Official: I Voted for Trump Thread

[GannonFan]

I get the Trump disdain. What I don't get from you is tripping over yourself to defend Hillary Clinton. You are becoming like UNHWildcats with that.

Your IQ is probably high enough to understand that just because someone never gets in trouble does not mean that they aren't doing anything wrong. If you just wanted to go by what's been thoroughly corroborated then Al Capone was a swell guy that just cheated on his taxes. Hillary has left trails of smoke behind her for her entire career and the only defense is that only some embers have really been found. Wake up. She's a career sleezebag.

What's especially funny is that how you have repeatedly preached the importance of Supreme court picks and how dangerous what you call "egalitarianism" (what I think should be called "equivilatarianism" ) is. Guess what? Hillary Clinton will put staunch pro-abortion, anti-gun judges on the bench. I have no doubt about that. And the institutionalized "egalitarianism" is going to reach a fever pitch. Hillary has gone so far as to use the term "systemic racism" (that's even farther than Obama has ever gone) and you know she's a grrl power feminazi as well.

And I dont buy into the idea that Trump is going to nuke someone because they insulted him on twitter. If insane people like the Kim Jongs can run a country and there not be a nuclear apocalypse or even a war on the South Korean peninsula you know Trump won't be a problem. He would just be an inactive president who wants to feel important and would really let all of his advisors and his vice president make the decisions.

Seriously, what has gotten into you?

Like I said, JSO isn't a big picture kind of guy.

Agreed. Not liking Trump is certainly understandable, and I'm sure there are people who don't like Trump but are begrudgingly voting for him. But to do what JSO has done and gone so 180 and to be as pro-Hillary as he's become, to ignore the obviousness of the criminal corruption that she has brazenly been directing in the past 8 years, it just destroys any credibility he could have. I'm not voting for Trump because I don't want him as a leader for this country. But I'm sure as not voting for Hillary either because she too doesn't come close to what I want to have as a leader for this country. This election has just decimated any respect anyone could have had for JSO.

[Ivytalk]

Like I said, JSO isn't a big picture kind of guy.

Agreed. Not liking Trump is certainly understandable, and I'm sure there are people who don't like Trump but are begrudgingly voting for him. But to do what JSO has done and gone so 180 and to be as pro-Hillary as he's become, to ignore the obviousness of the criminal corruption that she has brazenly been directing in the past 8 years, it just destroys any credibility he could have. I'm not voting for Trump because I don't want him as a leader for this country. But I'm sure as not voting for Hillary either because she too doesn't come close to what I want to have as a leader for this country. This election has just decimated any respect anyone could have had for JSO.

So you're voting for 89Hen.

[89Hen]

Agreed. Not liking Trump is certainly understandable, and I'm sure there are people who don't like Trump but are begrudgingly voting for him. But to do what JSO has done and gone so 180 and to be as pro-Hillary as he's become, to ignore the obviousness of the criminal corruption that she has brazenly been directing in the past 8 years, it just destroys any credibility he could have. I'm not voting for Trump because I don't want him as a leader for this country. But I'm sure as not voting for Hillary either because she too doesn't come close to what I want to have as a leader for this country. This election has just decimated any respect anyone could have had for JSO.

So you're voting for 89Hen.

I am hoping I get a few write ins. First name 89, last name Hen (one N).

[Ibanez]

So you're voting for 89Hen.

I am hoping I get a few write ins. First name 89, last name Hen (one N).

South Carolina doesn't allow write ins for POTUS. So...take 1 Gary Johnson vote from SC and put it in your column.

[JohnStOnge]

And you know what really influences people's decisions? Emotions.

Yes. And that's why Trump won the Republican primaries and has a chance to win a general election. If people made their decisions on the basis of objective, analytical thought processes he would never have been a factor.

[JohnStOnge]

Brevity shows the ability to take a complex topic and focus on the important substance.

Not really. Brevity is a compromise. You know that most people only have a certain attention span. So you leave out a lot of context and support so as not to go beyond that.

Now, I'll admit that a lot of people just assert stuff without doing anything to back it up. That contributes to brevity. I believe that when a person says something they should back it up. And that compromises brevity.

When you're dealing with the general public there is no doubt that there are issues. That's why you see the kinds of guidelines I mentioned. You know, write to the 6th to 8th grade level.

I don't know if that speaks real well of our population.

[JohnStOnge]

I get the Trump disdain. What I don't get from you is tripping over yourself to defend Hillary Clinton. You are becoming like UNHWildcats with that.

Your IQ is probably high enough to understand that just because someone never gets in trouble does not mean that they aren't doing anything wrong. If you just wanted to go by what's been thoroughly corroborated then Al Capone was a swell guy that just cheated on his taxes. Hillary has left trails of smoke behind her for her entire career and the only defense is that only some embers have really been found. Wake up. She's a career sleezebag.

Pwns, have you perchance looked at Trump's background? This goes to what I wrote in the thread about corruption. This thing where people act like there is some kind of ethics advantage for Trump is just absurd. If HIllary is a career sleezebag, Trump is a career sleezebag squared.

Look, I am not pro Hillary per se. I am anti Trump. It just so happens that Hillary is the only thing standing between that nut job Trump and the Presidency. BELIEVE me, I wish the Republican primary electorate would've picked someone else from among the MANY choices they had. If they had picked ANYBODY else among the alternatives they had I would be behind them right now. But they just picked someone who has NO BUSiNESS being in that job.

[JohnStOnge]

Agreed. Not liking Trump is certainly understandable, and I'm sure there are people who don't like Trump but are begrudgingly voting for him. But to do what JSO has done and gone so 180 and to be as pro-Hillary as he's become, to ignore the obviousness of the criminal corruption that she has brazenly been directing in the past 8 years, it just destroys any credibility he could have. I'm not voting for Trump because I don't want him as a leader for this country. But I'm sure as not voting for Hillary either because she too doesn't come close to what I want to have as a leader for this country. This election has just decimated any respect anyone could have had for JSO.

I can respect not voting for either. As I said in my previous post I am not pro Hillary. I am anti Trump. If the Democrat candidate was a hamster I'd be behind the Democrat candidate right now because the Democrat candidate is the only alternative to Trump.

But I must say that I don't think there is sufficient evidence to say Hillary Clinton has been directing criminal corruption for the past 8 years. I think there's a lot more evidence for corruption on Trump's part. Criminal corruption? I don't know. But corruption? Yes. I'm not saying that there's not smoke. But, for better or worse, there's no real "smoking gun" with respect to Clinton.

With Trump there are smoking guns. You can actually see a video of him saying he personally picked instructors for Trump University then read that he later said in depositions that he did not. You can see that Texas and Florida Attorney Generals didn't charge Trump University for fraud in association with Trump giving them donations. That sort of thing. There's nothing like that with Clinton. You can't see any direct evidence of "Person A gave money to Clinton then Clinton took Action B in favor of that person."

[JohnStOnge]

[
You remind me of another poster that would tell us how smart he was. He also told us that 21/3=6.93.

The only reason I said anything about the range in which I think my IQ falls is that someone else, in response to me lamenting the fact that my genius level IQ brother is voting for Trump, wrote:

Stupid, ignorant, and fearful people often disparage people with a high IQ...glad to see you're playing your role well.

So I went ahead and said that as far as I can tell I have a fairly high IQ as well. Not as high as the brother I'm talking about. But fairly high. Probably higher than somewhere in the range of 98 to 99 percent of the population. It just is what it is. I'm sure there are a number of people on this board that have higher IQs than I have. I can see that in the discourse, I think. That's one reason I come here. I consider this to be a board populated by intelligent people.

[Vidav]

Hey guys. How are things?

[93henfan]

Hey guys. How are things?

Not so good for my girl Jill, but we still have four more days to get our base energized.

[SeattleGriz]

Sorry. I've got a brother with a genius level IQ who is going to vote for Trump because he's a lawyer and he's into the Supreme Court. But voting for Trump is still and idiotic thing to do. Just really a stupid thing to do.

Really makes me wonder about the future of the United States. And even if he wins the support for him on the "right" is going to destroy the "right" in the long run. They may win this short term battle thanks to Comey's weird ways of handling things and Wikileaks but they will have taken a big step towards losing the war.

And failing to see that is...well...stupid; even if you've got a high IQ.

What's his IQ?

[JohnStOnge]

I just picked a poll to check to get a feel for what we're talking about. Bear in mind that when Obama beat Romney in 2012 the college grad vs. non college grad thing went like this:

Non college grads: Obama 51%, Romney 47%
College grads: Obama 50%, Romney 48%

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/result ... president/

In other words, there's no indication that whether or not someone was a college grad made any difference. Obama pretty much had the same advantage among the two groups. The small 1 percentage point difference is well within what one would expect from random sampling error. But look at what the just-released Marist poll shows with respect to Clinton and Trump right now:

Non college grads: Clinton 39%, Trump 50%
College grads: Clinton 55%, Trump 37%

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politic ... %20results

Now whether or not someone is a college grad is clearly a factor. Now there's a 28 percentage point swing based on which group you look at.

You'll just have to take my word for it when I say that what happened in 2012 is typical. What's going on this year is unusual. The proportional level of support among the "cognitive elite" for the Democratic candidate is way higher this time than it's typically been in the past. And I don't think it's because it's an outstanding Democratic candidate. I think it's because the Republican candidate is so awful.

[JohnStOnge]

I'll mention what the Marist poll has about Whites and education. It's consistent with what we've heard all along. Reportedly, since this kind of polling started, Democrats have never won among White college graduates. But here is what the Marist poll estimates now:

White non college graduates: Clinton 30%, Trump 57%
White college graduates: Clinton 51%, Trump 41%

[Ivytalk]

Hey guys. How are things?

Not so good for my girl Jill, but we still have four more days to get our base energized.

You've gone from Drumpf to Jill Stein? Quite a political odyssey.

[JohnStOnge]

Sorry. I've got a brother with a genius level IQ who is going to vote for Trump because he's a lawyer and he's into the Supreme Court. But voting for Trump is still and idiotic thing to do. Just really a stupid thing to do.

Really makes me wonder about the future of the United States. And even if he wins the support for him on the "right" is going to destroy the "right" in the long run. They may win this short term battle thanks to Comey's weird ways of handling things and Wikileaks but they will have taken a big step towards losing the war.

And failing to see that is...well...stupid; even if you've got a high IQ.

What's his IQ?

I THINK it was measured at 143 when he was in school. He went through elementary school and high school without ever making anything but A. I'm talking about A on everything. Every test. Every quiz. Every report card subject. Never made anything but A or A+. Another thing is that he never had to study. He just immediately got everything. And he graduated valedictorian.

Me, I scored high on standarized tests but I didn't make great grades. I did OK but I was not even the remotest threat to be valedictorian. Of course I didn't study either. And I smoked pot all the time. He didn't do that. Never took a hit.

[SeattleGriz]

I just picked a poll to check to get a feel for what we're talking about. Bear in mind that when Obama beat Romney in 2012 the college grad vs. non college grad thing went like this:

Non college grads: Obama 51%, Romney 47%
College grads: Obama 50%, Romney 48%

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/result ... president/

In other words, there's no indication that whether or not someone was a college grad made any difference. Obama pretty much had the same advantage among the two groups. The small 1 percentage point difference is well within what one would expect from random sampling error. But look at what the just-released Marist poll shows with respect to Clinton and Trump right now:

Non college grads: Clinton 39%, Trump 50%
College grads: Clinton 55%, Trump 37%

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politic ... %20results

Now whether or not someone is a college grad is clearly a factor. Now there's a 28 percentage point swing based on which group you look at.

You'll just have to take my word for it when I say that what happened in 2012 is typical. What's going on this year is unusual. The proportional level of support among the "cognitive elite" for the Democratic candidate is way higher this time than it's typically been in the past. And I don't think it's because it's an outstanding Democratic candidate. I think it's because the Republican candidate is so awful.

I have stayed out of this because I can't possibly keep up on all the information, so please excuse if this has been asked before. Does it make sense that college grads gravitate more to Hillary because they have degrees and have not felt the pinch of their job fields decreasing?

A degree gives you a lot of open doors versus not having one. I work in manufacturing, and while the guys are great, they aren't going to come close to beating me for a job that pays well in today's market because they don't have a degree.

Their financial status is out of their control and Trump represents a chance.

[93henfan]

Not so good for my girl Jill, but we still have four more days to get our base energized.

You've gone from Drumpf to Jill Stein? Quite a political odyssey.

I'M MAKING A STAND, DAMN IT!!!

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

ad and say that I figure my IQ appears to be somewhere in the range of 130 to 140 or so. I say that because if you estimate my IQ from my GRE score it's 130. That was back when I used to smoke pot all the time. Later on after I hadn't smoked pot for a long time took what I think is a good on line IQ test that included all the components I read about in the Bell Curve I scored 141. It had all the stuff in it including the forward and backward digit span tests. Not your typical on line IQ test. And for what it's worth I had to pay for it. Also, I've scored anywhere from the 97th through the 99th percentile in every standardized test I've taken in my lifetime. Not the smartest person in the world but definitely among what Hernstein and Murray defined as the "cognitive elite."

I think most if not all of the people on this board are among the "cognitive elite" as defined by Hernstien and Murray. They defined those in the top 15% as such. My guess is from looking at the post that most if not all people on this board are in that group. We have at least one Harvard guy and he wouldn't have gotten into Harvard if he wasn't in the top 1%.

Most of the time I try not to feel superior to most in the population. I consciously try to avoid that. I also do things like dumb down my vocabulary when I'm interacting with people in day to day life. You know how it goes.

But this time I am feeling superior. I'm feeling very good about being smart enough to recognize what Donald Trump is early on, make the decision that there's no way I could vote for someone like that to be President, and stick to the decision. And I frankly do feel superior to people who are either ignorant or in denial so that they would actually vote for somebody like that. I'll feel that way regardless of the outcome. In this case there's no doubt that I'm right. Right is right when everybody around you is right and it's still right when everybody around you is wrong.

I get the Trump disdain. What I don't get from you is tripping over yourself to defend Hillary Clinton. You are becoming like UNHWildcats with that.

Your IQ is probably high enough to understand that just because someone never gets in trouble does not mean that they aren't doing anything wrong. If you just wanted to go by what's been thoroughly corroborated then Al Capone was a swell guy that just cheated on his taxes. Hillary has left trails of smoke behind her for her entire career and the only defense is that only some embers have really been found. Wake up. She's a career sleezebag.

What's especially funny is that how you have repeatedly preached the importance of Supreme court picks and how dangerous what you call "egalitarianism" (what I think should be called "equivilatarianism" ) is. Guess what? Hillary Clinton will put staunch pro-abortion, anti-gun judges on the bench. I have no doubt about that. And the institutionalized "egalitarianism" is going to reach a fever pitch. Hillary has gone so far as to use the term "systemic racism" (that's even farther than Obama has ever gone) and you know she's a grrl power feminazi as well.

And I dont buy into the idea that Trump is going to nuke someone because they insulted him on twitter. If insane people like the Kim Jongs can run a country and there not be a nuclear apocalypse or even a war on the South Korean peninsula you know Trump won't be a problem. He would just be an inactive president who wants to feel important and would really let all of his advisors and his vice president make the decisions.

Seriously, what has gotten into you?

I like the idea that the rest of the world might think Trump would nuke them over a Tweet.

They need to get back to knowing their place in the food chain.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[Vidav]

Trump is a crazy person. He is an imbecile. He doesn't deserve to run a PTA let alone the US.

[Ibanez]

Can someone give me the Executive Summary of the last several JSO posts? I don't want to miss any gems.

[93henfan]

Can someone give me the Executive Summary of the last several JSO posts? I don't want to miss any gems.

Trump is a crazy person. He is an imbecile. He doesn't deserve to run a PTA let alone the US.

[Ivytalk]

You've gone from Drumpf to Jill Stein? Quite a political odyssey.

I'M MAKING A STAND, DAMN IT!!!

Cute moral stand, at that. You and duncedawg: perfect together!

[SeattleGriz]

Can someone give me the Executive Summary of the last several JSO posts? I don't want to miss any gems.

Trump is a crazy person. He is an imbecile. He doesn't deserve to run a PTA let alone the US.

Can he drink an IPA though? Can we at least agree on that!?!

[CID1990]

Agreed. Not liking Trump is certainly understandable, and I'm sure there are people who don't like Trump but are begrudgingly voting for him. But to do what JSO has done and gone so 180 and to be as pro-Hillary as he's become, to ignore the obviousness of the criminal corruption that she has brazenly been directing in the past 8 years, it just destroys any credibility he could have. I'm not voting for Trump because I don't want him as a leader for this country. But I'm sure as not voting for Hillary either because she too doesn't come close to what I want to have as a leader for this country. This election has just decimated any respect anyone could have had for JSO.

I can respect not voting for either. As I said in my previous post I am not pro Hillary. I am anti Trump. If the Democrat candidate was a hamster I'd be behind the Democrat candidate right now because the Democrat candidate is the only alternative to Trump.

But I must say that I don't think there is sufficient evidence to say Hillary Clinton has been directing criminal corruption for the past 8 years. I think there's a lot more evidence for corruption on Trump's part. Criminal corruption? I don't know. But corruption? Yes. I'm not saying that there's not smoke. But, for better or worse, there's no real "smoking gun" with respect to Clinton.

With Trump there are smoking guns. You can actually see a video of him saying he personally picked instructors for Trump University then read that he later said in depositions that he did not. You can see that Texas and Florida Attorney Generals didn't charge Trump University for fraud in association with Trump giving them donations. That sort of thing. There's nothing like that with Clinton. You can't see any direct evidence of "Person A gave money to Clinton then Clinton took Action B in favor of that person."

3/4ths of what you post is in defense of Hillary

Long, drawling, expansive pablum about how she isn't corrupt, confirming the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy TM

You post pages of substance about Hillary and nothing more than "he's immature, he's crazy, he's unfit" about Trump with little substance other than your personal impression

You may not think you are, but you're as pro-Hillary as Huma Abedin


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk