Donald Trump will exaggerate to make himself look better, richer, smarter... but that is ego, and it's out in the open where everyone can see it. Hillary Clinton operates in the shadows for power, money, and influence... and doesn't care who it hurts, or kills. Ask John Christopher Stevens... oh wait, you can't, because he's dead. The list would be way too long for me continue, but you get the point. Donald Trump has never made someone die, and then lie about it to absolve themselves of responsibility. You want to point at Trump University? It's a simple case of someone claiming to be an unsatisfied customer. It's the same as going to Outback Steakhouse, eating dinner, and then sue them... claiming it's not a restaurant. If he didn't run for President, you would have never heard about any of this. All these women coming out saying "he touched me!", is only because he's running for President and it's a couple weeks before election day. If he didn't run... you wouldn't hear about it.

You really think the full extent of Trump's immoral behavior is limited to exaggeration? That seems very naive to me. Or disingenuous. You and other excited Trump supports act almost like he's literally the savior of humanity and Hillary is the devil incarnate. Unbiased moderates aren't going to buy that, for the most part. Your argument is weak because it's so obviously biased.

 

He changed positions on issues because he changed party. He used to be a Democrat... until they all turned Socialist.

What does economics have to do with going from Pro Choice to Pro Life?

Pretty sure he has flip-flopped a bit on some issues during this very campaign. (counting from the start of primaries)
 

 

 

You really think the full extent of Trump's immoral behavior is limited to exaggeration? That seems very naive to me. Or disingenuous. You and other excited Trump supports act almost like he's literally the savior of humanity and Hillary is the devil incarnate. Unbiased moderates aren't going to buy that, for the most part. Your argument is weak because it's so obviously biased. What does economics have to do with going from Pro Choice to Pro Life? Pretty sure he has flip-flopped a bit on some issues during this very campaign. (counting from the start of primaries)

The point is... Trump exaggeration has done zero damage... you just don't like his enormous ego.

 

The lies of Hillary Clinton have done a lot of damage.

 

Donald Trump is not a savior, he is merely the best chance we have ever had to clean house in Washington DC. Hillary is not the devil incarnate. That would take supernatural power. She's just a really evil person.

 

The Pro-Choice platform has enormous effect on the economy. It's firmly entrenched in every Progressive agenda for US taxpayers to fork up the cash to pay for abortion on demand. You want to murder your children? Pay for it yourself.

 

You really think the full extent of Trump's immoral behavior is limited to exaggeration? That seems very naive to me. Or disingenuous. You and other excited Trump supports act almost like he's literally the savior of humanity and Hillary is the devil incarnate. Unbiased moderates aren't going to buy that, for the most part. Your argument is weak because it's so obviously biased. What does economics have to do with going from Pro Choice to Pro Life? Pretty sure he has flip-flopped a bit on some issues during this very campaign. (counting from the start of primaries)

The point is... Trump exaggeration has done zero damage... you just don't like his enormous ego.

 

The lies of Hillary Clinton have done a lot of damage.

 

Donald Trump is not a savior, he is merely the best chance we have ever had to clean house in Washington DC. Hillary is not the devil incarnate. That would take supernatural power. She's just a really evil person.

 

The Pro-Choice platform has enormous effect on the economy. It's firmly entrenched in every Progressive agenda for US taxpayers to fork up the cash to pay for abortion on demand. You want to murder your children? Pay for it yourself

How does a marginal outlay on a small scale government service have an enormous impact on the economy?

 

Well I've finally decided I will support Hillary in the end.

Cool! Will you return to us in two years and take responsibility for that decision?

 

 

Sure. I'll return in two years and tell you that every gripe you have about what she's done (which won't be much as long as congress is republican controlled), and I'll refer you to the fact that your party was incapable of giving me a viable candidate as a alternative. I have to choose between the status quo, which is corrupt politics and bullshit, or the status quo plus an 4 year old in the oval office who wants to play the "(s)he started it!" game anytime shit hits the fan and can't control their emotions. Pretty obvious choice, we all hate it. None of us like Hillary, but your party chose that man child, and therefore she is the better option for many of us.

 

 

You really think the full extent of Trump's immoral behavior is limited to exaggeration? That seems very naive to me. Or disingenuous. You and other excited Trump supports act almost like he's literally the savior of humanity and Hillary is the devil incarnate. Unbiased moderates aren't going to buy that, for the most part. Your argument is weak because it's so obviously biased. What does economics have to do with going from Pro Choice to Pro Life? Pretty sure he has flip-flopped a bit on some issues during this very campaign. (counting from the start of primaries)

The point is... Trump exaggeration has done zero damage... you just don't like his enormous ego.

 

The lies of Hillary Clinton have done a lot of damage.

 

Donald Trump is not a savior, he is merely the best chance we have ever had to clean house in Washington DC. Hillary is not the devil incarnate. That would take supernatural power. She's just a really evil person.

 

The Pro-Choice platform has enormous effect on the economy. It's firmly entrenched in every Progressive agenda for US taxpayers to fork up the cash to pay for abortion on demand. You want to murder your children? Pay for it yourself.

 

 

Every progressive funding plan for planned parenthood and abortion that I've seen never used tax payer money to pay for abortions, including planned parenthood BEFORE it was defunded. You can keep your views on abortion to your own decisions, and they can keep it to themselves because taxpayer money was never being used.

 

 

@lystria The acorn thing was also roundly debunked...it fell victim to the same crooked lies. CNN have shown trump losing each debate and he lost ground after the first two. At the same time you predicted a Trump bounce after each. And finally, you proudly cast your caucus vote for Trump and broad cast that fact on this forum. You could have voted for someone else.

Did you really say "crooked lies"? Did you keep a straight face while typing that? I suppose you also believe Planned Parenthood doesn't sell pieces of aborted babies, and you would be personally afflicted by the repeal of Obamacare. Dear God, how many times do we have to defeat England to be free from these people?

 

I never expected a bounce... hoping to keep even was the best that could possibly happen... and I proudly supported my caucus. If they wanted Gene Simmons, I would have supported him. Any Republican is better than Hillary Clinton.

 

 

@lystria The acorn thing was also roundly debunked...it fell victim to the same crooked lies. CNN have shown trump losing each debate and he lost ground after the first two. At the same time you predicted a Trump bounce after each. And finally, you proudly cast your caucus vote for Trump and broad cast that fact on this forum. You could have voted for someone else.

Did you really say "crooked lies"? Did you keep a straight face while typing that? I suppose you also believe Planned Parenthood doesn't sell pieces of aborted babies, and you would be personally afflicted by the repeal of Obamacare. Dear God, how many times do we have to defeat England to be free from these people?

 

I never expected a bounce... hoping to keep even was the best that could possibly happen... and I proudly supported my caucus. If they wanted Gene Simmons, I would have supported him. Any Republican is better than Hillary Clinton.

 

Guess as Trump isn't a politician yet, his claims are still taken by a grain (or perhaps a truck?) of salt, while Hillary as seasoned politician is suddenly being marked as being able to shove any and all US-ENDING policies that swirl the water cooler of the GOP propaganda room into the Constitution.

 

news-flash, politicians oversell! Both sides are doing it. And either side is being a drama queen over what the other side is overselling.

Hillary has done something I've never thought to see. My state, Texas, is a swing state now.

 

I have seen literally hundreds of Hillary bumper stickers, yard signs, and even billboards throughout the metroplex as I drive. Trump, however, I can count on one hand the bumper stickers I've seen for him. The yard signs, however, are pretty common here.

 

Granted, I've seen a bunch of Clinton stuff here. I never suspected she even had a chance to win Texas. Today, however, early voting started and Texas was classified a swing state. Looking around and even talking to people today, I truly believe Hillary may win Texas. If Hillary secures California, New York (2 obvious ones) AND Texas, what chance does Trump have?

 

I'll definitely be casting my vote for Trump, but I just wanted to express my shock to Texas becoming a swing state. From some people I've talked to, it even threw some of the hardcore liberals I grew up with off as well. I don't think anyone could really see that one coming. I think this is truly a sign the Republican party is on its last breath.

Well yougov, who show better scores for Trump than other pollsters are showing Texas to be within a few percentage points. It is interesting...if the election falls on the centre line of pollsters then the error in yougov is enough to tip Texas.

 

Of course there is the big if of assuming that the average is correct, the big if of assuming such a hypothetical error would be even between state and national polling. It is not a prediction being made here, just raising a possibility.

 

But at the same time the Clinton odds in Texas are better than the Trump odds in general.

Well yougov, who show better scores for Trump than other pollsters are showing Texas to be within a few percentage points. It is interesting...if the election falls on the centre line of pollsters then the error in yougov is enough to tip Texas.

 

Of course there is the big if of assuming that the average is correct, the big if of assuming such a hypothetical error would be even between state and national polling. It is not a prediction being made here, just raising a possibility.

 

But at the same time the Clinton odds in Texas are better than the Trump odds in general.

Guess as Trump isn't a politician yet, his claims are still taken by a grain (or perhaps a truck?) of salt, while Hillary as seasoned politician is suddenly being marked as being able to shove any and all US-ENDING policies that swirl the water cooler of the GOP propaganda room into the Constitution. news-flash, politicians oversell! Both sides are doing it. And either side is being a drama queen over what the other side is overselling.

 

^ There is definitely some truth to this statement.

 

And a lot of people do take what Trump says with a grain (or truckload) of salt. Has

nothing to do with him not being a politician though. I'd say it's more

because he's made his living being a salesman and has been accused

quite a few times of misleading customers/investors among other shady

business practices. Such as hiring illegals or using illegal Chinese

steel for his buildings. When confronted with these things during the

debates he didn't deny most of it he simply said "Well I could get away

with it so I did it. You should've made it so I couldn't get away with

it, Hillary."

 

Which it is a decent counter-argument but it still

speaks to his character and as President you can get away with a lot.

He also bragged about groping women uninvited because he could get away

with it being rich and famous. And that he would go into the women's

dressing rooms at beauty pageants because he owned the pageant and used

the excuse that he was inspecting it and said, and I quote "I can sort

of get away with that kind of stuff"

 

Trump has really shot himself in the foot with all that because those audio/video records, his

responses at the debate. Those things are irrefutable because he said

it himself on tape and he hasn't claimed it was faked footage. Whereas

it is plausible that e-mails leaked about Hillary could have been faked.

It's just text and I'm not sure there's a way the authenticity can be

verified, especially not for your average person. I'd have to rely on a

third party telling me they are authentic and just have faith in them. I

really don't like to made decisions based off faith, I like facts.

 

Anyway, due to these facts it is hard to take Trump seriously and to believe he

won't be corrupt and isn't doing all this for his own interests. Even

taking him seriously I don't care for some of his positions.

 

All that being said, if Hillary's leaked e-mails do show something

extremely vile and corrupt. I may consider not voting for her. Though

like I said earlier, e-mails are just text, not hard to fake at all. It

is somewhat odd too that nothing is being leaked on the GOP side. Surely

they have some scandalous things there that could be revealed as well.

 

Lysis and some other Trump supporters might be like "Oh c'mon dude, use

common sense. You really think the e-mails might be faked or released by

Russia to influence the election?" and I can understand why they might

say that but really that seems about as plausible, if not more, than a

lot of the conspiracy theories being thrown around by the Alt-R and

Trump.

 

You think Sandy Hook could be faked and all that but not some e-mails?

 

Of course some of the e-mails do seem to be real but conspiracy theorist should know best, the best way to spread a lie is to surround it with things that are true. That way people say "well that and that was true, so that other thing must also be true"

 

So I am open to hearing more about e-mails but it will have to be pretty damn convincing and pretty damn evil. Because I am convinced Trump is a fairly large P.O.S. himself and the only reason he hasn't been corrupt in pubic office is simply because he hasn't served in public office yet. Really it's indisputable that he's a fairly large P.O.S. since he's admitted to most of it on video.

 

btw, about Media.. sure CNN and especially MSNBC are liberal and supportive of liberal agendas but I mean, there is Fox News & talk radio which are conservative and support their agenda's. And both sides bend the truth sometimes and have a tendency to gloss over bad things their side has done/is accused of.

You think Sandy Hook could be faked and all that but not some e-mails?

As far as I am aware, I don't think anyone on the IRON boards has ever claimed Sandy Hook was a hoax or false flag event. I know initially there was some confusion with news networks getting the story wrong by saying he left the AR-15 in his trunk and only used handguns. But that got cleared up rather quick. Most of the other discrepancies are either coincidental or flat out false.

 

I suppose some people got mad they demolished the school. I personally didnt like that outcome because they allowed some murderer to get credit for the taxpayer burden of spending tens of million of dollars to build a new school. I get it was a horribly tragic incident, but I wouldn't tear down my home if a murderer shot up my house and killed my children. I might one day move but I wouldn't destroy my home and then rebuild. Even if I had the money to do so, it would still be fiscally irresponsible.

 

 

Every progressive funding plan for planned parenthood and abortion that I've seen never used tax payer money to pay for abortions, including planned parenthood BEFORE it was defunded. You can keep your views on abortion to your own decisions, and they can keep it to themselves because taxpayer money was never being used.  

Planned Parenthood receives Federal funding... Federal means US Taxpayer money. Planned Parenthood is a 'private' abortion business. That's what they do. It's how they make their money. Private... just like Kentucky Fried Chicken, Walmart, and My Pillow. If you feel up a girl after sucking out her baby with a vacuum, and say "you should get that lump checked", it doesn't mean you specialize in cancer screening. Planned Parenthood are abortion mills, and Americans are being taxed to fund abortions. This is illegal, and there are professionals out there that could better use that money for the purpose Congress intended. Cut them loose.

Planned parenthood provides a lot of services and abortions account for about 3% of the visits they recieve. None of which are funded by federal money because they already weren't allowed to do so.

 

https://youtu.be/iGlLLzw5_KM

 

There's plenty pf info out there. This congressman presented blatently false facts and attempted to bull over the president of planned parenthood to make them look bad but he didn't even remove the tag from the pro life site he stole that graph from (despite saying he pulled it personally from their records which is a blatent lie). That site btw is well known to falsify the facts in order to align with their views.

 

Next fake argument please.

 

 

Planned parenthood provides a lot of services and abortions account for about 3% of the visits they recieve

Yes of course. Reception, abortion counselling, scheduling, anesthesia, arranging for a ride home, and plenty of pamphlets to read. The vacuum part is about 3% of the time involved. Planned Parenthood will survive just fine without your protection.

You are just adorable. When are the mole people attacking? Have a date yet or just a plan?

 

Every progressive funding plan for planned parenthood and abortion that I've seen never used tax payer money to pay for abortions, including planned parenthood BEFORE it was defunded. You can keep your views on abortion to your own decisions, and they can keep it to themselves because taxpayer money was never being used.

Planned Parenthood receives Federal funding... Federal means US Taxpayer money. Planned Parenthood is a 'private' abortion business. That's what they do. It's how they make their money. Private... just like Kentucky Fried Chicken, Walmart, and My Pillow. If you feel up a girl after sucking out her baby with a vacuum, and say "you should get that lump checked", it doesn't mean you specialize in cancer screening. Planned Parenthood are abortion mills, and Americans are being taxed to fund abortions. This is illegal, and there are professionals out there that could better use that money for the purpose Congress intended. Cut them loose.

True story: when I was in Graduate School I had very little income and I couldn't afford health insurance. So when I needed a gynecologist, I went to Planned Parenthood and got a sliding scale fee that I could afford. No abortion was involved, I needed healthcare and they took me. That is the majority of what P.P. does. And since then, I have made it a point to include them in my charitable giving. They are a nonprofit organization and I get a tax deduction. These are facts. You don't have to like it, but just in case someone is uneducated on the subject, I can't let your distortions and mischaracterizations about an honorable, helpful, nonprofit organization stand.

 

Edit: I also got credit in high school volunteering for Planned Parenthood. The one I was working at didn't perform abortions at all, that was a long time ago, but they did women's health services only.

Hillary has done something I've never thought to see. My state, Texas, is a swing state now.

Hillary don't do that, tRump did. Tell me something, do you actually like Donald, or is your support for him based on your hatred of Clinton? If you do like Donald, what appeals to you about him?

 

Clinton is not my fave, and I didn't vote for her in the primaries, but I am not actively frightened by her. Trump actually scares me. I fear for the world if he gets elected. I would vote for almost anyone over that man. I think a lot of people feel the way I feel about him, and that is why you see support for Clinton. My biggest fear is that her supporters will take it for granted she will win and not vote, thus giving the election to that man.

Don't get me wrong Dems... I'm on your side on the abortion issue. I also believe abortion is a legal choice, and should only be discussed and executed between a woman and her doctor... and compensation should only be discussed and arranged between a woman and her doctor. You can't say taxpayers have no say in what is done, and then send the taxpayers the bill. Planned Parenthood performs abortions... therefore should be prohibited from Federal funding.

 

 

Every progressive funding plan for planned parenthood and abortion that I've seen never used tax payer money to pay for abortions, including planned parenthood BEFORE it was defunded. You can keep your views on abortion to your own decisions, and they can keep it to themselves because taxpayer money was never being used.

Planned Parenthood receives Federal funding... Federal means US Taxpayer money. Planned Parenthood is a 'private' abortion business. That's what they do. It's how they make their money. Private... just like Kentucky Fried Chicken, Walmart, and My Pillow. If you feel up a girl after sucking out her baby with a vacuum, and say "you should get that lump checked", it doesn't mean you specialize in cancer screening. Planned Parenthood are abortion mills, and Americans are being taxed to fund abortions. This is illegal, and there are professionals out there that could better use that money for the purpose Congress intended. Cut them loose.

True story: when I was in Graduate School I had very little income and I couldn't afford health insurance. So when I needed a gynecologist, I went to Planned Parenthood and got a sliding scale fee that I could afford. No abortion was involved, I needed healthcare and they took me. That is the majority of what P.P. does. And since then, I have made it a point to include them in my charitable giving. They are a nonprofit organization and I get a tax deduction. These are facts. You don't have to like it, but just in case someone is uneducated on the subject, I can't let your distortions and mischaracterizations about an honorable, helpful, nonprofit organization stand.

Edit: I also got credit in high school volunteering for Planned Parenthood. The one I was working at didn't perform abortions at all, that was a long time ago, but they did women's health services only.

I've never been a fan of Planned Parenthood from a personal experience, despite it being the actions of one individual. When my ex wife was pregnant the first time (ended in miscarriage) we had a few complications. Our son now also did as well, but thankfully, he made it. He was premature and in the ICU for over a month, but I'm just happy he is here. Anyway, we went in after she had been having bad pains. We were low income at the time as I had just been laid off and she was discharged from the military. We went in, as the office near us offers medical treatment. The lady asked me to leave and apparently had been telling my ex wife that abortion may be our best option because a baby is a huge financial concern, we were young, she was going to sacrifice her body, and the baby wouldn't make it anyway because her body wasn't built to birth a baby. (Granted that last part has some truth. She couldn't birth my son, so they had to do a C-Section. She is pregnant by another man now and again, she needs a C-Section. Her body can't hold a baby it seems.)

I've always felt that she did PP a discredit. PP does offer ALOT of good services preventive services, but employees like her are the issue. Not the organization, but employees like her. Thankfully, I had a better spot in life when my son came around and could afford a better doctor. Of course this is my experience and opinion, and I am happy SM had a better experience.

 

As far as facts and percentages, when you take out the pregnancy tests and free condoms they give out (which they include in their 3% statistics. Im sorry, grabbing a condom for free isn't the same as recieving services.)

 

PP direct abortion services (the actual abortion itself) accounts for 12% of the clients with 327,000 procedures

 

Of course, STD testing accounts for the bulk at 4.5M, but I don't think that is included in the procedure statistics. Cancer screenings at 975,000 patients also aren't but 1.1M prenatal services (not free condoms) are included as well as adoption referrals/services (not sure on the exact number).

 

Hillary has done something I've never thought to see. My state, Texas, is a swing state now.

Hillary don't do that, tRump did. Tell me something, do you actually like Donald, or is your support for him based on your hatred of Clinton? If you do like Donald, what appeals to you about him?

Clinton is not my fave, and I didn't vote for her in the primaries, but I am not actively frightened by her. Trump actually scares me. I fear for the world if he gets elected. I would vote for almost anyone over that man. I think a lot of people feel the way I feel about him, and that is why you see support for Clinton. My biggest fear is that her supporters will take it for granted she will win and not vote, thus giving the election to that man.

I do believe we have a lot more qualified and talented individuals than both candidates presented. Trump wasn't my first republican choice.

When lined up by their views on policies (Johnson, Trump, and Clinton) I agree most with Trump, then Johnson, then Clinton in last. Strictly voting by policies that have the most interest to me (Foriegn policy. Trump is only one running now who has mentioned the RoEs. I don't believe we should accept Refugees until a better system is in place. Johnson is close to that stance but not firm.enough on it for me. I don't believe Felons should have a right to vote right out of prison. Trump is the only one taking a hard stance on that. Education wise, Trump and Johnson want to make common core a state decision, whereas Hillary wants to continue it. I feel common core was a horrible.idea and making it a state decision is closer to fixing/getting rid of it.)

Johnson I agree we should label GMOs and legalize/tax marijuana. He is against drug testing welfare, where as Trumo believes we should. I do think we should drug test welfare IF cash is involved. Healthcare and food services are a basic human necessaty and even drug addicts deserve those. Cash services? Drug test.

 

The only things I find myself agreeing with Clinton on are her stance on Global Warming and her views on Gay Marriage being legalize. (However the latter her views have changed. I'm not sure how she really feels or if she is trying to sway votes.)

Trump also has the better tax plan in my opinion.

Johnson is also against the NSA spying unlawfully on citizens. Neither Trump or Clinton to my knowledge has acknowledged that. That is a huge bonus to Johnson for me.

Lastly (and I know you will hate me for this stance.) Torture. Trump supports the use of open Torture to gather information. Don't think torture won't happen under a Clinton or Johnson presidency. It will. At least with Trump, we will know. And there will (hopefully) be some room to moderate it. Torture does have its benefits in a war. I do support it. If torturing a high ranking ISIS member to save a few hundred people is necessary, I'm for it. At the same time, I'm.not for torturing some random.joe you found looking suspicious in the streets of Baghdad. Trump wants to allow our intelligence community to torture once again.

 

I do have a few stances I agree with candidates on and several I oppose each on. Like I mentioned, I agree most with Trump. I really wished someone like Rand Paul or even Carson would've been in that spot instead. I have a lot of similar views to the first and Carson I felt was mature enough to represent us in a positive light on the world stage.

Don't get me wrong Dems... I'm on your side on the abortion issue. I also believe abortion is a legal choice, and should only be discussed and executed between a woman and her doctor... and compensation should only be discussed and arranged between a woman and her doctor. You can't say taxpayers have no say in what is done, and then send the taxpayers the bill. Planned Parenthood performs abortions... therefore should be prohibited from Federal funding.

 

They spend taxpayer dollars on women's health. They spend donated money on performing abortions when necessary, or at least that's what they have been told to do and that's what they say they do, I can see how you may be skeptical if you disagree with it to start with. Considering that our government goes to war (essentially, even though we haven't declared war in 75 years) without the approval of congress, and therefore, without the approval of the people of the United States, how can they send Taxpayers the bill? The Pentagon admitted to losing 6.5 trillion dollars recently, after having admitted to losing 2.3 trillion dollars the day before 9/11. We all know that they know where that money is going. Therefore how can they say, that taxpayers not only have no say in what is done, but no right to know what is being done, and sending them the bill? 

 

Hillary has done something I've never thought to see. My state, Texas, is a swing state now.

Hillary don't do that, tRump did. Tell me something, do you actually like Donald, or is your support for him based on your hatred of Clinton? If you do like Donald, what appeals to you about him?

 

Its ironic that I have actually seen the exact opposite in my state. Almost all of New York state has Trump signs wherever you go. I literally can count on one hand the number of Hillary signs I have seen out of people's front lawns in the past 6 months. But none of Upstate matters because whichever way NYC votes decides Presidential and State Governor elections.

 

I have really come to hate that NYC chooses how life is run for the entire rest of New York.

 

 

 

 

Hillary has done something I've never thought to see. My state, Texas, is a swing state now.

 

Hillary don't do that, tRump did. Tell me something, do you actually like Donald, or is your support for him based on your hatred of Clinton? If you do like Donald, what appeals to you about him?

 

Its ironic that I have actually seen the exact opposite in my state. Almost all of New York state has Trump signs wherever you go. I literally can count on one hand the number of Hillary signs I have seen out of people's front lawns in the past 6 months. But none of Upstate matters because whichever way NYC votes decides Presidential and State Governor elections.

 

I have really come to hate that NYC chooses how life is run for the entire rest of New York.

Pitaki was governor, but he lost NYC.

 

 

 

Hillary has done something I've never thought to see. My state, Texas, is a swing state now.

Hillary don't do that, tRump did. Tell me something, do you actually like Donald, or is your support for him based on your hatred of Clinton? If you do like Donald, what appeals to you about him?

 

Its ironic that I have actually seen the exact opposite in my state. Almost all of New York state has Trump signs wherever you go. I literally can count on one hand the number of Hillary signs I have seen out of people's front lawns in the past 6 months. But none of Upstate matters because whichever way NYC votes decides Presidential and State Governor elections.

 

I have really come to hate that NYC chooses how life is run for the entire rest of New York.

Pitaki was governor, but he lost NYC.

 

Indeed, he won 3 times. Now look at these maps, which technically don't matter because the Governor Race is by popular vote, but it does give an indication for what the regions of the state want.

 

1994: Pataki won pretty much everything but NYC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_gubernatorial_election,_1994#/media/File:NewYorkGubernatorial1994.svg

 

1998: Pataki won everything but NYC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_gubernatorial_election,_1998#/media/File:NewYorkGubernatorial1998.svg

 

2002: Once again won everything but NYC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_gubernatorial_election,_2002#/media/File:NewYorkGubernatorial2002.svg

 

Now look at this map of the 2014 Governor Election. Seems like almost all of NY wanted a Republican Governor, but yet we ended up with Cuomo. Out of 62 counties, only 16 voted for Cuomo but yet he still won. Hardly seems representative of all New Yorkers considering NYC is practically a different state. Different taxes, different laws, entirely different culture and politics.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/New_York_Governor_Election_Results_by_County%2C_2014.svg

 

 

 

 

Hillary has done something I've never thought to see. My state, Texas, is a swing state now.

Hillary don't do that, tRump did. Tell me something, do you actually like Donald, or is your support for him based on your hatred of Clinton? If you do like Donald, what appeals to you about him?

 

Its ironic that I have actually seen the exact opposite in my state. Almost all of New York state has Trump signs wherever you go. I literally can count on one hand the number of Hillary signs I have seen out of people's front lawns in the past 6 months. But none of Upstate matters because whichever way NYC votes decides Presidential and State Governor elections.

 

I have really come to hate that NYC chooses how life is run for the entire rest of New York.

Pitaki was governor, but he lost NYC.

 

Indeed, he won 3 times. Now look at these maps, which technically don't matter because the Governor Race is by popular vote, but it does give an indication for what the regions of the state want.

 

1994: Pataki won pretty much everything but NYC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_gubernatorial_election,_1994#/media/File:NewYorkGubernatorial1994.svg

 

1998: Pataki won everything but NYC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_gubernatorial_election,_1998#/media/File:NewYorkGubernatorial1998.svg

 

2002: Once again won everything but NYC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_gubernatorial_election,_2002#/media/File:NewYorkGubernatorial2002.svg

 

Now look at this map of the 2014 Governor Election. Seems like almost all of NY wanted a Republican Governor, but yet we ended up with Cuomo. Out of 62 counties, only 16 voted for Cuomo but yet he still won. Hardly seems representative of all New Yorkers considering NYC is practically a different state. Different taxes, different laws, entirely different culture and politics.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/New_York_Governor_Election_Results_by_County%2C_2014.svg

 

You think it was Gerrymandered? 

 

 

 

 

 

Hillary has done something I've never thought to see. My state, Texas, is a swing state now.

Hillary don't do that, tRump did. Tell me something, do you actually like Donald, or is your support for him based on your hatred of Clinton? If you do like Donald, what appeals to you about him?

 

Its ironic that I have actually seen the exact opposite in my state. Almost all of New York state has Trump signs wherever you go. I literally can count on one hand the number of Hillary signs I have seen out of people's front lawns in the past 6 months. But none of Upstate matters because whichever way NYC votes decides Presidential and State Governor elections.

 

I have really come to hate that NYC chooses how life is run for the entire rest of New York.

Pitaki was governor, but he lost NYC.

 

Indeed, he won 3 times. Now look at these maps, which technically don't matter because the Governor Race is by popular vote, but it does give an indication for what the regions of the state want.

 

1994: Pataki won pretty much everything but NYC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_gubernatorial_election,_1994#/media/File:NewYorkGubernatorial1994.svg

 

1998: Pataki won everything but NYC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_gubernatorial_election,_1998#/media/File:NewYorkGubernatorial1998.svg

 

2002: Once again won everything but NYC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_gubernatorial_election,_2002#/media/File:NewYorkGubernatorial2002.svg

 

Now look at this map of the 2014 Governor Election. Seems like almost all of NY wanted a Republican Governor, but yet we ended up with Cuomo. Out of 62 counties, only 16 voted for Cuomo but yet he still won. Hardly seems representative of all New Yorkers considering NYC is practically a different state. Different taxes, different laws, entirely different culture and politics.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/New_York_Governor_Election_Results_by_County%2C_2014.svg

 

You think it was Gerrymandered? 

 

No, gerrymandering can only exist in a Electoral System. Governor races are almost always done by Popular Vote. The point I am trying to make is that NYC metropolitan comprises about 64% of the state's population while 40% reside within in New York City. Yet they represent such a small fraction of New York State's land mass/sphere of influence. That incredibly tiny landmass largely decides politics effecting the entire rest of the state. Something that many Upstate New York residences are not happy about.

 

Taken from:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York