Hillary has "medical episode" at 9/11 Memorial

[Mike Mercury]

Originally Posted by Cybercowboy

You can tell that the whole body double thing is a distraction and will only be used to discredit her detractors.

I felt the same about her pearl "earpiece" issue; it was almost too visable. Limbaugh said he wasn't going on that bandwagon; he smelled a rat about this...

Originally Posted by Craig

They have their own primaries...

Yep; it's not that the Libertarian party decided too late to attempt; they were going through the normal motions and proper timing. The problem is those that waited until the first two were decided upon... before looking at a Libertarian candidate.

If one wants the Libertarian party to gain ground and possibly win in 2020, then in 2017 they need to start forming & holding rallies, and openly call out the media each time they are ignored.

And it would certainly help if some Libertarian candidates won congressional seats in the 2018 midterms.

The way things sit right now, the math is not with them.

[Hoog]

Logic isn't your strong suit.

[Admiral Blue]

hillary has nice suits.

[Hoog]

The knees are scuffed in one of them.

[ApexOversteer]

The spin makes me retch...

"I'm struck by her courage, getting up early, on a Sunday, to stand with these families, when she has pneumonia."

BARF.

[Cybercowboy]

Originally Posted by ApexOversteer

The spin makes me retch...

"I'm struck by her courage, getting up early, on a Sunday, to stand with these families, when she has pneumonia."

BARF.

We'll just need another president for when temperatures are above 80.

[Mike Mercury]

Originally Posted by Hoog

Logic isn't your strong suit.

I notice that on this subject, plenty of VB posters reply with their opinions and observations about elections and the electorical process. Some even take the extra time to look up historical record, statistics, recorded facts to aid in a discussion on this topic

In your responeses, instead of showing historical record, published data, and facts about the subject at hand....you offer negativity towards your fellow participating VB posters.

Why is this ?

[Rob]

I once had a car that would overheat, I got rid of it because it was unreliable and always left me with the fear of being stranded.

Is that what you want with a presidential candidate or this nation?

I vote we bring back the "cash for clunkers" deal and see what we can get if we trade in Hillary.

[Hoog]

Originally Posted by Mike Mercury

Why is this ?

When you repeatedly insisted (based on assumption alone) that Johnson pulls his support from Trump, I showed you both statistically and through citation that you're wrong. Is that what you mean? Historical record, as your fond of spouting....bares NO relevance to this election, but you're stuck on using that as the basis of your fallacious logic.

When you say you won't vote for Johnson, or that voting for him is a waste, because he can't get elected...that is begging the question.

All of my negativity toward you is focused on one thing, the lack of logical thought expressed in your posts regarding Libertarians and voting for a third party. The circular reasoning mainly, but now you're suggesting that people should make a choice...before the choices are know.That's just taking it to a whole new level.

Originally Posted by Mike Mercury

The problem is those that waited until the first two were decided upon... before looking at a Libertarian candidate.

That is a problem why? There are three choices on the ballot in all 50 states. You have chosen one for your reasons....as have I. Have I said anything against you, or anyone for choosing a candidate based on what they bring to the table?

[Thunder22]

Originally Posted by snide

Any truth to the rumor that Clinton has a body double?

Her name is Teresa Barnwell, and she's a comedian.

https://www.google.com/search?q=tere...E8C0cQ_AUIBygC


She was also in Los Angeles all day yesterday.

[Cybercowboy]

Originally Posted by Hoog

When you say you won't vote for Johnson, or that voting for him is a waste, because he can't get elected...that is begging the question.

The idea that support for Johnson comes mainly from Hillary is a non-starter. Anyone who doesn't want Hillary to be president needs to vote for Trump to ensure she loses. That isn't a logical fallacy, it's just the situation we find ourselves in. At any rate, OK, you're voting for Johnson. He's a flippin' terrible candidate with no chance of winning, and he won't win a single state. Meanwhile, those votes, moved from GJ to Trump, would have him win in a landslide.

That's not some sort of fallacious thinking, it's just uncomfortable for those who can't seem to get past the reality of this stark choice. And, again, I will just point out that a Trump defeat will be seen as a mandate for amnesty, the media will beat that like a drum, any congress will cave, and Hillary will sign it in a millisecond. Hell, they can even put in all sorts of "border security" verbiage in there. Like they did 10 years ago, when enhanced border security funding was passed and absolutely nothing done about it.

Again, if Hillary gets elected there won't be any more chances to turn this barge around. It goes over the falls. You won't get another chance at getting a libertarian, conservative, or squishy moderate like Romney elected ever again. Guys like Kaine will be seen as not big government globalist enough. The donor class won't even bother to deign considering funding opposition. They will probably form a new "opposition" party to play the part of the Washington Generals, just a wing of our new socialist globalist overlords.

That's what we've been trying to beat into you guy's heads, but you won't have it for a second because some irrelevant reason. And believe me, if Hillary wins and the #NeverTrump non-vote crowd is seen, even marginally, as the reason...well history will not be kind. Until it gets rewritten.

[Mike Mercury]

Originally Posted by Hoog

When you repeatedly insisted (based on assumption alone) that Johnson pulls his support from Trump,

I never said that about Johnson.

I said that if the 3rd party candidate is right leaning, they tend to take votes away from the Republican party; and if the 3rd party candidate is left leaning, they tend to take votes away from the Democrats. There's after-election data that plainly shows this; but if I bother to copy/paste... will you then only comment about me personally?

All of my negativity toward you...

interesting, that I have no negativity towards you.

I'd like to see your charts and data; I can't seem to find them.
I have an keen interest in the national election process, especially historical records that show trends and such. I let the records lead me to a conclusion, and not the other way around. Please re-post whatever you said you had... I'd love to see it.

[Hoog]

Originally Posted by Mike Mercury

interesting, that I have no negativity towards you.

I'd like to see your charts and data; I can't seem to find them.

I'm using your word...negativity. That's how YOU labeled my responses. If you feel they're negative....ok, they're negative.

The chart and link are in the "other choice" thread that got boneyarded...I mean moved to the political section.

[78SA]

I care more about how a candidate stands in regards to issues and not how he acts aside from the issues. Trump has been the best of the choices in regards to the issues.

[Hoog]

Originally Posted by 78SA

Trump has been the best of the choices in regards to the issues.

....in your opinion. I see him as second best, but apparently that makes me a "Never Trumper".

[Mike Mercury]

Voter registration records, they vary somewhat depending where you get them, but they average-out in 2014 to:

40% registered Democrats
37% registered Republicans
13% Libertarian (independant)
9% other (independant)

(22% independant all together)


If these percentages carry over for 2016,

the democrats don't need any registered Republican to cross the aisle for an assured clear (%51) win, all they need for an assured victory is 45% of the total independents to vote for them. Democrats already have a "vote total victory" (51% is not required to win). If all the independants do indeed vote independant, and all registered republicans vote republican.... the Democrats will win.

As well, the Republicans don't need any registered Democrats to cross the aisle for an assured clear (%51) win, all they need for an assured victory is 60 % of the total independents to vote for them; or just 16% of the independant voters to have a vote-total win.

The Libertarian party needs 230% of the total independants to vote for them to gain a clear vote majority. Or, for a vote-total-victory over Hillary, the Libertarians would need all 9% of the "other" catagory, plus 55% of registered Republicans to vote Libertarian.

Problem is, historical data shows that those who register to a certain political party - once election day arrives - will vote party lines in the national offices (regardless of what they say beforehand)... with no more than a pervent ot two variance of their listed registered party (again, talking about how they voted for the national offices).
However, when voting for a local candidate (governor, mayor, representative, senator) they'll break party rank with more often. There are two noteable exceptions to this for first time running candidates, Nixon and Reagan... who had the largest crossovers in modern times (again, this being for their first term elections; and not including re-election).

Many voters this election want a simple outcome; a Hillary loss; period. They have looked for the best route to accomplish this. For those wanting a sure Hillary defeat... the numbers show the closest route is to help one of the other parties, one that already has a large number of votes under their hat; just needing a tipping-of-the-hat to triumph against her.

For these voters, it looks like a lost cause to attempt to land 100% of the independant votes - and half of the registered republican voters - for the Libertarian candidate to defeat Hillary.

It's been seen as a much easier path to defeating Hillary by just adding 4% of independants to the Rebublican candidate for a vote total win; or 14% to get a clear win (51%).

I am intentionally not mentioning electoral votes in this; because if you zero in on that, 3rd party candidates haven't been on the map, except for one election in 1968.

[78SA]

Originally Posted by Hoog

....in your opinion. I see him as second best, but apparently that makes me a "Never Trumper".

I'm basing it on what I have seen of them. Johnson lost me with his illegal immigrant rant and not knowing what Alleppo is. His choice for VP didn't help. I look for Trump to stay for 4 years and Pence get the next 8.

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

Lemme get this bitches.
#HILLSMUFFTASTESLIKECHERRYPIEANDLOOKSLIKEITTOO

[VITE1]

Why does Hillary have her doctor traveling with her regularly if She is in good health?
She been traveling with her since April 2016.


http://hillarydaily.com/brandon/2016...ime-physician/

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

Originally Posted by VITE1

Why does Hillary have her doctor traveling with her regularly if She is in good health?
She been traveling with her since April 2016.

Because when I'm done hitting it she needs medical attention.
That's why.