4 ms·

I've driven just short of 45,000 miles this year -- over most of the country. And there are easily 30 trump signs for every hillary sign. The hillary "support

by stray 10y ago

I've driven just short of 45,000 miles this year -- over most of the country. And there are easily 30 trump signs for every hillary sign. The hillary "support" is mostly fake. Just like the fake Carter support in '80. You'll see.

AnimalMuppet 10y ago
We'll see, certainly. A question for you: Suppose that Trump loses. Are you going to believe that it had to be rigged? Or are you going to decide that you were wrong in how you read the country? (BTW, for whatever it's worth: Here in Utah, there's plenty of political signs, but very few for either Trump or Hillary. Nobody feels enough in favor of either of them to put up signs. I've seen more signs for Gary Johnson than for anyone.)
- stray 10y ago
  It has been rigged. That won't change if Trump wins. It will still have been rigged, but the people will have overcome that handicap.
  - AnimalMuppet 10y ago
    Evidence?
    - stray 10y ago
      The system is rigged as evidenced by outrageously lopsided support verging on Soviet level propaganda. And at least some electronic voting machines manufacturers have clear conflict of interest because of association with Clinton Foundation. Not to mention the emails (verifiable through DKIM) released by Wikileaks outlining the rigging of the Dem primaries -- as well as Project Veritas videos some of which are corroborated by FEC filings, CNN video, and other mainstream media sources.
      - AnimalMuppet 10y ago
        Most of the media is on one side. I accept that statement. (Though I'm not sure that Fox is "fair and balanced", either.) DNC was clearly on Hillary's side, which is not what they're supposed to be doing. I accept that as well. To most people, though, "the election is rigged" means "the votes are not counted honestly". Do you have evidence of that?
        stray 10y ago
        You mean like Chambers County, Texas? They pulled electronic voting machines and switched to paper ballots because the machines were switching the presidential votes from Trump to Clinton for people who had voted all-republican? http://www.12newsnow.com/news/local/programming-issue-briefly-forces-chambers-county-voters-back-to-paper-ballots/341655957 http://www.12newsnow.com/news/local/programming-issue-briefl... http://www.fox26houston.com/news/local-news/213659018-story http://www.fox26houston.com/news/local-news/213659018-story I think machines that change votes to favor Clinton -- and ONLY Clinton -- counts as votes not counted honestly. Would you agree with that?
        AnimalMuppet 10y ago
        Well, it counts as votes not being counted accurately. It's only not being counted honestly if it's deliberate. Also, one county in Texas is not going to hand Clinton the election. Is there any evidence that this is systematic and country-wide? Or is it just one incident in Texas? Look, all votes should be counted accurately. But it's going to take probably more than a million votes changing to change this election. Anything less than that is still a problem, still needs fixed, but isn't going to change the result.
        stray 10y ago
        So we're just going to keep moving the goalposts? I don't believe you're arguing in good faith. What does it take to convince you? Does video evidence of people involved in the Clinton campaign bragging about voter intimidation suffice? Or do you not think voter intimidation counts as rigging an election? So what's good enough? We've got some pretty damning emails that can be proven not to have been altered (DKIM) -- is that good enough? Clearly, voting machines supplied by companies with ties to the Clinton foundation having "glitches" that always work in favor of Clinton isn't good enough. Do we consider Clinton having received debate questions beforehand to be rigging? Or do we just ignore that a candidate for President of The United States has just been proven to have CHEATED -- because that cheating wasn't dishonestly counting votes with PROVABLE INTENT? I could bring up the "coincidence" of the Democratic Party bus caught illegally dumping raw sewage on the side of a road in my hometown -- miraculously coinciding with an unprecedented early voter turnout. But why bother? We'll just move the goalposts further. Whatever. It doesn't matter. Because even with a completely rigged system -- we're going to elect Trump anyway.
not_kurt_godel 10y ago
Instead of arguing with you, I would like to make a bet up to $100,000 cash that Hillary will win. Would you be amenable to this? I am 100% serious.
- stray 10y ago
  I'll bet all of my money against your $100,000 -- if I had $100,000 I'd move to Cambodia.
  - not_kurt_godel 10y ago
    How much do you have?
    - stray 10y ago
      Not much. If we're taking risk proportional to what we have in the bank, the amount is immaterial -- an impartial 3rd party can verify that I'm not sandbagging (I do have to reserve rent, electric, internet, and gas bills though). But I could really use the $100,000 -- so how 'bout we set up an escrow to keep each other honest. Trust but verify and all that jazz.
      - not_kurt_godel 10y ago
        I wound up investing through https://www.predictit.org https://www.predictit.org . Much easier than betting with a stranger.
        stray 10y ago
        Sucks too, because with my new $100,000 -- I'd have been kicked back on a beach in Cambodia right now. Making Extended Vacation Great Again. At least I got some of your money on PredictIt.
maxerickson 10y ago
Carter did not have fake support in 1980. http://themonkeycage.org/2012/08/what-really-happened-in-the-1980-presidential-campaign/ http://themonkeycage.org/2012/08/what-really-happened-in-the...

by stray 10y ago

AnimalMuppet 10y ago

We'll see, certainly. A question for you: Suppose that Trump loses. Are you going to believe that it had to be rigged? Or are you going to decide that you were wrong in how you read the country? (BTW, for whatever it's worth: Here in Utah, there's plenty of political signs, but very few for either Trump or Hillary. Nobody feels enough in favor of either of them to put up signs. I've seen more signs for Gary Johnson than for anyone.)

stray 10y ago
It has been rigged. That won't change if Trump wins. It will still have been rigged, but the people will have overcome that handicap.
- AnimalMuppet 10y ago
  Evidence?
  - stray 10y ago
    The system is rigged as evidenced by outrageously lopsided support verging on Soviet level propaganda. And at least some electronic voting machines manufacturers have clear conflict of interest because of association with Clinton Foundation. Not to mention the emails (verifiable through DKIM) released by Wikileaks outlining the rigging of the Dem primaries -- as well as Project Veritas videos some of which are corroborated by FEC filings, CNN video, and other mainstream media sources.
    - AnimalMuppet 10y ago
      Most of the media is on one side. I accept that statement. (Though I'm not sure that Fox is "fair and balanced", either.) DNC was clearly on Hillary's side, which is not what they're supposed to be doing. I accept that as well. To most people, though, "the election is rigged" means "the votes are not counted honestly". Do you have evidence of that?
      - stray 10y ago
        You mean like Chambers County, Texas? They pulled electronic voting machines and switched to paper ballots because the machines were switching the presidential votes from Trump to Clinton for people who had voted all-republican? http://www.12newsnow.com/news/local/programming-issue-briefly-forces-chambers-county-voters-back-to-paper-ballots/341655957 http://www.12newsnow.com/news/local/programming-issue-briefl... http://www.fox26houston.com/news/local-news/213659018-story http://www.fox26houston.com/news/local-news/213659018-story I think machines that change votes to favor Clinton -- and ONLY Clinton -- counts as votes not counted honestly. Would you agree with that?
        AnimalMuppet 10y ago
        Well, it counts as votes not being counted accurately. It's only not being counted honestly if it's deliberate. Also, one county in Texas is not going to hand Clinton the election. Is there any evidence that this is systematic and country-wide? Or is it just one incident in Texas? Look, all votes should be counted accurately. But it's going to take probably more than a million votes changing to change this election. Anything less than that is still a problem, still needs fixed, but isn't going to change the result.
        stray 10y ago
        So we're just going to keep moving the goalposts? I don't believe you're arguing in good faith. What does it take to convince you? Does video evidence of people involved in the Clinton campaign bragging about voter intimidation suffice? Or do you not think voter intimidation counts as rigging an election? So what's good enough? We've got some pretty damning emails that can be proven not to have been altered (DKIM) -- is that good enough? Clearly, voting machines supplied by companies with ties to the Clinton foundation having "glitches" that always work in favor of Clinton isn't good enough. Do we consider Clinton having received debate questions beforehand to be rigging? Or do we just ignore that a candidate for President of The United States has just been proven to have CHEATED -- because that cheating wasn't dishonestly counting votes with PROVABLE INTENT? I could bring up the "coincidence" of the Democratic Party bus caught illegally dumping raw sewage on the side of a road in my hometown -- miraculously coinciding with an unprecedented early voter turnout. But why bother? We'll just move the goalposts further. Whatever. It doesn't matter. Because even with a completely rigged system -- we're going to elect Trump anyway.

not_kurt_godel 10y ago

Instead of arguing with you, I would like to make a bet up to $100,000 cash that Hillary will win. Would you be amenable to this? I am 100% serious.

stray 10y ago
I'll bet all of my money against your $100,000 -- if I had $100,000 I'd move to Cambodia.
- not_kurt_godel 10y ago
  How much do you have?
  - stray 10y ago
    Not much. If we're taking risk proportional to what we have in the bank, the amount is immaterial -- an impartial 3rd party can verify that I'm not sandbagging (I do have to reserve rent, electric, internet, and gas bills though). But I could really use the $100,000 -- so how 'bout we set up an escrow to keep each other honest. Trust but verify and all that jazz.
    - not_kurt_godel 10y ago
      I wound up investing through https://www.predictit.org https://www.predictit.org . Much easier than betting with a stranger.
      - stray 10y ago
        Sucks too, because with my new $100,000 -- I'd have been kicked back on a beach in Cambodia right now. Making Extended Vacation Great Again. At least I got some of your money on PredictIt.

maxerickson 10y ago

Carter did not have fake support in 1980. http://themonkeycage.org/2012/08/what-really-happened-in-the-1980-presidential-campaign/ http://themonkeycage.org/2012/08/what-really-happened-in-the...