Trump will end lobbyists

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Actually I just bothered to read the data instead of just the introduction.

Page 9 shows that Hillary won independents 54 vs. 33, and a greater share of Democrats than she lost Republicans. This means that [b]even if you adjust for the number of democrats over-sampled, she still won. [/B]

Yea am really going to believe CNN cause "they said so"

Keep dreaming, when you wake up in your 40's and you realize how wrong you were all your life, you will get it.

The only reason you are so pro CNN and Hillary, is cause CNN now is free main stream indoctrination. And Hillary is your candidate, cause your parents are liberal democrats who were raised on CNN and liberal lies their whole life and you can't break ranks

You cant name 10 reasons and policies Hillary has that will help america👆

Go ahead, and try to name how she is going to help America, cause I have about 75,000 emails that prove otherwise.

What you dont get is Hillary is a neo con😂 You been fooled thinking she is a liberal democrat!😂

And all you people who are voting for her are voting for a ultra conservative that is going to destroy America.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Oh don't worry about it, there's no ethics involved. All I'm saying is, you'll do a better job at convincing people you're really smart and wise if you conduct yourself with a little grace, a little subtlety, and a touch more self-deprecating humour. It can sting to do, but in the end more people will believe you and listen to you.

Pretty much no one here above your age group thinks much of you and that's mostly due to your attitude. Do a 180 on that, reassess your public persona, and you'll start raking in the kudos from all the other smug internet c*nts who think way too goddamn highly of themselves. C*nts like me.

You f*cking c*nt alrite I'll stop c*nting around show you. the f*ck who do yu think i am you smegma enthusiast?

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
All I'm saying is, you'll do a better job at convincing people you're really smart and wise if you conduct yourself with a little grace, a little subtlety, and a touch more self-deprecating humour. It can sting to do, but in the end more people will believe you and listen to you.

I've considered going the you/Tempest route and becoming a smart allic, but I don't think I want to. Believe it or not, my primary interests for this forum are debate, Star Wars/some other things, and some posters I like. That's why I humor even TI with debates.

Pretty much no one here above your age group thinks much of you

Tempest is basically the only person outside of my age group on the forum I frequent anyway, and he's a high opinion of my debating ability, as does practically everyone else (some people accuse me of trolling, but admit that I'm good when I want to be). Regardless, it's a neat rhetorical trick to just make the empty claim that nobody likes someone. Sort of fits your own style. mmm

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Yea am really going to believe CNN cause "they said so"

You believed them when they noted how many democrats there were. But now that I've owned you by actually looking at the numbers instead of reading the opening paragraph, you've backtracked from "the sample is biased!" to outright allegations of fraud. 🙄

Then the rest of your post was a nice attempt to pivot away from the poll that you so horribly misread.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Nice strawman, I didnt quote the intro👆

How does this change my point? Whatever you quoted, if you look more carefully at the numbers, Hillary won among independents as well, so the sampling bias towards democrats is irrelevant.

This is an example of the logical fallacies I was talking about: the fact that you didn't quote the intro is a red herring and does nothing to change the fact that you didn't read the poll right.

also

Don't change the subject. Explain why the sampling bias towards democrats matters when Hillary also carried the independents in the sample.

"CNN said it so it must be true."

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
"CNN said it so it must be true."

You believed them. You noted that they reported lots of democrats. If they were just making up the data, why wouldn't they just make the numbers of democrats and republicans even?

Also, why do you automatically believe online polls?

Again, you're backtracking, and you know it.

I'm not. You believe anything CNN says. That's on you. You are incapable of understanding when you have been mislead.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I'm not. You believe anything CNN says. That's on you. You are incapable of understanding when you have been mislead.

If their results were just made up, why did you bother pointing out that there were lots of made-up democrats in the made-up sample? Why didn't you just claim that they were fake from the start?

You didn't claim that they were fake; you claimed that the sample was biased. Now that you've been owned on the latter, you're changing your tune to the former.

If you had any integrity or honesty, you'd just admit that you made a mistake.

I don't think I made a mistake👆 I believe it was oversampled and it was prolly all a lie anyways.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I believe it was oversampled

I've explained this to you five times: the oversample doesn't matter because Hillary won among independents in the sample too. And she won a greater percentage (.i.e. adjusted for size) of democrats than she lost republicans.

and it was prolly all a lie anyways.

This is a separate accusation. Why don't you admit that you made a mistake about oversampling, but that you still think your general point is right because the data was made up? That would make you sound a little bit mature, you know, since you're supposed to be older than me.

Like CNN telling us it's illegal to read the emails. Yea I believe everything they say👆

Maybe I was wrong about the oversampling?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial

Maybe I was wrong about the oversampling?

You're so lacking in the basic integrity and maturity that you should have given that you keep bragging to me about your advanced age and "life experience", that you can't even just admit when you've made a trivial mistake. You've had to pretend to dodge and ignore my point for a page or so, and even now, all you can do is to phrase it as a question (unless if you edit your post again, like you always do).

Pathetic.

I literally just said maybe I was wrong and you write that?👆

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I literally just said maybe I was wrong and you write that?

You deliberately evaded me for a page and even then can only say "maybe?". There is no "maybe"; you were wrong.

Do you realize how dishonest you are, on top of being utterly lacking in any social graces or intellect?

And you are a Piece of shit, now what?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
And you are a Piece of shit, now what?

How mature of you. Weren't you just bragging about being older?

Just say: "Sorry, I messed up, I was wrong." And then we can talk about your new position (that it's all a fraud).

Considering the crap you just said to me, you deserved it👆