Is Trump just a sore loser or is the election really rigged?

Is Trump just a sore loser or is the election really rigged?

Other urls found in this thread:

bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-37787347
archive.is/ujtYb
youtube.com/watch?v=v9i8y5Q8rEo
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

sore loser for sure, everyone who says otherwise is delusional

He's subhuman.

I rigged your mother last night.

>>(you)

Well, it is certainly rigged in terms of media coverage/propaganda.

When you read stuff like this:
bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-37787347
It's pretty obvious. Not in the sense that that article in itself is biased but just based on what the interviewed people say it's obviously the result of American establishment propaganda and people swallowing it hook, line, and sinker globally.

That looks photoshopped

You tell me?

polls are oversampled with dems. its going to be a landslide.

fuck drumpf and fuck white people

>sore loser for sure
>loser

How do you lose something that is rigged?
Clinton is even conspiring with election officials now.
archive.is/ujtYb

>Early voting in Arkansas started Monday
>Judge changes the ballot four days after voting started
>140000 votes already cast

Nope, not rigged at here, nope.

Rigged.
But republican voter turnout will override any attempt at rigging.

youtube.com/watch?v=v9i8y5Q8rEo

You're going to be very surprised by the turnout.

Bush won Ohio in 2004 because of a massive influx of evangelical voters. Polls shows Kerry winning in the margin of error.

Same thing is going this year with working class voters and the "discouraged" job seekers.

>Clintons campaign literally comes out and says they rig the elections.
>Wonder if the election is actually rigged.

I really wish you would just kill your self. I dont think people as stupid as you deserve to live in the same world as me.

can you faggots stop posting pictures of Trump and Clinton. you're costing chinkmoot a fortune.

The DNC rigged their primaries and Clinton keeps shilling about Russian attempts to rig the election. Don't see why Don's claims are so crazy when the other side has the same story and have been confirmed to do it in the past.

After a year of media slander, Trump is still within 2% of Hillary in even the most biased media polls. Even oversampling Democrats and suppressing Republicans and Independents can't overcome the fact that 85% of Republicans support Trump, and that Trump leads 12-18% in Independents.

If Trump loses, it will be because the election was rigged and stolen by the Democrats.

Even ignoring all the other evidence, the O'Keefe videos show Democrats admitting that they are attempting to rig the election. The only question is how much impact will that have? If they're not that effective, then Hillary might actually be able to win by a margin that results in her winning fairly, e.g. if election fraud in a state puts her 2 points up, and she wins by 3, the actual votes would have had her win by 1.

Of course, since we don't know the extent of the election fraud, we can't figure out what the real numbers are. We know dead voters are being registered Democrat. We know the Democrats are trying to find ways to sneak in ballots cast by criminal immigrants. We know that the voting machines have exhibited weird behavior, and the company that makes a lot of them has ties to Soros. What we don't know is what impact these things will have in the actual election.

If the race is close, and Hillary wins, expect people to start digging. And the Democrats aren't particularly smart, so expect things to be found. What happens at that point is still up in the air, but I wouldn't visit the USA during November.

...

Ok, so the polls are rigged.

But doesn't that just mean that Trump is too beta to have them rigged even though he prides himself on being this super savvy negotiator, and Hillary is alpha as fuck because she knows how to win?

What the fuck Hans, what would you know about being alpha?

Well, I know that alphas win, and if Hillary wins the election for whatever reason, doesn't it follow that she's alpha?

>implying he has time for that shit

Do you have any idea how much time he spends rallying?

Also he's going to do the impossible; win against the establishment without commiting voter fraud. That makes him the winner and the alpha

>Do you have any idea how much time he spends rallying?

So you're saying he's to busy trying to win the election to actually take measures that would help him win the election?

Doesn't seem very savvy to me.

Trump is just poisoning the well to undermine Hillary's massive victory

Do you think Melania is gonna divorce him after he loses the election because she doesn't want to be associated with a beta?

No, it means he's high energy and it means that honor and honesty are male qualities

Is losing a male quality too?

drumpf is pivoting toward the millenial vote by throwing a temper tantrum while blaming anything and everything for his predicament.

Being cucked is a German quality

That and pussy grabbing

So you are saying that losing would, indeed, be a male quality in Trump's case?

...

Do you think Melania will propose to Hillary after she divorces Trump because she'll accept Hillary is the new alpha?

>$.001 has been added to your account

Is Nascar rigged? Oh please. Of course. Everything is rigged and it always has been. The Bush election? And yes Trump is a sore loser as well. It would have to really hurt when it's rigged and your still losing.

You might have to blame the trump supporters. Not the brightest bulbs.

I'm saying you're cucked, Hans. But if you knew how politics worked in the US, you'd know that he's very likely to win because of one important factor you're forgetting; the turnout. The turnout for Republicans will be 50% greater, and this fact matter more than any CTR post and any biased poll put together by your favorite marxist media source

>You might have to blame the trump supporters. Not the brightest bulbs.

Yes, there is empiric evidence that supports this.

I asked if you considered losing to be a male quality, and you've dodged the question twice.

Which is very telling. Sad.

Losing is clearly not a male quality. Males are still winning in a society that favors women in almost every way. Though in Germany it might be a male quality to lose your wife to a Syrian refugee

>drumpf
oh god a john oliver fan.

So if Trump loses, does that mean he's unmanly?

Sure thing mohammed

>le oversampled maymay

Fucking underage.

Why don't any of you faggots understand how polling works? If you randomly pick people to poll, you are more than likely to end up with a demographic that is not representative of America (i.e. you will end up will a very large and u proportiona percentage of white people)

They oversample minorities and dems, and then change their influence on polling results to reflect the actual population of that minority group. So that the demographic of the polls actually looks like the demographic of America.

Fuck off.

Watch out for that edge lads

No, because Trump can only lose if Hillary keeps commiting voter fraud and using every dirty trick trick she can come up with. It would mean the establishment was never going to lose in the first place. Another sign that it needs to be rooted out and destroyed

Sore loser

Except when it doesn't actually represent the demographics of a certain state, Arizona and Texas are good examples

So losing is unmanly, but Trump losing is not unmanly. Got it.

Even discounting any present active rigging like machine fuckery, dead people/criminal voting, busing, etc - the election is rigged by definition by the fact that the Dems are importing masses of non-whites (legally and illegally) who vote Dem as a bloc, and stifling any attempts to stem/reverse this tide.

Honestly if Hillary wins by a slim margin it'd be within White America's rights to entirely disregard the result and call for a coup.

>They oversample minorities and dems, and then change their influence on polling results to reflect the actual population of that minority group.

They also tweak the numbers so that they're more in line with what the pollster believes are historical norms for that group. And that's where things can get fucked up.

Read (((Nate)))'s post on why 538 got the Michigan primary wrong. He mainly laid the blame on the historical tweaking being incorrect for young people, blacks, etc... apparently from every single pollster, no less.

I'm going with rigged.
Looking at the gatherings and the evidence of media and DNC collusion it sure looks like a rigged game.

Can it really be called losing? I call it being cheated. Bernie was cheated out of the primaries for instance.

>wikileaks exposed bribing polling websites and news stations
>"ahhahHAhahaHhah eugh tinfoil drumpftards only say the polls are rigged when she's up!"

Trust the fucking kraut to be a cuck.

Yes, I'd say the definition of "not winning" is, indeed, "losing". Would you disagree?

Trump is an idiot who could have easily won this election if he would have listened to his political strategists or tried to make an actual attempt to appeal to the people he needs to win.

Instead he's been fueling scandal after scandal, allowing Shillary to take the White House without discussing policy with the American people at all. No one knows what she believes or stands for, and she'll be our President.

Thanks, fucktards.

Cheating is beta mohammed

Is not winning alpha?

>watching current year cunt

>getting your political info from a non American comedian

kys

In a hilarious twist of fate, it will turn out that Sup Forums, as a representative of the alt right, will be responsible for ensuring a Hillary win and putting her in the White House.

>both Germans
>both got Hitler dubs
WHAT DOES IT MEAN

hey, it's gamergate all over again!

But in this case, Trump is playing a game that supposedly can't be won. Usually, the only way to win a game you can only lose, is not to play. But Trump intends on doing the impossible, beating the establishment with the sheer momentum and energy of his supporters. Even if the establishment turned his fellow Republicans against him.

Trump has a kind of drive and unexplainable ability to win against overwhelming odds that only the manliest of men can have. A "will to power". He's an Ubermensch

>Trump is playing a game that supposedly can't be won.

But Hillary seems to be winning, meaning the game can be won. Does that mean that she's superhuman?

It means she's part of the establishment that can't lose. Hillary has only been having tiny rallies once a month and shitting her pants at home

Wow this really stimulates my cortex.

>It means she's part of the establishment that can't lose.

So why didn't Trump anticipate this when he decided to declare his candidacy?

Seems to me that he's not very good at risk assessment. Maybe that's why we ended up with Trump Steak.

See my previous post.

He's beating the system that can't be beat

He is beating the system by handing a win to Hillary?

I don't think you that that all they way through.

No, he's winning by exposing political corruption and because he has more supporters. Despite what the media tells you, Trump has only been gaining supporters while Hillary has been losing the support of many Democrats and Independents who understand how corrupt and wicked Hillary is

So he's losing to Hillary, but he's really winning? I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

I never implied once that he was losing. I did say he should be losing, and I did say the media is desperate to make it look like he's losing, but he's not. Even these past few days, a lot of Independents have been flocking to Trump when they realized Hillary is the WW3 candidate

fpbp

Plus it really drives home how much of an alpha Trump ISN'T.

What a whiny little bitch.

Why not both?

So he isn't losing, but if he does, that still won't make him a loser, even though he'll have lost, but that doesn't matter anyway, because he won't lose at a game that can't even be won?

And even if he does lose, that only means that Hillary cheated and Trump was too manly to cheat back, so there is no way for him to lose either way?

I'm afraid you lost me.

losing has no gender you fucking retard

Your fellow Trump supporter from Canada seems to disagree:
>Losing is clearly not a male quality.

He's sampling closer now because (((they))) need to get their fraudulent, opinion leading (((poll))) numbers back closer to reality, so they don't look like complete idiots and lose what little credibility they have left when Trump wins in a landslide.

Weird, because people who make more than 35k a year (a sign of actual brains and success as opposed to a gender studies degree) tend to support trump.

Wear red on election day

Bush was rigged by the same people who are rigging this election for Hillary. It's not republicans and it's not democrats, they are two sides of the same forces. It's a cabal of people with wealth who are controlling things behind the scenes to fit their agendas.

ok

Thanks for changing your mind, Canada appreciates your support.

Aah yes, the "educated yet idiot" class.

Those are most of the people who are ruining our country btw.

Money says he's seen Wikileaks that we haven't that proves it.

It's rigged in the sense that Trump actually has to run against 2 candidates.

Clinton and then the Media, which acts as her proxy while enjoying the benefit/shield of calming journalists objectivity/impartiality.

You could even stretch things to say he has to run against 3 other candidates if you add in the President..lame duck or not, the power of the bully pulpit is very real.