US Military Endorses Hillary

SweatpantsGeneral

My point, Sir Ozone is that this discussion is fucktarded. 22 "flag" (only a navy dude says that) even if true -- which I have yet to see your source -- is a very small amount of starred Officers.

It is actually against UCMJ to comment on elected officials or stump politically. We need to portray loyalty to the government even if we think it sucks.

This is a ridiculously biased poll that holds no relevance. I know thousands of Soldiers. Maybe 3 support Hillary. And they drive Subaru Outbacks.

And btw. The average enlisted Soldier (at least in the Army) has 3+ years of college. The Hicks from the sticks is a thing of the past.

Enlisted includes my SFCs, MSGs, and SGM/CSMs that had a Bachelors if not a Masters. These are smart professional fuckers that would school 99% of civilian pussies intellectually.

And. They know Hillary is a cunt.

HoustonHusky

OZONE said:

HoustonHusky said:

Wow...2 responses and both pretty dumb.

Yes, the poll was not 2-1 Trump to Hillary...it was actually more. And yes, after you bash the soldier in the military you can change your criteria and still look like a fool...the poll was something like 66% enlisted and 34% officers.

Keep slurping Hillary...

Keeping showing your ignorance of polls and math.

It was not a poll of the military, it even says so. It was a poll of subscribers of that publication. They made no effort to do proper sampling, and they don't know the ratio of enlisted men that responded because they let the respondents self identify. And again, it was done in May, before Clinton was the nominee.

In the real world, poll results like this would be thrown in the garbage while you were laughed out of the SVP's office and told to find a new job. I bet even Trump is smart enough to see the flaw in your "magazine subscriber poll" results.

So again, how many generals and flag officers have endorsed Trump? Hillary has 22.

There is a whole lot of stupid in this post...lets keep it simple:

Name the poll where people don't "self identify"...how the hell do you think polling is done? They have teams of investigators following up on each respondent? FS...

Military Times polled active duty, and if you knew any (as someone else here pointed out) you'd realize its true.

And you can pick your poll...the scientific NBC one that came out last week had Trump double digits over Hillary (51-41) in military families...etc. Its all the same result, no matter how much your minimum wage Hillary supporters group is paying you to say otherwise.

Keep slurping Hillary...

TierbsHsotBoobs

HoustonHusky said:

OZONE said:

HoustonHusky said:

Wow...2 responses and both pretty dumb.

Yes, the poll was not 2-1 Trump to Hillary...it was actually more. And yes, after you bash the soldier in the military you can change your criteria and still look like a fool...the poll was something like 66% enlisted and 34% officers.

Keep slurping Hillary...

Keeping showing your ignorance of polls and math.

It was not a poll of the military, it even says so. It was a poll of subscribers of that publication. They made no effort to do proper sampling, and they don't know the ratio of enlisted men that responded because they let the respondents self identify. And again, it was done in May, before Clinton was the nominee.

In the real world, poll results like this would be thrown in the garbage while you were laughed out of the SVP's office and told to find a new job. I bet even Trump is smart enough to see the flaw in your "magazine subscriber poll" results.

So again, how many generals and flag officers have endorsed Trump? Hillary has 22.

There is a whole lot of stupid in this post...lets keep it simple:

Name the poll where people don't "self identify"...how the hell do you think polling is done? They have teams of investigators following up on each respondent? FS...

Military Times polled active duty, and if you knew any (as someone else here pointed out) you'd realize its true.

And you can pick your poll...the scientific NBC one that came out last week had Trump double digits over Hillary (51-41) in military families...etc. Its all the same result, no matter how much your minimum wage Hillary supporters group is paying you to say otherwise.

Keep slurping Hillary...

Chincredible for using legitimate data.

DerekJohnson

HoustonHusky said:

Rich Alexis?

RaceBannon

ETOS

OZONE

koopdog said:

This is a ridiculously biased poll that holds no relevance.

That is my point. No idea why Houston keeps trying to prop up his magazine poll as evidence of anything. The methodology is shit.

OZONE

HoustonHusky said:

OZONE said:

HoustonHusky said:

Wow...2 responses and both pretty dumb.

Yes, the poll was not 2-1 Trump to Hillary...it was actually more. And yes, after you bash the soldier in the military you can change your criteria and still look like a fool...the poll was something like 66% enlisted and 34% officers.

Keep slurping Hillary...

Keeping showing your ignorance of polls and math.

It was not a poll of the military, it even says so. It was a poll of subscribers of that publication. They made no effort to do proper sampling, and they don't know the ratio of enlisted men that responded because they let the respondents self identify. And again, it was done in May, before Clinton was the nominee.

In the real world, poll results like this would be thrown in the garbage while you were laughed out of the SVP's office and told to find a new job. I bet even Trump is smart enough to see the flaw in your "magazine subscriber poll" results.

So again, how many generals and flag officers have endorsed Trump? Hillary has 22.

lets keep it simple:

Please do. I've asked at least 3 times to list how many generals and flag officers have endorsed Trump. 22 have endorsed Clinton.

Your poll of magazine subscribers is shit.

TurdBomber

OZONE said:

HoustonHusky said:

OZONE said:

HoustonHusky said:

Wow...2 responses and both pretty dumb.

Yes, the poll was not 2-1 Trump to Hillary...it was actually more. And yes, after you bash the soldier in the military you can change your criteria and still look like a fool...the poll was something like 66% enlisted and 34% officers.

Keep slurping Hillary...

Keeping showing your ignorance of polls and math.

It was not a poll of the military, it even says so. It was a poll of subscribers of that publication. They made no effort to do proper sampling, and they don't know the ratio of enlisted men that responded because they let the respondents self identify. And again, it was done in May, before Clinton was the nominee.

In the real world, poll results like this would be thrown in the garbage while you were laughed out of the SVP's office and told to find a new job. I bet even Trump is smart enough to see the flaw in your "magazine subscriber poll" results.

So again, how many generals and flag officers have endorsed Trump? Hillary has 22.

lets keep it simple:

Please do. I've asked at least 3 times to list how many generals and flag officers have endorsed Trump. 22 have endorsed Clinton.

Your poll of magazine subscribers is shit.

P-p-p-p-r-r-r-r-e-e-e-e-s-s-s-s-s-s-i-i-i-n-n-n-n-g-g-g!!!
Goddamn.

Sledog

OZONE said:

koopdog said:

This is a ridiculously biased poll that holds no relevance.

That is my point. No idea why Houston keeps trying to prop up his magazine poll as evidence of anything. The methodology is shit.

Only the twisted BS you spout is correct. Anything anyone else puts up is wrong. Face it you're wrong.

DeepSeaZ

koopdog said:

OZONE said:

HoustonHusky said:

OZONEfs reaching HondoFS levels...over 80% of the military is enlisted.

Do you even understand the difference between the enlisted ranks and the officer ranks?

I do. You want to pick this fight? I apologize ahead of time to your children

Koop I'm thinking it is time for us to pick the fight. It's us and our brothers and sisters who chose to serve this country who are put in harms way by fucktards who have become numb to the consequences. And who benefits? Not our country. Not our families. What the fuck are we doing? I feel like a cheap mercenary. The shit we do needs to matter for our children. For their children. This country needs another revolution to get back to its roots. Hillary and Trump? Two different sides of evil. Fuck them!

Swaye

DeepSeaZ said:

koopdog said:

OZONE said:

HoustonHusky said:

OZONEfs reaching HondoFS levels...over 80% of the military is enlisted.

Do you even understand the difference between the enlisted ranks and the officer ranks?

I do. You want to pick this fight? I apologize ahead of time to your children

Koop I'm thinking it is time for us to pick the fight. It's us and our brothers and sisters who chose to serve this country who are put in harms way by fucktards who have become numb to the consequences. And who benefits? Not our country. Not our families. What the fuck are we doing? I feel like a cheap mercenary. The shit we do needs to matter for our children. For their children. This country needs another revolution to get back to its roots. Hillary and Trump? Two different sides of evil. Fuck them!