2016 Presidential debate debate

[miguel]

4chan is likely filled with 400# people in basements, so of course they would take offense.

but... Why skew it to look like a trump win?

yes, the simplest explanation for dozens of polls showing the same thing is manipulation by one group. Sure.

The results from that tossed salad of polls is sprinkled with parsimony and chopped with occam's razor.

Because we are going to make an effort to defeat the left using leftist tactics for once.

See something red, say it is blue! Eat something sweet, say it is bitter! A man can be a woman! A woman can be a xhe not a she! Guns are bad! Criminals are misunderstood!

The *****es want cultural revolution and chaos, the *****es are starting to get it. This is only the beginning.

Here's a summary of where we are as a nation: Why Does The Left Always Win?

The Trump candidacy may not be the red pill we need, but it sure ain't the other baby blue options on the plate this November.

p.s. 8ch.net is better than 4chan.

 

[jamil]

Maybe there are just more NRA die hard 2nd Amendment proponents than the NeverTrumpers can calculate?
The one's I know had the debate marked as a Hillary loss before it even started.

Usually people wait for the game to be played to determine the winners in actually head-to-head competition. But, I dunno. Maybe you mean "win" differently from what I think "win" means. In a presidential debate it means who accomplished what they needed to accomplish. Sometimes that means both win. Sometimes that means neither wins. Trump managed to get through the whole debate without implying the size of his penis, so I suppose that's a win for him. But unfortunately, Trump was too busy jumping into the Ego rabbit holes Hillary dug for him, so she got away with saying she's sorry for the emails. So because of Trump's lack of preparation, that ended up being a win for her.

 

[david890]

Why skew it to look like a trump win?

Because they know Trump will shout it from the rooftops, not realizing HOW those numbers were generated.

It's like Putin saying he got 98% of the vote; we know it's BS, yet the dude keeps on mentioning the numbers as if they were footnotes on the 10 Commandments - etched in stone, sent from God himself...

You know, TROLLING.....

 

[bwframe]

Obamacare 'Death Spiral' Doesn't Make Debate Cut | LifeZette

Updated 28 Sep 2016 at 11:38 AM
The day after moderator Lester Holt declined to ask a single question about Obamacare in the first 2016 presidential debate, the current administration launched a new effort designed to save the fledgling health care law — and lawmakers in Congress are rushing to protect Americans from becoming collateral damage in its collapse.

16 of 23 nonprofit co-ups set up under Obamacare to subsidize health care coverage have collapsed nationwide, leaving thousands who signed up for health care under the law without coverage.

 

[T.Lex]

Absolutely, unequivocally agree that Obamacare needs more attention in the presidential discussion. We need a plan to fix that debacle and we need it day 1.

Repeating "repeal" time after time is not a position. What was done with the ACA cannot be undone at the stroke of a pen (after an appropriate party line vote). There needs to be a plan in place.

 

[ATM]

Absolutely, unequivocally agree that Obamacare needs more attention in the presidential discussion. We need a plan to fix that debacle and we need it day 1.

Repeating "repeal" time after time is not a position. What was done with the ACA cannot be undone at the stroke of a pen (after an appropriate party line vote). There needs to be a plan in place.

Do we really need some other plan to coerce the subjects into medical insurance?

Why would any such plan be needed or tolerated? Repeal illegitimate edicts, or nullify them.

 

[T.Lex]

Do we really need some other plan to coerce the subjects into medical insurance?

Why would any such plan be needed or tolerated? Repeal illegitimate edicts, or nullify them.

Wow. Sorry. I should've been more clear.

We need a plan to mitigate (or at least phase in over time) the pain to companies and people. (We all know companies are people, too, but you know what I mean.)

If we simply repealed the legislation, that would be REALLY bad. Companies - mainly insurance companies, but also various financial institutions - have arranged their finances and certain infrastructure around this "new normal." That doesn't go away with the repeal.

Not to mention the people - actual people - who may have relied on this. Pulling the rug out from under them, while as principled as it may be from a conservative standpoint - isn't the right thing to do either.

We need a plan.

 

[ATM]

Wow. Sorry. I should've been more clear...

So, a phased repeal? I like that better than what came to mind when I saw "...a plan to fix...".

 

[T.Lex]

So, a phased repeal? I like that better than what came to mind when I saw "...a plan to fix...".

Yeah, in the re-reading, I can see that there were a couple ways to read that (although "debacle" seems pretty clear as to my sentiment).

To me, "repeal" is "now that law doesn't exist." That would be reckless in terms of the ACA. It was phased in over several years, the vacuum created if it was straight up repealed would be tragic. There should be a way to plot a path back to where we were, or I'd even accept "where we were" plus limited reforms that I was willing to accept back then.

At least let's go back to the national dialogue on it, because what we have already sucks.

 

[Expat]

I think the next step is obvious, public option followed by single payer. That has been the plan all along, hasn't it?

 

[Expat]

This may have already been brought up, but I was shocked that Lester didn't ask Hillary what Bill was doing on the Epstein Pedo-Plane.

 

[PistolBob]

How were those polls conducted? Simple random sampling? Stratified random sampling? On-line voting, with no checks for re-votes? People PAID (or at least goaded) to vote a particular way?

Any on-line poll can be gamed. I war reading that the members of 4chan took offense at Trump's "400 lb. hacker" comment, so gamed the polls.

Of course, the polls really don't mean anything; it's the EC vote that counts.

I find it hard to believe that every CNN viewer managed to vote.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

6 point swing from pre-debate Reuters/Ipsos poll. It was tied

New Reuters/Ipsos nat'l poll of likely voters:

2-WAY
Clinton 44
Trump 38

4-WAY
Clinton 42
Trump 38
Johnson 7
Stein 2

Sept. 22-26, +/-3.5%

 

[ATM]

6 point swing from pre-debate Reuters/Ipsos poll. It was tied

New Reuters/Ipsos nat'l poll of likely voters:

2-WAY
Clinton 44
Trump 38

4-WAY
Clinton 42
Trump 38
Johnson 7
Stein 2

Sept. 22-26, +/-3.5%

But wait... I keep hearing that 3rd party votes are votes for Hillary. That does not appear to be the case at all.

 

[KLB]

But wait... I keep hearing that 3rd party votes are votes for Hillary. That does not appear to be the case at all.

That was exactly my first thought.

 

["Username"]

Concepts you are not likely to hear about in these so called debates.



[video=youtube_share;qXBswFfh6AY]http://youtu.be/qXBswFfh6AY[/video]

 

[Ericpwp]

I saw a few times when Trump was setting up his zinger, Lester would interrupt it.

Breaking: POKER PRO AGREES - Hillary Was Sending Hand Signals to Debate Moderator Holt

[video=youtube;Vqe4vqhA3D4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vqe4vqhA3D4[/video]

 

[Kutnupe14]

Breaking: POKER PRO AGREES - Hillary Was Sending Hand Signals to Debate Moderator Holt

[video=youtube;Vqe4vqhA3D4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vqe4vqhA3D4[/video]

Lol, really? Lol

 

[nate77]

Lol, really? Lol

Yeah, Hillary Clinton, and the mainstream media have way to much integrity for something like that

 

[Kutnupe14]

Yeah, Hillary Clinton, and the mainstream media have way to much integrity for something like that

Maybe not Clinton, but Lester Holt most certainly does.