for sources, they do so to invalidate what you are saying.
If Tucker Carlson says 2 and 2 equal 4, these douches will be like, "Tucker Carlson would say that".
The best thing is to quote articles make them seem like they are your POV and then when they attack it, you can reveal that it is a neutral or left wing source.
For example, here is a great factual report on how Biden has fucked up the oil and gas and energy sector.
Here is a quote.
"The average USA Household in 2021 spent an extra $600 in higher gasoline costs and $70 in higher electricity costs. Further, households that use natural gas spent an extra $300, on average, and those using home heating oil paid $1,000 more. Cumulatively, the average American household paid about $1,000 in higher energy costs in 2021, compared to 2020.
Now if you list the article which is here they will say Zero hedge? Epoch Times? [URL]https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/biden-energy-policies-added-1000-typical-households-costs-2021-report[/URL].
This is THE Democratic method. Facts on ZH, epoch times, and Fox News do not count even if they are correct.
So it is best if you go to the source that is being quoted, in this case Heartland, and the report is here: [URL]https://www.heartland.org/publications-resources/publications/biden-energy-policies-cost-us-households-more-than-1000-in-2021[/URL].
It is kind of hard to go after Heartland as it is not as well known.
But the best way to trap them is to quote Democratic liberals but not say who they are and then catch them when they go against one of their own.
I have no problem saying Obama was a good president and Clinton was a great one, but Reagan was the best president in my lifetime, and it is amazing how these Democratic do not accept that. The guy won two fucking landslides, and they are like, "Oh, he sucked. " GW Bush who was once of the worst presidents in my lifetime gets a pass while the Democratic pile on Reagan. They completely lack any sense of being objective, and it is fun to poke that and show how full of shit and hypocritical they are.
I said Obama had a sound energy policy, and Biden's energy policy is a fucking joke. With them, all Democratic energy policies are great, and all Republican ones sucked. It does not matter what the price of gasoline is today. Biden is fucking great.
Democratic are not nice people, and they do not care what the price of gasoline is and how many people suffer. All they care about is if their guy is in charge.
[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2664122]Axel, I found this poll in 2 seconds: [URL]https://www.newsweek.com/trump-widens-lead-over-biden-6-points-hypothetical-2024-matchup-poll-1662708[/URL].
Whenever a Democratic asks for sources, they do so to invalidate what you are saying.[/QUOTE]I don't know about Democrats, but I just want to verify one's statement, that's all. If I can paste a link, I'm sure anyone can.
[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2664122]If Tucker Carlson says 2 and 2 equal 4, these douches will be like, "Tucker Carlson would say that".[/QUOTE]By "these douches" do you mean Carlson's own lawyers? Because according to the judge it was them who insisted "that Carlson is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary. ".
Are you mad at Carlson's lawyers, Elvis?
Wait, here is the source for you: [URL]https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye[/URL].
[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2664122]The best thing is to quote articles make them seem like they are your POV and then when they attack it, you can reveal that it is a neutral or left wing source.
For example, here is a great factual report on how Biden has fucked up the oil and gas and energy sector.
Here is a quote.
"The average USA Household in 2021 spent an extra $600 in higher gasoline costs and $70 in higher electricity costs. Further, households that use natural gas spent an extra $300, on average, and those using home heating oil paid $1,000 more. Cumulatively, the average American household paid about $1,000 in higher energy costs in 2021, compared to 2020.
Now if you list the article which is here they will say Zero hedge? Epoch Times? [URL]https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/biden-energy-policies-added-1000-typical-households-costs-2021-report[/URL].
This is THE Democratic method. Facts on ZH, epoch times, and Fox News do not count even if they are correct.
So it is best if you go to the source that is being quoted, in this case Heartland, and the report is here: [URL]https://www.heartland.org/publications-resources/publications/biden-energy-policies-cost-us-households-more-than-1000-in-2021[/URL].
It is kind of hard to go after Heartland as it is not as well known.[/QUOTE]Now you're just being silly (again). Nothing's easier than going after Heartland. After all, there aren't many "think tanks" that would boldly claim there was no correlation between smoking and health risks. It wouldn't be easy to find a more disreputable "charity" in America. Even the Big Oil stopped giving them money, at least publicly.
[QUOTE]
The Heartland Institute is an American conservative and libertarian public policy think tank known for its rejection of the scientific consensus on climate change and the negative health impacts of smoking.[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.desmog.com/heartland-institute[/URL]
Thanks for the chuckles, Elvis.
[QUOTE=Xpartan;2664142]Thanks for the chuckles, Elvis.[/QUOTE]You gave me the chuckles. Did you address anything factual at all in your retort? All you did was due to typical Democratic move and attacked the sources: Fox News, Epoch news, Zero Hedge, Joe Rogan, and Heartland. It is to the point that you guys want to cancel everyone who disagrees with you facts be damned.
Among the Biden policies the report claims are causing energy costs to increase dramatically are these:
Canceling the Keystone XL pipeline linking Canadian oil producing areas with refineries in the Midwestern and Southern United States.
Restricting drilling in parts of the Arctic Ocean, Bering Sea, and continental federal lands, especially in the Western USA.
Placing a moratorium on new oil and gas leases on federal lands.
Rescinding energy production leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Plans to close nearly half of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska.
Stringent new regulations on methane emissions from domestic USA Oil and gas production.
Classifying residual water wastes from oil and gas drilling as toxic.
Considering hiking royalties paid to the federal government by fossil-fuel companies producing oil and natural gas on federal lands.
So yeah, bash Heartland on smoking so you do not have to address them on energy. Meanwhile, all the media outlets pushing the Russiagate hoax are somehow legitimate.
So I told Axel to not list sources or use more obscure ones and you did what?
Attacked the source. LOL. That is why we are not listing them for you Democratic anymore. Your little minds cannot handle any facts that bother your preset narratives. Everything is a version of where did you get that from? Fox News?
And you did not only exactly as I predicted, you were even worse than predicted. So no, thank you for the laugh.
[QUOTE=Xpartan;2664142]I don't know about Democrats, but I just want to verify one's statement, that's all. If I can paste a link, I'm sure anyone can.
By "these douches" do you mean Carlson's own lawyers? Because according to the judge it was them who insisted "that Carlson is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary. ".
Are you mad at Carlson's lawyers, Elvis?
Wait, here is the source for you: [URL]https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye[/URL]..[/QUOTE]It amazes me that the fascists on this board, Elvis, CaliGuy, Canada, Axel at al, post "alternative facts", mislabel them as "facts" and think that the rest of us are simply too stupid to know the difference.
Let's face it, we all have our own opinions and that is all they are. Opinions. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion but there is only one set of facts. Facts are facts. Alternative facts are, well, lies.
As you wisely pointed out, Heartland (which Elvis cites as an authority) went out of their way to deny a link between smoking and lung cancer. How ludicrous is that? But yet Elvis calls them experts because their lies fuel his delusions.
It is the same thing that fascists use all the time. Did the Orange Fruitcake say that he wouldn't have time to golf because he was working? Of course he did. [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EN2enFzOXcw[/URL] But ask any fascist and they will deny he said it.
Did the Orange Buffoon tell people to inject disinfectant? Of course he did. Calls to several state poison control centers went up after he said that. But ask any fascist and they will deny he said it.
Did the Mango Mussolini say that COVID would vanish, just like a miracle? Of course he did. But ask any fascist and they will deny he said it.
Everything that the one-term, twice-impeached, fake-POTUS former guy says when he bloviates against else is a clue that he is doing exactly the same thing. 1. "But her emails! Turns out the OTTIFPFG was doing the same thing. 2. "But she used non-secure phones! Turns out the OTTIFPFG was doing the same thing. 3. "The Clintons stole White House furniture. " Turns out the OTTIFPFG was doing something far worse, like stealing presidential documents.
Psychologists call this type of behavior "projection". It is a standard fascist tactic and a standard tactic of the OTTIFPF.
G.
What Elvis and the other fascists don't understand, and never will, is that Democrats don't have the one-term, twice-impeached, fake-POTUS former guy living rent-free in their heads. We would just as soon forget that he existed. But since the fascists are trying so very hard to cover up January 6th, his breaking the law by ripping up documents, his breaking the law by stealing documents, Democrats must keep exposing this criminal for what he is. A criminal.