**** Elections thread *****

[spoonitnow]

I think so too.

I shouldn't say I think Trump should be dumped at the convention, because really I don't know what I want. The anti-SJW force is IMO the most important force in the country right now, and that alone could put Trump over the top in us needing him as President. I just do not like him as a person and I don't think I ever will.

Liking him as a person is completely and totally irrelevant. That's woman talk, and it's the kind of vaginal bullshit that pulled the average vote super far to the left after women were allowed to vote.

[wufwugy]

I'd agree with that.

[spoonitnow]

Hey while we're at it, fuck BLM

[wufwugy]

Yanked from the_donald. must read for anybody. the mainstream narrative about blacks is an atrocity.

https://www.facebook.com/jay.stalien...11372818974402

[boost]

Talks per capita when convenient, uses straight numbers when convenient.

Further, the whole theme of that editorial is a very strange "police killing black people is not an issue because black people kill black people."

Both can be problems at the same time, and neither is going to be solved by solely blaming the individuals in the groups.

[spoonitnow]

When I see BLM do a single fucking thing to stop black on black murder, I'll stop calling them a racist, terrorist organization.

[boost]

When I see the police do a single fucking thing to stop cop on black murder, I'll stop calling them a racist, terrorist organization.

Sup, bro?

[spoonitnow]

A higher percentage of dead whites are shot by cops than dead blacks are so get over it.

[wufwugy]

didn't a study just hit that found that cops shoot blacks as often as whites?

[boost]

didn't a study just hit that found that cops shoot blacks as often as whites?

Link or it didn't happen.

[wufwugy]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/up...ings.html?_r=0

[boost]

Did either of you read the article?

[wufwugy]

Multiple times.

[boost]

Well, why did you fail to convey it's/the study's/the author of the study's message? Why did you instead chose to cherry pick the part that suits your world view?

[wufwugy]

Well, why did you fail to convey it's/the study's/the author of the study's message? Why did you instead chose to cherry pick the part that suits your world view?

We were talking about cops killing black people. I mentioned the relevant portions. I only fully perused the article after you asked for it.

Using stats for my arguments isn't really my thing. They can be worth mentioning, but beyond that I don't think they have much value. That may be why I offhandedly presented this. I should have been more thoughtful about it. Frankly I'm not interested in the results either way. How does the phrase go? Something like "You can torture data to tell you anything."

[wufwugy]

The study is a good example of why jumping to conclusions based on stats is a bad idea. Statistics are good for showing that something happened, not why something happened. It is a mistake to use this study to say "aha fewer shots at blacks implies less racism against blacks" but it is also a mistake to say "aha more force against blacks means more racism against blacks." Extrapolation and inferences from statistics is a bad idea.

These things need to be evaluated on a case by case basis. It's really the only way to get to the heart of what's actually going on. Take for example all of BLM's martyrs (or maybe just most of them, I'm not up to speed on everything BLM does). Using equivalent parameters as in studies like the linked, they would statistically show extreme "wrongful" treatment of blacks. Yet the facts of the individual cases say otherwise.

[wufwugy]

Here's an example for why these stats are inherently unreliable when used to infer causes.

Let's say the whites in the 'compliant' sample said "yes, officer" and "no, officer" more often than the blacks did, while blacks said "yeah" and "no" instead. Well, that one difference could account for a non-insignificant amount of difference in force used against subjects. Saying "yes, officer" instills a greater deal of safety and comfort into the situation and distills tension the officer may be feeling. It is reasonable to assume that the samples could contain unaccounted for variables like this.

[spoonitnow]

It shows that blacks are 24 percent less likely to be shot at by cops than white when lethal force is appropriate.

It completely defeats this narrative that cops are somehow just going around shooting black folks because they're black.

Get the fuck over it.

Fuck BLM. They are a racist, terrorist organization that does not care about black people, let alone anyone the fuck else.

In shootings in these 10 cities involving officers, officers were more likely to fire their weapons without having first been attacked when the suspects were white. Black and white civilians involved in police shootings were equally likely to have been carrying a weapon. Both results undercut the idea of racial bias in police use of lethal force.

Any further discussion by anyone who knows these simple pieces of information who are trying to defend BLM in any way, shape or form confirmed that the person is either a complete fucking idiot or a race-baiting sack of fucking shit.

On the election topic, the Grand Dragon of the California KKK confirmed on video that they donated $20,000 to Hillary's campaign and endorse her for president.

Related image:

[a500lbgorilla]

Whites: 196,817,552
Blacks: 37,685,848

Ratio 5.22:1

Whites shot by cops since Jan 1 2015: 732
Blacks shot by cops since Jan 1 2015: 381

Ratio 1.92:1

Oh look.

I know stats can be tricky and critical thinking was never your strong suit, spooners, but maybe pull up a bit on the blind zeal.

[wufwugy]

Whites: 196,817,552
Blacks: 37,685,848

Ratio 5.22:1

Whites shot by cops since Jan 1 2015: 732
Blacks shot by cops since Jan 1 2015: 381

Ratio 1.92:1

Oh look.

I know stats can be tricky and critical thinking was never your strong suit, spooners, but maybe pull up a bit on the blind zeal.

Crime rates among blacks are much, much higher than whites. One quick-googled claim is that the homicide offending rate is almost 8x higher for blacks than whites.


I think we lack in zeal on these issues. I am upset with myself in pulling back because I don't want to offend anybody. But people need to be offended. Some shit is wrong and needs to be changed, and if people don't suffer the consequences of their bad ideas, the bad ideas perpetuate. BLM is a black supremacy terrorist organization. Professional victims have shit values and shit culture and they make the world a worse place.

[spoonitnow]

Whites: 196,817,552
Blacks: 37,685,848

Ratio 5.22:1

Whites shot by cops since Jan 1 2015: 732
Blacks shot by cops since Jan 1 2015: 381

Ratio 1.92:1

Oh look.

I know stats can be tricky and critical thinking was never your strong suit, spooners, but maybe pull up a bit on the blind zeal.

The numbers you've pulled there are completely irrelevant. A much higher rate of blacks commit crimes than whites, etc. You have zero logic being used there whatsoever.

[spoonitnow]

Whites: 196,817,552
Blacks: 37,685,848

Ratio 5.22:1

Whites shot by cops since Jan 1 2015: 732
Blacks shot by cops since Jan 1 2015: 381

Ratio 1.92:1

Oh look.

I know stats can be tricky and critical thinking was never your strong suit, spooners, but maybe pull up a bit on the blind zeal.

According to the 2013 FBI Crime Report, that year the number of blacks killed by whites was at approximately 0.77 per 1,000,000 blacks, while the number of whites killed by blacks was at 9.83 per 1,000,000 whites.

Oh look.

Stats aren't tricky, it's getting the message across to pussy brain-dead liberals that's tricky. If BLM wants to make a fucking dent in anything that makes a flying fuck (instead of just being a racist, terrorist organization), then they need to start addressing the truth.

[a500lbgorilla]

Does anyone know what this sentence means?

I took it from this paper that some guy wrote http://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf

[a500lbgorilla]

Then why isn't it white lives matter? Whites are the ones being shot by cops at higher rates when lethal action was justified.

Does anyone know what this sentence means?

I took it from this paper that some guy wrote http://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf

Spoon, you heard a stat that fueled your preconceptions and spun around in a tirade, and you were wrong.

Get over it.

[a500lbgorilla]

The paper actually concludes that they couldn't find any evidence of racial bias wrt shootings only, but is forthcoming with possible flaws.

If anything, BLM is highlighting a problem that I would like addressed - police violence, and I'm hoping someone figures out that legalizing the fun drugs would sweep the legs out from under a lot of young crime and fundamentally change the relationship cops have with the public.

[wufwugy]

The paper actually concludes that they couldn't find any evidence of racial bias wrt shootings only, but is forthcoming with possible flaws.

I found the "no racial bias" claim strange since it appears they found racial bias against whites regarding weapons fired. Wait, that claim does make sense to me since of course everybody knows that it's not possible to have a negative racial bias regarding whites.

[a500lbgorilla]

haha what

[wufwugy]

major lols

[JKDS]

The biggest problem with supporting or opposing the BLM movement is the evidence.

You might say that blacks commit more crimes than whites. But police have discretion in who they charge, and you'll never know who was let off easy. Geography also plays a role. So does population density, and poverty.

You might say that police pull people over for "driving while black". But good luck proving it, even if it were true. You can be stopped for any traffic violation, and most people dont know them all. Even if you could demonstrate that blacks were pulled over more often, how could you say that it wasnt due to the other factors above? Like being in a high crime area?

You might say that there are many many videos of police misconduct against blacks. But only a few have surfaced which, imo, demonstrate such misconduct. Even so, with millions of people in the United States, how can a few videos possibly be demonstrative of the group as a whole?

The evidence to support a "us vs them" claim just isnt there. Are blacks whiny fake-victims? Are the police discriminating against them? The evidence needed to support either claim is not something we currently have available to us.

[wufwugy]

The biggest problem with supporting or opposing the BLM movement is the evidence.

You might say that blacks commit more crimes than whites. But police have discretion in who they charge, and you'll never know who was let off easy. Geography also plays a role. So does population density, and poverty.

You might say that police pull people over for "driving while black". But good luck proving it, even if it were true. You can be stopped for any traffic violation, and most people dont know them all. Even if you could demonstrate that blacks were pulled over more often, how could you say that it wasnt due to the other factors above? Like being in a high crime area?

You might say that there are many many videos of police misconduct against blacks. But only a few have surfaced which, imo, demonstrate such misconduct. Even so, with millions of people in the United States, how can a few videos possibly be demonstrative of the group as a whole?

The evidence to support a "us vs them" claim just isnt there. Are blacks whiny fake-victims? Are the police discriminating against them? The evidence needed to support either claim is not something we currently have available to us.

Great post.

I would like to clarify that when I discuss victim culture, it is about something else. I don't suggest the data show a particular way about who is a victim; instead I claim that playing the role of the victim is destructive. I believe this to be the case on the individual as well as broad level. An individual can hardly do something better for himself than to not think of himself as a victim, and demographic groups that eschew victimization have risen higher and faster than others.

Relating this to blacks, well, any white person who says there is an intense streak of victimization in black culture is labeled a racist, and any black person who does so is labeled Uncle Tom.

[spoonitnow]

The biggest problem with supporting or opposing the BLM movement is the evidence.

My standpoint in opposing BLM is that they are horribly ineffective at everything they allegedly set out to do other than being a racist, terrorist group.

Oh and by the way:



You can't stump the fucking Trump

toot toot here comes the trump train

[wufwugy]

My standpoint in opposing BLM is that they are horribly ineffective at everything they allegedly set out to do other than being a racist, terrorist group.

Oh and by the way:



You can't stump the fucking Trump

toot toot here comes the trump train

I like the Pennsylvania numbers. I think he wins it. Near the election, I think his numbers come up a lot. Right now people just aren't sure if they can get behind him.

[JKDS]

But when a black person kills someone, he's more likely to kill a white due to population. Whites would be more likely to kill whites too

[spoonitnow]

But when a black person kills someone, he's more likely to kill a white due to population. Whites would be more likely to kill whites too

Then why isn't it white lives matter? Whites are the ones being shot by cops at higher rates when lethal action was justified. That's what BLM was started over and is supposed to be about.



Source: Department of Justice

Here's my point: BLM is a joke. They are ineffective at saving black lives (or any lives for that matter). They have proven themselves to be a racist, terrorist group. Several of their leaders have criminal histories of terrorism and hate crimes. It's ridiculous.

If you brought MLK back from the dead, he would take one look at BLM and instantly regret taking all of those ass-whoopins.

Know what I'd like to see? Some real action that led to real results, not a bunch of people standing in the road bitching or shooting at cops like the shooting we just saw last night - http://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime...police-say.ece

First place to start? Education and after-school programs in poor, predominantly black areas. If they want to name their group "black lives matter," then they need to do some shit to show that black lives matter, and more money for education and after-school programs are the number one place to start because they're systems that are proven 100 percent to drop crime and increase the prospects in life for the people who come through them. BLM has a tremendous social media presence to the point that they can quickly coordinate big protests and all kinds of other crap that leads to cops to getting shot, so they could surely put together something to create enough pressure that they could get these programs going.

[wufwugy]

First place to start? Education and after-school programs in poor, predominantly black areas. If they want to name their group "black lives matter," then they need to do some shit to show that black lives matter, and more money for education and after-school programs are the number one place to start because they're systems that are proven 100 percent to drop crime and increase the prospects in life for the people who come through them. BLM has a tremendous social media presence to the point that they can quickly coordinate big protests and all kinds of other crap that leads to cops to getting shot, so they could surely put together something to create enough pressure that they could get these programs going.

Here's where I mostly disagree. Black culture doesn't give a shit about education. The Booker T. Washington side was right (focus on education and entrepreneurship). It didn't lose so much as its successful adherents focused on their own lives instead, which handed the black culture wars to the professional victims.

You don't get people to treat you fairly by forcing social justice upon them. You get it by changing who you are and making it so that they benefit from treating you fairly. This is the difference between black culture and the many other subjugated cultures that have escaped their subjugation. Asians were treated every bit as badly as blacks, but they focused on education and entrepreneurship, and now they do better than whites and mistreatment of them is minuscule. The Irish were once considered below nigger status, but they embraced the whites' rule of law and within several decades became the epitome of whiteness. Jews were once thought of as nothing but thugs and scoundrels, but through the same methods they became a stronger demographic than the rest. I've mentioned the same regarding Mormons several times recently, so I won't repeat it.

A story I told a while back: a friend spent a good deal of time as a missionary in West Africa and has great memories of it. A couple years ago he planned to move to South Korea to teach English. I asked him why not teach English in Africa since he liked it so much. He said because African students respect all the wrong things. They glorify cheating and ridicule honesty. Getting good marks does not improve your social status among African children, but figuring out any way to get away with cheating does. Where White America imported British values of rule of law, integrity of character, and self-reliance, African slaves brought a whole different set of values with them to America. Some of those values are awesome and have done wonderful things for white culture (like freedom of expression).

Thomas Sowell often discusses how blacks were performing far better on many of the most important social and economic metrics back in the first half of the 20th century than they are today. That was when "the legacy of slavery" was relevant, yet blacks were succeeding rapidly. Fast forward to today, and the black family is devastated. All your slavery and all your racism in the world didn't hurt the black family, but guess what did: welfare.

The best thing we can do for blacks is stop doing shit for blacks. Police dangerous streets, stop welfare, localize education policy and funding, and -- most importantly -- reject the race-baiting hatred spewing from professional victims like BLM and the social justice media.

[boost]

Here's where I mostly disagree. Black culture doesn't give a shit about education. The Booker T. Washington side was right (focus on education and entrepreneurship). It didn't lose so much as its successful adherents focused on their own lives instead, which handed the black culture wars to the professional victims.

You don't get people to treat you fairly by forcing social justice upon them. You get it by changing who you are and making it so that they benefit from treating you fairly. This is the difference between black culture and the many other subjugated cultures that have escaped their subjugation. Asians were treated every bit as badly as blacks, but they focused on education and entrepreneurship, and now they do better than whites and mistreatment of them is minuscule. The Irish were once considered below nigger status, but they embraced the whites' rule of law and within several decades became the epitome of whiteness. Jews were once thought of as nothing but thugs and scoundrels, but through the same methods they became a stronger demographic than the rest. I've mentioned the same regarding Mormons several times recently, so I won't repeat it.

A story I told a while back: a friend spent a good deal of time as a missionary in West Africa and has great memories of it. A couple years ago he planned to move to South Korea to teach English. I asked him why not teach English in Africa since he liked it so much. He said because African students respect all the wrong things. They glorify cheating and ridicule honesty. Getting good marks does not improve your social status among African children, but figuring out any way to get away with cheating does. Where White America imported British values of rule of law, integrity of character, and self-reliance, African slaves brought a whole different set of values with them to America. Some of those values are awesome and have done wonderful things for white culture (like freedom of expression).

Thomas Sowell often discusses how blacks were performing far better on many of the most important social and economic metrics back in the first half of the 20th century than they are today. That was when "the legacy of slavery" was relevant, yet blacks were succeeding rapidly. Fast forward to today, and the black family is devastated. All your slavery and all your racism in the world didn't hurt the black family, but guess what did: welfare.

The best thing we can do for blacks is stop doing shit for blacks. Police dangerous streets, stop welfare, localize education policy and funding, and -- most importantly -- reject the race-baiting hatred spewing from professional victims like BLM and the social justice media.

It seems dubious to assume that these traits are inherent in African culture and not inherent to subjugated cultures. If you and your assumptions are right everywhere else, I suppose it shouldn't make a prescriptive difference, but I do think the difference is non insignificant if only in the sense that application of the solution is likely to be more thorough, thoughtful, and fully realized when applied from one starting point rather than the other.

[wufwugy]

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. As far as I can tell, the first mention of General Flynn as a possible VP for Trump first hit the airwaves three days after the supposed FBI anon posted it on 4chan.

If that dude is actually legit, good googly moogly we may be in for a real revival after half the political establishment is thrown in prison for treason.

[wufwugy]

Highly recommend Scott Adam's blog. Most posts are political analyses of why Trump beats asses.

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1473422...mps-glide-path

[wufwugy]

He isn't wrong. The study shows blacks are less likely to be shot than whites by 24%. I can't find what you quoted, but here's my copypasta of the link:

Blacks are 23.8 percent
less
likely to be shot by police, relative to whites. Hispanics are 8.5
percent less likely to be shot but the coecient is statistically insigni cant.

[a500lbgorilla]

He isn't wrong. The study shows blacks are less likely to be shot than whites by 24%. I can't find what you quoted, but here's my copypasta of the link:

Blacks are 23.8 percent
less
likely to be shot by police, relative to whites. Hispanics are 8.5
percent less likely to be shot but the coecient is statistically insigni cant.

I linked the actual paper the guy wrote. The paper that article is quoting. The paper that lists that stat and then says it isn't statistically significant.

To not be statistically significant means that you he could have easily found that result in his data set even if whites weren't being shot at more than blacks.

Things that were significant was that every other category of violent interaction (gun pointed at them, thrown to the ground, tazed, etc), blacks suffered at much higher rates than other races

[wufwugy]

Even though at this point I want Trump to get the nomination, I'm gonna LOL if he loses it, since it would be because of the large number of wrong things he did like accusing Ted's dad of being involved in the JFK assassination. He should have saved his blatant lies for enemies, not fellow Republicans.

[JKDS]

Maybe I wasn't clear. This is a marble game.

Pretend you have a jar with 3 white marbles, and 1 black. You dip your hand in and pick one at random. You are more likely to pick a white one.

Murders happen. But the fact that whites get killed more is insignificant. We expect that result, because there are more whites. But it doesn't mean that blacks are, or are not, being signaled out. Data showing the white marbles are drawn more often is expected, but it doesn't prove that they are being drawn at the proper rate. It's possible they are only drawn 66% of the time, instead of the expected 75%, and still be drawn more often.

If you follow, it means saying whites are killed more often is meaningless.

Not only that, but BLM is saying the black marble gets picked more than it should. Not that white ones don't get picked at all. And not the whites don't get picked more than blacks.

[wufwugy]

Okay I found the other quote. Apparently both of our quotes are in there, which is weird, since one says the blacks portion is statistically insignificant while the other says it's significant.

[JKDS]

I have highey educated friends posting videos, daily, about allegedly racist cops. Most of them, unsurprisingly, do not support their BLM position.

Its getting annoying.

[wufwugy]

^^I'm confused on the point you're making. Whose BLM position? What is the position? Why is it annoying?

[JKDS]

It's annoying because they're being intellectually lazy. If you're gonna rally behind something, and post evidence in support of the cause, make it good evidence. Everything else is a waste of time, and only serves to hurt their stance

[a500lbgorilla]

Most argument is lazy. Why not poke around and see what it's made of?

[wufwugy]

Trump's speech will go down in history as one of the best in all politics. He's gonna win in a landslide. 55% minimum. Scott Adams may not be far off with his ludicrous 65% prediction. Clinton may not even be able to pull 200 electoral votes.

[a500lbgorilla]

Trump's speech will go down in history as one of the best in all politics. He's gonna win in a landslide. 55% minimum. Scott Adams may not be far off with his ludicrous 65% prediction. Clinton may not even be able to pull 200 electoral votes.

He bellows to the night's sky.

It's Hillary's game to fuck up. I trust her lawyerlishness at least enough to put out a thick speech worth recognizing as better than whatever this joker thinks followers need to hear.

[wufwugy]

He bellows to the night's sky.

It's Hillary's game to fuck up. I trust her lawyerlishness at least enough to put out a thick speech worth recognizing as better than whatever this joker thinks followers need to hear.

Puff, puff, pass. Not puff, puff, puff, puff, puff, puff, puff, puff, puff, puff...

He's gonna eviscerate her so badly that the Democrats are gonna run some no-name Congressman in 2020 just to keep the party going and the down-ballot votes.

[Deanglow]

Trump's speech will go down in history as one of the best in all politics. He's gonna win in a landslide. 55% minimum. Scott Adams may not be far off with his ludicrous 65% prediction. Clinton may not even be able to pull 200 electoral votes.

would you like to revise this prediction?

[wufwugy]

would you like to revise this prediction?

I think she'll get over 200 EVs. She'll lose FL OH PA NH NV IA VA CO and maybe MI.

The polls are tremendously skewed, probably because the Democrats need to justify their coming election fraud. Nobody watches CNN and nobody goes to Clinton rallies. If she comes out of the debates well, though, that would be a problem.

[oskar]

The polls are tremendously skewed, probably because the Democrats need to justify their coming election fraud. Nobody watches CNN and nobody goes to Clinton rallies. If she comes out of the debates well, though, that would be a problem.

That won't matter because she doesn't need pro-Hillary votes if she can get all the pls-no-Trump votes.

[wufwugy]

That won't matter because she doesn't need pro-Hillary votes if she can get all the pls-no-Trump votes.

The pls no Trump votes seem greatly exaggerated to me. There may even be a greater number of pls no Hillary votes.

People are simply not sure on Trump, yet when it comes to pulling the lever, they'll do it. People are very sure on Hillary. Her base is the robot Democrat vote and nothing else. I would argue that she's weaker than Romney in that nobody is enthusiastic about her, yet, unlike Romney, she will probably lose the "moderate" vote too because the crooked label is too true.

People bitch and moan because that's what people do. They'll complain about him nonstop until they finally vote for him.

[Deanglow]

What did you particularly like about it

[wufwugy]

Personally, I liked Cruz's speech a whole lot better. But what I think will make this speech so great for Trump is his performance was WAY better than it has ever been. It's almost like he intentionally gave "bad" speeches before so that he could show up now and look perfectly poised and presidential. He hit all the most important points in a persuasive way. For example, one thing he needs to do to win the election is get rid of the "racist" label the Democrats put on him. Most people would try to do that by defending themselves by talking about how they're not racist and stuff, which doesn't work. Instead Trump alluded to race issues in the entire speech in a light that counters the racist label. He used some keywords that touch black voters more than others like "equality" when discussing inner city children. Another that stood out the most to me was how he repeated about four times virtually the same perfect phrase regarding law and order and safety.

[a500lbgorilla]

Personally, I liked Cruz's speech a whole lot better.

:thumb:

I dunno why I like Cruz so much. But I do like him.

[wufwugy]

:thumb:

I dunno why I like Cruz so much. But I do like him.

Because homey says the correct things about the world and how things work.

[Renton]

I found his repetition grating, but I'm sure the kickers of shit and breathers of mouth were pleased. I'd say it was a fantastic speech in terms of persuading his audience and increasing his chances of winning the presidency.

[a500lbgorilla]

I found his repetition grating, but I'm sure the kickers of shit and breathers of mouth were pleased. I'd say it was a fantastic speech in terms of persuading his audience and increasing his chances of winning the presidency.

:thumb:

[Deanglow]

It would take a miracle for either candidate to get past 45%

[wufwugy]

Nobody cares about Gary Johnson. >80% of the undecideds will go to Trump. Even Michael Moore's gonna vote for him.

[Savy]

Nobody cares about Gary Johnson. >80% of the undecideds will go to Trump. Even Michael Moore's gonna vote for him.

Do you really not think he's going to do great in comparison to the usual %? Will still be nothing obviously.

[wufwugy]

He might do slightly better by way of a handful of Never Trump social conservatives or Berners that won't move to Trump. Even so, Johnson is likely to do worse among his base because that's Trump's base. How many Ron Paulites moved to Johnson? Few. Ron Paulites are the most fervent of Trump's base.

[wufwugy]

Plus it can be said that the race doesn't truly start until the first debate. That's when casuals start paying attention. When they see Trump demolish Clinton while acting presidential and not saying anything that can be remotely construed as racist or bigoted, the 10-20% of undecideds are gonna start falling for him. Also there will probably be a huge Shy Tory effect. I'm expecting one so big that it'll be renamed the Shy Trump effect. So many of his supporters don't talk about supporting him because doing so gets an immediate "racist" label, and many are sort of just waiting for how they can justify voting for him.

[wufwugy]

Holy shitfuck I just saw a rando live interview with some rando DNC attendees who claimed that Clinton is less corrupt than Trump because BernVictims totes malotes stood up during the DNC to say how sadface Hillary made them therefore she's in the doghouse and that forces her to be less corrupt than the racist, sexist, xenophobic, bigoted, kills-babies, butt-fucks-Moses Donald Trump.

This is why we can't have nice things.

[wufwugy]

I hate the word "cuck," because so many people who use it are cucked for Donald (even cucked for Ivanka). But good goddamn, hell freezes over the day more people aren't cucked for Hillary.

[a500lbgorilla]

http://i.imgur.com/EdxY3p9.gifv

LMFAO

edit fleg, gifv tags not working

[Keith]

what would happen if a guy changed his name to " none of the above" and stood as an independent , whats his chances of winning the election ?

[a500lbgorilla]

Even if no one voted, Hilary would still win by 3 million votes.

[a500lbgorilla]

The party of Sarah Palin, the party of Donald Trump - when will it finally fold?

[Deanglow]

where my trumpkins at

[wufwugy]

did something happen?

[oskar]

If this was a sporting even, I'd say this is a fixed game for sure. Nobody drops the ball this hard that many times.

New conspiracy theory: Trump is a Democrat puppet to secure Hillary's victory.

[Savy]

If this was a sporting even, I'd say this is a fixed game for sure. Nobody drops the ball this hard that many times.

New conspiracy theory: Trump is a Democrat puppet to secure Hillary's victory.

If that's true do the american right get angry or do they realise that they want someone that badass running the country.