James Clapper Recalls ‘Staggering’ Proof of Putin Swaying Election to Trump

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by hcap

2016 Exit Polls vs. Actual Results: Here’s What May Have Happened

Fiction alert!!!

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Fiction alert!!!

Yeah...the new narrative by Dimwits is that exit polls Trump actual results.

[davew]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Fiction alert!!!

documented proof, once seen in print 2 more times....

[hcap]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Fiction alert!!!

Maybe, maybe not.

Widespread criticism of exit polling has occurred in cases, especially in the United States, where exit-poll results have appeared and/or have provided a basis for projecting winners before all real polls have closed, thereby possibly influencing election results. States have tried and failed to restrict exit polling, however it is protected by the First Amendment.[15] In the 1980 US presidential election, NBC predicted a victory for Ronald Reagan at 8:15 pm EST, based on exit polls of 20,000 voters. It was 5:15 pm on the West Coast, and the polls were still open. There was speculation that voters stayed away after hearing the results.[16] Thereafter, television networks have voluntarily adopted the policy of not projecting any victor within a state until all polls have closed for that state.[17] In the 2000 US presidential election it was alleged that media organizations released exit poll results for Florida before the polls closed in the Florida panhandle, as part of the westernmost area of the state is 1 hour behind the main peninsula.


........................................
It should be verified.

[woodtoo]

You should be verified.
In fact you are a verified looney tune conspiracy nut.

[davew]

Originally Posted by hcap

Maybe, maybe not.

Widespread criticism of exit polling has occurred in cases, especially in the United States, where exit-poll results have appeared and/or have provided a basis for projecting winners before all real polls have closed, thereby possibly influencing election results. States have tried and failed to restrict exit polling, however it is protected by the First Amendment.[15] In the 1980 US presidential election, NBC predicted a victory for Ronald Reagan at 8:15 pm EST, based on exit polls of 20,000 voters. It was 5:15 pm on the West Coast, and the polls were still open. There was speculation that voters stayed away after hearing the results.[16] Thereafter, television networks have voluntarily adopted the policy of not projecting any victor within a state until all polls have closed for that state.[17] In the 2000 US presidential election it was alleged that media organizations released exit poll results for Florida before the polls closed in the Florida panhandle, as part of the westernmost area of the state is 1 hour behind the main peninsula.


........................................
It should be verified.

Dang, the media affects the election results more than Russia?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by davew

Dang, the media affects the election results more than Russia?

Ah, man...you let the cat out of the bag! The Dimwits have never known that the lamestream media are in the opinion and emotions manipulation business.
Actual news hasn't been in the top 5 of their priorities for decades.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by hcap

Even so he didn't sell us out in Singapore and Helsinki, and profit like a thief from skirting the emoluments clause and Russian oligarch money

No, you're correct...he didn't sell us out...in public anyway, when he knew we were watching and listening.

He waited until he thought the mic was off to sell us out:

YouTube

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

No, you're correct...he didn't sell us out...in public anyway, when he knew we were watching and listening.

He waited until he thought the mic was off to sell us out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNxEDomUlXw

Oh lord... you rely on this way too much.

Do you have a problem with what Obama was saying? Do you even know what they were discussing...

In any case... if you have a problem with this how can you not have a problem with Trump openly capitulating to a foreign leader over taking the word of Americans?

[PaceAdvantage]

I'm sorry master.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

In any case... if you have a problem with this how can you not have a problem with Trump openly capitulating to a foreign leader over taking the word of Americans?

I don't agree that's what happened up on that stage.

Way overblown. But what else is new in Trump land?

Please refer any other question to Mark Levin.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

I don't agree that's what happened up on that stage.

Way overblown. But what else is new in Trump land?

Please refer any other question to Mark Levin.

You don't have a problem with the fact the President didn't utter a single word of displeasure with a dictator... after a cornucopia of information showing he attempted to undermine our electoral process...?

But him shit talking countries like Canada, Germany, and the UK is great in your eyes...? Because you know... cesspool...

Trump is like some people on here... they talk super tough on the interwebs but...

Or do you buy the BS he is actually pretty tough on Russia?

[hcap]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

No, you're correct...he didn't sell us out...in public anyway, when he knew we were watching and listening.

He waited until he thought the mic was off to sell us out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNxEDomUlXw

You are making a mountain out of a molehill.
You pull this out whenever your Chump-in-chief is accused of secret negotiations. A vain attempt at some sort of Trumpeteer false equivalency.

A 2 hour secret meeting with Putin with absolutely no record, is much worse than Obama "secretly" saying he would have more flexibility after the election. About the negotiations that were already going on.

There were talks going on between the US and Moscow...

Obama tells Russia's Medvedev more flexibility after election
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-n...82P0JI20120326

The United States and NATO had offered Russia a role in the project to create an anti-ballistic shield which includes participation by Romania, Poland, Turkey and Spain.

But Moscow says it fears the system could weaken Russia by gaining the capability to shoot down the nuclear missiles it relies on as a deterrent.

It wants a legally binding pledge from the United States that Russia’s nuclear forces would not be targeted by the system and joint control of how it is used

The White House, initially caught off-guard by questions about the leaders’ exchange, later released a statement recommitting to implementing missile defense “which we’ve repeatedly said is not aimed at Russia” but also acknowledging election-year obstacles on the issue.

“Since 2012 is an election year in both countries, with an election and leadership transition in Russia and an election in the United States, it is clearly not a year in which we are going to achieve a breakthrough,” White House deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes said.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by hcap

You are making a mountain out of a molehill.
You pull this out whenever your Chump-in-chief is accused of secret negotiations. A vain attempt at some sort of Trumpeteer false equivalency.

A 2 hour secret meeting with Putin with absolutely no record, is much worse than Obama "secretly" saying he would have more flexibility after the election. About the negotiations that were already going on.

There were talks going on between the US and Moscow...

Obama tells Russia's Medvedev more flexibility after election
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-n...82P0JI20120326

The United States and NATO had offered Russia a role in the project to create an anti-ballistic shield which includes participation by Romania, Poland, Turkey and Spain.

But Moscow says it fears the system could weaken Russia by gaining the capability to shoot down the nuclear missiles it relies on as a deterrent.

It wants a legally binding pledge from the United States that Russia’s nuclear forces would not be targeted by the system and joint control of how it is used

The White House, initially caught off-guard by questions about the leaders’ exchange, later released a statement recommitting to implementing missile defense “which we’ve repeatedly said is not aimed at Russia” but also acknowledging election-year obstacles on the issue.

“Since 2012 is an election year in both countries, with an election and leadership transition in Russia and an election in the United States, it is clearly not a year in which we are going to achieve a breakthrough,” White House deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes said.

There is no equivalency.

He brings it up anyway.

Obama was slammed for wavering on ballistic missile defense for our NATO allies by Trumper's at the time for "selling out our allies" but is applauded for repeatedly bashing Europe, the Alliance, etc. etc.

People want to have it both ways. Or just parrot people so far up the guys ass his crap is on their shirt... like Levin.

I don't see anyone bringing up Levin when it comes to trade around here though... funny he disagrees with Trump there...

[hcap]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

There is no equivalency.

He brings it up anyway.

Obama was slammed for wavering on ballistic missile defense for our NATO allies by Trumper's at the time for "selling out our allies" but is applauded for repeatedly bashing Europe, the Alliance, etc. etc.

People want to have it both ways. Or just parrot people so far up the guys ass his crap is on their shirt... like Levin.

It is getting worse as the "vises" close in on Trump. Impossible to keep up with all the cult's false equivalency theories, excusing dear Leader. Now he can murder 100's on fifth avenue and get away scott free.