ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 8 of 14
« First < 45678 9101112 > Last »
Washington DC and The Holy Land>Google manipulated from 2.6 million to 16 million votes for Hillary Clinton in 2016
Taco John 01:58 PM 08-19-2019

Wow, Report Just Out! Google manipulated from 2.6 million to 16 million votes for Hillary Clinton in 2016 Election! This was put out by a Clinton supporter, not a Trump Supporter! Google should be sued. My victory was even bigger than thought! @JudicialWatch

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 19, 2019



Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower:
Is there evidence of actual favoritism in Google’s search engine? Well, the European Union certainly thinks so, having fined Google $2.7 billion last year for having biased search results. In the months leading up to the 2016 election here in the U.S., I led a team that used objective methods to preserve 13,207 online election-related searches and the 98,044 web pages to which the search results linked. These data showed that Google’s search results favored Hillary Clinton (whom I supported) in all 10 positions on the first page of search results — enough, perhaps, to have shifted two or three million votes in her direction over time.
Source

[Reply]
GloryDayz 09:54 AM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by Loneiguana:
:-)

Moscow Mitch has blocked all election security bills and has offered zero of his own. Moscow Mitch doesn't care about America's election security.
Lie. As long as he's pushing for getting rid of illegals and stopping them from flowing in, he's doing the best thing that can be done to fix one of the problems.

Let's not forget how many of those useless fucking animals that, yeah, "that", have infested our country!
[Reply]
Hoopsdoc 10:16 AM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by Loneiguana:
:-) WTF are you actually googling? "2nd amendment" doesn't bring any of the up.

Quick Copy and Paste (Bold is my words):



That's the first page. The vast majority is just informational links. For the one link that could be anti-gun (don't know, haven't read if the slave owners one) there is a Townhall pro gun link. We also have a NRA link, which is obviously pro gun.
:-):-):-)

You are a sad sad sack of s**t.

First of all, your own words prove you were flat out lying in your first response to my claim, when you claimed to have googled the 2nd amendment. You dumbass. :-)

2nd, your results are exactly the same as mine, except for the ones you conveniently left out, like the Brady campaign link and the gunsdownamerica link.

Youíre such a pathetic liar. Itís almost as if you are to dumb to realize that EVERYONE posting in this thread has the ability to google the same thing and get close to the same result.

Sometimes it boggles the mind how dumb you are.

Now, hereís where you run away and hide, per your SOP.
[Reply]
Loneiguana 11:13 AM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by Shields68:
Meh, Obama had authority to take the steps to protect the election without anyone else. There was no reason to make a public statement and no showing that a bipartisan public statement would have done anything but be used against Trump. The big problem is that Obama was too busy campaigning for Hillary to have any credibility for a public statement to be believed and that is not Mitch's fault.


Obama should have used diplomatic means that were not a public statement and told Russia to stand down. Instead he told our agents to stand down.
Your post sums exactly why Obama wanted and needed bipartisan support against Russian interference. Anything Obama would have done by himself against Russian interfering to help Trump would have caused conservatives to scream about him "campaigning for Hilary" and being anti-Trump. A bi Partisan effort would have eased that and shown a united front against other countries meddling in US elections.

And Obama did take numerous steps against Russia. And again, stand down only referred to aggressive tit of tat cyber warfare like releasing classified information about Putin's family.
[Reply]
Loneiguana 11:15 AM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by patteeu:
Your guy failed. It's time for you to stand down and let Trump and the Republicans MAGA.
:-)

After two years of having the both chambers and the WH, Moscow Mitch didn't do anything to protect our elections.

The only party actively trying to protect Americans from election interference is the democratic party. Unfortunately, Moscow Mitch is too concerned that without Russian help, Republicans may not win as many elections, to allow any election security bills to be voted on in the Senate.
[Reply]
New World Order 11:15 AM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by Loneiguana:
Your post sums exactly why Obama wanted and needed bipartisan support against Russian interference. Anything Obama would have done by himself against Russian interfering to help Trump would have caused conservatives to scream about him "campaigning for Hilary" and being anti-Trump. A bi Partisan effort would have eased that and shown a united front against other countries meddling in US elections.

And Obama did take numerous steps against Russia. And again, stand down only referred to aggressive tit of tat cyber warfare like releasing classified information about Putin's family.
He did a terrific job.
[Reply]
Loneiguana 11:24 AM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by Hoopsdoc:
:-):-):-)

You are a sad sad sack of s**t.

First of all, your own words prove you were flat out lying in your first response to my claim, when you claimed to have googled the 2nd amendment. You dumbass. :-)

2nd, your results are exactly the same as mine, except for the ones you conveniently left out, like the Brady campaign link and the gunsdownamerica link.

Youíre such a pathetic liar. Itís almost as if you are to dumb to realize that EVERYONE posting in this thread has the ability to google the same thing and get close to the same result.

Sometimes it boggles the mind how dumb you are.

Now, hereís where you run away and hide, per your SOP.
I straight up copy and pasted my results (evidence) from the first page, which matched what I said earlier (outside the news box, which I also said changes often. Like most everything, that seems to confuse you). I just did it again, and gasp, I got one less Ad this time. Everything else is just the same as I copied and pasted.

And yet here you are claiming I removed things while offering zero evidence of your own. How pathetic.

What's really obvious is your assertion that 975 out of 1,000 articles are anti gun is bull shit. The vast majority our non partisan informational pieces about the 2nd.
[Reply]
patteeu 11:58 AM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by Loneiguana:
:-)

After two years of having the both chambers and the WH, Moscow Mitch didn't do anything to protect our elections.

The only party actively trying to protect Americans from election interference is the democratic party. Unfortunately, Moscow Mitch is too concerned that without Russian help, Republicans may not win as many elections, to allow any election security bills to be voted on in the Senate.
With friends like the democrats, who needs enemies?
[Reply]
Mr. Kotter 12:00 PM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by patteeu:
With friends like the democrats, who needs enemies?
Serious question, patty...

Would you be proud of your children growing into the "adult" that Trump is? Seriously...
[Reply]
Pitt Gorilla 12:04 PM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by Taco John:
Every conservative knows beyond reasonable doubt that Google has altered search results to manipulate political sentiment. Not to mention the rampant censorship they do on Youtube.
:-)

Taco John in a nutshell. Who needs data?
[Reply]
patteeu 12:06 PM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by Mr. Kotter:
Serious question, patty...

Would you be proud of your children growing into the "adult" that Trump is? Seriously...
You mean a President? Or a (near) billionaire? Or a tea totaller? Or a patriot? Or a self-assured businessman who doesn't give up? Or a guy with bad hair? Or a guy who cheated on his wife? Or a guy who likes fast food?

Trump has a lot of qualities that I'd be proud to see in my daughters and some that I'd just as soon see them reject.
[Reply]
Merde Furieux 12:08 PM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by Mr. Kotter:
Serious question, patty...

Would you be proud of your children growing into the "adult" that Trump is? Seriously...
:-)
[Reply]
patteeu 12:08 PM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla:
:-)

Taco John in a nutshell. Who needs data?
You don't need data to be right about something. If you had to bet your life savings, would you bet that he's right or that he's wrong?
[Reply]
Loneiguana 12:11 PM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by patteeu:
You don't need data to be right about something. If you had to bet your life savings, would you bet that he's right or that he's wrong?
Conservatives don't need "data" and "facts" when they got their gut and feelings.

:-):-):-)
[Reply]
Pitt Gorilla 12:42 PM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by patteeu:
You don't need data to be right about something. If you had to bet your life savings, would you bet that he's right or that he's wrong?
100% wrong.
[Reply]
patteeu 12:47 PM 08-20-2019
Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla:
100% wrong.
You need a better education. What would your answer to my question be?
[Reply]
Page 8 of 14
« First < 45678 9101112 > Last »
Up