Rigging the Election

[Mrs. M.]

Henry Kissinger once said the best way to deal with a big problem is to get out in front of it before the news breaks. The news media has a big problem on its hands because Hillary is losing big and they know it.

The following news story is a classic example of Henry's crafty strategy. Before Clinton's rigged election numbers roll in the New York Post has already written a story to explain how she won by a landslide. According to the New York Post Americans are going to vote in record numbers for a President we don't like, don't trust and don't want. After she "wins" the election, poor Hillary will be without the comparison of Trump. Pass the Kleenex box please.

I'm truly amazed that the media believes that the American people are going to buy their story much less vote for "their candidate." According to their logic, 77% - 80% of American voters who do not want Hillary Clinton are going to vote for her anyway.

Americans are about to get the first landslide president we don’t want | New York Post
An astonishing (but kinda not really) NBC News/Survey Monkey poll released this week has her winning the presidential race by 9 points, even though just 42 percent of voters said Clinton has the personality and temperament to serve, just 23 percent agreed that she “cares about people like you,” just 20 percent said she shared their values, and only 11 percent said she is honest and trustworthy.

Your average IRS auditor/ambulance chaser who moonlights as a used-car salesman enjoys better numbers. Unfortunately for Clinton, as of Nov. 9, she will no longer enjoy the benefit of comparison with Trump. Americans are about to get the first landslide president we didn’t want. - end quote

This is no surprise that they compare Hillary Clinton's numbers to less than an IRS auditor/ambulance chaser who moonlights as a used-car salesman. Here is a visual aid for those who just can't seem to "get the picture."

The average number of Clinton supporters at her rallies have been estimated at 200 people or less. Trump has been consistently drawing tens of thousands of supporters in city after city after city while TV Networks avoid showing the pictures that reveal just how powerful turnout for Trump has been. How else can the media predict a landslide victory without avoiding such photos of Trump rallies, falsifying poll numbers and cutting off Julian Assange's internet service? Desperate people are known to do desperate things.

There is an online poll which reveals Trump receiving more than double the votes Hillary received. The poll name is entitled, "Vote for the President." You can vote with your email and they list 4 candidates on the poll.

Vote for the President Online

Vote for Trump, Clinton, Stein, or Johnson. This is by far the most accurate and believable poll I have seen to date. I can believe these numbers because they make sense given the huge turnout we see for Donald Trump across the United States and the level of disgust the American people feel for Hillary Clinton. What the New York Post and the rest of the liberal media is trying to sell does not make any sense at all.

Here are the results of this vote for the president poll thus far:

476,429 VOTES FOR TRUMP

'


227,815 VOTES FOR CLINTON

65,322 VOTES FOR JOHNSON
29,038 VOTES FOR STEIN

_____
Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Undecided, anyone can use this poll and vote and as you can see Trump's numbers are more than double Clinton's numbers. It is Donald Trump that is due for a landslide victory. Not Hillary Clinton.

The Liberal media machine rigging poll numbers for Hillary will not help her come election day. So what is the Clinton Campaign doing this time to rig the election?

Veritas reports:

Warning - Graphic Language


Warning - Graphic Language



I find it interesting that Chris Wallace asked Mr. Trump if he would accept the election results while not asking Mrs. Clinton the same question. I also found it interesting that these Democratic operatives openly boast on camera about achieving voter fraud on a massive scale and admit this is how they have been winning elections for the past 50 years while the media continues to insist that voter fraud is a myth.

Democrat confesses to rigging elections ‘for 50 years’

How sad. I'm told that the Clinton's have never been able to win elections without resorting to such criminal activities and this alone should be reason enough for the American people to not accept a Clinton win should it be announced.

Rigging the election is not winning.
Rigging the election is a a crime against the American people.
Hasn't she committed enough crimes against the American people already?
Volunteer to be a Trump Election Observer & Stop Hillary from rigging the election.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Fuck Kissinger.

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right - if Trump loses...

... it'll be `cause Hillary rigged the `lection.

 

[Bleipriester]

Looks like they prepare their biggest fraud yet.

 

[Mrs. M.]

When the Clinton's rig something it means the winner was robbed. The winner is still the winner and the loser remains a loser.

 

[Bleipriester]

When the Clinton's rig something it means the winner was robbed. The winner is still the winner and the loser remains a loser.

Sure but they put that ill woman into the Oval Office anyway. We can only hope...

 

[Mrs. M.]

When the Clinton's rig something it means the winner was robbed. The winner is still the winner and the loser remains a loser.

Sure but they put that ill woman into the Oval Office anyway. We can only hope...

I prefer prayer first but both are essential, Bleipriester.

 

[TheOldSchool]

 

[Bleipriester]

When the Clinton's rig something it means the winner was robbed. The winner is still the winner and the loser remains a loser.

Sure but they put that ill woman into the Oval Office anyway. We can only hope...

I prefer prayer first but both are essential, Bleipriester.

Mass demonstrations and rebellion could do the trick but they are lucky to know the westerners are not interested in politics and eat each shit they hammer down their throats. As long as the patrol tanks and refrigerators are not empty, of course...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Rigged elections? If elections could be rigged, you don't think Trump would be first in line to do it?

 

[Mrs. M.]

Rigged elections? If elections could be rigged, you don't think Trump would be first in line to do it?

Not a chance. Growing up Donald Trump was the kid that would have thrown a trophy away if it didn't rightfully belong to him (through winning it fairly). Otherwise, every time he looked at it, he'd be reminded that it wasn't his.

On the other hand if someone tries to take away what is his- like the oval office? Get ready for a fight. This man is not going to lay down for Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or anyone else. Which is one reason I like him.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Rigged elections? If elections could be rigged, you don't think Trump would be first in line to do it?

Not a chance. Growing up Donald Trump was the kid that would have thrown a trophy away if it didn't rightfully belong to him (through winning it fairly). Otherwise, every time he looked at it, he'd be reminded that it wasn't his.

On the other hand if someone tries to take away what is his- like the oval office? Get ready for a fight. This man is not going to lay down for Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or anyone else. Which is one reason I like him.

^ This woman is fucking nuts

 

[Mrs. M.]

You must be a Clinton supporter. I think all of you are out of your minds if you think that Clinton is actually ahead 9 points. Look at this picture and let it sink in. I realize it angers you, I'm sure the entire thread including the poll showing your candidate losing - badly angers you, but the truth doesn't change to accommodate your likes and dislikes. Face reality. Your candidate is losing big. Clinton is not winning. Not by a long shot. She's involved in election rigging and she is going down. She won't get away with it so stop trying to cover for her. Have some self respect.

 

[JQPublic1]

There is an online poll which reveals Trump receiving more than double the votes Hillary received. The poll name is entitled, "Vote for the President." You can vote with your email and they list 4 candidates on the poll.

So you actually accept a SNAP poll as proof of Donald's likelihood of winning? BWHAHAHAHAHA! My dear , dear woman…are you mad?
One person can vote thousands of times in such polls, thereby skewing the results to such an extent the poll is useless except for the purposes of spewing propaganda. Your entire op is full of HOLES! BTW…those multiple Trump photos seem to be of the same rally taken from different angles. Don't think We didn't notice.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Rigged elections? If elections could be rigged, you don't think Trump would be first in line to do it?

Not a chance. Growing up Donald Trump was the kid that would have thrown a trophy away if it didn't rightfully belong to him (through winning it fairly). Otherwise, every time he looked at it, he'd be reminded that it wasn't his. On the other hand if someone tries to take away what is his- like the oval office? Get ready for a fight. This man is not going to lay down for Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or anyone else. Which is one reason I like him.

You clearly have no idea of the pathology that runs Donald J. Trump, Mrs. M. You are a useful tool in fabricating a candidate who is the exact opposite of who you think is. Thank heavens he is going to lose.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The delusion is strong and growing in the supporters from the alt and far right.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

None of the state elections are 'rigged,' it would be impossible to do so.

And thus the desperation and idiocy from the right continue.

 

[candycorn]

Rigged elections? If elections could be rigged, you don't think Trump would be first in line to do it?

Not a chance. Growing up Donald Trump was the kid that would have thrown a trophy away if it didn't rightfully belong to him (through winning it fairly). Otherwise, every time he looked at it, he'd be reminded that it wasn't his.

On the other hand if someone tries to take away what is his- like the oval office? Get ready for a fight. This man is not going to lay down for Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or anyone else. Which is one reason I like him.

^ This woman is fucking nuts

Yeah…it seems like it’s part comedy skit, part attempt at cogent political analysis.

 

[candycorn]

Henry Kissinger once said the best way to deal with a big problem is to get out in front of it before the news breaks. The news media has a big problem on its hands because Hillary is losing big and they know it.

The following news story is a classic example of Henry's crafty strategy. Before Clinton's rigged election numbers roll in the New York Post has already written a story to explain how she won by a landslide. According to the New York Post Americans are going to vote in record numbers for a President we don't like, don't trust and don't want. After she "wins" the election, poor Hillary will be without the comparison of Trump. Pass the Kleenex box please.

I'm truly amazed that the media believes that the American people are going to buy their story much less vote for "their candidate." According to their logic, 77% - 80% of American voters who do not want Hillary Clinton are going to vote for her anyway.

Americans are about to get the first landslide president we don’t want | New York Post
An astonishing (but kinda not really) NBC News/Survey Monkey poll released this week has her winning the presidential race by 9 points, even though just 42 percent of voters said Clinton has the personality and temperament to serve, just 23 percent agreed that she “cares about people like you,” just 20 percent said she shared their values, and only 11 percent said she is honest and trustworthy.

Your average IRS auditor/ambulance chaser who moonlights as a used-car salesman enjoys better numbers. Unfortunately for Clinton, as of Nov. 9, she will no longer enjoy the benefit of comparison with Trump. Americans are about to get the first landslide president we didn’t want. - end quote

This is no surprise that they compare Hillary Clinton's numbers to less than an IRS auditor/ambulance chaser who moonlights as a used-car salesman. Here is a visual aid for those who just can't seem to "get the picture."

The average number of Clinton supporters at her rallies have been estimated at 200 people or less. Trump has been consistently drawing tens of thousands of supporters in city after city after city while TV Networks avoid showing the pictures that reveal just how powerful turnout for Trump has been. How else can the media predict a landslide victory without avoiding such photos of Trump rallies, falsifying poll numbers and cutting off Julian Assange's internet service? Desperate people are known to do desperate things.

There is an online poll which reveals Trump receiving more than double the votes Hillary received. The poll name is entitled, "Vote for the President." You can vote with your email and they list 4 candidates on the poll.

Poll Results - Vote for the President

Vote for Trump, Clinton, Stein, or Johnson. This is by far the most accurate and believable poll I have seen to date. I can believe these numbers because they make sense given the huge turnout we see for Donald Trump across the United States and the level of disgust the American people feel for Hillary Clinton. What the New York Post and the rest of the liberal media is trying to sell does not make any sense at all.

The Liberal media machine rigging poll numbers for Hillary will not help her come election day. So what is the Clinton Campaign doing this time to rig the election?

Veritas reports:

Warning - Graphic Language


Warning - Graphic Language



I find it interesting that Chris Wallace asked Mr. Trump if he would accept the election results while not asking Mrs. Clinton the same question. I also found it interesting that these Democratic operatives openly boast on camera about achieving voter fraud on a massive scale and admit this is how they have been winning elections for the past 50 years while the media continues to insist that voter fraud is a myth. How sad. I'm told that the Clinton's have never been able to win elections without resorting to such criminal activities and this alone should be reason enough for the American people to not accept a Clinton win should it be announced.

Rigging the election is not winning.
Rigging the election is a a crime against the American people.
Hasn't she committed enough crimes against the American people already?
Volunteer to be a Trump Election Observer & Stop Hillary from rigging the election.

I appreciate your extensive if not well thought out editorial. On one hand you seem to be stating that the size of the crowds proves scientific polling to be false. On the other, you seem to be stating that voter fraud would be employed on a wide scale by the Democratic Party according to what I’m sure you’d even admit are highly edited videos manufactured by a person whose ethics have been called into question in the past and who has even had court orders to pay for damages his videos have done.

James O’Keefe Pays $100K Settlement after Deceiving Public about ACORN (and ALEC Helped Take Down ACORN)

The obvious question is why you would go through the trouble of paying/engendering/facilitating (choose your verb) the press to report poll numbers when you have the fix at the ballot box?

Moving on to the canard that crowd size equals polling. For one thing, it is only in 10-15 states where candidates are holding rallies. So in 35-40 states, there are no crowds for either one. In Nationwide polling the most populous states are included and there are no pictures of rallies there. In general, those states (CA, NY, IL, PA, WI, VA, MD, NJ, MA) are firmly in Ms. Clinton’s column. Secondly, there is strong precedent for rallies not translating into polling or votes.

Governor Romney drew large crowds as well. The result? Resounding and total defeat. But, if you’re like others here, you will argue that election was also “rigged” (as Trump said in a tweet when it happened)

Mitt drawing larger crowds

Although later he did blame Romney. Imagine the meltdown that will happen when he loses.

Those in the “its rigged” camp never explain how it would be rigged. In the absence of explaining specifically how the Democrats can rig elections during Presidential years but amazingly forget how to in off year contests…we will apply some logic. Lets dispense with some guy with a laptop somewhere doing the Matthew Broderick thing and changing the grades via computer. Again, if it were that easy, you could do this for every election, you could save a bundle of money in travel and advertising… The other (much easier) way to commit voter fraud is to simply have a bunch of folks register in a state (or states) where they don’t live and vote in several localities. Its easy and effective since getting a false ID is cake and getting someone to vouch for your address if there is an investigation (which there won’t be). Could it happen? Sure. Would it be VERY easy to pull off? Yes. And it’s pretty cheap.

Is it happening here? No. Why? Well, because if you are going to put in, lets say, 10,000 plants into Trump territories of, lets say FL or OH (Northern Florida and Southern Ohio), those 10,000 will be voting for every democrat on the ticket or a straight Party vote. It makes no sense to cast a ballot for Ms. Clinton but not vote for Mr. Portman or Mr. Rubio’s opponent. So if there is a split between the Presidential and the Senatorial selections, there is not a fix in place. It’s more complex because the appeal of the candidate usually transcended House Districts abut one could look at them also. If Ms. Clinton wanted to rig, for example, NC; it would be smartest to put the plants into a district the GOP currently controls like the NC2 (where there is not an incumbent).

If you wish to explain how the “rigging” works, feel free. So far, it’s a bunch of anecdotes that are easily dismissed. Crowd size is not important at all.

 

[Mrs. M.]

Henry Kissinger once said the best way to deal with a big problem is to get out in front of it before the news breaks. The news media has a big problem on its hands because Hillary is losing big and they know it.

The following news story is a classic example of Henry's crafty strategy. Before Clinton's rigged election numbers roll in the New York Post has already written a story to explain how she won by a landslide. According to the New York Post Americans are going to vote in record numbers for a President we don't like, don't trust and don't want. After she "wins" the election, poor Hillary will be without the comparison of Trump. Pass the Kleenex box please.

I'm truly amazed that the media believes that the American people are going to buy their story much less vote for "their candidate." According to their logic, 77% - 80% of American voters who do not want Hillary Clinton are going to vote for her anyway.

Americans are about to get the first landslide president we don’t want | New York Post
An astonishing (but kinda not really) NBC News/Survey Monkey poll released this week has her winning the presidential race by 9 points, even though just 42 percent of voters said Clinton has the personality and temperament to serve, just 23 percent agreed that she “cares about people like you,” just 20 percent said she shared their values, and only 11 percent said she is honest and trustworthy.

Your average IRS auditor/ambulance chaser who moonlights as a used-car salesman enjoys better numbers. Unfortunately for Clinton, as of Nov. 9, she will no longer enjoy the benefit of comparison with Trump. Americans are about to get the first landslide president we didn’t want. - end quote

This is no surprise that they compare Hillary Clinton's numbers to less than an IRS auditor/ambulance chaser who moonlights as a used-car salesman. Here is a visual aid for those who just can't seem to "get the picture."

The average number of Clinton supporters at her rallies have been estimated at 200 people or less. Trump has been consistently drawing tens of thousands of supporters in city after city after city while TV Networks avoid showing the pictures that reveal just how powerful turnout for Trump has been. How else can the media predict a landslide victory without avoiding such photos of Trump rallies, falsifying poll numbers and cutting off Julian Assange's internet service? Desperate people are known to do desperate things.

There is an online poll which reveals Trump receiving more than double the votes Hillary received. The poll name is entitled, "Vote for the President." You can vote with your email and they list 4 candidates on the poll.

Poll Results - Vote for the President

Vote for Trump, Clinton, Stein, or Johnson. This is by far the most accurate and believable poll I have seen to date. I can believe these numbers because they make sense given the huge turnout we see for Donald Trump across the United States and the level of disgust the American people feel for Hillary Clinton. What the New York Post and the rest of the liberal media is trying to sell does not make any sense at all.

The Liberal media machine rigging poll numbers for Hillary will not help her come election day. So what is the Clinton Campaign doing this time to rig the election?

Veritas reports:

Warning - Graphic Language


Warning - Graphic Language



I find it interesting that Chris Wallace asked Mr. Trump if he would accept the election results while not asking Mrs. Clinton the same question. I also found it interesting that these Democratic operatives openly boast on camera about achieving voter fraud on a massive scale and admit this is how they have been winning elections for the past 50 years while the media continues to insist that voter fraud is a myth. How sad. I'm told that the Clinton's have never been able to win elections without resorting to such criminal activities and this alone should be reason enough for the American people to not accept a Clinton win should it be announced.

Rigging the election is not winning.
Rigging the election is a a crime against the American people.
Hasn't she committed enough crimes against the American people already?
Volunteer to be a Trump Election Observer & Stop Hillary from rigging the election.

I appreciate your extensive if not well thought out editorial. On one hand you seem to be stating that the size of the crowds proves scientific polling to be false. On the other, you seem to be stating that voter fraud would be employed on a wide scale by the Democratic Party according to what I’m sure you’d even admit are highly edited videos manufactured by a person whose ethics have been called into question in the past and who has even had court orders to pay for damages his videos have done.

James O’Keefe Pays $100K Settlement after Deceiving Public about ACORN (and ALEC Helped Take Down ACORN)

The obvious question is why you would go through the trouble of paying/engendering/facilitating (choose your verb) the press to report poll numbers when you have the fix at the ballot box?

Moving on to the canard that crowd size equals polling. For one thing, it is only in 10-15 states where candidates are holding rallies. So in 35-40 states, there are no crowds for either one. In Nationwide polling the most populous states are included and there are no pictures of rallies there. In general, those states (CA, NY, IL, PA, WI, VA, MD, NJ, MA) are firmly in Ms. Clinton’s column. Secondly, there is strong precedent for rallies not translating into polling or votes.

Governor Romney drew large crowds as well. The result? Resounding and total defeat. But, if you’re like others here, you will argue that election was also “rigged” (as Trump said in a tweet when it happened)

Mitt drawing larger crowds


View attachment 94746

Although later he did blame Romney. Imagine the meltdown that will happen when he loses.

Those in the “its rigged” camp never explain how it would be rigged. In the absence of explaining specifically how the Democrats can rig elections during Presidential years but amazingly forget how to in off year contests…we will apply some logic. Lets dispense with some guy with a laptop somewhere doing the Matthew Broderick thing and changing the grades via computer. Again, if it were that easy, you could do this for every election, you could save a bundle of money in travel and advertising… The other (much easier) way to commit voter fraud is to simply have a bunch of folks register in a state (or states) where they don’t live and vote in several localities. Its easy and effective since getting a false ID is cake and getting someone to vouch for your address if there is an investigation (which there won’t be). Could it happen? Sure. Would it be VERY easy to pull off? Yes. And it’s pretty cheap.

Is it happening here? No. Why? Well, because if you are going to put in, lets say, 10,000 plants into Trump territories of, lets say FL or OH (Northern Florida and Southern Ohio), those 10,000 will be voting for every democrat on the ticket or a straight Party vote. It makes no sense to cast a ballot for Ms. Clinton but not vote for Mr. Portman or Mr. Rubio’s opponent. So if there is a split between the Presidential and the Senatorial selections, there is not a fix in place. It’s more complex because the appeal of the candidate usually transcended House Districts abut one could look at them also. If Ms. Clinton wanted to rig, for example, NC; it would be smartest to put the plants into a district the GOP currently controls like the NC2 (where there is not an incumbent).

If you wish to explain how the “rigging” works, feel free. So far, it’s a bunch of anecdotes that are easily dismissed. Crowd size is not important at all.

Candy, your response is almost as long as my Op-ed. This tells me that you're worried. You should be if you're expecting Americans to believe that Clinton is anywhere close to Donald Trump in this race.

Clinton is drawing crowds of 200 or less in small auditoriums (like schools). Donald Trump is consistently drawing tens of thousands of people filling huge arenas. If you will recall, Obama drew huge crowds during his first election and had I told you then that those huge crowds meant nothing you would have balked at the idea.

Now that your candidate had to hire "actors" on Craigslist to fill her own DNC Convention for nomination with possibly more Democrats (Sanders voters) protesting against her outside than Democrats for her inside (minus the paid actors) and the media doing its best to hide just how small Clinton rallies actually have been, you want us to believe that crowds don't matter. I have news for you, Candy. Huge Crowds represent Huge voter turnout. Small crowds and a half empty DNC nomination convention represent a Party that is no longer with you.

Clinton is the most unelectable candidate in US History. Even her own Party doesn't want her. Your mistake was believing the DNC could pull this over on the American people - taking the nomination away from Sanders (who won) because Hillary believed it was "her turn."

Tell your candidate that becoming president of the USA is not an entitlement -which she has come to expect - but rather a privilege - which she does not deserve.