Trump vs Biden 2020, Ultimate battle for the fate of our universe (pt 3)Read OP 01/11

swampgas

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Trump now claiming to be "Symptom Free"



Some sharp ass-covering wordsmithing there from Conley.

HE Reported no Symptoms , not the Doctors?

As far as I know, medically, symptoms are those things that can only be reported by the patient, nausea, pain, dizziness, mood etc. These are inherently subjective. Signs, on the other hand, are objective, for example temperature, heart rate, blood pressure, pallor.

Conley isn't being that devious, but he is omitting to say whether his patient is showing any signs of Covid. No doubt because his patient won't allow him to comment on them.

briany

If you think Trump's bad on Twitter now, wait 'til you see him if/when Biden wins! He might say stuff that gets even him kicked off.

Quin_Dub

briany wrote: »

If you think Trump's bad on Twitter now, wait 'til you see him if/when Biden wins! He might say stuff that gets even him kicked off.

Here's a prediction - Twitter will "moderate" a tweet of his in the immediate aftermath of the Election and he will lost it entirely.

Kermit.de.frog

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313584866932527105

Because you're an effing lunatic.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Jesus F**king Christ - For the umteenth time - Trump winning WAS NOT A SHOCK.

Yes , The Media were shocked , Yes , a lot of voters were shocked.

But the Statisticians that work for the pollsters were absolutely categorically NOT SHOCKED.

You sound very emotional. Are you okay?

Don't be silly... of course they were shocked. Everyone was shocked - and everyone was furiously angry. (Just like you are now) Because the big bumbling "moron" managed to outwit all the so-called clever people and game his way into the oval office. Something he pretty much predicted he could do as far back as the 1980's.

And they still don't understand how he did it to this day. Which must be very frustrating for all the so-called "clever people" in society. :P

People can say whatever they want after the fact, but those of us with good memories, can remember every expert they could drag out of every conceivable field imaginable during the election, to predict he wouldn't/couldn't win!

Classic monday morning quarterback BS!

But who cares anyway? He's in office, and he'll very likely be there for another 4 years. Cheer up, it's only 4 years - it'll be over before you know it!

yourdeadwright

I know everyone wants rid of Donald but I actully think with Biden or more realistically Bidens handlers will be this years Trump in 4 years time (as in everyone wil l want them out)

blackcard

swampgas wrote: »

As far as I know, medically, symptoms are those things that can only be reported by the patient, nausea, pain, dizziness, mood etc. These are inherently subjective. Signs, on the other hand, are objective, for example temperature, heart rate, blood pressure, pallor.

Conley isn't being that devious, but he is omitting to say whether his patient is showing any signs of Covid. No doubt because his patient won't allow him to comment on them.

No. Symptoms include Fever, shortness of breath, dry cough all of which can be detected by a doctor

dark crystal

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313584866932527105

Because you're an effing lunatic.

Against religion? The catholic who attends mass regularly - against religion??

This coming from a thrice married adulterer who can't recite a single bible verse and spends his Sundays golfing.

Nutcase.

yourdeadwright

dark crystal wrote: »

Against religion? The catholic who attends mass regularly - against religion??

This coming from a thrice married adulterer who can't recite a single bible verse and spends his Sundays golfing.

Nutcase.

He never said which religion,

1800_Ladladlad

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Jesus F**king Christ - For the umteenth time - Trump winning WAS NOT A SHOCK.

Yes , The Media were shocked , Yes , a lot of voters were shocked.

But the Statisticians that work for the pollsters were absolutely categorically NOT SHOCKED.

Trumps win was absolutely within the parameters of the data - As I said in my earlier post , they had Clinton winning the popular vote by ~3% which gave her about a 60% chance of winning , meaning Trump had about a 40% chance of winning . She actually won by 2.1% , within the Margin of Error and that gave Trump a ~70% chance of winning.. And guess what , he did

A Horse winning at better than 1:2 odds isn't exactly a shock now is it??

Right now , Trumps odds are about 33:1 , still possible but it's a serious outside bet.

He could of course still win - What odds would you have gotten on Sunday Morning on the actual final results for the Liverpool and Man U games for example?

It was a huge shock.

gmisk

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Jesus F**king Christ - For the umteenth time - Trump winning WAS NOT A SHOCK.

Yes , The Media were shocked , Yes , a lot of voters were shocked.

But the Statisticians that work for the pollsters were absolutely categorically NOT SHOCKED.

Trumps win was absolutely within the parameters of the data - As I said in my earlier post , they had Clinton winning the popular vote by ~3% which gave her about a 60% chance of winning , meaning Trump had about a 40% chance of winning . She actually won by 2.1% , within the Margin of Error and that gave Trump a ~70% chance of winning.. And guess what , he did

A Horse winning at better than 1:2 odds isn't exactly a shock now is it??

Right now , Trumps odds are about 33:1 , still possible but it's a serious outside bet.

He could of course still win - What odds would you have gotten on Sunday Morning on the actual final results for the Liverpool and Man U games for example?

Sorry maybe a silly question.
But where are you getting the 33:1 from?
Most of the websites I look at give trump maybe a 30 percent chance of winning?

briany

dark crystal wrote: »

Against religion? The catholic who attends mass regularly - against religion??

This coming from a thrice married adulterer who can't recite a single bible verse and spends his Sundays golfing.

Nutcase.

Turns out the Protestant evangelicals of the U.S. couldn't give a fiddlers about the sitting President's personal adherence to religion so long as said president panders to their desire to control abortion and teach creationism in schools. That accomplished and they would literally vote for Satan himself.

1800_Ladladlad

1800_Ladladlad wrote: »

It was a huge shock.

Statistically it wasn't, he was within the margin of error in swing states. No idea how you guys are still failing to comprehend this fact.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Deleted User wrote: »

Statistically it wasn't, he was within the margin of error in swing states. No idea how you guys are still failing to comprehend this fact.

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics"

extra gravy

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics"

What's the point of the constant emojis? They add nothing to your posts and just make you look immature.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

extra gravy wrote: »

What's the point of the constant emojis? They add nothing to your posts and just make you look immature.

Because I feel like it... ? :rolleyes:

I couldn't care less whether anyone likes them tbh. My post, my style!

For the record, most people in society are so "mature" they might as well be smelly old cheese. Past their sell by date! You gotta maintain your playfulness in this life, keeps one mentally agile!

That's some free wisdom for you there kid!

Richard Hillman

yourdeadwright wrote: »

I know everyone wants rid of Donald but I actully think with Biden or more realistically Bidens handlers will be this years Trump in 4 years time (as in everyone wil l want them out)

I would bet my left testicle that the Republicans will win in 2024.

Mendelsohn33

It's 50-50 at this stage.
I mean I am very buttblasted and sore about orange trump being president.
I was a moderator on a political discussion board in 2015 2016 and I bet all my eggs on hillary
Now nobody respects my opinion on political matters
So ya
I will ban anybody
Co's I was wrong.

I need to buy some trump butt salve cream because I was so wrong
And every body sees it

Faugheen

extra gravy wrote: »

What's the point of the constant emojis? They add nothing to your posts and just make you look immature.

That’s what we call ‘bad faith’.

They’ve no interest in actually discussing anything, just making you go through all the effort to refute their lazy points and then laugh as they run off or goad you some more.

Better off ignored

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Faugheen wrote: »

That’s what we call ‘bad faith’.

They’ve no interest in actually discussing anything, just making you go through all the effort to refute their lazy points and then laugh as they run off or goad you some more.

Better off ignored

I think what you probably mean to say, if you had the vocabulary(:p), is disingenuous...

But really you're both just reading WAAAY too much into some harmless smiley faces. Some of us are just a bit more colourful in personality, and like to brighten the place up a bit with some goofy emojis.

Really nothing more to it than that tbh. Sorry to disappoint with the pop psychology. Nice effort though all the same.

threeball

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

I think what you probably mean to say, if you had the vocabulary(:p), is disingenuous...

But really you're both just reading WAAAY too much into some harmless smiley faces. Some of us are just a bit more colourful in personality, and like to brighten the place up a bit with some goofy emojis.

Really nothing more to it than that tbh. Sorry to disappoint with the pop psychology. Nice effort though all the same.

Climate change denier and a Trump supporter and you criticise others intelligence. You couldn't make this sh1t up.

D.Q

These trump threads are always a pretty startling example of how awful this site is becoming.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

threeball wrote: »

Climate change denier and a Trump supporter and you criticise others intelligence. You couldn't make this sh1t up.

Climate change denier? Care to explain that one?

Quin_Dub

gmisk wrote: »

Sorry maybe a silly question.
But where are you getting the 33:1 from?
Most of the websites I look at give trump maybe a 30 percent chance of winning?

If you look at the analysis on 538, I linked to our earlier - It Biden actually lands an 8%+ National poll victory , which is where looking puts him right now, that equates to about a 98% chance of winning overall, so the inverse of that gives Trump odds of about 33:1 of winning or about 3%.

The polls will probably tighten a little, but even a 5% win margin gives Biden an over 90% chance of winning

Panrich

D.Q wrote: »

These trump threads are always a pretty startling example of how awful this site is becoming.

I find them very useful for updating the ignore list. The worst offenders are attracted to threads like these like flies to a turd.

Billy Mays

That McCloskey couple from the RNC charged with evidence tampering

Donnie sure know how to pick em :pac: :pac:

What a week it's been

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

https://www.fitsnews.com/2020/09/14/decision-2020-are-the-fake-polls-back/

Regarding the legitimacy around some of these polls.

It's not just Trump that thinks there might be some shenanigans going on.

Tell me how

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

https://www.fitsnews.com/2020/09/14/decision-2020-are-the-fake-polls-back/

Regarding the legitimacy around some of these polls.

It's not just Trump that thinks there might be some shenanigans going on.

The guy behind that website is a known blogger who claims to have had an affair with Niki Halley, publishes pictures of women in bikinis and has plead guilty to a domestic violence charge. Bob Woodward, he is not.

Should we trust an article on the legitimacy of the polls from a site that used to have the tag line, 'Unfair. Imbalanced.'?

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Tell me how wrote: »

The guy behind that website is a known blogger who claims to have had an affair with Niki Halley, publishes pictures of women in bikinis and has plead guilty to a domestic violence charge. Bob Woodward, he is not.

Should we trust an article on the legitimacy of the polls from a site that used to have the tag line, 'Unfair. Imbalanced.'?

It's not my job to hold your hand and tell you what to believe.

Many people are becoming increasingly skeptical of the agenda driven mainstream media, so the question of credibility is not as straightforward as some would like to pretend. You can pretty much pick holes in practically every source these days, if you're of a mind to do so.

I felt some people might find it interesting. Others will dismiss it of course... such is life. I'm not saying I necessarily believe it 100% - I'm still doing more digging on it myself. Just thought it was worth a read.

Cody montana

Wonder what scandal will break today?