Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
thedutchiedutch

Computer scientists urge Clinton campaign

624 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

deusex
On 11/23/2016 at 10:28 PM, Frank Merton said:

A lot of fiction being posted here.  The plain fact is Mrs. Clinton won the popular vote by over two million, and it continues to rise.  Trump is about the least legitimate President in history.

Yeah if you count the dead the illegals that voted.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
16 minutes ago, Michelle said:

From what I know about some of those places, population doesn't necessarily mean legal either.

From what  know about forums based in politics, ZZ's fingers were sticky and red from picking cherries while he posted.

I'm still curious as to the context.

Michelle: What level of the illegal votes in those counties would have to sway the entire vote and make that county's vote invalid? That amount of fraud would be mind boggling.

Edited by Likely Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
5 minutes ago, aquatus1 said:

Or voting, but we make do with what we get.

After all, let's be real...no one is trying to change anyone's mind through rationality here.

I've seen many extremely rational people, with valid opinions, who have given me a lot of room for thought.

I'm not nearly so old so it could be said I am set in my ways. After all, both Obama and Hillary have changed their stance on gay marriage in only the last few years.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
18 minutes ago, deusex said:

Yeah if you count the dead the illegals that voted.

Proof for your assertion? Repeating it doesn't mean it's true in a debate. Try again.

Edit: I assume you could give me some lame link and wave me away.

But, let's be sporting in that you give me your best evidence for your assertion.

That would be great.

Edited by Likely Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
13 hours ago, South Alabam said:

Funny how Fox usually had higher polls than other mainstream media. They were just trying to manipulate the voters into thinking Hillary was ahead, all the time, at least that is my opinion. Election results proved Fox right.

Kind of like how Huffington Post said the day before the election that their "Expert" models gave Clinton a 98% chance of winning??

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
36 minutes ago, aquatus1 said:

Nah, it's just something that's been circulating around Tumblr for a few weeks.  It's probably about as credible and accurate as the other pictures that have been posted.

It's been all over Facebook also. But, when I looked into it, it seem contrived, otherwise I would have posted it a long time ago.

The other one going around is the two maps where one supposedly shows Democrat Counties and the other shows Criminal Activity. But, that one is contrived also, because the criminal activity correlates with population density, and the actual ratio of crime per capital isn't necessarily greater in those areas.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
5 hours ago, pallidin said:

By suggestive electoral votes, Trump has won.

By suggestive popular votes, Hillary won.

The two systems should have the exact same outcome regarding presidential elections, should they not?

Or, is the "populace" still deemed "unfit and dumber" than the electoral college regarding presidential elections as it was many, many years ago when education and rapid information was scarce?

 

That's a fair point, but until Congress changes the way the Constitution outlines the elections to be run, we're kind of stuck with it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
3 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

From what  know about forums based in politics, ZZ's fingers were sticky and red from picking cherries while he posted.

I'm still curious as to the context.

Michelle: What level of the illegal votes in those counties would have to sway the entire vote and make that county's vote invalid?

It wouldn't matter if billions of illegal people in California voted for Hillary. She already had the electoral votes from that state.

There were a few key swing states that historically mostly vote Democrat that made the difference. Where she made one of her biggest mistakes was thinking she had them in the bag. She ignored them, didn't campaign in those states and never addressed their current concerns.

Of course, that is only my opinion.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
1 minute ago, Michelle said:

It wouldn't matter if billions of illegal people in California voted for Hillary. She already had the electoral votes from that state.

There were a few key swing states that historically mostly vote Democrat that made the difference. Where she made one of her biggest mistakes was thinking she had them in the bag. She ignored them, didn't campaign in those states and never addressed their current concerns.

Of course, that is only my opinion.

And that's the question in play. They can be dismissed, or addressed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
4 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

And that's the question in play. They can be dismissed, or addressed.

I still can't help but find it funny. :P

Before the election, when Trump said voting was going to be rigged, everyone was making fun of him. They went to the extreme on how and why it can't and doesn't happen. Now all kinds of the "experts" are coming out, explaining in detail, how it can and does happen. It doesn't even help to throw their own written words up in their face. The same people who say we shouldn't even have to have a valid ID to vote, regardless of the fact they are free.

It boggles my mind.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
24 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

And that's the question in play. They can be dismissed, or addressed.

I thought it had been addressed? The algorithms used in "adjusting" the various phone polling numbers had some kind of issue with them. Hillary never was ahead as far as polls placed her.

Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan, all have a history of flipping back and forth. The fact that they all voted Democrat in the previous 6 or 7 elections shouldn't mean that something is wrong. The trend of less people voting for the Democrat was seen to be true across the entire Midwest, South and West.

Wisconsin voted Democrat in 2000 and 2004 by less the 0.5%.

Michigan voted Democrat in 2000 and 2004 by about 5%.

Pennsylvania voted Democrat in 2000 and 2004 by about 4% and 2.5%.

All it took was a very small percentage to stay home, and those states flipped Red.

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
1 minute ago, DieChecker said:

I thought it had been addressed? The algorithms used in "adjusting" the various phone polling numbers had some kind of issue with them. Hillary never was ahead as far as polls placed her.

Not in the 12% range reported before the Comey declaration, no. That was just one poll. Most said 2 to 4%, which is about as much as she has won the popular vote (and still lost the election).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
2 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

Not in the 12% range reported before the Comey declaration, no. That was just one poll. Most said 2 to 4%, which is about as much as she has won the popular vote (and still lost the election).

That is only partly true, because the various states that were polled didn't match up results to the expectation of the polls.

If the national poll was correct, then is that evidence that the state elections were hacked, or that the overall expectation was correct? I'd say it means the national poll was correct, and the various state polls were messed up. They use different "adjustments", they "weigh" the various states, differently with different algorithms, to try to take into account differing demographics in each state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
15 minutes ago, Michelle said:

I still can't help but find it funny. :P

Before the election, when Trump said voting was going to be rigged, everyone was making fun of him. They went to the extreme on how and why it can't and doesn't happen. Now all kinds of the "experts" are coming out, explaining in detail, how it can and does happen. It doesn't even help to throw their own written words up in their face. The same people who say we shouldn't even have to have a valid ID to vote, regardless of the fact they are free.

It boggles my mind.

Well it boggles my mind that he truly thought he was going to lose through a 'rigged election' and ended up winning.

I'm sure that his 'UNFAIR!' speech was duly prepared for deliverance.

Let me get this straight, did you believe Trump before the election that it was rigged, or after the election that it wasn't rigged?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

I certainly didn't believe him, any more then I believed Hillary when she said she had no idea that her email would be such a major issue.

It was just Hedging in my opinion. A way for him to immediately call for recounts, or whatever, after the election. Maybe a pride saving technique if he lost.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
10 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

That is only partly true, because the various states that were polled didn't match up results to the expectation of the polls.

If the national poll was correct, then is that evidence that the state elections were hacked, or that the overall expectation was correct? I'd say it means the national poll was correct, and the various state polls were messed up. They use different "adjustments", they "weigh" the various states, differently with different algorithms, to try to take into account differing demographics in each state.

Different samples, different media, different questions.

The guess of the popular vote was right, the electoral college vote on election day was far more opaque.

Edit: Out of 45 presidents, only five didn't have the popular vote. Only Nostradamus would have seen that one coming, or not,

Edited by Likely Guy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
10 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

*respectfully snipped*

It was just Hedging in my opinion. A way for him to immediately call for recounts, or whatever, after the election. Maybe a pride saving technique if he lost.

Maybe he should validate his position by asking for a recount himself?

Sorry, I was just about to burst out laughing as I typed that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
Just now, Likely Guy said:

Well it boggles my mind that he truly thought he was going to lose through a 'rigged election' and ended up winning.

I'm sure that his 'UNFAIR!' speech was duly prepared for deliverance.

Let me get this straight, did you believe Trump before the election that it was rigged, or after the election that it wasn't rigged?

I think Trumpo was more shocked that anyone else. :P

I'll say this...I've had to show my ID, or have an adult vouch for me about my age, since I was less than 12. I couldn't get in for the child's price because I looked older. The first time I voted at 18 I was amazed I didn't have to show an ID. I couldn't imagine why I was allowed to participate in such an important decision without a valid ID. It wasn't a huge political issue at the time, but it seemed wrong to me. I have never changed my stance on that because I could see the potential for fraud.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
1 minute ago, Michelle said:

I think Trumpo was more shocked that anyone else:P

I'll say this...I've had to show my ID, or have an adult vouch for me about my age, since I was less than 12. I couldn't get in for the child's price because I looked older. The first time I voted at 18 I was amazed I didn't have to show an ID. I couldn't imagine why I was allowed to participate in such an important decision without a valid ID. It wasn't a huge political issue at the time, but it seemed wrong to me. I have never changed my stance on that because I could see the potential for fraud.

Trumpo (your word) is a deer caught in the headlights. Baldwin's last impersonation of him on SNL is fairly legitimate I believe.

Michelle, did you show ID last time?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
Just now, Likely Guy said:

Trumpo (your word) is a deer caught in the headlights. Baldwin's last impersonation of him on SNL is fairly legitimate I believe.

Michelle, did you show ID last time?

I missed that...haha

Yes, Tennessee is one of the few states you now have to show ID in.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
4 minutes ago, Michelle said:

I missed that...haha

Yes, Tennessee is one of the few states you now have to show ID in.

Used to be able to vote with a phone or power bill, showing your address with I.D. on election day. Now, nope you have to have that little government card that comes in the mail. Doesn't matter if the scrutinizer has known you, and where you live for 25 years.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
2 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

Used to be able to vote with a phone or power bill, showing your address with I.D. on election day. Now, nope you have to have that little government card that comes in the mail. Doesn't matter if the scrutinizer has known you, and where you live for 25 years.

I didn't have to start showing ID to buy beer until I became an old fart. Times change. :lol:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
12 minutes ago, Michelle said:

I didn't have to start showing ID to buy beer until I became an old fart. Times change. :lol:

I quickly grew a beard and surpassed that requisite.

Love you, over and out.

Edited by Likely Guy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
1 hour ago, Likely Guy said:

Edit: Out of 45 presidents, only five didn't have the popular vote. Only Nostradamus would have seen that one coming, or not,

Then it is not unprecedented, and society didn't fall apart four other times.

I feel all the complaining is more Chicken Little, then anything else.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
28 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

Trumpo (your word) is a deer caught in the headlights. Baldwin's last impersonation of him on SNL is fairly legitimate I believe.

Talking about SNL...they had some hilarious skits about Obama. I tried to look them up on the archives and they weren't accessible due to "copyright infringements". It's odd how things like that happen with the popular candidates.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.