It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Don't listen to the liberal MSM: Trump crushed Hillary at the debates.

page: 7
72
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: imjack

He's as liberal as a constipated librarian you're trying to explain late books to.




posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bloodydagger
a reply to: kamebard

More tinfoil hat nonsense. Killary supporters hate having rain poured down on their parade. Keep reaching.


Love the resorting to ad hominem attacks in the face of discouraging evidence.

But let's see the polling firms put out their numbers over the next few days and see if there is a consistency between them.

IMHO Trump hung himself with his own rambling, but Hillary could have done such a better job. Trump brought the rope, stood on the pedestal, all she had to do was push, but instead she just let him stand there and took it. Hilary can be a real Bitz - if she had brought it to the debate she would have scored an irrecoverable win, but instead she let this horse race drag on wards.

Hence many of the opinions are that it was more of a tie or close event rather than a clear winner.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: imjack

I just love your generalizations. Pa.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Bloodydagger

Common man sure but the numbers don't prove anything. Oh forget it.
Yes. He won. Everybody says so. Where have I heard that phrase before?



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: ksiezyc

makes things easy to read. why get specific unless there is real content?
IE: Hillarys emails would have been more fun to read than the trash about them for months.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: kamebard

originally posted by: Bloodydagger
a reply to: kamebard

More tinfoil hat nonsense. Killary supporters hate having rain poured down on their parade. Keep reaching.


Love the resorting to ad hominem attacks in the face of discouraging evidence.




I just posted what the polls show is all. Unless you're one of the ones who think the polls were hacked by bots or someone casting hundreds of thousands of votes etc across multiple polling websites.

All you're doing is going by your gut and what you saw viewed through a bias lens (like many of the Killary supporters here)
edit on 27-9-2016 by Bloodydagger because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

Ill wait for the university polls. Quinnipiac Monmouth thanks just the same.
But really polls not withstanding Hillary crushed it last night.
Trump shook and snooked up snot and couldn't stand still and repeated himself.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bloodydagger

originally posted by: kamebard

originally posted by: Bloodydagger
a reply to: kamebard

More tinfoil hat nonsense. Killary supporters hate having rain poured down on their parade. Keep reaching.


Love the resorting to ad hominem attacks in the face of discouraging evidence.




I just posted what the polls show. Unless you're one of the ones who think the polls were hacked by bots or someone casting hundreds of thousands of votes etc across multiple polling websites.

All you're doing is going by your gut and what you saw viewed through a bias lens (like many of the Killary supporters here)


not that I really care about the polls

but playing that off as a crazy theory isn't accurate at all.


It literally could be a single damned person casting 200,000 votes, unlike the '10 votes from pedro' scenarios. And it's completely possible.

People hack the REAL elections and you're going to act like a POLL has insurmountable amounts of security or something?



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bloodydagger
Dozens of online polls show that Mr Trump crushed Hillary at the debates. Here is a sample:


I find it hilariously funny how the MSM spin machine tried to paint Mr Trump a bad picture last night, when the overall public view is vastly different. What I find doubly funny is that the Left is holding on to this CNN poll from last night, and then conveniently leaving out the fact that the anchor had a caveat of the overall poll being heavily slanted toward Democrat voters (ie more Dems voted in this particular poll then Republicans did) before they released it on Live TV. Ever stop and think that Republicans don't watch CNN? CNN is the most Liberal news station on TV. No red blooded Republican watches that station. So NATURALLY anything coming from CNN anchors and news will be heavily slanted toward the Left and Hillary and they'll REACH when it comes to anything negative regarding Mr Trump. So yes, of course any poll coming from CNN will favor Hillary. Its a blue station through and through.

Spin this spin doctors.

I find it hilariously funny how many members of my Trump supporting family vote over and over again on these online polls all day long. Especially if their love for Trump is threatened. I doubt they're the only ones.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Science 101:
Not one poll concluded equal percentage.

Conclusion:
Samplesize FAILURE.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Ohanka

They are both genuine people. It's just one is qualified to hold the most important job on the planet and the other thinks Obama is an illegitimate pretender.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

they wont let you vote again



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: imjack

If they can hack the polls, they can hack the website. So if that is the case, then these media websites and otherwise need to beef their security up.

Also, i'm sure we'd be hearing about some kind of mass-media website hack in the news today. Show me a link to that statement if you still feel like these polls may of been hacked.

And I seriously doubt anyone sit there for hours and hours clicking hundreds of thousands of times in the same poll and then went to the next website and did the same thing. Remember, the debate was over at 10:30 CST. So if someone manually did this, then you may as well call them Flash (the super hero)
edit on 27-9-2016 by Bloodydagger because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bloodydagger

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Bloodydagger

Dude anyone who watched last night doesn't need any polls to tell them who won.


Well, apparently, a lot of people who watched did think he won. Shocking concept, I know.


Is there a large contigent of people out there who thought he won? Quite possibly. The polls for his support in the general election are pretty close, and thus, if the polls are consistent with the consensus of the population, you should see people supporting their candidate in the same ratio as the other polls are showing.

For such a poor debate performance by any objective standard (violations of debate decorum, clarity and on-target of responses, posture, etc...), you would expect a drop in the "who won" responses regardless of what people think of him as a candidate. For the polls to be showing him as winning in such a dramatic shift from the recent averages indicates something other than debate performance and recent polling as a driving factor in their results.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Bloodydagger

Anybody who watched with a modicum of sense knew different.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Bloodydagger

Well let's not split hairs. The polls most defended don't even require hacking, just refreshing the page. Obviously non-sophisticated programs can be run to do this all day. This is still considered 'hacking' the results.

As for major company security, you again seem to misplace concern as I mention people hack THE ELECTION, and you shift focus to if MSM is secure. Lol. Who cares if you can hack MSNBC? It's a new source. There would be little point to hold secret information at a News Website.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: Bloodydagger

Anybody who watched with a modicum of sense knew different.


You see, that is just the thing. This entire election cycle from the very beginning has never made any sense. So in reality, its par for the course.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
a reply to: underwerks

they wont let you vote again


Depends which poll you're talking about on which site. Set up different emails, spoof your IP, etc. It's not hard to vote over and over on online polls (depending on which site you're talking about).



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: 4003fireglo

My conviction would never let me vote republican.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 02:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: imjack
a reply to: Bloodydagger


Who cares if you can hack MSNBC? It's a new source. There would be little point to hold secret information at a News Website.


Yet if mass websites were "hacked" or if voting polls were mass altered across multiple website platforms, it would be in the news today. Show me proof.




top topics



 
72
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join