Ah, the great unwashed are so amused when they think they are mocking their betters.
New Low From Trump
- Thread starter PureX
- Start date
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
That would be Trump, Mr. Chips
1Mind1Spirit
Literal lunatic
Really?
My point is it was a guess are you saying that they have a more active role in the outcome?
The rotation of the earth and it's orbit around the sun hasn't been demonstrated?lain:
Seen the earth spinning have you?
Has anyone ever tried?
Prohibition ring a bell?
I'll leave you to your imagination on what the consequences could be for tampering with the 2nd amendment.
Single women had the right to own property before the suffrage movement,married women didn't, they were under their husbands.
Women couldn't speak at political meetings .
These things coincide with biblical principals.
Women are to be in silence, man head of woman.
Do these things ring a bell?
Like I said, "your idea of equality is biased."
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Well, he might consider getting a shower then instead of being one or expecting others to come down in one...
1Mind1Spirit
Literal lunatic
Might as well have been.
There is no chance a bunch of sissie liberals are gonna rise up and destroy anything.
No Whitehouse means we've been attacked and you can ask Japan what happened last time somebody tried that.
Wont be a chance of another 911 with Trump in, so don't even try to go there.
Okay, everyone has GOT to see this video, heeeelarious (only 1 minute) https://twitter.com/lachlan/status/785595392385687552
Polling and data analysis isn't a guess. You could say it's an educated guess of sorts, but there's more science to it than not.
Here's some help from a nice wiki sum of FiveThirtyEight's approach:
During the U.S. presidential primaries[FONT="] and
general election of 2008[FONT="], the site compiled polling data through a unique methodology derived from Silver's experience in baseball [/FONT]sabermetrics[FONT="] to "balance out the polls with comparative demographic data."[/FONT][FONT="][/FONT][4][FONT="][/FONT][FONT="] He weighted "each poll based on the pollster's historical track record, sample size, and recentness of the poll"[/FONT]
[/FONT]The result?
In the final update of his presidential forecast model at midday of November 4, 2008, Silver projected a popular vote victory by 6.1 percentage points for Barack Obama and electoral vote totals of 349 (based on a probabilistic projection) or 353 (based on fixed projections of each state).[538 11] Obama won with 365 electoral college votes. Silver's predictions matched the actual results everywhere except in Indiana and the 2nd congressional district of Nebraska, which awards an electoral vote separately from the rest of the state. His projected national popular vote differential was below the actual figure of 7.2 points.
The forecasts for the Senate proved to be correct for every race.
You don't get that from a lucky guess.
Well, yes. Yes I have. There's been an advance in technology that allows anyone interested to do that. If you haven't you really should. But you don't have to trust that technology. Science and mathematics will tell you if you know where to look. Here's a link to a really good explanation of the science from the good folks at scienceblogs.com.
To amend the Constitution? Sure. They've done it a number of times. Same process. You need, to begin with, two thirds of each half of Congress in agreement or a call for a Constitutional convention by two thirds of the state legislatures. Now even when the Republicans were all but beaten into non existence, they held onto enough seats to stop that from happening. The Democrats aren't nearly that weak. And you could't get 2/3 of Republicans to repeal the Civil Rights acts, let alone suffrage. So...
The hard right has been warning everyone the government was coming for its guns for decades. But under Democratic or Republican administrations, no one has. I still have mine and so do my neighbors. Has anyone taken yours?
I disagree, but it doesn't matter, because that's not why women were treated the way they were. Men thought they were inferior and enfeebled. That was the bias. They couldn't be trusted with the serious and weighty matters of government. This nation wasn't founded to serve as a defacto theocracy.
Even within churches, most people don't think you have that context right. That's because if you read it the way you're reading it then you have a real problem when you come to 1 Corinthians 11. But a secular state isn't a church in any event.
Here's a link to a fellow who really gets into the problem from a scriptural perspective. To him it all hinges on the usage of siago. I think you'll appreciate it, agree or not.
Several, but none of them the liberty.
I read that. I didn't read anything that actually made the case.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Might as well have been.
There is no chance a bunch of sissie liberals are gonna rise up and destroy anything.
No Whitehouse means we've been attacked and you can ask Japan what happened last time somebody tried that.
Wont be a chance of another 911 with Trump in, so don't even try to go there.
There's no chance a bunch of deluded conservatives are going to manage the same...
Pretty pointless if you're just gonna go the boring political label route...
When I see a post by TH all I can think of is Charlie Brown's teacher going Wah Wah Wahh... ..wah wah.. .. wah wah wah wah
Lets try again: Okay, everyone has GOT to see this video, heeeelarious (only 1 minute) https://twitter.com/lachlan/status/785595392385687552
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
1Mind1Spirit
Literal lunatic
I'll give yuh that it's interesting.
But it's all factored in with the number of voters going to the polls in the recent past.
Not everybody voted.
I've never seen a real time photo or video of earth from far enough out in space to prove it and neither have you.
I'm actually beginning to rethink the definition of firmament, you should too.
I reckon you've never heard of the people.
No, the hard right is fighting to stop the infringements on the 2nd amendment.
This is Liberal propaganda.
The founding Fathers were not Deists.
How many people in the churches today lived as an adult before 1920?
It is you who has the problem with Corinthians chap 14.
I don't even have to go there to know it's just watered down gender friendly lies.
All the things I quoted were in place at it's ringing.
You've literally made my case.
The "Groper and Chief" has fallen to the mid 30's in the polls - double digits behind his Democratic opponent with 28 days to go.
That's more that enough time for more videos to surface, more women to relate as to how they were victims od Trump's unwanted sexual advances, more opportunities for his outrageous comments, more examples of bizarre behavior and for more prominent Republicans to throw up their arms in disgust and head for the exits.
GOP strategists are increasingly alarmed that not only will they lose the White House (a blessing in disguise) and their Supreme Court majority, but that the Democrats are emboldened now that the Senate and even the House may be in play - as the Republican Party continues to unravel with the anti-Trump faction following Paul Ryan's example.
Last edited:
You liberals are-----:rotfl:
1Mind1Spirit
Literal lunatic
Then do pray tell what's gonna happen to our White House.
Why would you mention Satan? Only one person was identified, by Jesus, as Satan. And he has far more holdings (and control) of people, institutions, wealth and material other things, on earth, than Trump.
You make Trump sound like a smaller and milder version of a certain religious leader who was identified to be Satan and who now has an empire on earth that is his own city and who also has/print his own money and who also own prime investment in real estate and people, all over the world.
Are you saying that they both bank all their treasures on earth and therefore none in heaven?
Are you saying that the blood of Jesus have nothing to do with those two guys. I ask because your description of one and Jesus' description of the other, seen similar. Only, one is small time and the other big time.
Matthew: 6 1King James Version (KJV)
19 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
You are saying that one is not Satan. However Jesus identified the other as Satan. Yet your description of one seems very similar to the other. Are you being fair?
Fact is, one did not have an 'inquisition' where as the other had an inquisition through which he killed millions.
Your said Trump was 'given over to the idolatry of his own self'. Clearly the one who was identified as Satan, by Jesus, was eventually 'given over to the idolatry of his own self'.
However there is an obvious difference: One admit to saying things. The other clearly did things (inquisition and all).
Seems that you display open bias by focusing on 'saying' and ignoring 'doing', so as to elevate your own agenda.
You said, of Trump, 'He's a lawless, profane man who is given over to the idolatry of his own self. He loves tyranny, applauds greed, and lacks basic self-control. His heart is given over to acquisition and knee-jerk vengeance.' Clearly you are describing the one who Jesus identified to be Satan, so as to warn us.
Last edited:
You can poll on that point too, but I don't see a lot of people sitting this one out. The ratings for the first debate tell you that the nation is interested in this contest.
At any rate, they looked at the numbers, called it and got it right. You don't end up with that kind of accuracy accidentally. Nothing is infallible, but the odds are strongly in their favor, looking at the track record here.
You should check out the link and the science. Then we won't have to have a conversation about observable rotation sans time stop photography.
What is that supposed to mean? Again, it's a process. That's what it takes. No polling of our electorate supports the things you want to see done. You couldn't make the numbers to call the convention. Just not happening. Women and minorities have a political voice and vote and you couldn't repeal suffrage or the Civil Rights act even if you managed to keep them all quiet on the point.
What infringements? I'm curious about what you see as an infringement. It didn't happen when the Democrats had the numbers to pass anything they could unify on, which right there should tell you about the worry factor on the issue.
It really isn't. If you like I can produce quotes, writings from the period that illustrate it.
Some were, like Jefferson. But I don't recall saying that they were in the first place and I'm not sure why you bring it up. It's apparent that the founders weren't installing a particular religion, weren't infusing Christianity into the fabric of motto and creed.
What's the relevance of that question?
It really isn't.
Well that's one way to never change your mind about anything.
Reminds me of the old, "And Judas went out and hanged himself...go thou and do likewise." Or, context is important. So is the original tongue.
Only if you close your eyes tightly, which is always an option.
We are in the Age of mystery (i.e. the mysteries of God's kingdom of heaven). Polls are not reflective. Now, polls matters little. 'Brexit' type results are inevitable.
The old guard continue to use intellectual arguments to win win their support, in an age that is now intuitively informed. Polling is an old devise that forces a person to make an intellectual choice.
Fact is the real choice that more and more people make is based on intuition (that is not intellectually logical). These people comfortably make their intuitive choice only silently, privately and finally on election day. They are not bothered before. They do not pay attention to months of 'soap opera like' mind controlling madness which pass for media coverage and which totally distract from the real issues.
Last edited: