The Establishments war on Donald Trump
See other The Establishments war on Donald Trump Articles
Title: 'Out of Our Polls Trump': Topless Women Escorted Out of Manhattan Polling Station
Source:
NBC 4 New York
URL Source: http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/loca ... Polling-Station-400391281.html
Published: Nov 8, 2016
Author: By Lisa Fernandez and Mark Matthews
Post Date: 2016-11-08 11:17:42 by misterwhite
Keywords: None
Views: 6248
Comments: 38
Two women, naked from the waist up, burst into a midtown Manhattan polling station early Tuesday, shouting: “Out of our polls Trump, out of our polls Trump!” The women were soon escorted out of the basement of P.S. 59 at 233 E. 56th Street, where Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is expected to vote later. The women wore jeans but no tops. One had the word “Trump” near her collarbone and the words “Grab your balls” scrawled on her belly. Police charged the two with electioneering (an activity prohibited under New York law that includes wearing badges and signs supporting a candidate to a polling place) and booked them at a local precinct. The poll workers took the ruckus in stride, barely looking up at the chanting. Other voters turned around from their white booths, trying to see what was going on. Despite the commotion, the mood in the gymnasium remained mostly calm. Their identities were not immediately known. It's not clear if they will face charges.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
Video at the link. The best part is the guy in the hallway at the very end of the video who captures the moment with a sheepish grin.
Let's hope they never reproduce.
They don't look like the breeding type ... if you know what I mean.
WTF does that even mean? A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. I hope you are enjoying the results.... Florida, Ohio and NC... TRUMP!!!!! Say it, bitch. President TRUMP. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
What were you saying about the polls the other day?
Can you imagine how terrible CF's hangover will be?
I have no idea. I'm still trying to figure out this guy:
Say it, bitch. President TRUMP. I already said Trump was preferable to Hitlery, bitch. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. That they had incentives to get it right. Do you think the election results indicate otherwise? A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Given that they were so badly wrong, their alleged "incentives" apparently weren't sufficient for them to get correct results. And isn't it odd how their incorrect results favored Hillary? Better luck in four years.
Who ever said incentives always led to success? Not me. My luck was just fine, thanks: libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=47706, "If your state's in play, vote Trump (hold your nose if it helps) - if not, consider the Constitution Party" A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. The "incentives" led to massive across-the-board failure? Fascinating. Oh, and your candidate Darrell Castle's "luck" wasn't "just fine."
If this was simply a mistake you'd think that, statistically, half the time the polls would have favored Trump. Go figure. Last night, ABC was discussing these polling errors and how they and everyone else got it so horribly wrong. (One of the conclusions was that the Trump voters lied to them.) Anyways, the funniest line of the night was from Stephanopoulos when he followed that segment with a report that a majority of people really didn't want a wall on our southern border ... according to an ABC exit poll. You can't make this shit up.
The Cleveland Browns have clear incentives to win - but don't. I'm sure he didn't run to win, and I didn't vote for him with the idea he'd win. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. I'd be embarrassed to call myself tooconservative too. After all your wrong predictions.
That an error is systematic doesn't imply that it's intentional. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. The Cleveland Browns aren't all of the teams. Logic fail.
Sure it does. Something done systematically is done intentionally. Moot point. I never said that. I said that a mistake in the polls, statistically, would favor Trump half the time and not favor Trump half the time. Almost all the polls did not favor Trump. Meaning it wasn't a mistake.
Irrelevant to the noncontradiction between having an incentive and failing. You lose, again. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Sure it does. Something done systematically is done intentionally. Wrong as usual: "Systematic error is a series of errors in accuracy that are consistent in a certain direction, while random errors are those which are caused by random and unpredictable variation in an experiment. Generally, systematic error is introduced by a problem that is consistent through an entire experiment." - https://www.reference.com/science/difference-between-systematic-random-error-3bacc365403fb210 Only if you define "mistake" so as to exclude systematic errors - but then, you are a fan of using your own personal daffynitions. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Bzzzzt. You lose, again.
Such as bias and dishonesty. You lose, again.
Such as bias and dishonesty. It's your contention that bias and dishonesty are the only sources of systematic error? A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Nope. I'm still waiting for you to describe your mysterious and undefined "source of systematic error." [crickets]
Here's an obvious possibility: a negative correlation between supporting Trump and being willing to pick up the phone when a pollster calls. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. A self-serving hypothetical invented out of thin air with NO support, as opposed to massive and widespread oversampling of registered Democrats across multiple polls. Try again.
All that's required to support my statement (as opposed to any straw men you may wish to battle): "That an error is systematic doesn't imply that it's intentional." Is this what you're babbling about? "In our survey, registered Democrats were much likelier to respond than Republicans. Registered Democrats had an eight-point registration advantage in our unweighted sample, even though it was representative by other measures. "Mrs. Clinton would have actually led in The Upshot’s survey if it, like most others, didn’t weight by party registration." (emphasis added) - www.nytimes.com/interacti.../upshot/florida-poll.html A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Keep going: "One possibility is that the public polls are understating Mr. Trump’s support because registered Republicans aren’t answering the telephone... (So that's where you stole your argument.) But based on my reporting, this is probably not what’s going on. Private pollsters are conducting surveys using similar methods, and they’re not seeing this. And after all, our poll found that registered Republicans were extremely likely to indicate their support for Mr. Trump — not exactly the shy Trump voter." I almost feel sorry for you.
I had pollsters calling my house 3-4 times per day and we never did give them the time of day, what they don't know will hurt them.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
'James Lee of Susquehanna Polling & Research Inc. said his firm combined live- interview and automated-dialer calls, and Trump did better when voters were sharing their voting intention with a recorded voice rather than a live one. 'Women who voted for Trump might have been especially reluctant to tell pollsters, said David Paleologos of Suffolk University. The USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll [the guys who had Trump in the lead - CF] corroborated that: “Women who said they backed Trump were particularly less likely to say they would be comfortable talking to a pollster about their vote.”' - libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? ArtNum=48598 A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Sorry, Roscoe says you don't exist. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Thanks for the pointless non sequitur.
ConservingFreedom says he would love to spend the rest of his life sniffing Hillary's crotch.
Push polls?
Have a hankie. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. pointless non sequitur [crickets]
They were automated ones wanting a few minutes of time to answer questions, once the automation came on I just hung up.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
#2. To: misterwhite (#1)
#3. To: Roscoe (#2)
"Let's hope they never reproduce."
#4. To: misterwhite (#1)
'Out of Our Polls Trump'
#5. To: ConservingFreedom (#4)
#6. To: ConservingFreedom (#4)
#7. To: GrandIsland (#5)
TRUMP!!!!!
#8. To: ConservingFreedom (#4)
'Out of Our Polls Trump'
WTF does that even mean?
#9. To: GrandIsland (#5)
I hope you are enjoying the results.... Florida, Ohio and NC... TRUMP!!!!!
#10. To: Roscoe (#6)
What were you saying about the polls the other day?
#11. To: ConservingFreedom (#10)
That they had incentives to get it right.
#12. To: Roscoe (#11)
Given that they were so badly wrong, their alleged "incentives" apparently weren't sufficient for them to get correct results.
Better luck in four years.
#13. To: ConservingFreedom (#12)
Who ever said incentives always led to success?
#14. To: Roscoe (#11)
"And isn't it odd how their incorrect results favored Hillary?"
#15. To: Roscoe (#13)
The "incentives" led to massive across-the-board failure? Fascinating.
Oh, and your candidate Darrell Castle's "luck" wasn't "just fine."
#16. To: ConservingFreedom, AKA tooconservative (#15)
I'm sure he didn't run to win, and I didn't vote for him with the idea he'd win.
#17. To: misterwhite (#14)
If this was simply a mistake you'd think that, statistically, half the time the polls would have favored Trump.
#18. To: ConservingFreedom (#15)
#19. To: ConservingFreedom (#17)
"That an error is systematic doesn't imply that it's intentional."
#20. To: Roscoe (#18)
The Cleveland Browns aren't all of the teams.
#21. To: misterwhite (#19)
"That an error is systematic doesn't imply that it's intentional."
I said that a mistake in the polls, statistically, would favor Trump half the time
#22. To: ConservingFreedom (#20)
Irrelevant
#23. To: ConservingFreedom (#21)
Generally, systematic error is introduced by a problem that is consistent through an entire experiment.
#24. To: Roscoe (#23)
"Generally, systematic error is introduced by a problem that is consistent through an entire experiment."
#25. To: ConservingFreedom (#24)
It's your contention that bias and dishonesty are the only sources of systematic error?
#26. To: Roscoe (#25)
I'm still waiting for you to describe your mysterious and undefined "source of systematic error."
#27. To: ConservingFreedom (#26)
a negative correlation between supporting Trump and being willing to pick up the phone when a pollster calls.
#28. To: Roscoe (#27)
hypothetical
massive and widespread oversampling of registered Democrats across multiple polls.
#29. To: ConservingFreedom (#28)
"In our survey, registered Democrats were much likelier to respond than Republicans. Registered Democrats had an eight-point registration advantage in our unweighted sample, even though it was representative by other measures."
#30. To: Roscoe (#29)
#31. To: Roscoe (#29)
#32. To: CZ82 (#30)
I had pollsters calling my house 3-4 times per day and we never did give them the time of day
#33. To: ConservingFreedom (#31)
Trump did better when voters were sharing their voting intention with a recorded voice rather than a live one.
#34. To: ConservingFreedom (#32)
(Edited)
#35. To: CZ82 (#30)
#36. To: Roscoe (#33)
pointless non sequitur
#37. To: ConservingFreedom (#36)
#38. To: Roscoe (#35)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]