PC users voted Trump, Mac users voted Clinton

Sauce: axios.com/2016-election-by-device-type-2449951627.html

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative#Latin_and_Romance_languages
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative#Ancient_Greek
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative#Japanese
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative#Germanic_languages
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Yet ios users voted Trump. What's up with that.

Rural.

I was thinking the same thing.

Because pretty much everybody uses an iPhone. The smartphone market isn't split like the laptop market, Android is pretty much irrelevant.

I live in Nashville and I don't know literally nobody who owns an Android phone.

>lives in the ignorant south
>uses a double negative
Checks out.

baited kiddo

>hahah I was only pretending to be retarded

>people with more disposable income vote for someone who will protect the top 1%

Wow, didn't see that coming :)

>dumb windoze users voting for someone who is one of the 1%

Wow, didn't see that coming ;P

Mac user here, Trump all the way.

Cool, now get out!

While Trump himself is a Mac + Android user.
Really gets the noggin joggin'.

no u

So this pretty much just corroborates that you have to be low-IQ to use Windows. Nothing new here.

Apple products are for gays and women, everybody knows that

>voting for someone in the top 1% when your choices include someone in the top 1% and someone else in the top 1%

Retards :P

>picking Clinton over Trump
>smart

professionals and power users*

Trump voters are gamer NEETs, yeah we already knew that. Nothing to see here.

>picking an educated experienced leader rather than a TV-show host with various failed business ventures is not smart
Is this bizarro world?

You forgot to mention submerged in a number of corruption scandals.

Because Drumpf had no scandals at all, right?

Trump is just getting obstructed by dems, not his fault they're playing dirty to keep him from passing any meaningful legislature

both sides do it. Clinton and Ukraine were scheming (rundown on Hannity, youtube it)

Lol cause that's totally legit. Stop being a fucking retard. We've all seen the Clinton emails.

Any sensible human being would have picked anyone over satan herself. Given Trump was the most likely opponent to win, he was the one to vote for to keep that dumb bitch from running this country into the ground.

im a pc user and i voted for clinton

It's not really indicative of any intelligence measure, but just a linguistic curiosity caused by differences in grammar between certain dialects of a language
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative#Latin_and_Romance_languages
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative#Ancient_Greek
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative#Japanese
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative#Germanic_languages

>widely documented cases are not legit
>conspiracy theories are
Damn, I knew Drumpf voters were dense, but this is too much!

>Educated
Disbarred

>Experienced
At being the worst Secretary of State in living memory, a senator who did nothing and being married to someone who actually did things

>Leader
In number of collapses at public events and not much else

whatever you say, cletus

You're trying too hard bud. Nobody in this thread is taking you seriously. Just stop.

>He wants to vote for someone who promised to go to war with Iran, supported all military actions in the Middle East by the US gov't and was under scrutiny for the Benghazi scandal where for some reason she didn't answer calls from a US embassy under attack to send reinforcements from Spain to Libya (where we really shouldn't have been in the first place) to help them when she was President over an egotistical asshole


>Look I'm just going to ignore facts and call you stupid because double negatives definitely don't appear in other languages at all and only appears in stupid Southerner's speech
Kys

>satan himself
Why? I remember Bill as a highly successful president. The best we've had in 27 years by any objective measure. Why would his wife be any different?

>Trump was the one to vote to keep this country
You mean the same one who's deep in hot water on his very first six months as president?

Your tactic to keep this country from being run into the ground didn't quite work out so well, I'm afraid...

>taking bait that shitty
Even if it was legitimate, nobody who uses soccer mom-tier shit like "drumpf" deserves a (You)

>bait
You underestimate the stupidity of antifa-tards.

Why would you even have to post such a damage controlling post like this one if you were winning the debate, my friend?

Dumb frogposter.

I voted Clinton. So what if I only buy Apple products? My choice of OS doesn't change the fact that Trump is a closeted fag and a nigger-lover.

you got a chance at something with trump, just a chance, and even if that chance didn't pan out, you got to throw your brick.

Our choices were shit and worse shit and shit won.

>war with Iran
Just like Trump is threatening now to please his Republican allies?

>supported all military actions in the Middle East
Like bombing Assad like Trump's doing now?

>was under scrutiny for the Benghazi scandal
You mean just like Trump is now for Russiagate?

no surprise that brain dead mac faggots voted clinton.

>The best we've had in 27 years
Because the others were demonstrably shittier than he was. Bush I got us in involved in a pointless war with Iraq just like Bush II did and Obama who expanded it to Afghanistan, Libya and Syria. The only reason Bill looks good is because he didn't get us involved trying to topple dictators in the Middle East for "democracy's sake". That doesn't mean he was good seeing that he was the one that shilled hard for NAFTA, which in essence was the a less bearing TPP which fucked over the Rustbelt, which is one of the many reasons it went red last cycle.

>You mean the same one who's deep in hot water on his very first six months as president?
Over a conspiracy theory that holds as much weight as those idiots pushing the birther meme, from media firms that have proven over and over again they have little credibility and spin stories into oblivion just like Fox with the birther shit? Yeah, that's sure the most deepest water any president has ever been in.

Just look at this cunt, you can feel the fucking evil radiating from where her soul is supposed to be. All you need to hear to know she's evil is one word, "emails"

most of us just wanted you annoying dullards to shut the fuck up to be honest, a 4-year lesson in populism isn't going to do shit to the US in the long term and it more serves as a discourse shifter and a wake-up call to progressives that they need to pick their battles wisely and stop being such oversensitive whiny tryhards

but considering nobody can stop crying and grasping at straws long enough to take a minute and look at themselves and their own shortcomings, at this rate I'll be doing my part in 2020 to make sure it's an 8-year lesson instead

what year do you live in?

Linux and iOS here. Voted Trump. No regrets, although he wasn't my first choice.

>trump
>obstructed by dems

Your do realize that the senate and house both have a republican majority.....right?

Unless you mean that the dems are opposed trump's policies, which is the nature of bipartisan politics, however, they don't have the majority making it much more difficult to "obstruct" legislature.

I use GNU/Linux and me and everyone I know in the field (who are also GNU users) voted Bernie in the primaries and NOT TRUMP (aka Hillary, unfortunately) in the general election.

Nigga, Bill Clinton invaded Iraq too. WTF are you on about?

rush limbaugh is a big ios user. think he uses mac too though

>Your do realize that the senate and house both have a republican majority.....right?
cuckservatives = democrats

going to be fun voting out your little faggot friends in 2018.

He's just a newfag.

>Just like Trump is threatening now to please his Republican allies?
>Like bombing Assad like Trump's doing now?
You mean like how immediately after firebombing that air hangar in Syria, he said there would be no new boots on the ground and how we actually warmed up good relations with Russia after that shit we pulled there. We should probably just get out of Syria honestly.

>You mean just like Trump is now for Russiagate?
You mean Birtherism 2.0: Electric Boogaloo? I have very little comment on a blatant conspiracy theory that either side of the isle tries to push because it tends to be very stupid and only the most hardcore of Dems or Republicans believe that shit anyways.

Democrat politicians tend to vote the party line. Republicans actually try to represent the people that voted them in. What the Republicans in Kansas want isn't what the Republicans in Pennsylvania want 100% of the time.

In that way, while Republicans are less effective at ramming policies through, they are more pure regarding the spirit of democracy.

well that still doesn't make sense because no one with a brain wants the Obamacare repeal to die, which several Republicans voted No for

if you're against Trumpcare you're a cuck/welfare queen and should have your Republican registration revoked

That sounds right. Pic fucking related, the tears of democrats and whiny leftists are delicious.
And get this shit back to Sup Forums

>Democrats are evil
>Republicans are doing G'd's work!
Wow, you live in a nice fantasy world.

In practice though, most Republicans just vote party line all of the time, while some Democrats (like Heidi Heitkamp and Joe Manchin) often compromise in order to better represent their voter base. Get your facts straight.

I never understand this "poor oppressed niggers with $600 phones" meme. Please explain.

Actually, there are certain republicans that don't want a pure repeal (despite voting histories when Obama was in office, and they knew it would fail). 3 chick Republicans want to keep the Medicaid expansions in their states.

As for the "No," regarding "Repeal AND Replace," they didn't like the replacement, and are pushing for a "Repeal, THEN Replace." They figure if they repeal it completely, it will be easier to pass a replacement, because Dems will come to the table.

I never said Democrats were evil. I just said that they tend to vote as a solitary unit in Congress.

I find democracies to be terribly inefficient.

It's probably going to be more like only a 2-year lesson, given that Republicans are set to crash and burn in the mid-terms, losing greatly in both houses to massive Democratic majorities capable of overturning any presidential veto.

It's gonna be fun seeing Barack Obama making a comeback (but as Speaker of the House this time around) and watching Trump getting his big fat orange ass impeached!

>I don't know literally nobody
take your double negations back to mexico.

you had me for most of it, then you used an exclamation mark on fucking Sup Forums

get your bait game up dude I'm not basic enough for this shit

>It's probably going to be more like only a 2-year lesson, given that Republicans are set to crash and burn in the mid-terms, losing greatly in both houses to massive Democratic majorities capable of overturning any presidential veto.
>It's gonna be fun seeing Barack Obama making a comeback (but as Speaker of the House this time around) and watching Trump getting his big fat orange ass impeached!
You realize the Democratic Party has no leader, no platform besides "Fuck Trump" and hasn't actually proposed legislation despite a Republican-controlled Congress doing nothing, lost 4 special elections using the same tactics in the 2016 general election and you think that they'll actually win more than say 2-3 seats in the House of Reps or even the Senate, where it's more likely they'll lose seats since most of the states up for grabs went red this past election when they were previously blue. You're hella delusional.

>In practice though, most Republicans just vote party line all of the time, while some Democrats (like Heidi Heitkamp and Joe Manchin) often compromise in order to better represent their donor base.
ftfy. Get your facts straight, neoliberal.

Yeah, I'm sure that's why they voted for Gorsuch.

Btw, it's unlikely Trump will be impeached. Again, we're dealing with a bither-tier conspiracy theory on the other side of the isle last time and how well did those faggots that thing Obama was a Muslim socialist agent that was born outside of the US that wants to destroy our democracy (ala Cruz) do in getting him impeached? The same goes for anyone that unironically thinks that Trump is a Russian spy for the KGB doing the same thing: they look like unbridled idiots and won't be taken seriously.

*birhter-tier

weren't those special election seats pretty red to begin with though? 2018 is a point of concern to me because I don't see it being the absolutely tiring shitfest that 2016 was that made Trump win in the first place

I'm sure that's why they nominated neoliberal Garland. It's not like big pharma, and may I remind you to consider who Joe Manchin's daughter is, has any real beef with Gorsuch.
Clearly all oligarchs can't be trusted and all need to be beheaded. Prove me wrong.

Dems could win in 2018. But if they pull the shit they pulled during the special elections (literally nothing more than "I'm not with Trump!") then they are in HUGE trouble. And so far, they haven't done anything but that.

it worries because with how slow he is pushing things into action and how hard the propaganda machines are going this shit could be weaponized effectively

but you're not wrong, if they sit there and do the same "everyone who doesn't agree with me is bigoted DRUMPF DRUMPF DRUMPF vote for me pls even if you're a piece of rACIST sHIT" garbage while hocking god awful privileged ass pretty boy candidates then they're going to get destroyed, I'm sure as fuck not giving up my district

Honestly, so long as he keeps green energy at bay until it makes financial sense to do so, builds the wall, and either repeals Obamacare (no replacement necessary) or lets it implode, while renegotiating trade deals, I'll be happy.

Most Republicans just want their government to protect their borders (including poor trade deals) and leave them alone within their own borders. Or at least, that's my experience.

There just seems to be a disconnect between the voters and the government. Most Republican voters are more Civic Nationalists, and most Republican politicians are Neocons trying to appease rich globalists.

I don't think they have a chance. They've shown they have nothing to offer but cheap platitudes to sweeten neoliberal austerity. I'll be happy if they get prosecuted for RICO, but I don't think the other party would allow that to happen because it has too much to lose.

Well, the Democrats haven't learned that throwing huge quantities of money at your problem doesn't work well nowadays along with pissing off their blue-collar base completely in the Rustbelt and starting to irk the progressives in the party. Really all Trump needs to do is focus on tax reform before the mid-terms and the Republicans are golden.

Their problem is that they overplayed their hand. You can't push Privacy raping shit when Obama is in office, and then pretend like it's bad all of a sudden because Trump is in office. They just come off as bipolar when they go from pushing it so fucking hard for 8 years, and then literally going to the other end of the spectrum in the span of a day.

Add to this that while Trump is unpopular, both Congress and the news is even less popular in all polls taken, and I think its safe to say that, while nobody knows for sure what will happen, Dems have an uphill climb, especially due to notoriously low voter turnout during midterms.

>I have no counter argue therefore I will call him dumb because he posted a pepe the NAZI meme. XD XD that will show him!

honestly I don't give that much of a shit about the wall, I'm interested to see what he does with tax reform and most of his jobs-related shit

in the end I just want to see the American psyche improve, which isn't necessarily something I expect Trump to do but I hope it sets the precedent for stronger, more energetic and politically competent (but still "real") leaders in the future to bring this country out of the obnoxious self-hating malaise and narcissism epidemic that has been shitting all over it for the last decade and a half
hopefully you're right

Gays prefer Mac/iOS

>in the end I just want to see the American psyche improve
To do that, you can't have millions of illegals taking jobs for wages that citizens literally can't compete with (as they have to pay taxes and be paid a minimum wage). The wall isn't all that important in and of itself. It's a symbol. It will improve the psyche of the unskilled workers.

Walmart has always been great at reading the desires of the unskilled citizens. It's no surprise that they recently made a commitment to start using US industry as much as possible. It wasn't a selfless act, any more than them raising their minimum wage to 10 bucks per hour. It was to appease these workers. The wall is just the government doing the same thing, but in a different way.

the illegal issue doesn't really affect me as much where I live, more just shitty attitudes and constant shoving of political correctness and other guilt trip bullshit down everyone's throats

but I still feel the same way about the wall, it's not really the most effective solution to me but it's better than nothing, really that's how I feel about most of Trump's presidency

The president can never do much more than symbolic gestures without the approval of both Congress and the Supreme Court. Executive orders are nice, but can be stopped the second someone takes over command.

The Wall is permanent, even if manning it is not. But mandating E-verfiy would be far more effective, as would requiring proof of citizenship or legal residency in order to obtain government aide.

There's also the little matter of the fake primary that has probably permanently turned off Berners from the party or anything with even remotely the same sort of people in charge. The arguments of the DNC's lawyer in court are rather clarifying, to put it mildly, just what a sham the Democrat Party is.

>But mandating E-verfiy would be far more effective, as would requiring proof of citizenship or legal residency in order to obtain government aide.
Both parties' funders like depreciating labor and appreciating assets. Each party's policy goes about that goal in their own way. So, probably not going to get done.

>Both parties' funders like depreciating labor and appreciating assets. Each party's policy goes about that goal in their own way. So, probably not going to get done.
Of course its not. If Congress passed it, Trump would sign it into law, and it would be completely constitutional, so SCOTUS wouldn't overrule it. But since you have a party that wants illegals to vote, and another party that wants illegal labor to reduce costs for their big donors, it won't happen. Which leaves the president with symbols, and little else.

>probably permanently turned off Berners from the party
Why would socialists be turned off by the "bigger government" party?

>i don't know literally nobody
what the fuck man

>bigger government
Socialists and liberals are anathema to each other. Their policy preferences and principles conflict irreconcilably.
Also the size of government is not a single slider, despite what the two corporate parties would have people believe.

It is if you simply boil it down to GDP consumption.

That only makes sense in the ancap framing, where governments do not issue nor tax away the value of the national currency.

Well, it matters in the context of power it has over its citizens. If you were to tax 90% of their income, they would need to rely on the government more than if you taxed them at 60%, regardless of what that government was spending the money on.

mostly college kids and amateur content creators. ftfy

>rely
Not sure why that's actually a problem, if citizens === the government and it's their own money anyway, not just an IOU to (((creditors))). Nothing good will ever come of the arrangement where the government and the people are adversaries, especially under republican systems such as the USA's where the people pointedly do not have any effective rights of action in governance.

If you work, and then the government takes your wealth to the point that literally everyone has to rely on them, the government has power over them. Do what they say, or risk the boot coming down on you. USSR is a good example of government having absolute power.

That said, the government having no power means anarchy, which isn't any better.

>Mac
>PC
They are the same since PPC ditched.

>your wealth
Don't confuse stocks (in the sense of stores) and flows. Income is a flow. Wealth is a stock. A wealth tax would, arguably, be a better idea than an income tax, in that if one's accumulation of wealth is not creating value for all of society, it reverts to the state, and then, perhaps, to some council or citizen who can make better use of it.
Also, why the Bastiatic obsession with submitting to government instead of becoming government and participating in government as a broad public activity, for which time is set aside by law? Like jury duty, but actually changing things at a decent scale? Why the incapacity to see beyond the hierarchical Great Man model that has cucked us for 3500 years if not longer?

I take it you're an anarcho-communist?

Autism

Nah.