Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

US Military Endorses Hillary

2

Comments

  • HoustonHuskyHoustonHusky Member Posts: 5,993
    OZONEfs reaching HondoFS levels...over 80% of the military is enlisted.

  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 34,416 Standard Supporter
    OZONE said:

    Polls show the military prefer Trump to Hillary 2-1
    http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/election/2016/05/09/military-times-survey-donald-trump-beats-hillary-clinton/84132402/

    Considering 2 Retired Generals were among the group he picked his VP from (and not the procurement administrative "generals" and former Dem House candidates like Hillary seems to prefer) I think he does just fine with the military.

    And it is yet again funny how defensive you are over Hillary considering you claim not to be slurping her up and down...

    1st, that poll was from May, before Hillary became the nominee. 2nd, your math sucks, it wasn't 2-1. 3rd, it wasn't a poll of "the military", it was a poll of enlisted men. We already know that uneducated white men like Trump.

    Again, 22 generals and flag officers have endorsed Hillary. How many have endorsed Trump?

    Next.
    Facts don't matter to 0zone. The military doesn't want the person that left men under attack to die commanding them. Get it? No you won't it's not in Saul's book.
  • OZONEOZONE Member Posts: 2,510

    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?
  • OZONEOZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    Sledog said:

    OZONE said:

    Polls show the military prefer Trump to Hillary 2-1
    http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/election/2016/05/09/military-times-survey-donald-trump-beats-hillary-clinton/84132402/

    Considering 2 Retired Generals were among the group he picked his VP from (and not the procurement administrative "generals" and former Dem House candidates like Hillary seems to prefer) I think he does just fine with the military.

    And it is yet again funny how defensive you are over Hillary considering you claim not to be slurping her up and down...

    1st, that poll was from May, before Hillary became the nominee. 2nd, your math sucks, it wasn't 2-1. 3rd, it wasn't a poll of "the military", it was a poll of enlisted men. We already know that uneducated white men like Trump.

    Again, 22 generals and flag officers have endorsed Hillary. How many have endorsed Trump?

    Next.
    Facts don't matter to 0zone. The military doesn't want the person that left men under attack to die commanding them. Get it? No you won't it's not in Saul's book.
    Why can't you just answer the question? 22 generals and flag officers have endorsed Clinton. How many have endorsed Trump?
  • HoustonHuskyHoustonHusky Member Posts: 5,993
    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...
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,886

    OZONE said:

    Polls show the military prefer Trump to Hillary 2-1
    http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/election/2016/05/09/military-times-survey-donald-trump-beats-hillary-clinton/84132402/

    Considering 2 Retired Generals were among the group he picked his VP from (and not the procurement administrative "generals" and former Dem House candidates like Hillary seems to prefer) I think he does just fine with the military.

    And it is yet again funny how defensive you are over Hillary considering you claim not to be slurping her up and down...

    1st, that poll was from May, before Hillary became the nominee. 2nd, your math sucks, it wasn't 2-1. 3rd, it wasn't a poll of "the military", it was a poll of enlisted men. We already know that uneducated white men like Trump.

    Again, 22 generals and flag officers have endorsed Hillary. How many have endorsed Trump?

    Next.
    I never bash the troops.
    And I'll never bash a Kid for taking a Ft Bragg education.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 34,416 Standard Supporter
    OZONE said:

    Sledog said:

    OZONE said:

    Polls show the military prefer Trump to Hillary 2-1
    http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/election/2016/05/09/military-times-survey-donald-trump-beats-hillary-clinton/84132402/

    Considering 2 Retired Generals were among the group he picked his VP from (and not the procurement administrative "generals" and former Dem House candidates like Hillary seems to prefer) I think he does just fine with the military.

    And it is yet again funny how defensive you are over Hillary considering you claim not to be slurping her up and down...

    1st, that poll was from May, before Hillary became the nominee. 2nd, your math sucks, it wasn't 2-1. 3rd, it wasn't a poll of "the military", it was a poll of enlisted men. We already know that uneducated white men like Trump.

    Again, 22 generals and flag officers have endorsed Hillary. How many have endorsed Trump?

    Next.
    Facts don't matter to 0zone. The military doesn't want the person that left men under attack to die commanding them. Get it? No you won't it's not in Saul's book.
    Why can't you just answer the question? 22 generals and flag officers have endorsed Clinton. How many have endorsed Trump?
    0zone is a Soros paid troll.
  • OZONEOZONE Member Posts: 2,510

    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.
  • SweatpantsGeneralSweatpantsGeneral Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 2,138 Swaye's Wigwam
    OZONE 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
  • OZONEOZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    koopdog said:

    OZONE 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
    What fight are you looking for? I'm schooling Houston on how polls work and why you can't say that a poll of some magazine subscribers, that doesn't know the true sampling of enlisted men and officers, that was done in May, is not a poll that anybody would pay attention to.

    And I've asked him to answer the question of how many generals and flag officers have endorsed Trump, compared to Clinton's 22.

    Your point?
  • SweatpantsGeneralSweatpantsGeneral Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 2,138 Swaye's Wigwam
    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.
  • HoustonHuskyHoustonHusky Member Posts: 5,993
    OZONE 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...

    image
  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680

    OZONE 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...

    image
    Chincredible for using legitimate data.
  • AtomicPissAtomicPiss Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 64,474 Founders Club
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 107,539 Founders Club
  • OZONEOZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    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.
  • OZONEOZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    edited August 2016

    OZONE 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.
  • TurdBomberTurdBomber Member Posts: 19,986 Standard Supporter
    edited August 2016
    OZONE said:

    OZONE 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.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 34,416 Standard Supporter
    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.
  • DeepSeaZDeepSeaZ Member Posts: 3,901
    koopdog said:

    OZONE 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!
Sign In or Register to comment.