If "The TRUMP ARMY" Comes Out Full Force Tomorrow. Bye Bye Hillary!!!

[Ray From Cleveland]

you mock somebody with pneumonia?

Yeah, she had pneumonia like I have the winning lottery numbers. She really got over it quick though. They rushed her to her daughters apartment (which is what anybody would do with a sick person) and after she sobered up..........er got a rest, she was back to normal and kissing kids on the street.

 

[Dr Grump]

you mock somebody with pneumonia?

Yeah, she had pneumonia like I have the winning lottery numbers. She really got over it quick though. They rushed her to her daughters apartment (which is what anybody would do with a sick person) and after she sobered up..........er got a rest, she was back to normal and kissing kids on the street.

oh c'mon Ray. I have more respect for you than that. you're a conspiracy theorist? really? is that what this has come to? C'mon man...

 

[sealybobo]

If all those people that went to the Trump events of the last 15 or so months, vote,,and along with the millions who had to wait outside the arenas......Trump Wins!!!

And what are the average size crowds for Hillary and Tim?

Why wouldn't they show up?

Today you will learn lots of people at rally's don't equal victory.

Remember Bernie events were packed?

 

[dannyboys]

If all those people that went to the Trump events of the last 15 or so months, vote,,and along with the millions who had to wait outside the arenas......Trump Wins!!!

And what are the average size crowds for Hillary and Tim?

Why wouldn't they show up?

Today you will learn lots of people at rally's don't equal victory.

Remember Bernie events were packed?

Sander's rallies were "packed" with dopers and children who really believed Uncle Bernie would wipe out the 80K they borrowed from the taxpayer to fucking party for four years while learning about the evolution of medieval footwear.

 

[hazlnut]

If all those people that went to the Trump events of the last 15 or so months, vote,,and along with the millions who had to wait outside the arenas......Trump Wins!!!

And what are the average size crowds for Hillary and Tim?

I know you guys hate this--you hate being called uneducated whites but that is what you are. Uneducated Whites.

Today, the educated whites and people of color will save the country from an abomination.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I just think you overestimate the power of word of mouth, who people vote for is based on their beliefs, not what a friend tells them. Plus I don't think everybody at trump rally's are going to vote for trump, many are just checking out the show. Also, if you add Hillary plus her serrogates attendees they are getting the same numbers if not more when compared to just Trump and pence. Plus they have a much bigger ground game that gets out the vote... add all that together and you have a very tight race and advantage Clinton when considering the polls and electoral map

Yeah, I dont know of any formal studies done, just examples like Gibsons marketing Passion of the Christ.

The media downplays or ignores the impact of Word of Mouth because they sell advertising and Word of mouth topics in essence undercut their cash flow.

But it is very effective and I recall that the whole phenomena is often referred to as a "social epidemic"

How Ideas Spread [repost]

four key principles that make information more memorable;
why word of mouth is more than 10 times as powerful as traditional advertising;
how triggers in the environment can influence everything from what we buy to how we vote;
which types of sales messaging drives consumers to act; and
why your looser social ties are more likely to help you find a job than closer ones.

Create Predictably Viral Word of Mouth Campaigns - Synerzip

This posting explores how an advertiser can virally spread a message by leveraging laws of social epidemics extolled in the highly acclaimed book- “Tipping Point” by Malcolm Gladwell . The book was written before social networks like Facebook and Twitter came into existence. Now it has become much easier to spread social epidemics or build up popularity of a concept by spreading “word of mouth” using social media. Towards the end, this posting explores how we can test a message on a small slice of the target population or cohort and create a predictably viral word of mouth campaign.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Sander's rallies were "packed" with dopers and children who really believed Uncle Bernie would wipe out the 80K they borrowed from the taxpayer to fucking party for four years while learning about the evolution of medieval footwear.

And Sanders is right; today's college students have been defrauded by higher education establishments, and with the future of the jobs market so bad due to robotics becoming capable of doing ALL JOBS over the next 20 years, these student will need relief and they will get it rather than let a financial crisis develop due to catastrophic defaults in student loans.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Win or lose, Trump has emasculated ruling class

Whatever happens Tuesday, Trump has made history and has forever changed American politics.

Though a novice in politics, he captured the party of Lincoln with the largest turnout of primary voters ever, and he has inflicted wounds on the nation’s ruling class from which it may not soon recover.

Bush I and II, Mitt Romney, the neocons and the GOP commentariat all denounced Trump as morally and temperamentally unfit. Yet, seven of eight Republicans are voting for Trump, and he drew the largest and most enthusiastic crowds of any GOP nominee.

Not only did he rout the Republican elites, he ash-canned their agenda and repudiated the wars into which they plunged the country.

Trump did not create the forces that propelled his candidacy, but he recognized them, tapped into them and unleashed a gusher of nationalism and populism that will not soon dissipate.

Whatever happens Tuesday, there is no going back now.

 

[dannyboys]

Win or lose, Trump has emasculated ruling class

Whatever happens Tuesday, Trump has made history and has forever changed American politics.

Though a novice in politics, he captured the party of Lincoln with the largest turnout of primary voters ever, and he has inflicted wounds on the nation’s ruling class from which it may not soon recover.

Bush I and II, Mitt Romney, the neocons and the GOP commentariat all denounced Trump as morally and temperamentally unfit. Yet, seven of eight Republicans are voting for Trump, and he drew the largest and most enthusiastic crowds of any GOP nominee.

Not only did he rout the Republican elites, he ash-canned their agenda and repudiated the wars into which they plunged the country.

Trump did not create the forces that propelled his candidacy, but he recognized them, tapped into them and unleashed a gusher of nationalism and populism that will not soon dissipate.

Whatever happens Tuesday, there is no going back now.

About the existing student debt there's zero chance most of it will ever be paid off by the student who spent four years studying the evolution of medieval footwear.
These (cough) 'educated' people will NEVER have a decent well paying job.
There is existing technology which right now waiting in huge warehouses in China (I've visited these warehouses) which can be installed in every fucking Starbucks on the planet which would eliminate 80% of the (cough) 'educated' people working in them.
The ONLY reason Starbucks hasn't installed the robotics is 100% political.
Put all these educated assholes out of work and what's going to be the local political fallout?
Win or lose Trump has permanently changed the political/social landscape of the country.
That's a win for the average hard working middle class family.

 

[bripat9643]

[hmmmmm . . . . I thought you douche bags like McCain and Romney. You keep telling us that's the kind of guy we should have nominated.

You nominated a loser.

He was losing against Clinton during the primaries, and he's losing now.

But you Orange Jesus worshipers closed your eyes, stuck your fingers into your ears, wouldn't listen, and nominated the guy who consistently was the worst candidate against Clinton. All the other candidates did better than Trump against Clinton.

Now, he's going to lose to the most unpopular candidate ever to run for the Presidency - other than him, of course - a woman who has serious ethical and possibly legal issues.

That's how bad Trump is.

So you guys don't really give a shit about Clinton winning. You were more interested in settling scores in the Republican Party.

Nice way to change the subject. Were McCain and Romney the kind of candidate we should nominate, or were they "losers," as you described them?

 

[Slade3200]

Funny, a friend of mine play golf with trump and said that he cheated Biggly. Notes a tendency for kicking balls out for better shots (the ol foot wedge). True golfers know what this says about a person

We can certainly not vote for him for that reason. Believe it or not, some are so petty they won't vote for Hillary because she erased evidence subpoenaed by the United States Congress........imagine that!!!!

It was just an interesting side note. Not everything is do or die. Chill

 

[Slade3200]

I just think you overestimate the power of word of mouth, who people vote for is based on their beliefs, not what a friend tells them. Plus I don't think everybody at trump rally's are going to vote for trump, many are just checking out the show. Also, if you add Hillary plus her serrogates attendees they are getting the same numbers if not more when compared to just Trump and pence. Plus they have a much bigger ground game that gets out the vote... add all that together and you have a very tight race and advantage Clinton when considering the polls and electoral map

Yeah, I dont know of any formal studies done, just examples like Gibsons marketing Passion of the Christ.

The media downplays or ignores the impact of Word of Mouth because they sell advertising and Word of mouth topics in essence undercut their cash flow.

But it is very effective and I recall that the whole phenomena is often referred to as a "social epidemic"

How Ideas Spread [repost]

four key principles that make information more memorable;
why word of mouth is more than 10 times as powerful as traditional advertising;
how triggers in the environment can influence everything from what we buy to how we vote;
which types of sales messaging drives consumers to act; and
why your looser social ties are more likely to help you find a job than closer ones.

Create Predictably Viral Word of Mouth Campaigns - Synerzip

This posting explores how an advertiser can virally spread a message by leveraging laws of social epidemics extolled in the highly acclaimed book- “Tipping Point” by Malcolm Gladwell . The book was written before social networks like Facebook and Twitter came into existence. Now it has become much easier to spread social epidemics or build up popularity of a concept by spreading “word of mouth” using social media. Towards the end, this posting explores how we can test a message on a small slice of the target population or cohort and create a predictably viral word of mouth campaign.

I'm in the marketing business and agree with much of what you say about word of mouth, however that applies to normal consumer products and services. People want to know which doctor their friends recommend or which TV has the best picture, which movie to go see, etc a recommendation from a friend goes a long way with that stuff. Voting is a different game. While I do recognize an effectiveness of word of mouth, it can also be very polarizing as it is a personal choice that many are passionate about. Both sides of this race want a landslide but reality is that we are in a close race and Clinton has an advantage. To say a Clinton victory means fraud before the votes are cast is a foolish statement. To say Trump has no chance of winning is also a foolish statement.

 

[Slade3200]

No they aren't. He lies more than Hillary. He would be much more corrupt than Hillary. A egomaniac that can't take responsibility for his mistakes. His entire run would be cover ups, distortion of the facts, bullied attacks against his critics, lies, lies and more lies. There is no doubt

All politicians lie. It's not how much they lied, it's what they lied about.

I love your wording: Trump "would be" more corrupt than Hillary. How can you take that argument to the polls? You would elect somebody that is corrupt over somebody that isn't corrupt, but might be later on?

Like you said, all politicians lie, which means all politicians are corrupt to a degree. Knowing Trumps character I have no doubt that he would be, by far, the most corrupt politician in history. Clintons corruption that yall have been obsessing about is bad but not as bad as you make it out to be. I don't condone what she did with the server but I understand why she wanted to protect her communications. She's had millions attacking her and trying to discredit her for decades. Many lies and manipulations agaist her by her opponents. I don't blame her for being secretive and guarded.

 

[bodecea]

If all those people that went to the Trump events of the last 15 or so months, vote,,and along with the millions who had to wait outside the arenas......Trump Wins!!!

And what are the average size crowds for Hillary and Tim?

Why wouldn't they show up?

Today you will learn lots of people at rally's don't equal victory.

Remember Bernie events were packed?

Sander's rallies were "packed" with dopers and children who really believed Uncle Bernie would wipe out the 80K they borrowed from the taxpayer to fucking party for four years while learning about the evolution of medieval footwear.

You keep telling yourself that excuse......gonna be around this evening for the celebration?

 

[bodecea]

[hmmmmm . . . . I thought you douche bags like McCain and Romney. You keep telling us that's the kind of guy we should have nominated.

You nominated a loser.

He was losing against Clinton during the primaries, and he's losing now.

But you Orange Jesus worshipers closed your eyes, stuck your fingers into your ears, wouldn't listen, and nominated the guy who consistently was the worst candidate against Clinton. All the other candidates did better than Trump against Clinton.

Now, he's going to lose to the most unpopular candidate ever to run for the Presidency - other than him, of course - a woman who has serious ethical and possibly legal issues.

That's how bad Trump is.

So you guys don't really give a shit about Clinton winning. You were more interested in settling scores in the Republican Party.

Nice way to change the subject. Were McCain and Romney the kind of candidate we should nominate, or were they "losers," as you described them?

Against H. Clinton either one would have won...and then the GOP would get to pick SCOTUS nominees. Now..............?

 

[Toro]

Win or lose, Trump has emasculated ruling class

Whatever happens Tuesday, Trump has made history and has forever changed American politics.

Though a novice in politics, he captured the party of Lincoln with the largest turnout of primary voters ever, and he has inflicted wounds on the nation’s ruling class from which it may not soon recover.

Bush I and II, Mitt Romney, the neocons and the GOP commentariat all denounced Trump as morally and temperamentally unfit. Yet, seven of eight Republicans are voting for Trump, and he drew the largest and most enthusiastic crowds of any GOP nominee.

Not only did he rout the Republican elites, he ash-canned their agenda and repudiated the wars into which they plunged the country.

Trump did not create the forces that propelled his candidacy, but he recognized them, tapped into them and unleashed a gusher of nationalism and populism that will not soon dissipate.

Whatever happens Tuesday, there is no going back now.

Trump emboldened the Democrat ruling class.

And because of it, we're going to get a Democrat President, probably a Democrat Senate, and a liberal Supreme Court.

 

[bendog]

[hmmmmm . . . . I thought you douche bags like McCain and Romney. You keep telling us that's the kind of guy we should have nominated.

You nominated a loser.

He was losing against Clinton during the primaries, and he's losing now.

But you Orange Jesus worshipers closed your eyes, stuck your fingers into your ears, wouldn't listen, and nominated the guy who consistently was the worst candidate against Clinton. All the other candidates did better than Trump against Clinton.

Now, he's going to lose to the most unpopular candidate ever to run for the Presidency - other than him, of course - a woman who has serious ethical and possibly legal issues.

That's how bad Trump is.

So you guys don't really give a shit about Clinton winning. You were more interested in settling scores in the Republican Party.

Nice way to change the subject. Were McCain and Romney the kind of candidate we should nominate, or were they "losers," as you described them?

Against H. Clinton either one would have won...and then the GOP would get to pick SCOTUS nominees. Now..............?

That's true, but I don't think either could have beating Trump in the primaries. (A younger McCain might have chewed off Trump's head onstage in a debate, but that's another matter)

I'm an American more than I am partisan about any issue ... unless it involves something beyond question constitutional like equal protection. The dems have won the popular vote (Perot I know) in 5 of the last 6, and 2004 was decided on terror, so imo they deserve to control the scotus. To me the interesting question is whether Trump will effectively change the gop to make it a more populist party.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I'm an American more than I am partisan about any issue ... unless it involves something beyond question constitutional like equal protection. The dems have won the popular vote (Perot I know) in 5 of the last 6, and 2004 was decided on terror, so imo they deserve to control the scotus. To me the interesting question is whether Trump will effectively change the gop to make it a more populist party.

You say that the Dems won the popular vote, but it was only the largest block, not a majority except for 2012 and 2008.

That hardly makes them the dominant party that should get to pick all SCOTUS appointments.

That is why we have a system that has a prescribed process.

IF the Dims wouldnt get shellacked in off year elections this wouldnt even be an issue.

And yes, I think Trump has recast the GOP as a populist party and the Dims need to emulate him without credit as they always do when someone beats them at their own game.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I just think you overestimate the power of word of mouth, who people vote for is based on their beliefs, not what a friend tells them. Plus I don't think everybody at trump rally's are going to vote for trump, many are just checking out the show. Also, if you add Hillary plus her serrogates attendees they are getting the same numbers if not more when compared to just Trump and pence. Plus they have a much bigger ground game that gets out the vote... add all that together and you have a very tight race and advantage Clinton when considering the polls and electoral map

Yeah, I dont know of any formal studies done, just examples like Gibsons marketing Passion of the Christ.

The media downplays or ignores the impact of Word of Mouth because they sell advertising and Word of mouth topics in essence undercut their cash flow.

But it is very effective and I recall that the whole phenomena is often referred to as a "social epidemic"

How Ideas Spread [repost]

four key principles that make information more memorable;
why word of mouth is more than 10 times as powerful as traditional advertising;
how triggers in the environment can influence everything from what we buy to how we vote;
which types of sales messaging drives consumers to act; and
why your looser social ties are more likely to help you find a job than closer ones.

Create Predictably Viral Word of Mouth Campaigns - Synerzip

This posting explores how an advertiser can virally spread a message by leveraging laws of social epidemics extolled in the highly acclaimed book- “Tipping Point” by Malcolm Gladwell . The book was written before social networks like Facebook and Twitter came into existence. Now it has become much easier to spread social epidemics or build up popularity of a concept by spreading “word of mouth” using social media. Towards the end, this posting explores how we can test a message on a small slice of the target population or cohort and create a predictably viral word of mouth campaign.

I'm in the marketing business and agree with much of what you say about word of mouth, however that applies to normal consumer products and services. People want to know which doctor their friends recommend or which TV has the best picture, which movie to go see, etc a recommendation from a friend goes a long way with that stuff. Voting is a different game. While I do recognize an effectiveness of word of mouth, it can also be very polarizing as it is a personal choice that many are passionate about. Both sides of this race want a landslide but reality is that we are in a close race and Clinton has an advantage. To say a Clinton victory means fraud before the votes are cast is a foolish statement. To say Trump has no chance of winning is also a foolish statement.

Yeah, the techniques that make Word of Mouth work well are polarizing as Trump "rebranding" of his opponents illustrate. Hell, only now Cruz is campaigning for him and he is still butt hurt over the whole primary thingy.

However, it does work and it goes around the establishment media very effectively.

Trump thought through this campaign very well, way ahead of time, and no one will give the guy any credit for his astonishing success in a game run by experts, dirty tricks and hatchet men.

BTW, we dont know the "reality" of what is going to happen because of the Brexit Factor. It is hilarious to hear pollsters object that they find no evidence of Brexit in their polling when THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT, duh! roflmao

 

[bendog]

I'm an American more than I am partisan about any issue ... unless it involves something beyond question constitutional like equal protection. The dems have won the popular vote (Perot I know) in 5 of the last 6, and 2004 was decided on terror, so imo they deserve to control the scotus. To me the interesting question is whether Trump will effectively change the gop to make it a more populist party.

You say that the Dems won the popular vote, but it was only the largest block, not a majority except for 2012 and 2008.

That hardly makes them the dominant party that should get to pick all SCOTUS appointments.

That is why we have a system that has a prescribed process.

IF the Dims wouldnt get shellacked in off year elections this wouldnt even be an issue.

And yes, I think Trump has recast the GOP as a populist party and the Dims need to emulate him without credit as they always do when someone beats them at their own game.

Every party typically gets hit in off year elections. The founders set it up that the president who wins gets to nominate. The Founders may not have foreseen parties, but that's the way it's set up. And the reason is pretty clear. Presidents come and go, but Justices tend to last a long time. So it's a check against overwhelming populism. The gop's position on not confirming Garland is wrong, as a matter of principle.