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

There’s No Such Thing as a Good Trump Voter says Slate

page: 2
35
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 07:45 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

We need to reach out to them.

Many don't know what happened, many don't realize the DNC did this and interfered with democracy the each step of the way.

Wikileaks showed they pushed out Bernie and propped up an awful candidate.

Wikileaks also showed they propped up Trump with the help of MSM because he was the only one "she could beat".

Luckily many of us saw it and blocked their treasonous attempts

edit on 15-11-2016 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 07:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blueracer

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: Blueracer
You keep spewing the 8 and 29 percent numbers but I don't take much stock in them. NO ONE KNOWS who voted for who with 100% accuracy.

Keep on living in your denial bubble. Makes you feel safer , huh ?


So people stood in the booth with voters to see who they voted for? That is the only way they would know.


Or exit polls. Voter registrations logs, a bunch of places you can get such data. The media typically does the job of parsing that data for us. Those are the numbers I used.

You can keep harping on it to try to discredit me and this post in particular, but no discerning individual would agree with your ridiculous assertions.

Enjoy your denial. Seems like an awfully nice place to live safely away from opinions backed by data you don't like and don't want to believe...

It was that denial that lost liberals the election. So you'll excuse me if I don't take your word for it.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blueracer
a reply to: projectvxn

You are missing the point, intentionally or not. It does not matter what someone says about blacks, Hispanics, or anyone else about who they may, or may not, have voted for. So there is not point in repeating the same info over and over when it is completely unprovable, one way or the other. It just makes me question the rest of your posts where you've used the exact same info.





The numbers aren't wrong, and even the MSM is quoting pretty much the same statistics this election. If those numbers are not accurate, then the margin of error is very low and not enough to change any argument or debate about it enough to make any difference. And when people do register to vote they are asked to mark a box next to race, although it is optional, and most people usually mark the box, so the numbers on percentages of race categories who voted must be very close to accurate, and as I said, if they ARE off, they are not off enough to matter for the sake of this discussion or any other.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: Blueracer

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: Blueracer
You keep spewing the 8 and 29 percent numbers but I don't take much stock in them. NO ONE KNOWS who voted for who with 100% accuracy.

Keep on living in your denial bubble. Makes you feel safer , huh ?


So people stood in the booth with voters to see who they voted for? That is the only way they would know.


Or exit polls. Voter registrations logs, a bunch of places you can get such data. The media typically does the job of parsing that data for us. Those are the numbers I used.

You can keep harping on it to try to discredit me and this post in particular, but no discerning individual would agree with your ridiculous assertions.

Enjoy your denial. Seems like an awfully nice place to live safely away from opinions backed by data you don't like and don't want to believe...

It was that denial that lost liberals the election. So you'll excuse me if I don't take your word for it.


Exit polls? People can say anything. Look at how wrong most of the polls were before the election. Now you are putting complete faith in the media after they have been proven to be inaccurate and deceiving.

And accusations won't win this argument for you.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Blueracer
a reply to: projectvxn

You are missing the point, intentionally or not. It does not matter what someone says about blacks, Hispanics, or anyone else about who they may, or may not, have voted for. So there is not point in repeating the same info over and over when it is completely unprovable, one way or the other. It just makes me question the rest of your posts where you've used the exact same info.





The numbers aren't wrong, and even the MSM is quoting pretty much the same statistics this election. If those numbers are not accurate, then the margin of error is very low and not enough to change any argument or debate about it enough to make any difference. And when people do register to vote they are asked to mark a box next to race, although it is optional, and most people usually mark the box, so the numbers on percentages of race categories who voted must be very close to accurate, and as I said, if they ARE off, they are not off enough to matter for the sake of this discussion or any other.


The numbers are not provable one way or the other. They are meaningless to support an argument with.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Enough already, a thread last night was binned because of inplied intellect of the lack thereof as to Trump election voters...I presume. I presume also that would be regardless what partisan take could be made of it.
Aside from that there is this in the link,

"Whether Trump’s election reveals an “inherent malice” in his voters is irrelevant. What is relevant are the practical outcomes of a Trump presidency. Trump campaigned on state repression of disfavored minorities. He gives every sign that he plans to deliver that repression. This will mean disadvantage, immiseration, and violence for real people, people whose “inner pain and fear” were not reckoned worthy of many-thousand-word magazine feature stories. If you voted for Trump, you voted for this, regardless of what you believe about the groups in question. That you have black friends or Latino colleagues, that you think yourself to be tolerant and decent, doesn’t change the fact that you voted for racist policy that may affect, change, or harm their lives. And on that score, your frustration at being labeled a racist doesn’t justify or mitigate the moral weight of your political choice."

True or not true?
We don't actually know as yet, the link is presumptive, however there is some thought given in that post.
Shoot the guy down okay, but make it something more than they lost we won.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

Did you not take Hillary at her word when she called us "Deplorables?"

Many of them echoed her sentiment.

We don't simply have different opinions and visions for the nation as them. We are simply stupid, ugly, horrible deplorable and unredeemable people. (Calling us people is being generous).



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 08:20 PM
link   
What is it with all this posturing from the media, and the left in general?
Do they think they're gearing up for some sort of a civil war or something?

A little less than half the country voted for one criminal, a little less than half the country voted for another, worse (much worse, imo) criminal.

The states made their call and decided the lesser of two evils "wins". This happens every couple of years.

All of a sudden, it's like every rich and powerful person got together with every minimum wage worker and welfare case, and they're working together to gnash their teeth and screech bloody murder at anyone who disagrees with them. They're acting like they WANT to fight about it... but they're the exact same people who have always praised tolerance and think that individual rights to privacy are a joke, but also want to make sure that the whole country is a judgement free zone.

They are also generally the go-to crowd for the kinds of laws that make gun grabbing possible, and are big fans of shooting gallerie-err, I mean gun free zones.

So what is it? Do they WANT to start a fight with roughly the other half of the country? Honest question, not looking for trolling or ridiculous emotional rant responses... what's the end game here?



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Blueracer




The numbers are not provable one way or the other.


This is such an obvious attempt to discredit data you don't like just because it says something you don't want to hear.




And accusations won't win this argument for you.


Being obtuse and denying the validity of data provided by multiple sources isn't an argument, it's a deflection tactic.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 08:22 PM
link   
At this rate I can only assume that the DNC is aiming to be irrelevant for the next 12 years or more......



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: lordcomac




Do they think they're gearing up for some sort of a civil war or something?


This isn't something I'm prepared to discuss. I don't even want the idea out there to be considered.

Not over this election.

But when left wing media keeps making these claims they are attempting to dehumanize an entire swath of the population. There is only one reason to do that. That would be to indoctrinate your troops.

Unfortunately there's a hell of alot more to warfare than numbers and guns. The leftists in this country trying to start a conflict will figure it out when the bullets start flying.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn




posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 08:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: lordcomac




Do they think they're gearing up for some sort of a civil war or something?


This isn't something I'm prepared to discuss. I don't even want the idea out there to be considered.

Not over this election.

But when left wing media keeps making these claims they are attempting to dehumanize an entire swath of the population. There is only one reason to do that. That would be to indoctrinate your troops.

Unfortunately there's a hell of alot more to warfare than numbers and guns. The leftists in this country trying to start a conflict will figure it out when the bullets start flying.


Well, for their sake lets hope that isn't the plan- because as it stands the huge and vast majority of bullets are not in their hands.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 08:49 PM
link   
I'm not even a Trump voter nor really like him all that much but to categorize people as such as a whole is uncalled for. That media, part of the dying MSM is grasping at straws to label people wrongfully.
edit on 15-11-2016 by dreamingawake because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blueracer

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: Blueracer
You keep spewing the 8 and 29 percent numbers but I don't take much stock in them. NO ONE KNOWS who voted for who with 100% accuracy.

Keep on living in your denial bubble. Makes you feel safer , huh ?


So people stood in the booth with voters to see who they voted for? That is the only way they would know.


[sigh] - really?

It's called exit polling and it's usually pretty accurate, unlike pre-election polling which can be off by a good deal as evidenced by this election.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 09:12 PM
link   
If you're on the right side of the political spectrum in general and in the alt-right in particular you couldn't really have hoped for a better aftermath and reaction from the left. The lack of introspection, hyperbole, and fear mongering shows not only did they not consider the possibility of losing, but are unable to even identify why. Calling half the country racist, is great way to earn back a good portion of that half's trust isn't it?

What's even better is that there are people on the left who are trying to properly identify the causes like Bill Maher and David Axelrod, and have articulated that they can kinda understand where the Democrats lost Rust Belt whites, being shouted down by others on the left saying "we don't care if you're right that doesn't respect our feelings".

They better hope that this election trend is a one off, and it might be, but if it's not there is a new paradigm in play. I've seen it proposed that in a multi- cultural, multi racial society, identity trumps ideology once the majority is thin enough to feel threatened. I've also seen it said from both voices on the left and right that "white people voted like a minority group this election".
There is a lot to digest for anyone who cares about the future of this country regardless of which side you're on. Save the rhetoric for fund raising and the next election, a failure to honestly assess how this happened will has great potential to end in blood, tears, and fire.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 09:21 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

i wouldn't put much stock in it, slate is just a sjw tabloid here is another sleezy story they are running and trolling for sleez.
Do You Have Information About Abortions Trump May Have Paid For? Let Us Know.




posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 09:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Blueracer




The numbers are not provable one way or the other.


This is such an obvious attempt to discredit data you don't like just because it says something you don't want to hear.




And accusations won't win this argument for you.


Being obtuse and denying the validity of data provided by multiple sources isn't an argument, it's a deflection tactic.


The reliability of the data discredits itself. Stop using it as a crutch. There is no known validity of the data. They could have said any number. They do not KNOW and neither do you.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 09:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Blueracer




The reliability of the data discredits itself. Stop using it as a crutch. There is no known validity of the data. They could have said any number. They do not KNOW and neither do you.


Please quit while you're behind.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 09:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter

We KNOW the pre-election data was off NOW. There is NO WAY to know the true accuracy of who people ACTUALLY voted for.



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join