Knicks · Where the heck is Hillary Clinton? (page 159)

arkrud wrote:All I can say the real powers are entering the game when the intervention really matters.
Washington bureaucrats/large corporations behind Hillary/Democrats and secret services/law enforcement/military behind Republicans/Trump.
What is missing from the picture is anyone representing American people.
It is not about changing the way of life, it is about who controls the wealth distribution.
In any case it will be one half of 1% or another.
The Republic slowly sleeping into Empire and decadence.
The history always repeats itself.

Secret service backs trump??..Since when does the secret service shared a political opinion?

Hopefully the Newsweek story that came out today will make the rounds because we definitely have a case of the "pot calling the kettle black" when it comes to destroying documents.

The race for the White House is tight, but it has not been radically changed by the FBI director's bombshell announcement last week.

Hillary Clinton has a slim three-point lead over Donald Trump one week before Election Day, according to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll conducted entirely after FBI Director James Comey announced the discovery of new emails that might pertain to the former secretary of state's private server.

Clinton leads Trump 46 percent to 43 percent in a two-way race, and 42 percent to 39 percent in a four-way race, with Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson at 7 percent and the Green Party’s Jill Stein at 5 percent.

The poll was conducted using an online panel of 1,772 likely voters on Saturday and Sunday, beginning one day after Comey's announcement. The poll carries a margin or error of 2 percentage points.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/cl...

The new polling is encouraging. The electoral map looks good too. We have to win the Senate too though.

Bonn1997 wrote:Wow, the Rasmussen poll (which has a pro-Republican bias) was conducted mostly since the e-mail story and Hillary's lead has *increased* to 3 points.

Don't even look at Rasmussen...

After the 2010 midterm elections, Silver concluded that Rasmussen's polls were the least accurate of the major pollsters in 2010, having an average error of 5.8 points and a pro-Republican bias of 3.9 points according to Silver's model.[64] He singled out as an example the Hawaii Senate race, in which Rasmussen, in a poll completed three weeks before the election, showed incumbent Daniel Inouye only 13 points ahead, whereas in actuality he won by a 53% margin[79] – a difference of 40 points from Rasmussen's poll, or "the largest error ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight’s database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998."[64]

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Wow, the Rasmussen poll (which has a pro-Republican bias) was conducted mostly since the e-mail story and Hillary's lead has *increased* to 3 points.

Don't even look at Rasmussen...

After the 2010 midterm elections, Silver concluded that Rasmussen's polls were the least accurate of the major pollsters in 2010, having an average error of 5.8 points and a pro-Republican bias of 3.9 points according to Silver's model.[64] He singled out as an example the Hawaii Senate race, in which Rasmussen, in a poll completed three weeks before the election, showed incumbent Daniel Inouye only 13 points ahead, whereas in actuality he won by a 53% margin[79] – a difference of 40 points from Rasmussen's poll, or "the largest error ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight’s database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998."[64]

But Silver points out that the trajectory of all polls (even ones with large bias) is meaningful. If a poll consistently has a 5 point pro-Republican bias and it uses the same methodology today as a week ago, it's meaningful to see how the poll moved in that time.
538 counts the Rasmussen poll and gives it a 1 point adjustment. So the +3 Clinton in Rasmussen counts as a 4 point Clinton lead.

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Wow, the Rasmussen poll (which has a pro-Republican bias) was conducted mostly since the e-mail story and Hillary's lead has *increased* to 3 points.

Don't even look at Rasmussen...

After the 2010 midterm elections, Silver concluded that Rasmussen's polls were the least accurate of the major pollsters in 2010, having an average error of 5.8 points and a pro-Republican bias of 3.9 points according to Silver's model.[64] He singled out as an example the Hawaii Senate race, in which Rasmussen, in a poll completed three weeks before the election, showed incumbent Daniel Inouye only 13 points ahead, whereas in actuality he won by a 53% margin[79] – a difference of 40 points from Rasmussen's poll, or "the largest error ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight’s database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998."[64]

But Silver points out that the trajectory of all polls (even ones with large bias) is meaningful. If a poll consistently has a 5 point pro-Republican bias and it uses the same methodology today as a week ago, it's meaningful to see how the poll moved in that time.

Right, on a relative basis, as you are trying to point out in the post..But most have no clue of the bias and the significance of your post, much like most of the population wouldn't know..I'm sure it's the go to for Fox News...I guess my post are intended for others as I'm sure you are fully aware of what Rasmussen is...

Polls conducted mostly or entirely since the e-mail announcement:

Morning Consult: Clinton +3 (538 poll bias adjustment: Clinton +3)
Rasmussen: Clinton +3 (adjustment: Clinton +4)
IBD: Clinton +1 (adjustment: Clinton +3)

Average: Clinton + 2.3 (adjustment: Clinton +3.3)

Veritas Video update -

According to an email uncovered in the wikileaks of Podesta's emails, Robby Mook (he is the HRC 2016 Presidential campaign manager) "is close to Bob Creamer" (star of the veritas Videos, who has since "stepped back" from that position because of the videos).

Mook did not disclose their relationship, when he denied the campaign had any association with Creamer when asked about it, by Jake Tapper on CNN.

Deny, Deny, Deny.

We are now confirmed at one degree of separation, but yes there is still the littlest shred of doubt HRC is not aware of anything that the campaign was doing.........sure.

Military is not for trump. You have a few crackpot ex guys who are no armament board of directors (company that sell things that kill) and few off the chart right wingers.

Republicans usually get more military endorsements. Hillary has Colin Powell btw!!!! Im sorry, that's GENERAL Colin Powell!
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/09/politics/h...

BTW, our military is not in shambles as Trump likes to boast. Its a populist opinion by which there is no baseline to compare. Warfare has changed as has technology.
Why to do we announce to Isis that we will invade? Trump likes to say how stupid that is!
2 reasons. This requires a 6th grade level of thinking:

1. Humanitarian: We want civilians to not die.
2. When the bad guys need to move, they make noise. They chatter, move things, move equipment, and we can see them with our super secret spy/satilite stuff.

The idea is to kill as many bad guys and NOT kill civilians. Trump rallies are for those who think Wrestling is real.

WE spend a lot on military. For those with more than a 4th grade education they understand our economy is twice the size of China (Trump says "Giana")...
And if so, then our % is a bigger number.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarth...

Historical perspective
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-s...

GDP chart.......Growth is good!!!! World wide it is slow.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-s...

Debt is bad....
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-s...

Gov't spending is down......
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-s...

as a % of GDP....
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-s...

Draw your own conclusions. Don't rely on agenda's to do them for you.
Its not all rosy for either side to point but Trump paints a dire situation that is really not so.
If your underemployed and/or your wage growth has lagged behind its easy to see why he is appealing. Question is does he bring a tangible improvement with his policies for job and wage growth?
Or telling you want you want to hear?

Either way, get out and vote your mind!

reub wrote:So what happened to ABC's 12 point lead for Clinton over Trump? It evaporated in a week and that was before the new email investigation. The pollsters are crooked and working for Hillary just as the media is.

Then why wouldn't the pollsters keep the lead at 12 points? Election polls don't really show depth of feeling- they are a snap shot which is why they can change quickly (also undecideds deciding can swing the results).

gr33d wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

I understand that no matter who gets in, we might all lose anyways. Welcome to the sham called a two part system.
Regarding Trump being 5X worse than Clinton, I wouldn't be shocked, for in general, I'm weary of those who seek power, but right now, he hasn't done a fraction of the things she has done.

Trump hasn't had the same access and power as Hilary. What has Trump done with the power he has had? Manipulated the tax system to enrich himself, screw people out of money, con people out of money with his BS university, bully people and sexually harass and assault women. He's an out and out bigot, a habitual liar, an idiot and a bully who managed to lose almost a billion dollars. How the hell is he qualified to be President? What qualities does he have?! the ability to insult people?

You've just described Hillary to the letter... Same woman who when asked- did you wipe your server? Responds with- "like with a cloth?".

How fn dumb does she think the American people are with this nonsense...

How is Hilary Clinton a bigot, and sexual harasser and assaulter of women? How is she an idiot?

Bonn1997 wrote:The race for the White House is tight, but it has not been radically changed by the FBI director's bombshell announcement last week.

Hillary Clinton has a slim three-point lead over Donald Trump one week before Election Day, according to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll conducted entirely after FBI Director James Comey announced the discovery of new emails that might pertain to the former secretary of state's private server.

Clinton leads Trump 46 percent to 43 percent in a two-way race, and 42 percent to 39 percent in a four-way race, with Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson at 7 percent and the Green Party’s Jill Stein at 5 percent.

The poll was conducted using an online panel of 1,772 likely voters on Saturday and Sunday, beginning one day after Comey's announcement. The poll carries a margin or error of 2 percentage points.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/cl...

The new polling is encouraging. The electoral map looks good too. We have to win the Senate too though.

The thing to watch out for is which way the undecideds start to go from this point on- if they start coming out for Trump, Clinton (and the country) is in trouble

reub wrote:So what happened to ABC's 12 point lead for Clinton over Trump? It evaporated in a week and that was before the new email investigation. The pollsters are crooked and working for Hillary just as the media is.

Right...so when Hillary got sick and had her bad week and the polls tightened, the media was working for her then too, correct? And it's funny how Trump now think the polls are valid since it may be trending in his favor. Predictable.

Welpee wrote:

reub wrote:So what happened to ABC's 12 point lead for Clinton over Trump? It evaporated in a week and that was before the new email investigation. The pollsters are crooked and working for Hillary just as the media is.

Right...so when Hillary got sick and had her bad week and the polls tightened, the media was working for her then too, correct? And it's funny how Trump now think the polls are valid since it may be trending in his favor. Predictable.

Yeah, seriously! When the polls are in his favor, Trump talks about them more than any candidate I can remember.

Welpee wrote:Trump apparently has his own history of destroying emails and relevant documents during legal proceedings: http://www.newsweek.com/2016/11/11/donal...

Finally, under subpoena, Trump appeared for a short deposition. When asked about the missing documents, he made a shocking admission: The Trumps had been destroying their corporate records for the previous six months and had no document-retention program. They had conducted no inspections to determine which files might have been sought in the discovery requests or might otherwise be related to the case. Instead, in order to “save space,” Trump testified, officials with his company had been tossing documents into the shredder and garbage.

In subsequent filings, Power Plant maintained that Trump Hotels had intentionally deceived the court in its March 2006 filing when it claimed it had located no emails relevant to the case because, at that point, it had not yet conducted any searches of its computer system. Trump Hotels executives did not instruct their IT department to examine backup computer tapes until 2007, and even then the job wasn’t done, depositions show. And when computer specialists finally attempted to electronically locate any relevant documents that had survived the flurry of deletions, the procedures were absurdly inadequate. While looking for relevant documents, the technology team was told to use only two search terms—the name of the tribe and the last name of the former Trump associate. So even if there was an email that stated, “Donald Trump learned the full details of the Hard Rock casino deal in Florida in 1999,” it would not have been found by this search.

I think the media may be helping Trump and wants this to be a tight race if this Newsweek article doesn't have any legs (which I'm not hearing much about yet).

smackeddog wrote:

reub wrote:So what happened to ABC's 12 point lead for Clinton over Trump? It evaporated in a week and that was before the new email investigation. The pollsters are crooked and working for Hillary just as the media is.

Then why wouldn't the pollsters keep the lead at 12 points? Election polls don't really show depth of feeling- they are a snap shot which is why they can change quickly (also undecideds deciding can swing the results).

It's all part of the rigging for Hillary - they're trying to make sure Hillary's supporters don't become too complacent
I think that if the polls start showing a bigger lead or a smaller lead for Hillary, or if they show no change, or if they show Trump taking the lead, it all boils down to rigging for Hillary.

smackeddog wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:The race for the White House is tight, but it has not been radically changed by the FBI director's bombshell announcement last week.

Hillary Clinton has a slim three-point lead over Donald Trump one week before Election Day, according to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll conducted entirely after FBI Director James Comey announced the discovery of new emails that might pertain to the former secretary of state's private server.

Clinton leads Trump 46 percent to 43 percent in a two-way race, and 42 percent to 39 percent in a four-way race, with Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson at 7 percent and the Green Party’s Jill Stein at 5 percent.

The poll was conducted using an online panel of 1,772 likely voters on Saturday and Sunday, beginning one day after Comey's announcement. The poll carries a margin or error of 2 percentage points.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/cl...

The new polling is encouraging. The electoral map looks good too. We have to win the Senate too though.

The thing to watch out for is which way the undecideds start to go from this point on- if they start coming out for Trump, Clinton (and the country) is in trouble

True but Clinton is already not that far from 50% in these polls and she has a better ground game than Trump.

Kind of interesting here. New Wikileaks emails have broke.

New email shows DNC boss giving Clinton camp debate question in advance
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/...

snippet

Another leaked email has emerged showing Democratic National Committee boss and former CNN contributor Donna Brazile sharing a debate question in advance with the Hillary Clinton campaign -- despite Brazile's persistent claims to the contrary.

According to documents released Monday by WikiLeaks, Brazile sent Clinton Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri an email titled, “One of the questions directed to HRC tomorrow is from a woman with a rash,” the night before the March 6 CNN primary debate in Flint, Mich.

earthmansurfer wrote:Kind of interesting here. New Wikileaks emails have broke.

New email shows DNC boss giving Clinton camp debate question in advance
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/...

snippet

Another leaked email has emerged showing Democratic National Committee boss and former CNN contributor Donna Brazile sharing a debate question in advance with the Hillary Clinton campaign -- despite Brazile's persistent claims to the contrary.

According to documents released Monday by WikiLeaks, Brazile sent Clinton Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri an email titled, “One of the questions directed to HRC tomorrow is from a woman with a rash,” the night before the March 6 CNN primary debate in Flint, Mich.

And further emails and incriminating evidence. I will state now, I think this is a teaser for the big fish - The Clinton Foundation.

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/Bernie4People/status/793091796268187648

Click here to view the Tweet

Bonn1997 wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:The race for the White House is tight, but it has not been radically changed by the FBI director's bombshell announcement last week.

Hillary Clinton has a slim three-point lead over Donald Trump one week before Election Day, according to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll conducted entirely after FBI Director James Comey announced the discovery of new emails that might pertain to the former secretary of state's private server.

Clinton leads Trump 46 percent to 43 percent in a two-way race, and 42 percent to 39 percent in a four-way race, with Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson at 7 percent and the Green Party’s Jill Stein at 5 percent.

The poll was conducted using an online panel of 1,772 likely voters on Saturday and Sunday, beginning one day after Comey's announcement. The poll carries a margin or error of 2 percentage points.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/cl...

The new polling is encouraging. The electoral map looks good too. We have to win the Senate too though.

The thing to watch out for is which way the undecideds start to go from this point on- if they start coming out for Trump, Clinton (and the country) is in trouble

True but Clinton is already not that far from 50% in these polls and she has a better ground game than Trump.

My worry would be that the people who say to the pollsters that they are voting Hilary, offer ambivalent support and so may be open to changing their minds or may not bother voting in the end, while the Trump supporters are fewer but much more likely to vote. That plus undecideds backing Trump is my nightmare scenario.

earthmansurfer wrote:Kind of interesting here. New Wikileaks emails have broke.

New email shows DNC boss giving Clinton camp debate question in advance
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/...

snippet

Another leaked email has emerged showing Democratic National Committee boss and former CNN contributor Donna Brazile sharing a debate question in advance with the Hillary Clinton campaign -- despite Brazile's persistent claims to the contrary.

According to documents released Monday by WikiLeaks, Brazile sent Clinton Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri an email titled, “One of the questions directed to HRC tomorrow is from a woman with a rash,” the night before the March 6 CNN primary debate in Flint, Mich.

Megyn Kelly did full takedown of Donna Braille over this. Corruption unfortunately works both ways, the thing is you can hold this against the DNC but not against Clinton. There is no evidence that she was prepped for that question based on that email. Even if the email itself can be considered evidence, which it can't unless some judicial or legal function verifies it's authenticity