Debate questions that would absolutely CRUSH Hillary Clinton

>how could i spend all night thinking about an answer for something you posted twenty minutes before my post
I guess math is just one more thing Trumpfags are incapable of understanding.

Well, this is sort of your job, isn't it?

I mean, thinking of shit to say to try to Stump the Trump?

"Hillary, there are reports that you pray to Moloch. Are you a demon worshiper?"

>yes, I know the difference between looking at a stage and standing on one.

no, i don't get paid to laugh at a weasel like trump, though i certainly wish i did
on the other hand people like you PAY money to shill for a billionaire. how pathetic is that?

>thinking trump has even 1% of the wit required to think up something like that
good one

>no, i don't get paid to laugh at a weasel like trump

Your attempts to lie are precious.

You are becoming more like hillary every day, aren't you?

yeah man, go ahead and believe everyone who calls out trump for being a retard aka 50% of the population is getting paid off by hillary

...

>yeah man, go ahead and believe everyone who calls out trump for being a retard aka 50% of the population is getting paid off by hillary

Are you suffering from brain damage?

Wow, I guess hillary really does know how to pick her shill, doesn't she?

btw, did you check my repeating digits?

rebuttals, another thing trumpfags are incapable of
by the way, drop the trip, it makes you look even more pathetic

Bark for me, hillary.

Wow, this argument was blessed by kek

>rebuttals, another thing trumpfags are incapable of

What exactly was there to rebut?

You literally said nothing of substance.

Your entire post wasn't even an argument.

>by the way, drop the trip

No.

>it makes you look even more pathetic

Compared to you, I don't see how that is possible.

Stop trying to make a Hillary presidency happen, it's not going to happen.

Trump is going to be President of the United States of AMERICA.

You can't stop it.

kek appreciates chaos alone
>What exactly was there to rebut?
you could have tried claiming that 50% of the population doesn't realize trump is retarded, but you would be objectively incorrect
>Compared to you, I don't see how that is possible.
yeah, you trumpfags do have a lot of trouble seeing the truth, huh?

>you could have tried claiming that 50% of the population doesn't realize trump is retarded

Why would I have to rebut some more bullshit statistics from the hillary camp?

>yeah, you trumpfags do have a lot of trouble seeing the truth, huh?

We see the truth just fine, Hillshill.

>statistics from the hillary camp
>same poll that claims trump has a 50% unfavorability rating also claims hillary has over 30% unfavorability rating
just stop pretending you know what you're talking about
>We see the truth just fine
>but we support trump
pick one

>just stop pretending you know what you're talking about

Pretending isn't nessecary, hillshill.

Not only do we KNOW what we are talking about, we don't have to lie about it like you fools.

>We see the truth just fine
>but we support trump
>pick one

Why not both?

Also, you still trust hillary "Let's deport all of the jobs and delete all of the Emails" Clinton?

Because that's daft.

I feel bad for kicking someone as pathetic as you while they're down. I really do. But it's about time to end this charade.
>Not only do we KNOW what we are talking about, we don't have to lie about it like you fools.
source on pic related: fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-distaste-for-both-trump-and-clinton-is-record-breaking/

>Also, you still trust hillary "Let's deport all of the jobs and delete all of the Emails" Clinton?
Nowhere in any of my posts have I claimed that i trust, like, or intend to vote for hillary, and that's because i don't. See, while i know you trumpfags are far too stupid to conceive anything besides the two party dichotomy, there are other valid choices including simply not voting for either. But that's alright, i understand. People that willingly fall for the outrageous claims of a populist simply aren't very smart, after all.

Oh, and feel free to kill yourself from the shame of being blown the fuck out this hard.

>But it's about time to end this charade.

Then by all means, stop posting anytime.

>source on pic related: fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-distaste-for-both-trump-and-clinton-is-record-breaking/

You hillshills will literally never stop lying, will you?

>Nowhere in any of my posts have I claimed that i trust, like, or intend to vote for hillary, and that's because i don't.

New hillshill tactic, huh?

Abandoning hillary and just attacking Trump?

How well do you think that is going to work?

>Oh, and feel free to kill yourself from the shame of being blown the fuck out this hard.

And how exactly was I blown the fuck out?

I still support Trump.

And you no longer can publicly support hillary.

I win.

...

This attempt at damage control is so pathetic it's barely worth responding to. Sorry, but you might want to try a little harder if you want to reclaim your lost pride.

Checked.

>This attempt at damage control is so pathetic it's barely worth responding to.

I just can't help myself.

Hillshills damage control attempts really piss me off, I HAVE to respond.

>Sorry, but you might want to try a little harder if you want to reclaim your lost pride.

Keep projecting, hillshill.

I'm sure you will eventually regain the will to live.

Kek be praised

>Debate questions that would absolutely CRUSH Hillary Clinton.

Why aren't you 50 points ahead?

Man, for someone who hates hillary, you sure do like to lie and misdirect from the truth a lot! i guess on top of being just plain stupid you trumptards are massive hypocrites as well, huh?

Hillary, would you stare into this strobe light for a few seconds?

How can Trump being winning?
Why isn't Hillary ahead by 50 points?

>Man, for someone who hates hillary, you sure do like to lie and misdirect from the truth a lot!

Coming from a hillshill, that means precisely nothing.

>i guess on top of being just plain stupid you trumptards are massive hypocrites as well, huh?

Do you know how to do anything except project?

her health

>"Hillary, what do you say to a 12 year old girl who is raped by muslims?"
Perfect

>HILLSHILL! HILLSHILL! HILLSHILL! I KEEP SAYING IT SO IT MUST BE TRUE! GO AWAY AND TAKE YOUR FACTS WITH YOU!
>Do you know how to do anything except project?
that's rich - the man shilling trump for free and calling me a shill is claiming I'M the one projecting! how adorable, you don't even know what words mean.

>that's rich - the man shilling trump for free and calling me a shill is claiming I'M the one projecting! how adorable, you don't even know what words mean.

$0.01 has been deposited into your account.

and so he continues on and on and on
i feel sorry for you, really - i know that no human being could possibly be dumb enough to believe he was still in the right at this point, and you're desperately trying to claim SOME sort of victory over me in order to keep the last pieces of your pride intact. unfortunately, it won't work.

lol yep

>i feel sorry for you, really

I don't think about you at all.

Do you have an updated graphic?
The demographics have most likely changed since late April.

"Do you hate white working class Americans?

Can you walk 12 steps?

Did Robert Byrd induct you into the KKK?

Would you have shot harambe?

DNC leaks. Comment?

Do you & Thompson still want to ban kids' video games?

Best lesbian porn site?"

>I don't think at all.
I know, trumpfag. I know.
no updated graphic, but realclearpolitics claims that the unfavorable rating for both is over 50%
realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html
realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/clinton_favorableunfavorable-1131.html

>I know, trumpfag. I know.

Keep crying, your tears are delicious.

the only one crying here is you, and you make that painfully obvious.

If you're mentally competent, why did you declare war on a cartoon frog?

Hillary, how does Donald's ass taste?

>the only one crying here is you, and you make that painfully obvious.

Nice peewee herman response....

You don't get paid for your brains, do you?

I don't blame you, hillary has never been one to surround herself with intelligent people.

Don't worry, it's not your fault that you are stupid.

Plenty of stupid people out there are living really kick ass lives, i'm sure you will too one day.

keep crying, trumpfag

"Mrs Clinton, will you continue the economic war against the people of the state of North Carolina because of their "bathroom laws"?

Do you care at all that this policy is doing real damage to the poorest, most vulnerable, most underrepresented people in the African American community?

>keep crying, trumpfag

You are so mad.

Maybe you should try to calm down or something...

You seem to be getting a severe case of butt-frustration.

I advise you to reexamine your life, and get a job that doesn't involve you lying for a professional liar.

With enough time and effort, perhaps you can become someone who isn't so morally bankrupt that you look up to hillary clinton?

Maybe one of these days, non hillshill....

>"Hillary, why did your foundation steal 98% of the charity donations from Haiti?"
I'm really hoping he asks this one, because he promised to.

so desperate to protect your pride, it's hilarious
keep up with the tears

>Maybe one of these days, *non hillshill....

*user

>so desperate to protect your pride, it's hilarious
>keep up with the tears

I'm just laughing so hard at your posts... it's hard to stop, really.

You are embarrassing yourself and everyone else.

Everyone in this thread feels sorry for you.

I hope hillary has some better shills than you.

keep on crying bitch boy

>keep on crying bitch boy

Bark for me, hillary.

Thanks.
With an over 50% disapproval rating for both candidates, it's anyone's game.
However, at the moment Trump has the upper hand.

Clinton's email scandal, health concerns, and other minor gaffes still remain prevalent affecting her public perception, while Trump has capitilzed on this.

I look forward to the debates, to see which of the questions OP has posted Trump will ask.

Example:

As Secretary of State how were you not aware of the meaning of classification headers?

Mrs.Clinton, you have alleged that Trump has ties with Putin? Is there any factual evidence of this?

What kind of relationship should the U.S have with Russia?

keep up the tears, pathetic trumptard
although i certainly hope hillary will be asked hard questions at the debate chances are she has too much pull with the media to face any of them

>keep up the tears, pathetic trumptard

You just going to keep repeating the exact same thing as if you have a mental disorder?

i mean, that's all you do, why should i waste time putting in any more effort than that? i tried, but you simply continued deflecting because you're extremely butthurt

>i mean, that's all you do

lol, you are STILL projecting.

Am I going to have to come up with your insults FOR you?

it's not projecting if it's true, trumptard
learn what words mean

>it's not projecting if it's true, trumptard

Still projecting.

>learn what words mean

listen here you petulant fool, your sanctimonious attitude is casting doubts on your ability to handle a simple debate in an open forum.

If you can't handle the dankness of the bantz, then I suggest you go back to your little hugbox echo chamber where you can vicariously win a few arguments against strawmen arguments that your fellow shills vomit forth from their own repressed self hatred.

You are so desperate for a win of any kind, that you are basically just repeating whatever I say in a pathetically naieve attempt to win as much as I do.

But your attempts come across as incredibly desperate and lacking any possible mental maturity.

Perhaps you would be more comfortable with a coloring book and some safety crayons?

>You are so desperate for a win of any kind, that you are basically just repeating whatever I say in a pathetically naieve attempt to win as much as I do.
and what have you won, exactly
feel free to list a single victory so far, i could use a good laugh

>and what have you won, exactly

I made you look all manner of stupid.

>i could use a good laugh

Then you should stop crying first.

>I made you look all manner of stupid.
yeah, like that time i posted an objective source showing how trump has a huge disapproval rating and all you could do was cry "hillshill! hillshill! go away!"
sure made me look foolish
>Then you should stop crying first.
as has been established, the only one crying here is you

>objective source

lol, nice try.

>sure made me look foolish

Well, it's nice of you to finally admit it.

>as has been established, the only one crying here is you

I'm having fun, actually.

"Mrs. Clinton, what is the definite integral of x squared dx from 0 to 2?"

>it's not objective because i say so!
solid rebuttal
>I'm having fun, actually.
sure you are

>solid rebuttal

I wish I could say the same for your pathetic attempts, but this is disappointing as hell.

>sure you are

I'm glad you agree.

sorry but im not letting you deflect again this time
explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source

Q. Spit or swallow?

>sorry but im not letting you deflect again this time
>explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source

Oh look, it's anouther fake pro hillary graph...

Never seen one of those before.

push up contest. /thread

i heart Cred Forums

I wonder if hillary is going to answer any of my questions....

Or if she is going to plead the fifth, and delete the emails.

Your claims of a pro-hillary bias are completely unfounded and ignore the data provided as well as the author's own comments.
I ask again: explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source. You have so far failed to do so.

Your claims of a pro-hillary bias are completely unfounded

Thats funny...

theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/08/22/monmouth-university-pollster-patrick-murray-busted-manipulating-poll-data-then-lying-about-it/

Says here that you are lying.

>Your claims of a pro-hillary bias are completely unfounded

forgot to greentext this line...

You are trying to use a completely unrelated poll and pollster to claim that there is bias and falsehood in the fivethirtyeight data. It has no relevance to the discussion at hand.
Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

> It has no relevance to the discussion at hand.

Kinda confirms hillary to be manipulating polling data, doesn't it?

I think the voters would want to know that every single "Clinton poll surges" were the result of corruption and poll manipulation.

Don't you think the people have a right to know that clinton is manipulating poll data to make herself look good?

Here is a random text sample from the article...

"Rubio / Murphy: Poll Accurately [ IMMATERIAL ]
SCREENS
AGE
: Attached screens will move 80% of targets into the 30-50 age range. Use included statistical model to re-skew for publication.
LOCATION:
The location-call screens will favor south Tallahassee, east and north Gainesville, Central Tampa, north and west Jacksonville, west and south Orlando, and much of Dade / Broward counties. Space Coast regions and similar must be carefully screened for demographic.
DEMOGRAPHIC:
This should be obvious. We are looking at a heavy minority foundation with a college-white salt. Favored are liberal arts degrees and, especially, sociology. See attached call-files.
EMPLOYMENT:
We prefer polling areas of high unemployment for minority response. More are available to take calls during working hours and far, far fewer of them support Republican candidates.
EMBEDED NARRATIVE
It is imperative to create a morale boosting narrative in the liberal demographics. Our last published polling note gave liberals a “week before panic.” We must deliver on a turn-around in polls or risk collapse of enthusiasm. The data from our call / email sieve as well as legitimate polling indicates a level of despondency equivalent, roughly, to the Michael Dukakis candidacy. This is due to (a) Trump’s successful presidential-narrative surge and (b) a massive lack of enthusiasm on the part of minority and millennial voters who are beginning to view Obama as a failed president and Hillary Clinton as a ‘lying harpy.’ (word association testing focus groups)."

I especially like the way they said "Lying harpy" at the end.

None of that text appears anywhere in the article. In fact, you appear to be referring to an unrelated poll made in florida, while the article refers to a poll made in ohio.
Once again, you have provided no evidence that the data on fivethirtyeight was manipulated.
Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

This first one I really like. Trump has largely secured the pro-firearm vote. Woman make up a large portion of the anti-firearm votes (more so than pro, anyway). Trump needs to ask this question, or at least one along the lines that will associate
>Removing Guns
>Removes Womens Safety
Once this narrative is established, she's trapped. She's gone too hard into the "I'm the pro-woman candidate" Any implication that her policies might impact women negatively could sway voters. Again, establishing the narrative of
>Remove Guns
>Remove Womens Safety
is imperative. Once you structure the language so that "Women+Guns=Safer" she wont be able to further anti-gun causes without looking like a hypocrite. (although that might be a moot point by now) Highlighting rape stats should be used only as a nuke-option to establish the narrative.

Here's some more, you lying harpy.

"In order to rally the male-liberal base we will need to produce “resurgent” Florida polling. The conventional wisdom is that Florida will be the fulcrum state for the election and if it is seen as lost to Trump then we will have domino defections throughout the other swing-states. Presently, our internal analysis shows the Democratic Firewall in extreme jeopardy. This week the news cycle MUST show Hillary regaining the lead in Florida.
STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, & THREATS
Strengths
Almost none. The voter-registrations in Florida are balanced but we need to have at least D+3 to have a credible story. We also need to greatly oversample women. This shouldn’t be hard to manage as they are more likely to answer the phone and chat. Liberal self-reporters are tanking (around 12% in real numbers). We are going to have it at around 30% which we can probably get away with. Below are the target demographics our screens should produce with minimal manual intervention.
DEMOGRAPHICS (weighted) Self-Reported 32% Republican 34% Independent 35% Democrat 46% Male 54% Female 19% 18-34 25% 35-49 28% 50-64 28% 65+ 69% White 13% Black 15% Hispanic 4% Other MARGIN OF ERROR
unweighted moe sample (+/-)"

>"Hillary, Do you want to disarm women?"
"Disarming everyone will lead to a safer country for all"
>"Hillary, do you identify as a Muslim?"
"No, but I respect anyone who does"
>"Hillary, if you were president, what difference would it make?"
"I am a woman, I have something that no president before me could offer"
>"Hillary, why aren't you wearing a Hijab or Burka?"
"Because I'm not a muslim"
>"Hillary, what do you say to a 12 year old girl who is raped by muslims?"
"Rape culture is a problem in every society all over the world" and we need to offer support to any victim of rape"
>"Hillary, was Huma cleared to read all of the classified Emails that you sent to her?"
"no"
>"Hillary, how much more money have you spend on your campaign than Trump spent on his?"
"I don't know the exact figures, but I have a strong supporter base that believes in my campaign, Trump can't keep up with that"
>"Hillary, Do you agree with the muslim tradition of stoning homosexuals to death?"
"Homophobia is a problem in every society all over the world" and we need to offer support to any victim of homophobia"
>"Hillary, how many times exactly has Bill cheated on you?"
"That is an irrelevant and childish right wing attack"
>"Hillary, do you want to plead the fifth to all of these questions?"
"Do you want to not ask loaded questions, dipshit?"
>"Hillary, how many more polls do you have to manipulate in order to get a positive approval rating?"
">implying"
>"Hillary, what is your opinion of vote fraud?"
"disgusting, democracy is what makes this country great. Yes Donald, it's already great"
>"Hillary, why did your foundation steal 98% of the charity donations from Haiti?"
"That is a right wing conspiracy, now, back to these nazi frogs I was talking about..."
>"Hillary, Do you and Monica Lewinsky keep in touch?"
"This is the kind of abhorrent right wing bullying tactics I come to expect for you white males"

These are pretty easy senpai.

(continued)
>We also need to greatly oversample women.

Mmmm... poll bias much?

Why are you still referring to an unrelated Florida poll you have provided no source for claiming it's from an article about an unrelated Ohio poll in order to prove that the completely unrelated date from fivethirtyeight is manipulated and biased in favor of Clinton? This is some next level deflection, are you sure you don't work for hillary?
Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

Chek'd and rek'd

>"Hillary, Do you want to disarm women?"
>"Disarming everyone will lead to a safer country for all"

So, you don't think that women should be allowed to defend themselves against rapists?

>>"Hillary, if you were president, what difference would it make?"
>"I am a woman, I have something that no president before me could offer"

IS, your answer is literally that you have a vagina?

>"Hillary, what do you say to a 12 year old girl who is raped by muslims?"
>"Rape culture is a problem in every society all over the world" and we need to offer support to any victim of rape"

Is that really what you would say to a 12 year old rape victim?

>>"Hillary, why aren't you wearing a Hijab or Burka?"
>"Because I'm not a muslim"

Pic related.

>"Hillary, was Huma cleared to read all of the classified Emails that you sent to her?"
>"no"

Well, well, well...

Thanks for that one, hillary.

>>"Hillary, how many more polls do you have to manipulate in order to get a positive approval rating?"
>implying"

And thanks for that one.

>>"Hillary, what is your opinion of vote fraud?"
>"disgusting

And i'll remember that you said that.

>>"Hillary, why did your foundation steal 98% of the charity donations from Haiti?"
>"That is a right wing conspiracy

Actually, that's a LEFT wing conspiracy.

Because Hillaries charity group is Left leaning.

She conspired to rob peoples donations, and thus, it's HER conspiracy.

Do you not know how words work?

>These are pretty easy senpai.

You done fucked up.

"Weaknesses abound. The first is that the birther message is penetrating: 73% of Americans are willing to say they don’t know where Obama was born. This was previously locked out via media shaming. Trump is immune so his followers are immune. The Florida geography is also working against us. Hillary has 53+ Field Offices and they’re empty of volunteers. This lack of enthusiasm is showing up in the voting responses and it’s killing us. The “cell phones” rationale will only hold out for so long.
Opportunities
PPP is burned. There have been too many leaks. Monmouth is less well known and less disparaged by conservatives. This is a good chance for you to build your brand both with naïve liberals and with some conservative moderates. The general reputation of Monmouth as a party-school will work against you here but we think that will be easy to gloss over with the chaos of the messaging. We also have a chance to build a White People Are Racist narrative. We’ve got some good story coming out of The Upshot with the headline that “Whites” are keeping Trump alive in Florida. If we can double down on that in the cross-tabs we can strongly insinuate that Whites (who code as racists in the media) like Trump (who codes as racist) and get an Ouroboros-Pattern established for undecideds. Finally, while we have been forced by intense public scrutiny to accurately report a Trump Surge, we think there is an opportunity here for demoralization by reporting a “counter surge” or “Trump Collapse” that will reduce momentum as the Trump narrative has shifted to talking about the polls.
Threats
People are leaking
a lot
. If you don’t want Enten’s gang all over you, we suggest you
lock it the fuck down"

Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

"There are a lot of people poking around the edges that are on to things and a bunch of stuff out on the Internet that is more hit-than-miss. PPP’s extremely unwise decision not to disavow the leaks on Twitter has costs us a great deal of credibility and voters are a
lot
more educated about cross-tabs and skewing and we may not have as easy a time of it as we did in 2012. Finally, we know you consider Quinnipiac a “rival school.” Put that aside and stand down your hackers and arson-units. This is a team effort. If we lose this election we’re all fucked. Ensure loyalty in your staff by whatever means necessary. Keep appearances up. DO NOT SCREW THIS UP."

Hopefully if I repeat it enough you will start to understand.
Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

(continued)
>Put that aside and stand down your hackers and arson-units.

Hmmm... interesting.

>explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

because they've been objectively wrong about almost everything?

Such as?

> This is a good chance for you to build your brand both with naïve liberals

What do you suppose hillaries campaign meant by "Building a brand with Naive liberals?

Does hillaries campaign think of any liberals who would vote for her as "Naive"?

Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source, or admit you are incapable of doing so.

Mrs Clinton, are you going to respond to these allegations of poll rigging or not?

These are all shit. Almost all of them can be answered directly with yes/no or "Because I personally am not a Muslim." and they would be perfectly reasonable responses.

The remainders can be given answers that make you who are asking the question look like a mean spirited bully.

This is why the right will never get in power.

dailycaller.com/2016/05/04/7-times-nate-silver-was-hilariously-wrong-about-donald-trump/

thanks 4 the U

Why has Cred Forums seemed so strange the past few days? Maybe it's just because I have a bit of a cold and have been sort of out of it the past few days, but it's almost like Cred Forums has become a parody of itself.

Just from the way OP posts it's obvious he hasn't been on Cred Forums very long. Possibly someone from within a campaign fielding for potential answers to difficult questions?

There was also that "niggers=google kike=skype" thing last night that just exploded out of absolutely nowhere. I have never seen something become so universally accepted by Cred Forums so quickly without some sort of real life happening or a huge get to accompany it. It just seemed like a group of people had already made the decision beforehand and then were suddenly trying to push it onto us.

I don't know Cred Forums, things just seem strange the past couple days.

>Do you not know how words work?
Do you not understand how politics work?
If arguing facts would hurt Clinton she wouldn't even be in the race right now.
All she needs to do is twist this shit into being "unfounded, misogynist right wing attacks" and she's in the clear.

>So, you don't think that women should be allowed to defend themselves against rapists?
America is filled with guns and filled with rapists atm, she could argue that guns have done nothing to stop rape, and only to kill innocents. Men cause rape, men must be reprogrammed, yadda yadda yadda

>your answer is literally that you have a vagina?
It's a change in that a woman now has power, women have a voice, now have broken the glass ceiling. Women now have more freedom and opportunities, women don't start wars, other flowery bullshit, etc.

>Is that really what you would say to a 12 year old rape victim?
“We are going to have the rapist arrested who was responsible for the penetration of your pussy.”

>Pic related.
hurr durr. shitty argument friend

>Thanks for that one, hillary.
No one is going to double check that shit other than people that already hate her. Nice sounding deflection of "right wing conspiracies" is all she has to do to keep her voter base. These questions and answers will change nothing.

>Actually
like I said, no one cares

You done fucked up.

You are the biggest fag on pol congratulations holy shit

Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.
This is a fair start. However, the data provided in the article I linked (fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-distaste-for-both-trump-and-clinton-is-record-breaking/) is not making predictions.

>Just from the way OP posts it's obvious he hasn't been on Cred Forums very long.

Nice copypasta.

Have some OC, noob.

Agree I'm not getting in on that Google shit seems dumb, for some reason, I've had this horrible feeling that all our memeing will be used against us somehow and ruin everything, here's hoping Monday's debates go well for trump

Cred Forums ended up in the news. Influx of newfags.

Oh and the Google thing caught on because it was funny af

Why is anyone taking 538 and RCP seriously this election cycle? We know both are in the tank for Shillary.

Clinton go home your very ill

>If arguing facts would hurt Clinton she wouldn't even be in the race right now.

So, you agree that hillary is a lying harpy then?

Thanks for admitting it.

>she could argue that guns have done nothing to stop rape, and only to kill innocents.

Explain why cops have guns then.

And also explain all of the times guns have been used in self defense.

Actually, MOST gun usage is in self defense... but as you said before, arguing facts with you would be useless.

>It's a change in that a woman now has power

I think the American people could pick a better woman to vote for, honestly.

>“We are going to have the rapist arrested who was responsible for the penetration of your pussy.”

That's kind of a vulgar thing to say to a 12 year old girl who was just savagely attacked.

Have you no empathy and compassion?

>No one is going to double check that shit

That's where you're wrong, kiddo.

>like I said, no one cares

A majority of the country DOES care, actually...

It's why you have to rig polls to seem like you are popular.

And Trump is STILL handing you your ass.

>You done fucked up.

IS that the only tactic you have left?

Just copying what I say?

That's incredibly sad.

>Why is anyone taking 538 and RCP seriously this election cycle? We know both are in the tank for Shillary.
I genuinely question how you take data that clearly calls out clinton for having the highest disapproval rating in history (barring trump) and extrapolating that to say that they are biased in favor of hillary
i'll ask you the same question, feel free to explain how fivethirtyeight is not a credible source

>Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

You have yet to present an argument against your own campaigns leaks about poll rigging.

This is getting very embarrassing for you.

For someone who is not a shill you seem very enthusiastic about Hillary Clinton with positive stories and polls on the ready.

Shill :^)

You've gone from calling me a shill for hillary to calling me hillary herself, which corresponds with your desperation to try to somehow discredit me while lacking any sort of facts to do so.
Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

theintercept.com/2016/08/16/why-the-presidential-debates-will-suck-even-though-they-dont-have-to/

They wont ask any meaningful questions in the debates.

She's probably gone over every single question front to back with her prep team.

It's funny that you say that, because none of the data I have provided says anything along those lines.

Maybe OP's just new, but stuff like reads like a bot and he's memeing hard as fuck trying to push his point.

Actually I just had a thought. The way OP is acting is kind of like how I am when messing around on plebbit. I acted like a rabid Hillary supporter, being a complete condescending asshole to turn all of the disillusioned Bernouts off of her. They don't actually think they'll accomplish anything by being an asshole on Cred Forums, do they?

So, how do you respond to your(hillaries) previous assertions about mexico/illeigals being a problem?

Vid related:

youtube.com/watch?v=Ezaw-g6TIQI

Especially since your campaign seems to be centered around calling trump a racist because of these very policies that you seemed to be in favor of several years ago?

>So, you agree that hillary is a lying harpy then?
Of course, I'm on Cred Forums aren't I?

You keep acting as if she isn't immune to this shit.
There is no logic you or anyone could use that would destroy her. It would have happened already there was.
Deflect and attack, deflect and attack. Her followers will cheer her on.

Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

(continued)

Here's a good video of hillary lying for more than a dozen minutes straight.

And being caught in it.

youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI

>Her followers will cheer her on.

Considering that she doesn't actually HAVE a stable position, I'd say that her followers are abandoning her camp, and that is why her campaign is using poll manipulation to attempt to appear popular.

>Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

Explain why 30+ people have died trying to investigate Hillary clinton.

Just for shits and giggles, here's the Trump equivalent of that video: youtube.com/watch?v=oQ7_bo74VMA
Once again, completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

>Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

So you don't care about the people who died trying to investigate hillary clinton?

I don't, because I'm not trying to defend hillary clinton.
Now you have been desperately deflecting for over an hour at this point, and you only get more and more pathetic. Answer the question.
Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

>I don't

Well then, thanks for correcting the record.

Madame Secretary, has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

Are you anti-white?

Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

Imagine the collective shock if the following happened:

>what about the women murdered by muslims?
blah blah blah, not all muslims
>mention Rotherham
Bam. Sure, the MSM would go full blitzkrieg on him and it could backfire, but to remind her of a cover up of rape just because they didn't want to be accused of being called racist.

Also, to bring up the German police blaming the women for wearing provocative clothing, the completely opposite of what the liberal message is.

Mostly, Donald needs to make sure he doesn't open his big fat mouth. I think he can win this, but he has to show that he has matured while making Clinton look like she has matured ... GREATLY matured ...

Noice

Explain why you don't care that anyone who investigates hillary clinton dies.

It's almost like you hate America, and the rule of law.

Stop deflecting.
Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

>Stop deflecting.

Why don't you care about dead Americans?

Is this attitude typical of hillaries campaign, and personality?

fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-i-acted-like-a-pundit-and-screwed-up-on-donald-trump/

Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-i-acted-like-a-pundit-and-screwed-up-on-donald-trump/

"The big mistake is a curious one for a website that focuses on statistics. Unlike virtually every other forecast we publish at FiveThirtyEight — including the primary and caucus projections I just mentioned — our early estimates of Trump’s chances weren’t based on a statistical model. Instead, they were what we “subjective odds” — which is to say, educated guesses. In other words, we were basically acting like pundits, but attaching numbers to our estimates.3 And we succumbed to some of the same biases that pundits often suffer, such as not changing our minds quickly enough in the face of new evidence. Without a model as a fortification, we found ourselves rambling around the countryside like all the other pundit-barbarians, randomly setting fire to things."

I think the American people would much rather know about the 30+ deaths of the people who tried to investigate Hillary Clinton.

Don't you think that the American people care about the rule of law?

You are never actually going to address my question are you?

Typical of a hillary supporter.... cherry picking data to match a pro-hillary narrative, while deflecting all criticism against her illegal activities.

Hillary Clinton: Zero Accountability, Bad for America.

"Our early forecasts of Trump’s nomination chances weren’t based on a statistical model"

"Trump’s nomination is just one event, and that makes it hard to judge the accuracy of a probabilistic forecast."

"Basically, my view is that putting Trump’s chances at 2 percent or 5 percent was too low, but having him at (for instance) 10 percent or 15 percent, where we might have wound up if we’d developed a model or thought about the problem more rigorously, would have been entirely appropriate."

Closer to the mark, but it is unfortunately unrelated to the data from fivethirtyeight I provided.
>You are never actually going to address my question are you?
Why would I bother to address your question when you refuse to address mine?

>Why would I bother to address your question when you refuse to address mine?

Because yours has already been resoundingly defeated by other posters in this thread.

While you have YET to even acknowledge my questions.

>Because yours has already been resoundingly defeated by other posters in this thread.
It's nice to admit that you are simply too fucking stupid to actually address the point on your own. However, the other posters you claim have "resoundingly defeated" my question have, in fact, not done so.

Oh, I forgot to add.
Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

bepis

Oh, you want a more rigorous refute.
Let's go motherfucker.

>"Our early forecasts of Trump’s nomination chances weren’t based on a statistical model"
>"...we might have wound up if we’d developed a model or thought about the problem more rigorously..."

>"Trump’s nomination is just one event, and that makes it hard to judge the accuracy of a probabilistic forecast."

No data = no model.
Little data = shit model.

This would also mean that nate silver is saying that with the little data that he got, if he thought about the problem he would've put trump in top3 to win AT THE BEGINNING OF THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION PROCESS.

This is the man who believed in something like a 90%+ correlation between nomination and endorsement model.

As far as horseshit goes, nate is trying to learn from his imaginary view of trump, while falling behind schedule and running out of budget.

tl;dr: goddamn weather forecasters. They never fucking change.

>It's nice to admit that you are simply too fucking stupid to actually address the point on your own. However, the other posters you claim have "resoundingly defeated" my question have, in fact, not done so.

Dawww... You get so angry when you are BTFO.

Got any more rigged polls for us?

Is soros cooking up some more as we speak?

What about the Dead Americans?

Are your opinion numbers more important than Dead Americans?

You realize how sad this is getting for you, don't you?

You give more of a shit about artificial numbers than American Lives and the Rule of law.

What the hell kind of politician ARE you anyway?

Clearly you don't give a shit about anything but your own power and appearance.

You certainly don't give a shit about America, American Lives, Justice, Decency, Honor, etc...

You are a miserable specimen of a Female.

The feminists can do FAR better than you.

>Hillary, how come my peepee makes yellow AND white peepees?!!?

The data i am using from fivethirtyeight in this case is not related to their forecasts or even voting polls. this is not relevant.
for over two hours now you have tried so hard to pull together some sort of pathetic win for your side instead of answering the question. you are a failure as a human being, consider suicide.

I am

>for over two hours now you have tried so hard to pull together some sort of pathetic win for your side

What about the Dead Americans?

>consider suicide.

I bet you say that to everyone.

>Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or credible source.

>Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an objective or...source.

>Explain exactly why fivethirthyeight is not an OBJECTIVE or...source.

you wanna pull out the oxford or should I just leave you to your pagan worships of the modern bitch-whipped oracle?

Here is a partial list of all of the people who tried to investigate hillary clinton, who died "Mysteriously"

>"Hillary, how much of your time as Secretary of State can you actually recall?"
K E K
E
K

They admitted they were not being objective in the past, and said they would attempt to correct it. All recent articles seem to show that they have done so.

Nice too see the new batch of correct the record shills are coming out quite fierce. Wonder how long till they run out of steam

>"Hillary, if you were president, what difference would it make?"

I kek'd heartily. Thank you user.

>But with some time to reflect on the problem, I also wonder if there’s been too much #datajournalist self-flagellation.

ONE FUCKING PARAGRAPH IN
IN HIS FUCKING SELF REFLECTION ARTICLE

ONE

FUCKING

PARAGRAPH

IN

>Cases like these are why you should be wary about claims that journalists (data-driven or otherwise) ought to have known better. Very often, it’s hindsight bias, sometimes mixed with cherry-picking17 and — since a lot of people got Trump wrong — occasionally a pinch of hypocrisy.18

HIS OWN CONCLUSION JUST ABOUT CONTRADICTS EVERY FUCKING PARAGRAPH PRECEDING IT

IN

HIS

APOLOGY

You want to know why he's so desperate to claim to not be wrong?

Because him and his assfucking media buddies has turned objectivity into a business, one they can't back away from.

Because it's one step away from "data journalism" and what a jew on TV once called "bullshit mountain".

>I kek'd heartily. Thank you user.

You are quite welcome, user.

Most of what you put forward won't ring true for the average american. If trump really hammers the inconsistencies between muslim culture and western culture and how they are COMPLETELY incompatible, he might have something.

>> 90000000
I'm afraid Hillary won't be attending the debates.

>But with some time to reflect on the problem, I also wonder if there’s been too much #datajournalist self-flagellation.
You're taking that quote out of the context of the paragraph it is in, which is saying "we were wrong, but could we necessarily have guessed?" that's the question he poses and attempts to answer as the article continues. For instance, two paragraphs later, you get this:
>But I don’t think this defense is complete — at least if we’re talking about FiveThirtyEight’s Trump forecasts. We didn’t just get unlucky: We made a big mistake, along with a couple of marginal ones.

Once again, however, I am not using election forecasts from fivethirtyeight. I am using data on favorability ratings alone, from this article: fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-distaste-for-both-trump-and-clinton-is-record-breaking/
I also linked more up to date from realclearpolitics earlier in the thread.
realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html
realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/clinton_favorableunfavorable-1131.html

Expect questions like:
Hillary, why do you like kittens so much?
Hillary, Why do you think Trump wants to deport all puppies?
Hillary, how do you and Bill maintain your active sex life with your busy schedule?

To be fair nobody really understands the true nature of time

These are all retarded and you should feel embarrassed for wasting your time writing these up. She would have a fucking field day if she got asked these because it runs counter to the Trump narrative that the media has been easier on her. Several of them are nonsensical and most are very easy to answer. If you really think these are quality questions, you need to go read a book.