POLL: Trump or Hillary

[Hassknecht]

Look up suicide squad.

They are composed of 90% ink, with some blood, skin, and internal organs on the side,

I think you mean "Suicide Girls".
Yeah, those are inked up as hell. Kinda thought Vergil was refering to that chick you posted earlier.

 

[Vergil]

I would, tattoos are just ink, that doesn't define a person.

The fact that they went out and decided to permanently mark their skin with something that may also be incredibly stupid/trashy/theywontreallycareabouteventually/etc does.
I guy with "blessed" tattooed in cursive along his upper chest so you can always see it even when he has a shirt on or a guy with angel wings and vampire lips all across his chest tells you quite a lot about him at first glance.

I have the Witcher wolf medallion tattoed on my shoulder and overarm, and most people i know have tattoo's or planning to get one.

Video game tattoos are uh... not something I'd recommend to people but fair enough.

 

[Crni Vuk]

The support for her just isnt there. She has the same "chance" of winning as Johnson or Stein

Dude, to love Trump is one thing, to be unreasonable another. That's what people talk about when they mean that the judgement is clouded by your opinion/belief of someone.

Obviously all the polls that show her in the lead are rigged.

However, there is an easy way to fix this issue in an instant. All they have to do, is to the change the polls in Trumps favour.

 

[olestra]

Dude, to love Trump is one thing, to be unreasonable another. That's what people talk about when they mean that the judgement is clouded by your opinion/belief of someone.

--are you trying to say what he said didn't make sense?

 

[Draitex]

The fact that they went out and decided to permanently mark their skin with something that may also be incredibly stupid/trashy/theywontreallycareabouteventually/etc does.
I guy with "blessed" tattooed in cursive along his upper chest so you can always see it even when he has a shirt on or a guy with angel wings and vampire lips all across his chest tells you quite a lot about him at first glance.

Video game tattoos are uh... not something I'd recommend to people but fair enough.

I recommend tattooing in whatever you want to aslong as you think it looks decent or if it has a meaning to you.

we're all gonna die, so i don't really care how the tattoos will look when i am 50 +, and Tattoo's no longer carry stigma, most jobs will be available even with tattoo's, so i don't see the problem

ofcourse some tattoo's are dumb like the dude that tatooed hipster glasses on his face and ''douchebag tats''

but if you think it looks good then why not. but if you have a tattoo, then you need to be comfortable knowing some might find it awful looking and might make fun of you.

but if you like it, then you should have it.

that's my opinion on the matter.

 

[Crni Vuk]

--are you trying to say what he said didn't make sense?

No clue, do I? I just find it unreasonable to think that Hillary has no chance to win. But I guess, it's the same kind of thinking that can make people believe that the Brexit was a landslide and huge victory for the anti EU group in Britain, I mean yeah 51% of the votes, that's what is considered a victory of epic proportion these days. Point is, she is a very popular candidate, what ever if I or someone here likes her or not, doesn't change that fact.

 

[Vergil]

Dude, to love Trump is one thing, to be unreasonable another. That's what people talk about when they mean that the judgement is clouded by your opinion/belief of someone.

All the evidence points to a Trump victory, do you have anything to offer to the contrary or nah?

However, there is an easy way to fix this issue in an instant. All they have to do, is to the change the polls in Trumps favour.

Well that's what would happen if they stopped over sampling groups more likely to be against Trump so I guess yea in a way.

But I guess, it's the same kind of thinking that can make people believe that the Brexit was a landslide and huge victory for the anti EU group in Britain, I mean yeah 51% of the votes, that's what is considered a victory of epic proportion these days.

Considering the pre-Brexit polls were putting Leave as far back as 10+ points the night before and they ended up winning anyway, yes it is.
Sorry people are apparently still upset about it and somehow Democracy doesn't count when it's close and an outcome they don't like and somehow pointing out the obvious media bias inflating poll numbers that ended up being wrong is invalidated because "..."

Point is, she is a very popular candidate,

Every single one of her rallies in comparison to Trumps would disagree....

 

[Hassknecht]

All the evidence points to a Trump victory, do you have anything to offer to the contrary or nah?

Does it? The majority of the polls show Clinton in the lead. Sure, you can just dismiss it because lurral media always be lyin' 'bout Trump, but where is your evidence besides your filterbubble-fueled gut feeling that there's no support for Clinton?
Now I do think that it's going to be a very close race, and I honestly can't tell who's winning, but going all "Clinton got LITERALLY no chance of winning" just because everyone in my echochamber thinks so, too, is not exactly strong evidence, either.
And no, vague accusations of "Clinton rallyes are empty" are not exactly evidence, either, it's hearsay just as well.

 

[Crni Vuk]

All the evidence points to a Trump victory, do you have anything to offer to the contrary or nah?

If polls would be always absolutely and 100% correct with every and all predictions. Why even the need to vote? Just ask a thousand random schmocks on the street, and be done with it. - Hope you see the error here and the point I am trying to make.

*Edit also how could anyone here show you something, if you will just dismiss it as leftist media conspiracy if it's not in your favour.

I have no clue who's ahead right now, but it doubt that it is so large that Hillary has like, and I quote 'the same "chance" of winning as Johnson or Stein'. That's simply not accepting the reality. She is one of the most popular politicians on the stage, next to Trump, this alone gives here some chance to win the ellection. If she or Trump will win? We will see it in a few days. Unless if it's rigged of course.

Considering the pre-Brexit polls were putting Leave as far back as 10+ points the night before and they ended up winning anyway, yes it is.

Where do I talk about those polls, god damnit? I am talking about the finished ellection, which was a very narrow victory for the pro-Brexit camp, what I have a problem with is how some sell it like 90% of the population was in favour of it or something like that. Nowhere did I say it wasn't a victory for them, or that it wasn't a democratic process. But if 51% of a group vote 'yes', then it is far from a gigantic victory.

 

[olestra]

I just find it unreasonable to think that Hillary has no chance to win.

i'd agree trump is going to win. conservative voters are dedicated and will show up like granny getting her lotto tickets, but yeah, i don't need to say IT WILL BE AS UNANIMOUS AS THE RESULT IN GLORIOUS CRIMEA (or it's rigged)

 

[Vergil]

Does it? The majority of the polls show Clinton in the lead. Sure, you can just dismiss it because lurral media always be lyin' 'bout Trump, but where is your evidence besides your filterbubble-fueled gut feeling that there's no support for Clinton?

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/08/new-polls/
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...em-playbook-rigging-polls-through-oversamples
http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1184a12016ElectionTrackingNo1.pdf

METHODOLOGY – This ABC News poll was conducted by landline and cellular telephone Oct. 20-22, 2016, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 874 likely voters. Results have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 points, including the design effect. Partisan divisions are 36-27-31 percent, Democrats-Republicans-independents.

36 Democrats and 31 Independents but only 27 Republicans.

Now I do think that it's going to be a very close race, and I honestly can't tell who's winning, but going all "Clinton got LITERALLY no chance of winning" just because everyone in my echochamber thinks so, too, is not exactly strong evidence, either.

hy·per·bo·le
hīˈpərbəlē/
noun

1. exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

And no, vague accusations of "Clinton rallyes are empty" are not exactly evidence, either, it's hearsay just as well.

Do you have eyes?

Is it really just totally not worth mentioning that Hillary can't even approach the crowd sizes that Trump can? Does that not say ANYTHING AT ALL about overall popularity?

ev·i·dence
ˈevədəns/
noun

1. 1.
   the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

^ Something I have done and you have not
Nice meme btw, very good argument.

If polls would be always absolutely and 100% correct with every and all predictions. Why even the need to vote? Just ask a thousand random schmocks on the street, and be done with it. - Hope you see the error here and the point I am trying to make.

That polls are bullshit and not to be taken as gospel?
That's my whole point!
The only reason people are going "oy vey drumpf is totally gonna lose" is because of all the biased polls saying he will.

*Edit also how could anyone here show you something, if you will just dismiss it as leftist media conspiracy if it's not in your favour.

Not an argument.

I have no clue who's ahead right now, but it doubt that it is so large that Hillary has like, and I quote 'the same "chance" of winning as Johnson or Stein'. That's simply not accepting the reality.

hy·per·bo·le
hīˈpərbəlē/
noun

1. 
   exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

Sorry, next time I'll add a "/s" or some kind of other indicator for the slower members in the audience. I've never seen anyone ever get so autistic over a casual and incorrect use of "literally" for the sake of exaggeration to show how much I believe (and know) Trump is going to win and the fact that such a big issue is being made out of it makes me question how many credible points you people have left that you're reaching this hard.

Where do I talk about those polls, god damnit? I am talking about the finished ellection, which was a very narrow victory for the pro-Brexit camp, what I have a problem with is how some sell it like 90% of the population was in favour of it or something like that. Nowhere did I say it wasn't a victory for them, or that it wasn't a democratic process. But if 51% of a group vote 'yes', then it is far from a gigantic victory.

The two points I was making were that one: it's a perfect example of polls not meaning shit and two: winning at all with incredibly biased media firing on all cylinders and given such a low chance to win by everyone and ending up winning is a pretty huge victory and it in itself is a huge victory for Britain just in general.

i'd agree trump is going to win. conservative voters are dedicated and will show up like granny getting her lotto tickets, but yeah, i don't need to say IT WILL BE AS UNANIMOUS AS THE RESULT IN GLORIOUS CRIMEA (or it's rigged)

hy·per·bo·le
hīˈpərbəlē/
noun

1. 
   exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

Sorry, next time I'll add a "/s" or some kind of other indicator for the slower members in the audience.

Eitherway it doesn't really matter what's said here, Trump is going to win regardless.

 

[olestra]

ev·i·dence
ˈevədəns/
noun

1. 1.
   the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

^ Something I have done and you have not
Nice meme btw, very good argument.

oh right. that evidence of vote rigging conspiracy. really helps us discern when you're serious about your bullshit and when you're exaggerating. i'll have to remember conspiracy crackheads are all-in-one poe's law-like parodies of themselves

 

[Vergil]

oh right. that evidence of vote rigging conspiracy. really helps us discern when you're serious about your bullshit and when you're exaggerating. i'll have to remember conspiracy crackheads are all-in-one poe's law-like parodies of themselves

List of things this isn't:

• An argument

I'm gonna go ahead and stop responding to you here in case whatever mental deficiency you have is contagious and instead wait for the people I was actually speaking with who at least come up with better retorts than "crackhead" whilst not behaving too stable themselves.

 

[olestra]

List of things this isn't:

• An argument

So you provided evidence of vote rigging? You have actually provided anything amongst your nonsense to help differentiate any of it? It's kind of hard to pick exaggeration out from shit like that.

I'm gonna go ahead and stop responding to you here in case whatever mental deficiency you have is contagious and instead wait for the people I was actually speaking with who at least come up with better retorts than "crackhead" whilst not behaving too stable themselves.

woops. thanks for the edit. sure thing!

 

[Crni Vuk]

Eitherway it doesn't really matter what's said here, Trump is going to win regardless.

What if he doesn't?
I mean it's a democracy, with votes. We won't know for sure, before it isn't really done. That's all we're saying.

 

[olestra]

What if he doesn't?
I mean it's a democracy, with votes. We won't know for sure, before it isn't really done. That's all we're saying.

well, there are the aspiring timothy mcveighs speaking out.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Could you please use words that non-americans can also process?

 

[olestra]

Could you please use words that non-americans can also process?

timothy mcveigh was the major militia movement guy behind the oklahoma city bombing, so i'm referring to the people saying they're willing to be "patriots" and pursue armed revolution if trump loses

 

[Dr Fallout]

timothy mcveigh was the major militia movement guy behind the oklahoma city bombing, so i'm referring to the people saying they're willing to be "patriots" and pursue armed revolution if trump loses

I hope they do. I wonder, can Putin and Russia take on the EU?

 

[Antiwarprofallout]

I'm less worried about 'Timothy McVeighs' popping out of the woodwork if Trump loses and more worried about military coups if he wins. There was a piece done by the LA Times advocating one, basically saying, vote against Trump or there'll be a military coup.