Tingles the Clown has similar issues with regard to voter fraud:

Chris Matthews, the liberal MSNBC host who comes from Pennsylvania, vehemently opposes requiring ID at polling places. But he agrees that voter fraud is a Philadelphia tradition.

In 2011, on his show Hardball, he explained a common scheme:
"People call up, see if you voted or you’re not going to vote. Then all of a sudden somebody does come and vote for you. This is an old strategy in big-city politics. . . . I know all about it in North Philly — it’s what went on, and I believe it still goes on."

Media Are Flat Wrong to Dismisses Voter-Fraud Concerns
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/...delphia-pennsylvania

quote:

Originally posted by stormwalker:
Trump in Youngstown

It was another very strong message from Trump. If there were a way to get all of America to hear just one of his rally speeches in its entirety, the election would be over that day. He's very good in front of a microphone and doesn't use a prompter.

Trump raised $80 mil last month, and has not put out a single ad. Not one. Hillary is a target-rich environment, and my guess is that he is holding fire, holding, and waiting to "see the whites of their eyes."

Come September, the barrage will open.

That is my guess.

quote:

Originally posted by justjoe:
Trump raised $80 mil last month, and has not put out a single ad. Not one. Hillary is a target-rich environment, and my guess is that he is holding fire, holding, and waiting to "see the whites of their eyes."

Come September, the barrage will open.

That is my guess.

I'm looking forward to that barrage, cause I gotta tell ya', I'm getting sick of seeing just Hillary ads.

And I hope it's just as brutal as this when Trump finally yells "now" and hits her with ads backed by the full force of the truth.

Could always hope that the Hildabeast is hospitalized with a serious issue forcing the demonrats to hoist someone else. Trump could then unload his war chest to deflate whatever jackwad they offer.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by justjoe:
Trump raised $80 mil last month, and has not put out a single ad. Not one. Hillary is a target-rich environment, and my guess is that he is holding fire, holding, and waiting to "see the whites of their eyes."

Come September, the barrage will open.

That is my guess.

I'm looking forward to that barrage, cause I gotta tell ya', I'm getting sick of seeing just Hillary ads.

And I hope it's just as brutal as this when Trump finally yells "now" and hits her with ads backed by the full force of the truth.

There won't be many national spots by either campaign. Nearly all political spots are local region ads. In states where the outcome is obvious, neither side will waste money advertising. In states where one side is behind but there's a small chance of turning the outcome, they'll allocate money to ads but the one ahead won't spend much at all. In battleground states, where it could go either way, both sides will advertise heavily.

In Utah, you won't see many Trump ads (if any.) Money must be spent elsewhere. Hitlery will spend there but not as much as other states where she has a better chance of winning. In states like PA, OH, VA, NC, FL, etc., both sides will flood the airwaves starting about September 15th (Hitlery already has been running ads nonstop.)

quote:

Originally posted by Mainframe Coder:

In Utah, you won't see many Trump ads (if any.) Money must be spent elsewhere. Hitlery will spend there but not as much as other states where she has a better chance of winning. In states like PA, OH, VA, NC, FL, etc., both sides will flood the airwaves starting about September 15th (Hitlery already has been running ads nonstop.)

I happen to be on the east coast at moment, and on the ship we get the local Philadelphia channels. The local news networks are pounding Trump every evening with negative news coverage, and then when they break for commercial, it's nothing but Hillary ads. If he's really interested in PA, he might think about getting into the game.

i am seeing hillary ads in Kansas of all places. our whopping 6 electorals that still voted the republican platform to someone who bankrupted KS.

I think we will see the ads later as suspected, possibly in line with a few timely wikileaks releases.

quote:

Originally posted by Mainframe Coder: In states where the outcome is obvious, neither side will waste money advertising.

I understand why they do it, but it's really a shame that so much of the country is ignored in the current process. Minnesota is always written off by the Republicans. Historically, they may be right, but the margins are not huge. Last election, Obama beat Romney here by 5% (200k votes). Obviously a significant number, but hardly overwhelming. For the past 40 years, Republicans have not even tried to win here. It's not surprising that they lose.

It's a little sad that our choice of nominees is often determined by a few thousand people in a couple of small states in February and the general is now down to a handful of counties in a handful of states. Forty five percent on each side trying to convince six percent to help them screw over the other 49. Yuck.

quote:

it's really a shame that so much of the country is ignored in the current process. Minnesota is always written off by the Republicans. Historically, they may be right, but the margins are not huge. Last election, Obama beat Romney here by 5% (200k votes).

You are absolutely correct.

If you don't try to compete in places like Minnesota in this election, because you need the resources elsewhere, and it happens over and over, election cycle after cycle, entire generations of people never hear the message.
But Wisconsin is moving in our direction. It starts with local races. In a Presidential, they are going to do whatever they think will get the candidate 270 electoral votes.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by Mainframe Coder:

In Utah, you won't see many Trump ads (if any.) Money must be spent elsewhere. Hitlery will spend there but not as much as other states where she has a better chance of winning. In states like PA, OH, VA, NC, FL, etc., both sides will flood the airwaves starting about September 15th (Hitlery already has been running ads nonstop.)

I happen to be on the east coast at moment, and on the ship we get the local Philadelphia channels. The local news networks are pounding Trump every evening with negative news coverage, and then when they break for commercial, it's nothing but Hillary ads. If he's really interested in PA, he might think about getting into the game.

If all you get are the Philadelphia network affiliates, you won't see much from Trump. There's no reason to waste valuable ad dollars there. Western/Central Pennsylvania? Totally different story. Either way, I agree with the Trump Campaign's strategy of waiting until closer to 11/8 to start bombarding the airwaves in strategically chosen markets. Americans have very short memories. Trying to influence voters now for an election that is 85 days away is mostly a waste of money.

Biden speaking at a Clinton rally, calls Trump "not qualified" and "can't be trusted" to know the nuclear codes--then points out the guy sitting behind him holding the nuclear football!

quote:

Originally posted by TMats:
Biden speaking at a Clinton rally, calls Trump "not qualified" and "can't be trusted" to know the nuclear codes--then points out the guy sitting behind him holding the nuclear football!

The bias couldn't be more obvious from CNN. Read the title in their PIP box...Trump to give "terrorism" speech...... Trump gave one of the most coherent, common-sense foreign policy speeches we've seen since Reagan and the MSM has mostly ignored it after making fun of it for one news cycle. I think it scared them terribly and they couldn't wait to move on as fast as possible.

The Trump campaign has slowed down his rally schedule and it's probably a good thing. He was doing at least 1 every day, sometimes 2 a day, and the pace was taking its toll. Looks like they're going to something like 1 every other day. He is in West Bend, WI this evening and Walker will appear with him. I thought it was a good decision by Walker, both for this year and for the future.

Trump wants to vet potential immigrants and if found out that they hate gays, do not want to assimilate into the American culture, and or cannot tolerate other religions, they can't come in.

This is a real problem for the media because it makes so much sense.

On Trump's claims regarding Hillary's gun control agenda....

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion...amendment-stand.html

Donald Trump keeps saying that Hillary Clinton wants to “essentially abolish the Second Amendment.” But the media fact checkers are having none of it. Last week, CNN called his accusation “persistent” and “false.” At the same time, a Washington Post editorial also called the claim “absurd.”

In his analysis for CNN, Eric Bradner acknowledges Clinton’s support for many different types of gun control -- a 25 percent tax on handguns, an assault weapons ban, repeal of laws allowing permitted concealed handguns, and background checks on the private transfer of guns. Clinton also has supported increased fees and a variety of regulations that her husband imposed. Thanks to Bill Clinton’s regulations, the number of licensed firearms dealers from 248,155 in 1992 to 67,479 in 2000 -- a 73 percent reduction.

The media picks and chooses when to take Clinton at her word. CNN pointed to a recent Fox News Sunday appearance where Hillary Clinton claimed: "I'm not looking to repeal the Second Amendment. I'm not looking to take people's guns away." The Washington Post noted a statement from her campaign website about how “gun ownership is part of the fabric of many law-abiding communities.”

But in June, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos pushed Clinton twice on whether people have a right to own guns. “But that's not what I asked. I said do you believe that their conclusion that an individual's right to bear arms is a constitutional right?” Clinton could only say: “If it is a constitutional right . . . .”

Similarly, in New York City in the fall, she told donors: “The Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment, and I am going to make that case every chance that I get.” In Maryland in April, Chelsea Clinton promised that her mom would appoint to the Supreme Court justices who would overturn past decisions that struck down gun-control measures. But the only laws that the Supreme Court evaluated were complete gun bans and a law that made it a crime to use a gun.

Washington, D.C., had a complete handgun ban in place until 2008. It was also a felony, punishable by five years in prison, to put a bullet in the chamber of a gun. This amounted to a complete gun ban on using guns for self-defense. The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller struck down that ban.

Clinton told Stephanopoulos her opinion of this ruling: “I think that for most of our history, there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment until the decision by the late Justice Scalia.” She continued, “There was no argument until then that localities and states and the federal government had a right, as we do with every amendment, to impose reasonable regulation.”

Clinton went on to talk about her push for expanded background checks, an issue that was irrelevant to Scalia’s decision in Heller. Instead, the question is why was D.C.’s local gun ban a “reasonable regulation.” Why should people be imprisoned for five years for defending their families?

In McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in his dissent: "I can find nothing in the Second Amendment’s text, history, or underlying rationale that could warrant characterizing it as ‘fundamental’ insofar as it seeks to protect the keeping and bearing of arms for private self-defense purposes.” Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor signed on to Breyer’s opinion.

Breyer and Ginsburg were both appointed by President Bill Clinton. Sotomayor was Obama’s first nominee to the Supreme Court. Obama’s second nominee, Elana Kagan, would clearly have voted the same way had she been on the court at the time of McDonald. Indeed, Kagan served in Bill Clinton’s administration and helped lead the President’s gun control initiatives.

The Washington Post dismisses all this talk about the Supreme Court by saying that appointing Justices to the court “would not be anything like abolishing an amendment, which no court can do.” And it is true that the court can’t simply remove the amendment from the Constitution. But the media is appearing to be deliberately obtuse. If the court reverses Heller and McDonald and changes its interpretation of the Second Amendment as Hillary promises, what will really be left of the Second Amendment?

The media might not like to admit it, but The War on Guns is real. If Hillary wins in November, she will appoint Scalia’s successor and the Supreme Court will overturn the Heller and McDonald decisions. Make no mistake about it, the government will again be able to ban guns. Her claim that she isn't “looking to take people's guns away” is not consistent with her promise to overturn existing Supreme Court decisions.

Since I keep thinking turnout is the key, and wondering if maybe I'm being too pessimistic and translating pitiful nationwide numbers into local ones in key states, took a look for some data.

Nope - even in the "key" or "swing" states, turnout is simply awful. We have GOT to get that corrected this time around!



Link to 2014 data

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:


I happen to be on the east coast at moment, and on the ship we get the local Philadelphia channels. The local news networks are pounding Trump every evening with negative news coverage, and then when they break for commercial, it's nothing but Hillary ads. If he's really interested in PA, he might think about getting into the game.

Yep. Nothing but hate for Trump around here from the local media and Hillary's stupid TV ad with the compilation of him saying stupid shit is all we get now.

What's funny though is I still think Trump is going to pull off winning PA.

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair: We have GOT to get that corrected this time around!

Yes!!

In my "solid blue" state of MN, Obama won by 200,000 votes. Al Franken won the first time by less than 700. 2,000,000 stayed home!

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:


I happen to be on the east coast at moment, and on the ship we get the local Philadelphia channels. The local news networks are pounding Trump every evening with negative news coverage, and then when they break for commercial, it's nothing but Hillary ads. If he's really interested in PA, he might think about getting into the game.

Yep. Nothing but hate for Trump around here from the local media and Hillary's stupid TV ad with the compilation of him saying stupid shit is all we get now.

What's funny though is I still think Trump is going to pull off winning PA.

It'll all come down to turnout outside of Philadelphia but, yes, I'm convinced Trump can win Pennsylvania. In Chester County, you can't drive more than 2-3 minutes without seeing a Trump sign in a window or a yard sign. I don't think I've seen one Hitlery sign yet.

The fix is in for sure, and there will be massive fraud in Philly and other places, but....they can only create so much. If the turnout from the rest of the state is strong, Trump will win PA.

Right now PA is polling solidly for Hillary. Now PA is a solidly pro-gun state. That needs to be leverage is Trump is to have any chance to win.

quote:

Originally posted by Mainframe Coder:

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:


I happen to be on the east coast at moment, and on the ship we get the local Philadelphia channels. The local news networks are pounding Trump every evening with negative news coverage, and then when they break for commercial, it's nothing but Hillary ads. If he's really interested in PA, he might think about getting into the game.

Yep. Nothing but hate for Trump around here from the local media and Hillary's stupid TV ad with the compilation of him saying stupid shit is all we get now.

What's funny though is I still think Trump is going to pull off winning PA.

It'll all come down to turnout outside of Philadelphia but, yes, I'm convinced Trump can win Pennsylvania. In Chester County, you can't drive more than 2-3 minutes without seeing a Trump sign in a window or a yard sign. I don't think I've seen one Hitlery sign yet.

The fix is in for sure, and there will be massive fraud in Philly and other places, but....they can only create so much. If the turnout from the rest of the state is strong, Trump will win PA.