Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 101
The 2016 Election - Polls and DebatesPage 5 of 32    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32)

Iraq—Operation New Dawn, September 1, 2010 - Dem


Who knew that an operation that ended the Iraq war would be considered by you to be an additional war? Perhaps you are showing your ignorance about American history once again:

From the Library of Congress:


Iraq—Operation New Dawn
Effective September 1, 2010, the military operations in Iraq acquired a new official designation:
Operation New Dawn (OND). A short ceremony marked the transfer in which Army General Ray
Odierno passed command of USF-I to Army General Lloyd J. Austin. On December 15, 2011, U.S. Armed Forces in Baghdad marked the official end of the war in Iraq.
The Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff and other top U.S. military leaders observed the official end of U.S. Forces
Iraq’s mission after nearly nine years of conflict that claimed the lives of nearly 4,500 U.S.
troops. On the military side of Baghdad International Airport, Army General Martin E.
Dempsey, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, Army General Lloyd J. Austin III, commanding
general of U.S. Forces Iraq, and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq James F. Jeffrey addressed U.S. and
Iraqi officials and more than 150 troops and media from around the world.


Operation Freedom Sentinel, you think is a conflict or war? It's the draw down of American forces in Afghanistan to:


Afghanistan—Operation Freedom’s Sentinel
Effective January 1, 2015, Secretary of Defense Hagel announced that the new U.S. mission in
Afghanistan will focus on training, advising, and assisting Afghan security forces and designated
as Operation Freedom’s Sentinel.19 About 13,500 U.S. troops are expected in Afghanistan through
2015 and will be assisted by troops from NATO allies.


But hey, if you want to call ending one Bush war and drawing down forces to training and advising levels democrat wars-have at it...seems we're always mopping up after some republican mess.

ROFLMAO....2 WWl's and 5 WWll's...Double Zero, you really are showing off your ignorance of History. But if you insist-OK, 7 extremely justified wars-that we actually won...seems the republicans like to make unjustified wars and then don't have the willpower to actually finish them.


http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22452.pdf


Once again, you should read what you post:


Table 1. Overall Casualties in OIF, OND, and OEF, October 7, 2001- July 28, 2015

Deaths:

Operation Iraqi Freedom-4424
Operation Enduring Freedom-2355
Operation New Dawn-66
Operation Inherent Resolve-7
Operation Freedom Sentinel-3


Bush's Iraq and Afghanistan operations resulted in 6779 deaths while President Obama's 3 operations resulted in 76 deaths...your point has been made!
 Eric_Summit
Joined: 11/3/2009
Msg: 102
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/13/2015 12:51:31 PM
Governor Jindal very likely talked himself out of the race during the last debate on November 10, 2015.
When Governor Kasich and Senator Paul (likely) depart, it may allow Governor Christie to return to main stage.
 00Spy
Joined: 4/13/2013
Msg: 103
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/13/2015 1:08:44 PM
Please re-read the summary... In that summary they acknowledge the difficulty in pinning start dates but they do all the same and then following that summary they list the engagements and there starting dates.
"This report lists the beginning and ending dates for “periods of war” found in Title 38 of the Code
of Federal Regulations, dealing with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)"
It really can't be any clearer for you.
Not sure why you are focussed on ending dates when the discussion is on which presidential party started the engagement.
So let me help you with your comprehension challenge.
I will list directly from the official record those engagements you mentioned and are struggling with.
Again I quote directly from the official record;


Iraq—Operation New Dawn
Effective September 1, 2010, the military operations in Iraq acquired a new official designation: Operation New Dawn (OND). A short ceremony marked the transfer in which Army General Ray Odierno passed command of USF-I to Army General Lloyd J. Austin. On December 15, 2011, U.S. Armed Forces in Baghdad marked the official end of the war in Iraq. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other top U.S. military leaders observed the official end of U.S. Forces Iraq’s mission after nearly nine years of conflict that claimed the lives of nearly 4,500 U.S. troops.29 On the military side of Baghdad International Airport, Army General Martin E. Dempsey, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, Army General Lloyd J. Austin III, commanding general of U.S. Forces Iraq, and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq James F. Jeffrey addressed U.S. and Iraqi officials and more than 150 troops and media from around the world.


Operation New Dawn started September 1, 2010 it ended December 15, 2011 according to the US Governments own official record as maintained in the Library of congress.


Afghanistan—Operation Enduring Freedom
Operations began with U.S. military forces deployed to Afghanistan to combat terrorism on October 7, 2001, and designated Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF).
On March 27, 2009, President Barack Obama announced a new strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan and ordered the deployment of 17,000 troops that had been previously requested by General David McKiernan.15 In President Obama’s “Address to the Nation on the Way Forward in Afghanistan and Pakistan” at West Point on December 1, 2009, he stated that “it is in our vital national interest to send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan. After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home. These are the resources that we need to seize the initiative, while building the Afghan capacity that can allow for a responsible transition of our forces out of Afghanistan.”16
On June 22, 2011, President Obama again addressed the American people about the way forward in Afghanistan: “We will begin the drawdown of U.S. troops from a position of strength. We have exceeded our expectations on our core goal of defeating al-Qaeda killing 20 of its top 30 leaders, including Osama bin Laden. We have broken the Taliban’s momentum, and trained over 100,000 Afghan National Security Forces.”17 As a result, U.S. forces began the withdrawal of 10,000 troops from Afghanistan.
On December 28, 2014, after 13 years of combat operations, President Obama and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel announced the end of OEF, a conflict that claimed the lives of more than 2,200 American troops, and the beginning of a follow-on mission on January 1, 2015.18 A transition ceremony was held at the International Security and Assistance Force headquarters in Kabul, Afghanistan, attended by U.S. commanders and allied troops from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).


Operation Enduring Freedom started March 27, 2009 it ended June 22, 2011, 2011 according to the US Governments own official record as maintained in the Library of congress.
Nobody is questioning that Obama ended these two conflicts. Thank goodness since it was he who started them.
I am sorry you disagree with the US Governments Official record as held in the Library of Congress.
Perhaps you could get them to post in here?
 00Spy
Joined: 4/13/2013
Msg: 104
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/13/2015 2:14:36 PM
This discussion just became inconsequential with the news of the latest Islamic extremist terrorist attack in Paris.
Early reports are 35 dead in 3 separate attacks with hostages still being held.
God help them all.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 105
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/13/2015 3:49:47 PM

Operation New Dawn started September 1, 2010 it ended December 15, 2011 according to the US Governments own official record as maintained in the Library of congress.


You really don't know what Operation New Dawn was -do you-

Let me instruct you as to what Operation New Dawn was-it was the operation to draw down of US forces in Iraq to end the Iraq war-and yes it took from September 1, 2010 till December 15, 2011


Operation Enduring Freedom started March 27, 2009 it ended June 22, 2011


It was??? Well, once again you haven't read what you quoted. I note:


Operations began with U.S. military forces deployed to Afghanistan to combat terrorism on October 7, 2001, and designated Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF).


Gee it looks like Operation Enduring Freedom started on October 7, 2001.


Nobody is questioning that Obama ended these two conflicts. Thank goodness since it was he who started them.


Let me show you just how ignorant a statement that is...first, Operation New Dawn was a draw down of troops to end the Iraq war_one that was started by President Bush on fraudulent claims of WMD...and Operation Enduring Freedom was started by President Bush on October 7, 2001....is it ignorance, stupidity, or obsessive lying that makes you write these things?
 00Spy
Joined: 4/13/2013
Msg: 106
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/18/2015 11:35:31 AM
New Polls
Real Clear politics averages out all the major polls.
as of Nov 14, 2015

Previous Poll followed by New Poll
GOP National Nomination
Trump - 25.3 - 24.3
Carson - 24.5 - 23.3
Rubio - 11.8 - 12.3
Cruz - 10 - 10.7
Bush 5.5 - 5.3


Dem National Nomination
Clinton - 54.8 - 54.5


General Election
Trump Vs Clinton +2.2 - Clinton +4.4
Bush +0.7 vs Clinton - Clinton +1
Carson +5.2 vs Clinton - Clinton - Carson +4
Florin +1 vs Clinton - Clinton - +1.2
Rubio +0.6 vs Clinton - Clinton +0.8
Cruz vs Clinton +5.5 - Clinton +5.8

Clinton regains advantage against all but Carson who do you figure Carson's appeal. He is having a bad weak again.

Iowa Caucus Feb 1
GOP- Trump +0.5 - +0.5
Dem - Clinton +24 -

New Hampshire Primary
GOP - Trump +13.7 - +14
Dem - Sanders +1

Next Debates;
GOP - Tuesday Dec 15 -CNN/Salem Radio
Dem - Who cares.

What effect will Paris have on next weeks polls?
Stay tuned.

What say you?
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 107
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/18/2015 1:55:25 PM

New Polls
Real Clear politics averages out all the major polls.
as of Nov 14, 2015


How ignorant of you not to notice the general election poll average included polls up to 11/4 ...these poll averages don't reflect any recent poll-certainly no poll as of November 14th ...the latest poll in the average was the most recent one from McClatchy/Marist on 11/4 ...the rest of the average is from mid October...don't you actually read what you quote?

The latest poll-McClatchy/Marist has Ms. Clinton and Mr. Sanders beating all republicans often by double digits.
 00Spy
Joined: 4/13/2013
Msg: 108
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/18/2015 4:16:58 PM
Irish, If you believe it will be a double digit win for a Dem then you should travel to he UK to place a bet.
If you choose to focus on one poll then simply discuss it you don't have to insult to make your point.
But then again perhaps that is all you know.
You would think that after all the history and etiquette lessons I have provided to you (free of charge) you would be a little more civil.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 109
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/18/2015 4:36:03 PM

If you choose to focus on one poll then simply discuss it


Well, there is only 1 general election poll that is 2weeks old. The rest of the general election polls are older...I don't think bumping the thread with stale polls make any more of a valid point then citing one recent poll. In fact one recent poll is better then 4 stale 6 week old polls.




you don't have to insult to make your point.


Double zero, I simply used your words in the exact manner you've used them...you cannot claim insult now.
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 110
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/18/2015 4:45:00 PM
I kind of lost interest in this thread when it was going back and forth on how many wars were World Wars 1 and 2.

And it seems to be the same thing now, just a different topic. So I googled "American poll results" myself. Here's what I got
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh16gen.htm

Hillary beats the whole Republican field. Bernie would only lose to Carson.
 00Spy
Joined: 4/13/2013
Msg: 111
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/18/2015 4:48:44 PM
So angry and so confused my friend.
But you are doing better.
Have you booked your ticket to the UK yet?

As for the polls.
Carson is plummeting this week as he being exposed on National security issues.
As well, Hillary is floundering with her loyalty to Obama and her desire to define her own policy.
Her performance Saturday night was weak and provided the Repubs with plenty of quotes to differentiate.
One thing is for sure at this moment in time the Paris tragedy has had a great affect on the races.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 112
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/18/2015 4:52:34 PM

As for the polls.
Carson is plummeting this week as he being exposed on National security issues.
As well, Hillary is floundering with her loyalty to Obama and her desire to define her own policy.
Her performance Saturday night was weak and provided the Repubs with plenty of quotes to differentiate.
One thing is for sure at this moment in time the Paris tragedy has had a great affect on the races.


There are no polls that reflect any recent developments. While these may be your viewpoints, your viewpoints are reflected in now general election polls as there are none.


So angry and so confused my friend.


Awwww...ain't that cute...your poor feelings are hurt by your own words being used against you...too bad...so sad...
 00Spy
Joined: 4/13/2013
Msg: 113
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/18/2015 5:54:36 PM
Irish I will save you the hassle of going to the UK I will take you bet on a double digit Dem win as I am sure all in here would like to help you also. Taking you money certainly would not hurt my feelings. Keyboard tough guys are a dime a dozen.
As for the polls you seem to be confused on general election polls. I purposefully include a couple upcoming Primaries as well as the nomination polls as they are important right now. As for the General election polls they are fun to look at but mean nothing till after the nominations.
I guess you just forgot to look at the primary polls data dates.
But please stick around as there will be plenty more schooling to come.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 114
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/18/2015 6:07:31 PM

I guess you just forgot to look at the primary polls data dates.


ROFLMAO...well, if you were writing about primary polls then why did you post the stale general election poll numbers...I am so sorry to have to school you on the ignorance of your thread bump post.

Anyway, who cares about Trump or Carson in the republican nomination....there's been considerable talk about Romney stepping in at the Convention, nominating rule changes that will bump any Carson or Trump nomination, and Romney running away with the nomination without ever having to spend a dime on a presidential campaign up to the Convention.

Really, every time you get your azz handed to you you shift the topic being currently discussed...just like a slippery snake.
 00Spy
Joined: 4/13/2013
Msg: 115
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/18/2015 6:45:10 PM
Again you are comprehension challenged.
I posted all three races; nomination, general and early primary/caucus based on RCP averages. My later posts do not refer to a specific poll.
Not sure why you are confused again.
Perhaps it is your ideology and anger. You really should work n both as you have your civility(somewhat).

As for Romney winning the Repub nomination there is just two problems with your hypothesis. #1 there hasn't been a Republican brokered convention since 1948. The Primaries put an end to brokered conventions. Secondly Romney has stated he is not interested.
But hey if you are willing to bet on it I will gladly take more of your money.
I haven't shifted anything, it is not my fault that you can't keep up. You should try discussing posts honestly instead of mis-representing what people post here. I guess it is just your ideology getting in the way.
History lesson F.O.C..
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 116
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/19/2015 5:09:40 AM

The Primaries put an end to brokered conventions.


Not an end, but less likely.


Romney has stated he is not interested.


ROFLMAO...that hasn't stopped you and other radical conservatives from continuing to suggest Biden will run.

Here's an interesting take on a potential republican brokered convention:


But also feeding these rumors was a November 4 Wall Street Journal op-ed from Karl Rove, the well-known GOP adviser, about the possibility of a multi-ballot convention, with or without Romney. Rove sees five candidates with the money and desire to stay in the primaries until the convention starts: Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Marco Rubio, Jen Bush and Ted Cruz.

This leads to a scenario that with some Republican primaries allocating delegates in a proportional, and not winner-take-all way, there won’t be a candidate with enough delegates to get a majority of the first ballot at the convention.

The Republican Party at a national and state level controls the delegate part of the primary process (it’s not a constitutional thing), and in October, Time magazine’s Zeke Miller reported on rules changes that could affect the convention.

By Miller’s count, 29 states and territories have some type of proportional primary, where candidates get part of the delegate count once they hit a threshold. For example, in the New Hampshire primary on February 9, 2016, a candidate getting at least 10 percent of the vote gets to keep his or her delegates. But other states, like Virginia and Oregon, don’t have a threshold; each candidate comes out of the primary with some delegates.

In the long run, if at least three GOP candidates remain viable, the nomination could come down to the June 7th primaries, when California, New Jersey and two other states pick delegates in winner-take-all races.
http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2015/11/what-would-cause-the-gop-to-have-a-brokered-convention/
 00Spy
Joined: 4/13/2013
Msg: 117
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/19/2015 8:38:54 AM
Radical conservatives... uhh well ok if you must call names but then does that make you a radical liberal?
You are sooooo close irish. The "Keyboard Tough-Guy-Thug-Punk" persona just oozes out of you though.
But you are doing better.

Irish I know it is difficult but try to follow along.
Why could Dems end up with Biden... The FBI!
Remember Hillary is under FBI investigation.
So here is the scenario for a draft Joe campaign at the Dem. convention.
Next spring after well after the start of Primary season the FBI hands over its investigation into Hillary's mis-doings and recommends indictment.
The DOJ decides to prosecute.
Hillary withdraws from race.
Delegates she previously won are now freed up.
Draft Joe begins.
It all comes down to the FBI investigation.
Its too late now for her to wipe it clean "with a cloth.. or something".
As for a brokered Repub. convention as you propose, I'm glad you went and did some reading but the prospect is possible but not likely again as hasn't happened since 1948. Its nice though that you actually researched your post even if you are late to the party again.
But I will take the bett, a brokered repub convention, with you.

"Uh uh. I know what you're thinking. "Did he offer six bets or only five?" Well to tell you the truth in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But knowing that all in here want to take you bets and that devotion could blow up your bank account, you've gotta ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do ya, punk?"
But I paraphrase...
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 118
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/19/2015 9:37:02 AM
There isn't a rational human being alive who thinks that Hillary will be prosecuted over emails.

If you're going to be so thin skinned about being called a radical, you really shouldn't immediately follow that with name calling.

For someone who has in this thread set himself up as the arbiter of what constitutes civil debate, it's sort of incumbent on you not to be the first to resort to name calling.
 00Spy
Joined: 4/13/2013
Msg: 119
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/19/2015 10:45:19 AM
Half - no thin skin here, I just flipped the 'radical' term around on Irish.
You for one should know about us Radical Conservatives here in Canada. But then again if there are radical conservatives there must be radical liberals, correct?
Yet you react to the term "radical liberals".
Perhaps a more appropriate term would be "Democratic Socialists"?
As for the "civil debate" issue do you deny that it is much more pleasant in here than previous.
The problem for some however that is with out the anger and vitriol they have nothing left.
Now back to the thread topic because thats what we are here to talk about;
As for whether Miss Clinton will be formally charged you may be right Half but it has noting to do with what rational people think. It has to do with what Obama thinks as he controls the Justice Department. Obama has already inapropriately interjected his thoughts into the FBI investigation. But why did he do that? Do you think he considered the fact that Hillary could be charged? Do you think that he didn't want to be drawn into the Hillary fray. Did Obama worry about his legacy? Is that why the President inappropriately commented on an ongoing FBI investigation?
Is not President Obama a "rational human being"?
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 120
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/19/2015 1:59:18 PM

If you're going to be so thin skinned about being called a radical


I didn't call him a radical, but yanno if the shoe fits...
Oh but it's OK to call democrats socialists.


For someone who has in this thread set himself up as the arbiter of what constitutes civil debate


Double zero's idea of civil debate is to flame, troll, and bait...apparently he's ignorant of doing these things.


it's sort of incumbent on you not to be the first to resort to name calling.


Of course Mr. Zero forgets his own words:


She is ignorant


In his ignorance of civil debate he thinks when someone uses his words in the exact manner he uses them, it's name calling, but not when he does...



There isn't a rational human


ROFLMAO...Mr. Half, you overestimate those radical conservatives.


I posted all three races


Yes you did and here's the opening statement of your post:


New Polls
Real Clear politics averages out all the major polls.
as of Nov 14, 2015


Why would you claim all "new polls as of Nov 14, 2015" and then post stale general election polls with the average poll date being in mid October...and when called out on your sleazy deceptive thread bump you slither like a snake onto another topic...


Secondly Romney has stated he is not interested.


Really, then why do you and other radical conservatives keep saying Biden will enter the race? You must be ignorant of the 60 minutes interview with Biden when he told the world his reasons for not running. But, when mentioning Romney-well, he has said he won't run is enough...of course he won't run after the azzwhooping he got in 2012.


You should try discussing posts honestly instead of mis-representing what people post here.


If you had actually read the dates of those "New" general election polls you spoke of-then we wouldn't be having this discussion about your sleazy deceptive dishonest posting thread bumping tactics...but, in your rush to create some sort of gotcha moment (and bump the thread) you ended up stepping in your own shyte.


As for a brokered Repub. convention as you propose


ROFLMAO...it wasn't me who made the proposal, it was Karl Rove (the king radical conservative) in his article. But, I know in your mind, you know more than King Karl.


Its nice though that you actually researched your post


Thanks, we're still waiting for the time when you do the same.


But I will take the bett, a brokered repub convention, with you.


What bett? The thorazine must be wearing off-you're starting to imagine things.

Back to polls...here's a new one that almost cements a democrat victory in 2016:


A Latino Decisions poll released on November 16th, revealed that 84 percent of Latino voters in 14 selected battleground states believe that the Republican Party is either hostile or indifferent to them. 45 percent said the GOP was hostile towards Latinos, and another 39 percent said the party doesn’t care too much about Latinos. Only 16 percent believed the Republican Party truly cares about Latinos.
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/11/18/84-percent-latino-voters-republican-party-hostile-indifferent.html

In President Obama's landslide victory over Romney in 2012 71% of Latino's voted for President Obama..now it looks like 84% will vote for the democratic nominee...or more, because in 2012 18% of Latino's thought republican candidates were hostile towards them-now it's 84%....and we all know pist off voters vote.

ROFLMAO...at least Carson had incorrect map of the right country:


Republican presidential hopeful Ben Carson might have just made the biggest "oops" yet in his campaign trail, and it just so happens to fall on National Geographic's Geography Awareness Week. The former neurosurgeon's national campaign on Tuesday tweeted an image of what was supposed to be a map showing what states have governors who are claiming they would bar Syrian refugees from resettling in their borders. The only problem: The map shown in the tweet isn't an accurate map of the United States.
http://news.yahoo.com/ben-carson-us-map-photo-163724733.html


Wadda a moroon

as an edit:


look at the real story of that map and the states that are saying NO.


Oh yeaaa, thanks for pointing out that the number of radical republican governors that wouldn't take Syrian refugee's used to be 31 on Monday before being schooled in a conference call with President Obama...that number now stands at 26...Carson is an idiot savant who can't get foreign policy and makes up stories of his youth so he can claim redemption.
http://www.vox.com/2015/11/16/9746456/map-syrian-refugees-governors

 aj7125
Joined: 11/28/2014
Msg: 121
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/19/2015 2:18:53 PM
"ROFLMAO...at least Carson had incorrect map of the right country:"

^^^^^^^^^ To the poster, look at the real story of that map and the states that are saying NO. Of course that isn't what you want to report is it? You can't stand that the majority of the country says NO. Whether you yourself are a US citizen or not, the majority of US citizens, including me agree with states saying no for right now.
 bamagrl68
Joined: 11/14/2010
Msg: 122
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/19/2015 3:18:21 PM
OOSpy- Your first post that STARTED this thread............

"With less than 90 days til the beginning of the primary season, it's time to take a look at the debates and effects on the polls."
"Real clear politics averages out of all the major polls, as of November 6, 2015."
And THEN, YOU go on to talk about the general election poll numbers (Along with the others)

And, YET, HERE you say (post#127).........
"As for the general election polls they are fun to look at but mean nothing til after the nominations."
If that is the case, WHY include it, at all, in YOUR original post and then turn around and call someone else out for mentioning what YOU mentioned first?
Stick around for schooling???
Indeed, please do. :D
 00Spy
Joined: 4/13/2013
Msg: 123
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/19/2015 3:35:59 PM
Bama, simply because they are fun and a reference point.
But they mean nothing at this point as the Republican nomination is so much in a state of flux and the Dem leader may end up indicted. Oh and it was irish who did the calling out not I. I simply posted the New RCP information as I said I would and consistent with the original post.
But thanks for contributing.

Oh and irish you really need to read the definition of "ignorance" and stop mis-quoting me and others in here.
Could purposefully mis-quoting others be considered trolling?
 aj7125
Joined: 11/28/2014
Msg: 124
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/19/2015 4:36:59 PM
The democrats don't even know for sure if the nominee will be any of the three announced. Joe or Elizabeth may very well be sitting in the wings ready to go(now there are two people that have nothing to give).
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 125
The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates
Posted: 11/19/2015 4:43:53 PM

Oh and irish you really need to read the definition of "ignorance" and stop mis-quoting me and others in here.
Could purposefully mis-quoting others be considered trolling?


So, you don't stand by your words. To paraphrase you "what does it matter now?"



YOU go on to talk about the general election poll numbers
I simply posted the New RCP information as I said I would and consistent with the original post.


Bama, absolutely correct...and those general election poll numbers of Nov 6, 2015 were the exact same poll numbers he claimed were new as of Nov 14,2015...a sleazy attempt at deception that he now is attempting to sleaze out of.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > The 2016 Election - Polls and Debates