OtherGround Forums Real Collusion: Google Gave Hillary 2.6M Votes!

8/22/19 7:14 PM
7/22/15
Posts: 4227

This is a complete joke, lmao that people think google had anything to do with this election, people hate Trump, and people hate Hillary, what part of that do you have a problem understanding, some people hated both of them like me.

Do you think the people are going to come around and start liking Trump?

I haven't met anyone who has changed there attitude towards either of them, except I have known some people who have said they have seen enough of his tweeter rants and the only way they will still support him is if he keeps the economy strong.

8/23/19 4:14 PM
2/4/09
Posts: 5492

I wonder if any of this was as effective as Hillary Clintons superPAC funded correct the record?

 

Correct the Record was a hybrid PAC/super PAC founded by David Brock. It supported Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign. The PAC aimed to find and confront social media users who posted unflattering messages about Clinton and paid anonymous tipsters for unflattering scoops about Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, including audio and video recordings and internal documents.

 

The organization was created in May 2015 when it spun off from American Bridge 21st Century, another Democratic Super PAC. It coordinated with Clinton's 2016 U.S. presidential campaign via a loophole in campaign finance law that it says permits coordination with digital campaigns.[1][2]

8/23/19 5:08 PM
1/1/01
Posts: 10002
yabadaba -

 

Saying you don't like the website something was posted on is not "debunking" it. Jesus wept, you lot are desperate.

8/24/19 12:17 PM
2/22/09
Posts: 12728
HULC -
yabadaba -

 

Saying you don't like the website something was posted on is not "debunking" it. Jesus wept, you lot are desperate.

He pointed out that this is just something Epstein posted on his website (i.e. Epstein did not submit his claim to peer-review). 

Somehow you conclude from this that he doesn't like Epstein's website?

Jesus wept indeed.

8/24/19 3:33 PM
1/1/01
Posts: 10015
yabadaba - 
HULC -
yabadaba -

 

Saying you don't like the website something was posted on is not "debunking" it. Jesus wept, you lot are desperate.

He pointed out that this is just something Epstein posted on his website (i.e. Epstein did not submit his claim to peer-review). 

Somehow you conclude from this that he doesn't like Epstein's website?

Jesus wept indeed.


Lol! Are all your posts retarded? He literally equates posting his own research on his own website to it being debunked:

"And u published on your website, not in a peer-reviewed journal. So yeah, debunked 100%, sorry."

and all that your pea brain can come up with is "durr, how do you know he doesn't like that site, durr"

Try not being so stupid, it hurts my eyes to read your stupidity.

Also, if you had read your own link, you would see the very first reply to this guys tweet links evidence to show that actually it was peer reviewed. Womp womp
Edited: 8/24/19 3:46 PM
2/22/09
Posts: 12730
HULC -
yabadaba - 
HULC -
yabadaba -

 

Saying you don't like the website something was posted on is not "debunking" it. Jesus wept, you lot are desperate.

He pointed out that this is just something Epstein posted on his website (i.e. Epstein did not submit his claim to peer-review). 

Somehow you conclude from this that he doesn't like Epstein's website?

Jesus wept indeed.


Lol! Are all your posts retarded? He literally equates posting his own research on his own website to it being debunked:

"And u published on your website, not in a peer-reviewed journal. So yeah, debunked 100%, sorry."

and all that your pea brain can come up with is "durr, how do you know he doesn't like that site, durr"

Try not being so stupid, it hurts my eyes to read your stupidity.

Also, if you had read your own link, you would see the very first reply to this guys tweet links evidence to show that actually it was peer reviewed. Womp womp

"He literally equates posting his own research on his own website to it being debunked"

Nonsense. Here's what he wrote:

"From less than 95 subjects over the course of only 25 days. And you threw out data that would've likely made your results non-significant. And u published on your website, not in a peer-reviewed journal. So yeah, debunked 100%, sorry."

8/24/19 5:13 PM
6/20/13
Posts: 9730

Trump knows he won the popular vote. He wants credit for it.

 

I would advise Trump to pay attention to voter fraud because he will get more votes stolen in the next election. There is always DNC meddling in elections but next time there will be massive Chinese meddling.