(05-11-2018 02:15 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:13 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 01:52 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 01:03 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  If you looked at the poll numbers in public, it was a very good chance Trump would win. He lead in the last polls in MI and PA. He was neck and neck in NH and NV. He only needed 1 of PA, MI or WI or both of NH and NV if you assume he wins NC and FL which he clearly was leading (although very close).

I was not alone on this board in predicting a Trump win in the closing days.

I should find the link o nthe site to my electoral map projection back in the fall of 2016 which triggered Tom or Max so hard that they insisted I be banned for lying.

ok, I found the link. I apologize to Tom. He wasnt part of it.

IT WAS MACH! Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

https://csnbbs.com/thread-793182.html

While Mach may have overreacted, I can understand why in some respects. Nothing in the thread title or your post lead anyone to believe that this was just your prediction, unless you were aware that site was one where you just did your own projecting. And actually, I remember I linked a map from that site once with numbers I had changed without realizing it...and I seem to remember someone, maybe even you, who overreacted to it as well like I was trying to fool someone, when it was just a harmless mistake. Interesting, don't you think?

But bottom line, your thread and post were a clear troll. Not surprising, it's basically your MO.

So posting the truth and facts are now considered trolling?

Your thread saying it was the current situation, without saying it was just your prediction is somehow a fact?

(05-11-2018 01:58 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  If you looked at the poll numbers in public, it was a very good chance Trump would win. He lead in the last polls in MI and PA. He was neck and neck in NH and NV. He only needed 1 of PA, MI or WI or both of NH and NV if you assume he wins NC and FL which he clearly was leading (although very close).

I was not alone on this board in predicting a Trump win in the closing days.

Not that I don't believe you, but living in Michigan, I don't remember seeing any polls here saying that trump had pulled ahead or had a "good chance" of winning MI. Can you find a link perhaps? Thanks.

It was there, you just didn't want to see it.

I called Michigan for Trump a few days before the election, someone feel free to bump if they can find it.

(05-11-2018 02:23 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 01:58 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  If you looked at the poll numbers in public, it was a very good chance Trump would win. He lead in the last polls in MI and PA. He was neck and neck in NH and NV. He only needed 1 of PA, MI or WI or both of NH and NV if you assume he wins NC and FL which he clearly was leading (although very close).

I was not alone on this board in predicting a Trump win in the closing days.

Not that I don't believe you, but living in Michigan, I don't remember seeing any polls here saying that trump had pulled ahead or had a "good chance" of winning MI. Can you find a link perhaps? Thanks.

It was there, you just didn't want to see it.

I called Michigan for Trump a few days before the election, someone feel free to bump if they can find it.

Why would I want not to see it?

Besides, the claim is utter Sorry.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls...-5533.html

But kudos to Trafalgar Group...whoever the eff that is.

(05-11-2018 02:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:15 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:13 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 01:52 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 01:03 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  I should find the link o nthe site to my electoral map projection back in the fall of 2016 which triggered Tom or Max so hard that they insisted I be banned for lying.

ok, I found the link. I apologize to Tom. He wasnt part of it.

IT WAS MACH! Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

https://csnbbs.com/thread-793182.html

While Mach may have overreacted, I can understand why in some respects. Nothing in the thread title or your post lead anyone to believe that this was just your prediction, unless you were aware that site was one where you just did your own projecting. And actually, I remember I linked a map from that site once with numbers I had changed without realizing it...and I seem to remember someone, maybe even you, who overreacted to it as well like I was trying to fool someone, when it was just a harmless mistake. Interesting, don't you think?

But bottom line, your thread and post were a clear troll. Not surprising, it's basically your MO.

So posting the truth and facts are now considered trolling?

Your thread saying it was the current situation, without saying it was just your prediction is somehow a fact?

Mach does it basically every post he makes. Go complain to him.

(05-11-2018 02:23 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 12:14 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  If Obama put a spy in the Trump Campaign, then they knew that the polling numbers were different than what was being reported by the MSM. They wouldn't jeopardize that kind of political capital for a sure loser.

Note to self: January 20, 2017. President Obama told us to do everything "by the book", totally legal, really, that's what he said. Honest.

Bwahahahaha. They busted

(05-11-2018 02:26 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:23 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 01:58 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  If you looked at the poll numbers in public, it was a very good chance Trump would win. He lead in the last polls in MI and PA. He was neck and neck in NH and NV. He only needed 1 of PA, MI or WI or both of NH and NV if you assume he wins NC and FL which he clearly was leading (although very close).

I was not alone on this board in predicting a Trump win in the closing days.

Not that I don't believe you, but living in Michigan, I don't remember seeing any polls here saying that trump had pulled ahead or had a "good chance" of winning MI. Can you find a link perhaps? Thanks.

It was there, you just didn't want to see it.

I called Michigan for Trump a few days before the election, someone feel free to bump if they can find it.

Why would I want not to see it?

Besides, the claim is utter Sorry.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls...-5533.html

But kudos to Trafalgar Group...whoever the eff that is.

I'm not sure what citing polls that we (correctly) predicted were wrong and fake (vastly oversampled dems) does for your argument. Most of them know the result (narrative) they want to put out, and reverse engineer themselves in order to arrive at said result.

I called it in the run up, but it was blatantly obvious after that blowout Grand Rapids rally the night before (actually morning of) the election. You could tell from the energy in the building that it was in the bag. You probably didn't watch, because you didn't want to believe it. You were in denial.

rwt was probably sleeping like hillary, while the rest of us were late into the night, watching President Trump make history.

(05-11-2018 02:34 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:15 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:13 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 01:52 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  ok, I found the link. I apologize to Tom. He wasnt part of it.

IT WAS MACH! Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

https://csnbbs.com/thread-793182.html

While Mach may have overreacted, I can understand why in some respects. Nothing in the thread title or your post lead anyone to believe that this was just your prediction, unless you were aware that site was one where you just did your own projecting. And actually, I remember I linked a map from that site once with numbers I had changed without realizing it...and I seem to remember someone, maybe even you, who overreacted to it as well like I was trying to fool someone, when it was just a harmless mistake. Interesting, don't you think?

But bottom line, your thread and post were a clear troll. Not surprising, it's basically your MO.

So posting the truth and facts are now considered trolling?

Your thread saying it was the current situation, without saying it was just your prediction is somehow a fact?

Mach does it basically every post he makes. Go complain to him.

I have talked to Mach about such things before. Thanks for your concern.

(05-11-2018 02:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:26 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:23 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 01:58 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  If you looked at the poll numbers in public, it was a very good chance Trump would win. He lead in the last polls in MI and PA. He was neck and neck in NH and NV. He only needed 1 of PA, MI or WI or both of NH and NV if you assume he wins NC and FL which he clearly was leading (although very close).

I was not alone on this board in predicting a Trump win in the closing days.

Not that I don't believe you, but living in Michigan, I don't remember seeing any polls here saying that trump had pulled ahead or had a "good chance" of winning MI. Can you find a link perhaps? Thanks.

It was there, you just didn't want to see it.

I called Michigan for Trump a few days before the election, someone feel free to bump if they can find it.

Why would I want not to see it?

Besides, the claim is utter Sorry.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls...-5533.html

But kudos to Trafalgar Group...whoever the eff that is.

I'm not sure what citing polls that we (correctly) predicted were wrong and fake (vastly oversampled dems) does for your argument. Most of them know the result (narrative) they want to put out, and reverse engineer themselves in order to arrive at said result.

I called it in the run up, but it was blatantly obvious after that blowout Grand Rapids rally the night before (actually morning of) the election. You could tell from the energy in the building that it was in the bag. You probably didn't watch, because you didn't want to believe it. You were in denial.

I'm glad for you Nostradamus, but I was replying to bullet who said polls right before the election in MI and PA showed trump ahead and with a good chance of winning. I bolded it for you above. That was clearly not the case in Michigan. Please just stick to what I'm commenting on and not other things. Everyone is aware that the state polling was wrong.

(05-11-2018 02:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Your thread saying it was the current situation, without saying it was just your prediction is somehow a fact?

I don't understand what you're saying here

To what thread are you referring? The thread in the link wouldn't require the disclaimer you desire here and unless it wasn't really representative of the opinions expressed by the people presenting it, then it 'would' be a fact.

If I post a picture of the vegas line on the game tonight, I don't need to claim it's a prediction because it can't be anything BUT that. And as long as I'm posting an actual picture of the vegas line, it IS a fact that this is what the vegas line is. If I then say, visitors will cover, again I don't have to say it's a prediction because that is obvious.

(05-11-2018 02:58 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Your thread saying it was the current situation, without saying it was just your prediction is somehow a fact?

I don't understand what you're saying here

To what thread are you referring? The thread in the link wouldn't require the disclaimer you desire here and unless it wasn't really representative of the opinions expressed by the people presenting it, then it 'would' be a fact.

If I post a picture of the vegas line on the game tonight, I don't need to claim it's a prediction because it can't be anything BUT that. And as long as I'm posting an actual picture of the vegas line, it IS a fact that this is what the vegas line is. If I then say, visitors will cover, again I don't have to say it's a prediction because that is obvious.

But the picture did not say "Create our won electoral map" That's all I'm saying. If you didn't know that site was a create your own site you would think it was actually the current polling data, no?

And the OP in that link did not have a link to the 270 site, so you if you didn't know it was a create your own site, you could not easily click on a link to see the disclaimer on it that it was a create your own site.

So far only you Wahoo's believe this is a big deal. You control everything and can't arrest anyone. Sad.

(05-11-2018 03:09 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  So far only you Wahoo's believe this is a big deal. You control everything and can't arrest anyone. Sad.

Not time yet. Halloween parties will be a time for Democrat misery.

(05-11-2018 03:09 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  So far only you Wahoo's believe this is a big deal. You control everything and can't arrest anyone. Sad.

You don't arrest or indict until you know you can convict. Unlike your idiot savior Mueller who is getting dragged by Federal judges and his dog and pony show the Facebook Twitter Russians. They indicted and they don't even have a case to present.

Oh and it was near impossible to arrest any of them when the Obama Admin., DOJ, and the FBI were all totally corrupt.

(05-11-2018 01:58 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  If you looked at the poll numbers in public, it was a very good chance Trump would win. He lead in the last polls in MI and PA. He was neck and neck in NH and NV. He only needed 1 of PA, MI or WI or both of NH and NV if you assume he wins NC and FL which he clearly was leading (although very close).

I was not alone on this board in predicting a Trump win in the closing days.

Not that I don't believe you, but living in Michigan, I don't remember seeing any polls here saying that trump had pulled ahead or had a "good chance" of winning MI. Can you find a link perhaps? Thanks.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls...-6008.html

You can look up Pennsyvlania and Wisconsin too. The same poll had Trump ahead in Pennsylvania and within the margin of error in Wisconsin.

I didn't expect PA, MI or WI, but I did expect Trump to win NH and NV which would have put him over the top. But they had the opposite dynamic. Clinton was ahead in the RCP average, but Trump was ahead in the last poll in PA and MI. Trump was ahead in the RCP average, but Clinton was ahead in the last poll in NV. Clinton was ahead in NH in the RCP average, but only because of a clearly flaky poll showing her 11 points up, however, that was the last poll and it showed her in the lead. In WI, the latest poll showed Trump closing rapidly and within the margin of error, but not yet ahead.

(05-11-2018 09:19 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 09:17 AM)cb4029 Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 09:11 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  yet no leftists on here....

We're here with popcorn laughing at all the paranoid freakazoids in this thread.

or more like yall ******* are staying away because you are scared to get your ass handed to you.

They're still recovering from this: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/201...id=rrpromo

(05-11-2018 03:03 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  But the picture did not say "Create our won electoral map" That's all I'm saying. If you didn't know that site was a create your own site you would think it was actually the current polling data, no?

And the OP in that link did not have a link to the 270 site, so you if you didn't know it was a create your own site, you could not easily click on a link to see the disclaimer on it that it was a create your own site.

No it didn't say that, but it DID say 'the current state of the electoral map'... since he posted it prior to election day and no ballots had yet been counted, it is obviously a prediction by SOMEONE.... and yet the picture I see shows 216-182 for Trump and it STILL takes 270 to win, so it wasn't even a full prediction.... just as he said... the current state (in SOMEONE'S estimation)

The distinction you're making between 'this is someone's prediction that I agree with' and 'this is my prediction' is absolutely true, but your initial claim was that he was presenting his opinion as 'fact'... which he didn't do.

(05-11-2018 04:22 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 01:58 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  If you looked at the poll numbers in public, it was a very good chance Trump would win. He lead in the last polls in MI and PA. He was neck and neck in NH and NV. He only needed 1 of PA, MI or WI or both of NH and NV if you assume he wins NC and FL which he clearly was leading (although very close).

I was not alone on this board in predicting a Trump win in the closing days.

Not that I don't believe you, but living in Michigan, I don't remember seeing any polls here saying that trump had pulled ahead or had a "good chance" of winning MI. Can you find a link perhaps? Thanks.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls...-6008.html

You can look up Pennsyvlania and Wisconsin too. The same poll had Trump ahead in Pennsylvania and within the margin of error in Wisconsin.

No. Here is Pennsylvania:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls...-5633.html

And here is Wisconsin:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls...-5659.html

Same thing as Michigan. Not sure if you realize this, but the top line showing trump ahead is not the poll, it's the final results of the election.

The only polling firm showing trump with a lead in PA was Trafalgar, just like Michigan. Trafalgar did not have a WI poll.

Sorry, but you're just wrong.

In other news, there is rumblings that the spy was a man named Halper. Halper is/was both an FBI agent, and has ties to the former head of british intelligence. Halper has ties to Page and I believe also Papodoupolos. Halper was in communication with Carter Page in Mid-July, 2016.

The problem with this? The FBI has stated that the investigations started with Papdoupolos. (Well, after they lied and said it started with the fake dossier, then backed off of that.) The issue they will have is that Halpers communications to Carter Page occurred prior to Papadoupolos drunked rant in a bar, meaning the FBI has lied again.