|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Did anyone else notice /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1731610575 Message started by JOG on 11/14/24 at 10:56:15 |
|
Title: Did anyone else notice Post by JOG on 11/14/24 at 10:56:15 That The Polls, AFAIK all had the election as Close, but the Difference in Rally Attendance was YUGE? And the results of the election was very much in line with the differences in Rally Attendance... Howboutthatschitt!!?? It's Shocking just how valuable Observing Reality can be. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by MnSpring on 11/14/24 at 13:55:49 0F3A29312A2D293A2C480 wrote:
Haven't you been told, observed reality, is not really, real ! |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/15/24 at 14:25:12 How does Observed Reality address all the people that Observed larger Harris rallies? In their Observed Reality all the sudden rallies are no longer accurate - after all they only Observed Harris rallies as being larger. So for Trump supporters rallies as evidence of who will win are "real" as they Observed Trump rallies, but for Harris supporters it is not "real" because they never Observed larger Trump rallies. Yes millions of humans on other forums, social media sites, Reddit etc. Observed only Harris rallies were larger - because of the internet content they chose to use. My opinion is millions of humans on other forums, social media sites, Reddit etc. Observed only Harris rallies were larger - because of the internet content they chose to use. The "whose was bigger" argument was everywhere. This is an opinion. My opinion is The "whose was bigger" argument was everywhere. The previous sentence indicates a human opinion. Reference for opinion: o·pin·ion [ch601][ch712]piny([ch601])n] noun a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge: "I'm writing to voice my opinion on an issue of great importance" · "that, in my opinion, is dead right" Similar: belief judgment thought(s) school of thought the beliefs or views of a large number or majority of people about a particular thing: "the changing climate of opinion" (opinion of) an estimation of the quality or worth of someone or something: "I had a higher opinion of myself than I deserved" a formal statement of advice by an expert on a professional matter: "seeking a second opinion from a specialist" So Observed Reality is real for trump supporters, but not real for Harris supporters. This is an opinion. The previous sentence indicates a human opinion. o·pin·ion [ch601][ch712]piny([ch601])n] noun a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge: "I'm writing to voice my opinion on an issue of great importance" · "that, in my opinion, is dead right" Similar: belief judgment thought(s) school of thought the beliefs or views of a large number or majority of people about a particular thing: "the changing climate of opinion" (opinion of) an estimation of the quality or worth of someone or something: "I had a higher opinion of myself than I deserved" a formal statement of advice by an expert on a professional matter: "seeking a second opinion from a specialist" This post is an opinion. o·pin·ion [ch601][ch712]piny([ch601])n] noun a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge: "I'm writing to voice my opinion on an issue of great importance" · "that, in my opinion, is dead right" Similar: belief judgment thought(s) school of thought the beliefs or views of a large number or majority of people about a particular thing: "the changing climate of opinion" (opinion of) an estimation of the quality or worth of someone or something: "I had a higher opinion of myself than I deserved" a formal statement of advice by an expert on a professional matter: "seeking a second opinion from a specialist" |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by JOG on 11/15/24 at 14:33:02 Search and STUDY organic Astroturf Trump. Organic Kumsukkulla AssTroTurfukk Paid for celebrities to be The Draw. You're so transparent. They should replace you. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/15/24 at 16:02:03 Rally attendance is too small of a sample size to reliably predict a POTUS. Humans that support Harris swear up and down she had the larger rally attendance, using cellphone demographics, videos, images, personal statements etc. etc. etc. Their Observed Reality is Harris had larger rallies. So Observed Reality for them is not objective truth. Evidence does not support their Observed Reality. My opinion is rally attendance is too small of a sample size to reliably predict a POTUS. This is an opinion. The previous sentence indicates a human opinion. This is a human opinion. A human opinion specific to me is Humans that support Harris swear up and down she had the larger rally attendance, using cellphone demographics, videos, images, personal statements etc. etc. etc. This is a human opinion. It is an opinion that "Their Observed Reality is Harris had larger rallies." It is a human opinion that "Observed Reality for them is not objective truth." It is a human opinion that "Evidence does not support their Observed Reality." This opinion is underlined for emphasis. It is an opinion that the underlined portion is for emphasis. Emphasis is a human opinion. This post is an opinion. Reference for "opinion" without emphasis: o·pin·ion [ch601][ch712]piny([ch601])n] noun a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge: "I'm writing to voice my opinion on an issue of great importance" · "that, in my opinion, is dead right" Similar: belief judgment thought(s) school of thought the beliefs or views of a large number or majority of people about a particular thing: "the changing climate of opinion" (opinion of) an estimation of the quality or worth of someone or something: "I had a higher opinion of myself than I deserved" a formal statement of advice by an expert on a professional matter: "seeking a second opinion from a specialist" |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by JOG on 11/15/24 at 19:25:48 Rally attendance is too small of a sample size to reliably predict a POTUS So you've said. And yet, I said what I said, the polls said what They said, and the differences between the rally attendance and the differences in the voting ,,MEHH,, you're wrong,, Again |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/15/24 at 20:38:29 And yet, I said what I said, the polls said what They said, and the differences between the rally attendance and the differences in the voting ,,MEHH,, you're wrong,, Again Then how do you explain all the Harris supporters who Observed all the "Harris rallies are huge" internet articles, phone reports, maps, videos and personal statements? I said their sample size was too small also. Again: I said their sample size was too small also.. So I was right according to their Observed Reality. Their Observed Reality is Harris had larger rallies. So Observed Reality for them is not objective truth. Evidence does not support their Observed Reality. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by JOG on 11/15/24 at 21:03:22 Then how do you explain all the Harris supporters who Observed all the "Harris rallies are huge" internet articles, phone reports, maps, videos You gaslighting ,,fuuuk.. I already.. She HIRED PEOPLE TO DRAW A CROWD.. Dishonest people piss me off. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/15/24 at 22:35:13 You gaslighting ,,fuuuk.. I'm not gaslighting, you just aren't understanding, or are refusing to Observe that I am saying Harris rallies weren't larger. Harris supporters think her rallies were bigger based off their Observed Reality. They chose internet articles that supported Harris and so in their Observed Reality Harris had larger rallies. In their Observed Reality. Not actual reality - their Observed Reality. I already.. She HIRED PEOPLE TO DRAW A CROWD.. Yes. So in Harris supporters Observed Reality she had larger rallies. due to HIRED PEOPLE TO DRAW A CROWD. Can you not understand that? This means when I told them that rally size is not large enough of a sample to accurately predict an election of over a hundred million humans, I was right - if we use Harris supporters Observed Reality as the metric and not actual reality. Objective truth is not equal to Observed Reality. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by JOG on 11/15/24 at 22:51:04 Ohh,stoppit.. I was right. Get over it. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/16/24 at 00:27:56 Ohh,stoppit.. I was right. Get over it. So was I. Get over it. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by MnSpring on 11/16/24 at 06:41:39 A question; 'Who is them' ? 6D4D4F475A4D280 wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/16/24 at 12:40:02 A question; 'Who is them' ? Humans that presented online evidence that Harris rallies were larger than Trump rallies. In their ("their" means humans that used online evidence that Harris rallies were larger than Trump rallies.) Observed Reality Harris rallies were much larger. So if Harris supporters Observed Reality is that her rallies were larger, then their Observed Reality is not supported by actual evidence. This is the problem with using Observed Reality as a qualifier instead of objective truth and empirical evidence. It all depends on what one chooses to Observe. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by JOG on 11/16/24 at 13:08:53 No,the Difference is One was organic The other Astroturf. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/16/24 at 15:28:37 No,the Difference is One was organic The other Astroturf. The difference is Trump supporters Observed Reality is that Trump rallies were larger, and Harris supporters Observed reality is that Harris rallies were larger. Humans can Observe lies as equally as they Observe truth. Humans can Observe inaccurate information as easily as they can accurate information. Harris supporters Observed Reality, by your assessment is inaccurate, but that inaccuracy does not change their Observed reality. To them, larger rallies, that they Observed did not accurately predict a POTUS. This was a 50/50 no matter what. Literally a baboon flipping a coin had the same chances as anyone else. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by MnSpring on 11/16/24 at 17:25:03 A early Electoral, winning vote. A majority vote. IS NOT A "baboon flipping a coin" |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/16/24 at 19:27:59 A early Electoral, winning vote. A majority vote. IS NOT A "baboon flipping a coin" I agree which is why I wouldn't say that. However if we use the actual words I did: The chance is the same since there were only two outcomes specific and exclusive to a Trump vs Harris pool of candidates. A baboon flipping a coin has the same percentage chance to choose a winner as all other beings, human or otherwise taking the same chance. This was a 50/50 no matter what. Also Harris supporters Observed Reality is she had larger rallies. Objective truth and empirical evidence does not align with their Observed Realities. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by JOG on 11/16/24 at 22:52:54 Also Harris supporters Observed Reality is she had larger rallies. Objective truth and empirical evidence does not align with their Observed Realities. Correct, because those few rallies she had that were larger were Only larger because she Created a Draw, a free concert, etc,, Astroturf Trump didn't work to Draw people, other than for Trump to show up. Organic The difference between Fake and Real. Lefties fail at Nuance The difference between the results of the election and a coin flip is Trump could have lost the popular vote, won the Electoral college, and lost the house and senate, and it wouldn't have been a National declaration by the People, telling the left, piss off. So, your assessment fails to consider a Great deal. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/17/24 at 04:26:09 Correct, because those few rallies she had that were larger were Only larger because she Created a Draw, a free concert, etc,, Astroturf Agreed. So Harris supporters were fooled - does this mean it is not their Observed Reality? I think it is still their Observed Reality. Harris supporters Observed Reality, that Harris had larger rallies, is not supported by objective truth and empirical evidence. Trump didn't work to Draw people, other than for Trump to show up. Organic Harris supporters did not Observe this. They chose internet information that told them that their candidate, Harris, had larger rallies. How Trump ran his rallies has no bearing on Harris supporters Observed Reality - since they never Observed it. The difference between Fake and Real. Lefties fail at Nuance That only means they chose inaccurate information to create their Observed Reality. Harris supporters Observed Reality, that Harris had larger rallies, is not supported by objective truth and empirical evidence. This is why Observed Reality is a poor qualifier - it depends on what a human chooses to Observe. The difference between the results of the election and a coin flip is Trump could have lost the popular vote, won the Electoral college, and lost the house and senate, and it wouldn't have been a National declaration by the People, telling the left, piss off. So, your assessment fails to consider a Great deal. I disagree. My assessment is the percentage chance of choosing one out of two things is 50%. Is this incorrect? I'm not assessing emotional nonsense, I am assessing the percentage chance of predicting a winner between two and only two humans. A baboon flipping a coin has a 50% chance of getting one out of two outcomes. So does an election assessment with two humans. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by JOG on 11/17/24 at 04:49:26 You're wrong. You choose to ignore the obvious. You can pretend that because she had a few rallies that had decent attendance that the support for each candidate was close enough to not See any difference that would be sufficient to predict the winner. those Few rallies ONLY HAD decent attendance Because they were going FOR SOME OTHER REASON than to see Her. You IGNORE her pathetic attendance at many of her rallies. And you Ignore the fact that EVERY TRUMP RALLY WAS YUGE. Now, I'm done. My analysis is strong and correct. Thank you for presenting faulty arguments that are prepared well enough to get a lot of people off balance. You're keeping me sharp. Thanks for playing. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by MnSpring on 11/17/24 at 06:25:59 5575777F6275100 wrote:
So, "...A baboon flipping a coin has a 50% chance..." Sounds like a fact, unless it was a Baboon trained to vote one way or the other, depending on how it was trained. Question: "...So does an election assessment with two humans. ..." Why did you not post the, "OPINION" Caveat ? |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/17/24 at 07:18:00 You are so caught up with arguing that you wont even see I am agreeing with you about rally attendance numbers. You're wrong. You choose to ignore the obvious. You can pretend that because she had a few rallies that had decent attendance that the support for each candidate was close enough to not See any difference that would be sufficient to predict the winner. I never said that, or anything close to that. Stop gaslighting. I said Harris supporters chose to Observe pro-Harris internet content that claimed her rallies were larger. Stop saying I am claiming anything other than that. those Few rallies ONLY HAD decent attendance Because they were going FOR SOME OTHER REASON than to see Her. You IGNORE her pathetic attendance at many of her rallies. I already agreed with you multiple times. Stop lying about my statements. I never once commented on the reasoning for rally attendance volume at any rally, ever, at any time on this forum. I only claimed Harris supporters choose to Observe pro-Harris online content. And you Ignore the fact that EVERY TRUMP RALLY WAS YUGE. Incorrect. I never said anything like that. Prove that I did. Stop gasligting and admit I only said Harris supporters Observed pro-Harris online content and I SAID THEY WERE INACCURATE. I said they were INACCURATE. Can you even grasp that I am saying they were WRONG? Harris supporters rally attendance Observed Reality is not supported in objective truth or empirical evidence. Why won't you acknowledge this? It is literally saying the exact same thing you are. Thank you for presenting faulty arguments that are prepared well enough to get a lot of people off balance. You're keeping me sharp. Thanks for playing. I am saying the same thing you are about rally attendance numbers, but you are just so caught up in arguing that you refuse to Observe it. Are you really disagreeing that Harris supporters Observed that Harris rallies were larger? |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/17/24 at 07:26:18 So, "...A baboon flipping a coin has a 50% chance..." Sounds like a fact, unless it was a Baboon trained to vote one way or the other, depending on how it was trained. Except my statement is about the probability of choosing one thing out of a maximum of two things. That probability is 50%. If you want to add psychology to it go ahead, but that is not what I stated. You are conflating the prediction of who a baboon will vote for (which I did not state) with the mathematical percentage chance that each candidate out of two have a 50% chance. Question: "...So does an election assessment with two humans. ..." Why did you not post the, "OPINION" Caveat ? The software is not running. Question: Why aren't you clarifying in my other posts which sentences are opinion and which ones aren't? |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by MnSpring on 11/17/24 at 11:22:23 624240485542270 wrote:
I simply asked a question ! "Why did you not post the, "OPINION" Caveat ?" About a particular post of yours. You did answer, stating a software glitch. So why do you want, me to clarify for you. Wheather posts of yours. Are facts, or opinion. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by JOG on 11/17/24 at 11:52:40 What changed your mind? You've been arguing against me since I said Who needs polls? Look at rally attendance. Ohh,too small of a sample. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/17/24 at 13:53:23 You did answer, stating a software glitch. Incorrect. I said it was off. So why do you want, me to clarify for you. Wheather posts of yours. Are facts, or opinion. I didn't say I want you to clarify for me. I simply asked a question ! Why aren't you clarifying in my other posts? |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/17/24 at 14:04:34 What changed your mind? Nothing. It is too small of a sample size. You just can't seem to grasp that humans looking at the internet is a different action than calculating sample sizes. You are conflating rally attendance reasons with the mathematical assessment of rally attendance numbers to over a hundred million other humans. One subject is the psychology of "why" humans went to a rally (astroturf) and the other is the how many went in comparison to how many did not. Or in other words - The math. I am saying Harris supporters Observed that Harris rallies were larger than Trump rallies. Are you suggesting Harris supporters did not Observe this? You've been arguing against me since I said Who needs polls? Look at rally attendance. It is too small of a sample. I can think that rally sample sizes are too small of a sample size to predict the actions of over a hundred million other humans, AND ALSO think Harris supporters Observed larger rally sizes. There is no reason for those two things to be mutually exclusive. Harris supporters Observed Reality is that Harris had larger rallies. Do you disagree? Or will this be another question you refuse to answer while I continue to answer your questions. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by JOG on 11/17/24 at 16:06:22 Harris supporters Observed Reality is that Harris had larger rallies. Do you disagree? Or will this be another question you refuse to answer while I continue to answer your questions. Back to top DaFuq's wrong with you? Answered, read what I said. Did she HAVE any rally bigger than One of his? I doubt it. I'm not answering another thing here. Lie,twist the truth, do your best. I'm FUKKIN DONE. |
|
Title: Re: Did anyone else notice Post by Eegore on 11/17/24 at 18:31:49 DaFuq's wrong with you? Answered, read what I said. Did she HAVE any rally bigger than One of his? I doubt it. That's not my question. Stop trying to say I am asking IF she had larger rallies - we already agreed she did not. We agreed she did not have larger rallies. Stop changing the subject and trying to make this a "who had larger rallies" conversation. I am asking if Harris supporters used the internet or "the news" to Observe, inaccurately, that Harris had larger rallies? Did they log into MSNBC/Youtube/CNN and watch some pro-Harris rally footage for instance? Yes they did. Humans on this very forum did that and you commented on it. Many Harris supporters chose to Observe only the information that told them Harris had larger rallies. What is so hard to understand about humans using the internet to Observe things? Harris supporters Observed Reality about rally numbers is not supported in objective truth or empirical evidence. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |