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

John Oliver Demolishes Serial Liar Donald Trump, Launches Campaign To #MakeDonaldDrumpfAgain

2

Comments

  • Alexis
    Alexis Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 3,393 Founders Club

    Low energy thread. It's a disgrace.

    image

    Is there anything Race Bannon can't do?
  • OZONE
    OZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    OZONE said:


    I swear it's not that difficult. The amount of stupid people we have in the media and politics is absolutely amazing.

    Which is what is so funny about Drumpf. He is the dumbest of them all, yet he is the favorite of the Republicans.
    Because of people like you
    Actually, it is because your fucking party can't find any better candidate. Which is funny as fuck.
    Says the guy whose choices are a 80 year old Communist and a hardened criminal living off her husband's fame.
    Is trying to change the subject the best argument you have?

    Weak sauce.
  • sarktastic
    sarktastic Member Posts: 9,208
    OZONE said:

    OZONE said:


    I swear it's not that difficult. The amount of stupid people we have in the media and politics is absolutely amazing.

    Which is what is so funny about Drumpf. He is the dumbest of them all, yet he is the favorite of the Republicans.
    Because of people like you
    Actually, it is because your fucking party can't find any better candidate. Which is funny as fuck.
    I'm hearing that if the GOP nominates Trump... it will set the party back twenty years... maybe more.

    What's the issue?
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    OZONE said:

    OZONE said:


    I swear it's not that difficult. The amount of stupid people we have in the media and politics is absolutely amazing.

    Which is what is so funny about Drumpf. He is the dumbest of them all, yet he is the favorite of the Republicans.
    Because of people like you
    Actually, it is because your fucking party can't find any better candidate. Which is funny as fuck.
    Derek, can we have a HH super Friday event?
    It's odd that those who are afraid of communists are the same people that want a Friday sacrifice of those with differing view points.
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    2001400ex said:

    OZONE said:

    OZONE said:


    I swear it's not that difficult. The amount of stupid people we have in the media and politics is absolutely amazing.

    Which is what is so funny about Drumpf. He is the dumbest of them all, yet he is the favorite of the Republicans.
    Because of people like you
    Actually, it is because your fucking party can't find any better candidate. Which is funny as fuck.
    Derek, can we have a HH super Friday event?
    It's odd that those who are afraid of communists are the same people that want a Friday sacrifice of those with differing view points.
    Isn't that how the liberal left has operated for the last 20 years? I'm not allowed to do it though?
    The liberal left embraces communism, which makes them not hypocrites.

    HTH
  • sarktastic
    sarktastic Member Posts: 9,208
    what does it make you?
  • OZONE
    OZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    "Trump is still doing poorly among college educated voters"
  • sarktastic
    sarktastic Member Posts: 9,208
    Is that what your news source is programming you with?
  • OZONE
    OZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    edited March 2016

    Is that what your news source is programming you with?

    No. But thanks for asking.

    "The only candidate with higher negatives than Clinton, is Trump."

    -- Fox News

    Sounds more like your news source, than mine.
  • sarktastic
    sarktastic Member Posts: 9,208
    Fox isn't news
  • GrundleStiltzkin
    GrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,516 Standard Supporter
    I get mine from AllNaturals
  • PurpleJ
    PurpleJ Member Posts: 37,643 Founders Club
    I get my news from Gay Star News.
  • OZONE
    OZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    edited March 2016

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

  • PurpleJ
    PurpleJ Member Posts: 37,643 Founders Club
    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
  • OZONE
    OZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
  • pawz
    pawz Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 22,470 Founders Club
    OZONE said:

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
    I know how you love irony. But you do know the exact same is being said about Hills and her party?

    The difference being that people are coming out in droves to vote Trump.

    Hope this helps.
  • OZONE
    OZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    edited March 2016
    pawz said:

    OZONE said:

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
    I know how you love irony. But you do know the exact same is being said about Hills

    It is being said about Hills, not her party. The important difference is that Trump's negatives are higher than even Hillary's are.
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    pawz said:

    OZONE said:

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
    I know how you love irony. But you do know the exact same is being said about Hills and her party?

    The difference being that people are coming out in droves to vote Trump.

    Hope this helps.
    Do you have awareness of open primaries? I'd look into it and look into Trump's record in closed primaries.
  • pawz
    pawz Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 22,470 Founders Club
    2001400ex said:

    pawz said:

    OZONE said:

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
    I know how you love irony. But you do know the exact same is being said about Hills and her party?

    The difference being that people are coming out in droves to vote Trump.

    Hope this helps.
    Do you have awareness of open primaries? I'd look into it and look into Trump's record in closed primaries.
    You don't possess awareness, therefore your poont is mute.
  • pawz
    pawz Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 22,470 Founders Club
    OZONE said:

    pawz said:

    OZONE said:

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
    I know how you love irony. But you do know the exact same is being said about Hills

    It is being said about Hills, not her party. The important difference is that Trump's negatives are higher than even Hillary's are.
    The people I know saying it have voted D for a long time. HondaFS isn't one of them. Hope this helps.
  • OZONE
    OZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    pawz said:

    OZONE said:

    pawz said:

    OZONE said:

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
    I know how you love irony. But you do know the exact same is being said about Hills

    It is being said about Hills, not her party. The important difference is that Trump's negatives are higher than even Hillary's are.
    The people I know saying it have voted D for a long time. HondaFS isn't one of them. Hope this helps.
    Turn on any news channel, where you will see every major news outlet saying it as well.

    HTH back at you.
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    pawz said:

    2001400ex said:

    pawz said:

    OZONE said:

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
    I know how you love irony. But you do know the exact same is being said about Hills and her party?

    The difference being that people are coming out in droves to vote Trump.

    Hope this helps.
    Do you have awareness of open primaries? I'd look into it and look into Trump's record in closed primaries.
    You don't possess awareness, therefore your poont is mute.
    Yeah, why would you get educated on a topic you are arguing?
  • pawz
    pawz Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 22,470 Founders Club
    2001400ex said:

    pawz said:

    2001400ex said:

    pawz said:

    OZONE said:

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
    I know how you love irony. But you do know the exact same is being said about Hills and her party?

    The difference being that people are coming out in droves to vote Trump.

    Hope this helps.
    Do you have awareness of open primaries? I'd look into it and look into Trump's record in closed primaries.
    You don't possess awareness, therefore your poont is mute.
    Yeah, why would you get educated on a topic you are arguing?
    Relative to you, I have all that I need. Trust me that's not a high bar.
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    pawz said:

    2001400ex said:

    pawz said:

    2001400ex said:

    pawz said:

    OZONE said:

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
    I know how you love irony. But you do know the exact same is being said about Hills and her party?

    The difference being that people are coming out in droves to vote Trump.

    Hope this helps.
    Do you have awareness of open primaries? I'd look into it and look into Trump's record in closed primaries.
    You don't possess awareness, therefore your poont is mute.
    Yeah, why would you get educated on a topic you are arguing?
    Relative to you, I have all that I need. Trust me that's not a high bar.
    That's all your come back is? Come on, come with something better. Anything. Cause your response to me calling you stupid was "oh yeah, you are more stupid".
  • pawz
    pawz Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 22,470 Founders Club
    2001400ex said:

    pawz said:

    2001400ex said:

    pawz said:

    2001400ex said:

    pawz said:

    OZONE said:

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
    I know how you love irony. But you do know the exact same is being said about Hills and her party?

    The difference being that people are coming out in droves to vote Trump.

    Hope this helps.
    Do you have awareness of open primaries? I'd look into it and look into Trump's record in closed primaries.
    You don't possess awareness, therefore your poont is mute.
    Yeah, why would you get educated on a topic you are arguing?
    Relative to you, I have all that I need. Trust me that's not a high bar.
    That's all your come back is? Come on, come with something better. Anything. Cause your response to me calling you stupid was "oh yeah, you are more stupid".
    image
  • PurpleJ
    PurpleJ Member Posts: 37,643 Founders Club
    OZONE said:

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
    Sounds like a stat that a loser would point to if things weren't going their way.
  • allpurpleallgold
    allpurpleallgold Member Posts: 8,771
    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
    Sounds like a stat that a loser would point to if things weren't going their way.
    I've used the unfavorable stats against Hillary to defend Bernie so I can confirm this is true.
  • doogsinparadise
    doogsinparadise Member Posts: 9,320

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    PurpleJ said:

    OZONE said:

    Fox isn't news

    Do you have any source that refutes the fact that Trump has the highest negatives of any of the leading candidates out there?

    The fuck are negatives? The only thing that counts is whether you win or not.
    Negatives are measures used by predictive analytics professionals in their effort to look at a likely outcome for an election.

    The fact that so many registered Republicans have said they will not for Trump if he gets the nomination, is an example of why this particular measure of negatives is so interesting to political prognosticators, from both sides of the political news spectrum.

    HTH
    Sounds like a stat that a loser would point to if things weren't going their way.
    I've used the unfavorable stats against Hillary to defend Bernie so I can confirm this is true.
    Thing is that unfavorables are usually only important in the general, so you may still be right.