he goes overseas and admits it. I wonder if he thinks it won't get back to us. Of course we knew it already! ![]()
He said it put a "spring in his step" but he didn't say people changed their vote because of it. They are quite different.
Do you really think all those blue collar, middle class workers in PA, Mich, Wisc, Ohio changed their vote last minute when Comey jumped in? Do they even know who Comey is or cared what he said?
You don't think their vote was economic based?
"He said it put a 'spring in his step' but he didn't say people changed their vote because of it. They are quite different."
Well, in truth, if one reads the whole article, he said more than just that. And, did it change the die hard Hillary or Trump vote. No. But, it most probably did affect the independent and undecided voters, and the turnout of those just moderately supportive of Hillary. If you don't think so then you didn't watch him and the other Trump surrogates beat the drum, frequently and loudly of: “With eleven days to go in this election cycle something amazing happened. The FBI director, James Comey, came out on a Friday and said they may be reopening the investigation into ‘crooked’ Hillary Clinton’s emails,” he said.
“What that did was remind people that there are two different rules in Washington, those of the elites, for the privileged - and those for everybody else.”
Now, if they didn't think that message would negatively impacted Hillary's changes of winning, I'm certain they would not have spent the effort.
Plus, if you had been following 538 you would know that it did hurt her changes of winning, and from which she never fully recovered.
-- Modified on 11/17/2016 12:53:23 PM
Remember though, Comey came out 48 hours before the election and cleared her. Are you saying the masses got the first Comey message but didn't get the last one?
Did you see Bernie say it caused her the election? No. He specifically said she didn't lose bc of Comey.
Also, remember the Obamacare bills arrived in mail boxes first week of November and that almost certainly hurt her as well.
As for 538, I do not believe they are on record saying Comey caused her loss
Of course it affected votes. The Clinton's and the Democrats should be glad that's all Comey did. If he had done his job correctly there would have been an even bigger win for DJT. Another 9 or 10 states would have most likely swung for DJT.
And now all that's up for grabs in this thread is what? Noting that a fired campaign manager admitted the thing we all know? And it's significant because he did it overseas? How about the significance of what BHO's been saying overseas the last couple of days? Is it significant that DJT has not been talking about Comey? Why should he stir things up at this point? Maybe after he's in office? Jeese Jackson just publicly called on BHO to pardon HRC. For what? Doesn't one have to have committed a crime (or at least be accused) to be pardoned?
straining at gnats while swallowing camels. Go back and re-read the title of the article. The operative word is "helping" not causing ![]()
PHOENIX A.Z. (AP) — For months now, rumors have circulated the Internet that individuals were being paid to protest at rallies held by presidential hopeful Donald Trump. Today a man from Trump’s rally in Fountain Hills, Arizona back in March has come forward to say that he was paid to protest the event.
“I was given $3,500 to protest Donald Trump’s rally in Fountain Hills,” said 37-year-old Paul Horner. “I answered a Craigslist ad about a group needing actors for a political event. I interviewed with them and got the part.”
Trump supporters have been claiming that protesters are being paid by the Bernie Sanders’ campaign, but Horner disagrees.
“As for who these people were affiliated with that interviewed me, my guess would be Hillary Clinton’s campaign,” Horner said. “The actual check I received after I was done with the job was from a group called ‘Women Are The Future’. After I was hired, they told me if anyone asked any questions about who I was with or communicated with me in any way, I should start talking about how great Bernie Sanders is.” Horner continued, “It was mostly women in their 60’s at the interview that I went to. Plus, all the people that I communicated with had an AOL email address. No one still has an AOL email address except people that would vote for Hillary Clinton."
Who's Next?
-- Modified on 11/17/2016 11:11:10 AM
I think I might "consider the source" on this one.
This Paul Horner character is not exactly the most believable of people
Can't even trust ABC to keep their shit straight
in them to try some dirty-tricks. But, really! Was it all that hard to find someone to demonstrate at a Trump rally, that they would have to recruit someone and pay them? Plus, the story was created to paint a picture. It was not a recounting of a personal experience. How can I tell? I know plenty of older women, and none of them have AOL accounts. If they are not savvy enough to have the latest technology and services, their kids are, and set them up with it.
Paul Horner has made a nice living spreading fake news stories. The more outrageous they are, the more they go viral and the more money he makes off of morons like YOU (and meinarsche) who click on the stories.
Facebook and Google have just announced that they will not allow ads in websites that contain fake news, depriving them of their source of income.
And the fact that GaG even considers that the "story sounds VERY plausible" to him while at the same time hedging his bet that it isn't true should put him in the Top Ten for SPOTY, although he is still way behind YOU!
I knew for an absolute fact the story was completely full of shit, what I meant is that because I detest Hillary as much as I do, and for good cause, I could see her doing something "like" this, as I would put nothing past her. but my reference to Paul Horner should have made it very clear that I knew THIS story was a hoax.
I guess in hindsight I should have put the emphasis on "sounds" rather than "very" as in the "story SOUNDS very plausible" although it has no basis in truth.
I don't have to explain myself when joking about stories in the "onion" I didn't think I had to explain myself on this fake news story either. I guess people really are that dumb and if you really think I was "hedging my bet" that would make you pretty dumb too
...or should I say: "Give with one hand while taking with the other." This is how your posts go, especially when it's a reply to someone you don't like or never agree with:
"While I think you're a jerk and a moron, I'll have to reluctantly agree with you...this time only! Don't make it a habit, lol."
Sound familiar? Why can't you just agree with someone, even if you can't stand them? When they're right, they're right, regardless of whether you've ever agreed with them before or if you think they're despicable.
-- Modified on 11/17/2016 2:51:08 PM
and sometimes just because I have a reputation to uphold
but I take it you agree, especially after reading my link that shows Paul Horton not just to be a fraud, but debunks the very claim made by our new SPOTY contender. No objective person could possibly conclude I gave Paul Horton's claims even the slightest credence.
False, I did not "hedge my bet" True, I do "take with one hand while giving with the other"
Agreed?
One other thing, I do not allow the fact about whether or not I like someone cloud my judgment about whether they are right or wrong. It's a well known fact Jake and I are friends. That didn't stop me from calling his ass out when he tried to weasel out of a post he made.
-- Modified on 11/17/2016 4:55:50 PM
After you weaseled out on your VERY recent statement that if the Fed raised rates 1/4 point the Dow would drop 1,000. When I called you on it you had the unmitigated gall to say, "I changed my mind," instead of manning up and just saying, "I was wrong."
And, yes, I will point this out at EVERY opportunity. And that goes double if you "change your mind" that the Senate majority will not kill the filibuster over a Supreme Court nominee.
Can't wait.
I didn't "weasel out" on my statement, I made an OP stating that both circumstances and my position had change, I made the post of my own volition after listening to Janet Yellen today, I was hardly called out by you before making my post.
You certainly do seem not only to get butt hurt over the smallest of issues, but you seem to stay that way for an inordinately long time. My very serious advice to you is to start drinking again, you were a much happier, and much less petty a person back then, Still pedantic and petty to a fault, but a thousand times better than today.
Okay, have fun arguing endlessly with anyone bored enough to engage with you for the rest of the evening, maybe I will pop back in to see if any intelligent conversation manages to slip through the cracks. Ciao puta
"That said, because of the Trump factor, I am coming off my dire prediction that higher interest rates are going to kill both the economy and the market." When I saw that I immediately pointed out it was in conflict with your recent statement that a rate increase would cause a 1,000-point drop in the Dow. You then said you had changed your mind but refused to admit your earlier position was WRONG.
Why can't you just admit your original statement was wrong and move on? I probably wouldn't push it were it not for the fact that you jump on EVERYONE when you think they're wrong. Why should you not expect the same? Just be graceful about it, as hard as that may be for you.
Oh, and I did start drinking again. What's your excuse?
-- Modified on 11/17/2016 8:19:34 PM

-- Modified on 11/17/2016 9:09:41 PM
Lewandowski should be part of the Tranny Team..he is as fucked up as the rest of them..