Search results

but they had hillary with very large leads until they unskewed. that is why your pundits were so wrong. lets not forget you were posting big electoral college wins for hillary on Nov 5th. here I documented some of the unskewing...

your polls were crooked as could be until the end when they unskewed or herded. that is why the pundits were wrong. they were invested in the unskewed polls. no one in the world called it better than the algo... "The algo was quite satisfied with the templates after the herding. So its...

then you posted this... Huge jump in the betting markets after FBI news

here is what you Tony wrote on november 5th predicting hillary had 73 to 98 percent change of winning and winning big in the electoral college Betting markets 323-215 Princeton Election Consortium Clinton 312, Trump 226 Silvers original algo 290-246 RCP...

here is what I said on nov.. 7th 2016. It was perfect... https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/the-polls-is-trump-winning-even-without-the-algo.301548/page-84#post-4355689 ---- "its way too close to call. The algo was quite satisfied with the templates after the herding. So its looks...

I have to keep this post on auto post to combat your out of context posting.... but is what I said right in front of the election.... and I was even more spot on in 2016. --- "How many times have I showed you this to you Tony. I posted this 2 nights before the election.... just so everyone...

you and your team were predicting hillary would win the electoral college using your teams crooked polls.

you also presented the polls that said she would win the electoral college... that was your choice... your polls were wrong.

polls you presented stated she was winning the electoral college by a wide margin. she lost.

you presented partisan hack polls predicting she would win the electoral college in a land slide. they failed. bigly. 2. your hack polls had her up by 8 or 10 points and more for most of the season... when to have been correct they should have had her lead in the margin for error. So they...

awesome... how timely that is. I can't believe it... I just had to cheer my daughter up about this a few weeks ago. my youngest has to work so hard sounding out the words. its like she can not memorize the look of the word. And she does flip letters. (one of her brothers had the same issue...

so you are grafting ice core data onto thermometer or instrument records... and you think that means man made co2 is causing warming? that is statistical noise caused by a change in measurement... here is context... we are close to the bottom of the historical record for temps and co2... just...

exthinker... you keep writing the same specious bullshit. hiring a US company to do your crimes does not insulate the principle. you can't hire a criminal to do a crime and think you are not guilty of the crime. so if what don jr did was a crime (as you told us it was) then what hillary did was...

were you not the moron citing statutes saying what Trump did was against the law. Even a new your times reporter says this is a mirror image to the trump jr scenario. i don't think what Trump did was a crime and I am not sure if what hillary did was a crime. I am just saying you and or tony...

I remember a different episode where he was talking about his jewish lawyers acting like they were the best... I was a little kid and it bothered because my dad was a lawyer an not jewish. pretty funny I just recalled that. I look at this now and am amazed it was successful. Even if archie...

the really big story here is that these uranium one crimes make the dossier stuff look like bean bag.

you are a twisted liar. if hillary hired her lawyer to hire consultants to hire a hitman. hillary is still responsible for the hitmans crimes. Even when things get a far more complicated prosecutors have RICO statutes that can be used by prosecutors indict ham sandwiches.

you participate in one thread an then made a new one to write this garbage? the crimes of the agent are imputed to Hillary. so when her agent was receiving info from russian spies and paying for it that is the same or worse as when don jr was meeting with russian who had dirt on hillary's...

your denial is an example of extreme leftist dishonesty. Her agents met with Russian spies and not only spoke but received info from them for money. You told us that Don Jr. was guilty of a crime for meeting and maybe getting info. Hillary and the DNC can't insulate themselves from...