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

No Civil War, right... Rally Attendance Numbers.

page: 2
25
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Picklesneeze

In lieu of evidence that it was "missing", it would seem to be there.

The audit was not a financial audit. The claim that it showed $6 billion "went missing" is bogus.




posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Morale is a dangerous thing. Where are her black early voters? She did the Jayz and Stevie Wonder black vote pandering way too late. Should have did that months ago but HCamp got greedy like their leader and did not want to pay those artists. Now it just looks like cheap and desperate attempt to copy Trump's thunder.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: eisegesis

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Um.... okay?

Because rally attendance scientifically represents the voting population?

Also.. their amount of Rallies are no where near quality so comparing the total attendance doesn't mean anything.

From your thread titled,

Hillary Clinton Met With Mass Applause In Cleveland Ohio Jay-Z Concert


The crowd went insane. There had to be 20-30,000 in attendance easily... seeing as how all my friends are back home its all over my social media feeds. Apparently she gave quite the speech...

She even quoted some Jay-Z lyrics in her address... I know this sounds crazy.. but Cleveland is the driving force of Ohio.. this could really swing the tides back in her favor... it was genius...

"Lucy, you got some 'splainin' to do!"


Do rally attendance numbers have an effect or not?


Gladly!

This actually falls in line with exactly what I've been saying. Hillary has more support but an un-motivated voter base. That concert will boost her voter turnout amongst people who were not originally going to vote.. because as many replied to me...
More people were there for the concert than her. Therfore is was advertising to people who didn't have the product.

People at Trump rallies are people who are already voting for him.

That's how the two different. Trump is catering to his base with his Rallys... while Hillary is reaching out to non voters



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 03:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: jellyrev

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Um.... okay?

Because rally attendance scientifically represents the voting population?

Also.. their amount of Rallies are no where near quality so comparing the total attendance doesn't mean anything.

You want to see a real worthwhile statistic... look at the Total Primary Popular Vote numbers

Hillary faced Bernie.. a much tougher opponent and STILL amassed a higher popular vote total than Trump. That's proof in itself.. that's actually voting numbers



Is it not accepted fact that it was rigged against bernie? who knows the true vote totals.


Nope.

It was "Ron Paul All Over Again."

People mistake large rallies and enthusiastic crowds for millions of voters. Bernie was getting a lot of young people at his rallies - but they vote in SMALLER numbers than the ol' geezers. And it was the ol' geezers who didn't support Bernie.

Look at the stats. Remember that Baby Boomers are the largest group right now... and about 80% of them vote and have the time (retired) to go vote: www.electproject.org...



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

In the lighjt of a recently leaked email from Eric Schmidt (google
s ceo) where he outlines a campaign strategy and disclose a digital platform to track voters according to their political preferences, its possible that her campaign was targeting the undecided, they would know more less who they are.

But yes, replying to the people who questioned the reasons for the post. Will such a vocal crowd accept a defeat if they feel the´ve been cheated?



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: CrapAsUsual
a reply to: Byrd

In the lighjt of a recently leaked email from Eric Schmidt (google
s ceo) where he outlines a campaign strategy and disclose a digital platform to track voters according to their political preferences, its possible that her campaign was targeting the undecided, they would know more less who they are.

But yes, replying to the people who questioned the reasons for the post. Will such a vocal crowd accept a defeat if they feel the´ve been cheated?

Of course they'll accept it. Maybe not in spirit, but in action. People have too much invested in the lie of this society to bring it all down on top of themselves.

As long as there's food in the fridge, movies from Hollywood for distraction, and the job you have to show up at the next morning just to survive, no one will do anything but wait another 4 years. And change won't come then either.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Totally agree.

It has to get "visually bad" for people wake up.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Don't forget Facebook polls, Trump is blowing her out of the water!



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd
a reply to: CrapAsUsual

I noticed that while Trump was at big "WE LOVE YOU!" rallies, Clinton was working smaller venues of undecided and "likely" voters rather than playing to the crowd.

I think that's a better strategy.


How do you know they were undecided, the question mark placards they were holding
The "I might likely vote for you" bumper stickers

These people not interested in politics coming out for Hillary in droves
Probably decide not to vote at all



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: CrapAsUsual

Aak Ron Paul about rally attendance numbers.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Lucidparadox

However, Obama supporters sure did go to rallies with the same type of enthusiasm that Trump supporters display now, and I remember how the media treated him because of it.

All those pictures with the halos and the pseudo religious posturing ... the idea that he was the new progressive Lincoln or even Reagan ... because his apparent popularity and enthusiasm seemed to indicate a popularity reaching those levels.

But now suddenly attendance at rallies and apparent popularity suddenly means nothing because Hillary doesn't have it.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 08:50 PM
link   
a reply to: jellyrev


Doesn't one of the leaked emails, say something to the effect, "How to stick the knife in Bernie" and "don't worry we have something on him?" or something close to that.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 09:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Picklesneeze




But I guess that it's a good thing that the 6 billion dollars that came up missing under hilary's watch
False.


Here is my OP on Killary's waste and missing Millions, between 5.4 Million and an additional 9+ Million. As evidenced by the GAO!
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Where is your source, if none, well...we have had this discussion before.
edit on V032016Sundaypm30America/ChicagoSun, 06 Nov 2016 21:03:55 -06001 by Violater1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Violater1




we have had this discussion before.

In all likelihood, yes. Because it is an oft stated claim, the one about $6 billion. The one about the letter.

My source is the letter from the OIG.

edit on 11/6/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: CrapAsUsual
a reply to: Byrd

In the lighjt of a recently leaked email from Eric Schmidt (google
s ceo) where he outlines a campaign strategy and disclose a digital platform to track voters according to their political preferences, its possible that her campaign was targeting the undecided, they would know more less who they are.

But yes, replying to the people who questioned the reasons for the post. Will such a vocal crowd accept a defeat if they feel the´ve been cheated?


I think that many will feel cheated if their candidate looses. For the Dems, if they loose, Soros has already tested the tempest for social unrest. I mean look, police officers are getting murdered every several days due to his meddling and financial support. And look at the Hitllary that was PAID to not just disrupt, but to assault and commit battery against the U.S. citizens. Yes, the Dems will riot. If Trump looses, his supporters have seen the PROOF of hillary's corruption. The rigged voting machines, the exposing of Top Secret, classified information during a world wide TV debate! The Missing MILLIONS from her rule as SoS (not including the illegal, non-disclosed 1 million dollar Bill Klinton Birthday gift from a muslim country that treads beneath their feet, the rights of women, but that's OK right?), and the loss of life of esteemed U.S. citizens. The Law Enforcement community is fed up, the military is fed up, and GOP supporters are fed up. Who wins? Soros and Buffett.
BTW, who is the model that you use as your avatar and what chocolate is she enjoying?



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 09:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Violater1




we have had this discussion before.

In all likelihood, yes. Because it is an oft stated claim, the one about $6 billion. The one about the letter.

My source is the letter from the OIG.


sigh.
Again, no source.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to find that photo of that face palm fail, that I have had to use with you before.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 11:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Lucidparadox

However, Obama supporters sure did go to rallies with the same type of enthusiasm that Trump supporters display now, and I remember how the media treated him because of it.

All those pictures with the halos and the pseudo religious posturing ... the idea that he was the new progressive Lincoln or even Reagan ... because his apparent popularity and enthusiasm seemed to indicate a popularity reaching those levels.

But now suddenly attendance at rallies and apparent popularity suddenly means nothing because Hillary doesn't have it.


Okay I will gladly explain

Obama had enthusiasm, AND he had turnout.

Trump has enthusiasm, but his turnout doesn't match it.

Hillary doesn't have enthusiasm... yet her turnout exceeds it.

Hillary had a much tougher opponent in the primary in revolutionary Bernie Sanders.. Trump had a slice of cheesecake..

The Democratic primary turnout was larger than the GOPs... and the Democratic population is larger..

Hillary's total primary popular vote was higher.

Half of the GOP un-endorsed Trump.. and it shows in his actual voting numbers aside from what goes on in his rallies...




posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 12:18 AM
link   
Reeducation camps for everyone!



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 12:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lucidparadox

originally posted by: eisegesis

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Um.... okay?

Because rally attendance scientifically represents the voting population?

Also.. their amount of Rallies are no where near quality so comparing the total attendance doesn't mean anything.

From your thread titled,

Hillary Clinton Met With Mass Applause In Cleveland Ohio Jay-Z Concert


The crowd went insane. There had to be 20-30,000 in attendance easily... seeing as how all my friends are back home its all over my social media feeds. Apparently she gave quite the speech...

She even quoted some Jay-Z lyrics in her address... I know this sounds crazy.. but Cleveland is the driving force of Ohio.. this could really swing the tides back in her favor... it was genius...

"Lucy, you got some 'splainin' to do!"


Do rally attendance numbers have an effect or not?


Gladly!

This actually falls in line with exactly what I've been saying. Hillary has more support but an un-motivated voter base. That concert will boost her voter turnout amongst people who were not originally going to vote.. because as many replied to me...
More people were there for the concert than her. Therfore is was advertising to people who didn't have the product.

People at Trump rallies are people who are already voting for him.

That's how the two different. Trump is catering to his base with his Rallys... while Hillary is reaching out to non voters


yeah i guess thats an optimistic way to look at it. another way to look at it alot people came to see jay z and beyonce and were willing to sit thru listening to her if it meant getting to see them preform. i guess if they don't keep up with current events or have never heard of wikileaks maybe she won some votes. hopefully not alot of people vote based on one speech and very little else. maybe they do. somehow i doubt it. just curious did she speak after they preformed or before?



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 12:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lucidparadox

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Lucidparadox

However, Obama supporters sure did go to rallies with the same type of enthusiasm that Trump supporters display now, and I remember how the media treated him because of it.

All those pictures with the halos and the pseudo religious posturing ... the idea that he was the new progressive Lincoln or even Reagan ... because his apparent popularity and enthusiasm seemed to indicate a popularity reaching those levels.

But now suddenly attendance at rallies and apparent popularity suddenly means nothing because Hillary doesn't have it.


Okay I will gladly explain

Obama had enthusiasm, AND he had turnout.

Trump has enthusiasm, but his turnout doesn't match it.

Hillary doesn't have enthusiasm... yet her turnout exceeds it.

Hillary had a much tougher opponent in the primary in revolutionary Bernie Sanders.. Trump had a slice of cheesecake..

The Democratic primary turnout was larger than the GOPs... and the Democratic population is larger..

Hillary's total primary popular vote was higher.

Half of the GOP un-endorsed Trump.. and it shows in his actual voting numbers aside from what goes on in his rallies...



wasn't the primary 20 or 30 wikileaks ago?



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join