Posted by DougOut on 5/13/2020 7:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Uofa2 on 5/13/2020 7:00:00 PM (view original):
I would like to remind people that there was majority support for impeachment and removal. And that was before the pandemic and crash.

The notion that the electorate is somehow conducive to him winning reelection is just not in line with reality.

But yeah, Obamagate, people going to jail, best president ever. Sure thing,

Where do you get your drugs?

Once the lack of evidence became clear, people realized that had been duped by the witch-hunting Dems and the Trump-hating media, and it was NOT a majority, but don't let petty facts interfere with your rantings.

All3 is just straight-up lying. Someone please call him out.

Ok, maybe not a "majority", but a clear plurality supported impeachment.

I tried to shrink the image, the ****? Why is it still so big?

Someone texted that I "had" to read tang's 12:20 post. Against my better judgement I did.
One of the best examples yet of why I will never unblock him. What a total and complete waste of time he is. Says I am lying for saying it was NOT a majority that favored a Trump impeachment, begs someone to call me out on it, then says, "OK, maybe not a majority...". At least I did get a good laugh at him.

That's a positive eh? You know buddy, IF Trump wasn't POTUS I'd get a good laugh about the **** he spews, too. But alas.
The country (at least a large part of it) is dadgum dumb.

Oh my ******* god all3, you know that's not what you meant. You mean to tell me you typed

"Once the lack of evidence became clear, people realized that had been duped by the witch-hunting Dems and the Trump-hating media, and it was NOT a majority"

Because you knew that 48% supported and 43% were against?

Your post even implies that support was high at first, but got lower as more facts came out. In fact, the exact opposite happened.

No one is going to believe that you knew the numbers. Any rational person reading your post will understand that. Just confess that you didn't know, and take your statement back. If you knew the numbers, you would have said something like,

"While a plurality did support impeachment, it was NOT a majority, and there is a good chance that the numbers would have dwindled after the trial ended. Bringing up impeachment says nothing about whether Trump will win in 2020."

**** off.

Posted by tangplay on 5/15/2020 12:20:00 PM (view original):


All3 is just straight-up lying. Someone please call him out.

Ok, maybe not a "majority", but a clear plurality supported impeachment.

Your data didn't go long enough.

"In the first poll to be conducted following the House's passage of impeachment articles, 52% of respondents said they supported the Houses' articles of impeachment, with 43% opposing. Similarly, 52% of respondents said they support Trump's impeachment and removal from office, while 42% disapproved."

You're right. I didn't realize that the image I got to show only had the polling through October.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/impeachment-polls/

Here's the link to the more updated polling. This actually helps our argument more. A plurality has supported impeachment since the Ukraine stuff came out, and it even reached a majority before the Senate acquitted, then dipped back to 49.5.

Nothing about my argument changes, though. All3 is still dishonest.

Posted by tangplay on 5/15/2020 1:34:00 PM (view original):
You're right. I didn't realize that the image I got to show only had the polling through October.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/impeachment-polls/

Here's the link to the more updated polling. This actually helps our argument more. A plurality has supported impeachment since the Ukraine stuff came out, and it even reached a majority before the Senate acquitted, then dipped back to 49.5.

Nothing about my argument changes, though. All3 is still dishonest.

*fist bump*

i think you mean *elbow bump*

Posted by tangplay on 5/15/2020 12:21:00 PM (view original):
I tried to shrink the image, the ****? Why is it still so big?

It's genetic.

Posted by DougOut on 5/15/2020 3:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/15/2020 12:21:00 PM (view original):
I tried to shrink the image, the ****? Why is it still so big?

It's genetic.

That's what she said........

"Your data didn't go long enough."

That's what she said!

Posted by bronxcheer on 5/15/2020 3:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by DougOut on 5/15/2020 3:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/15/2020 12:21:00 PM (view original):
I tried to shrink the image, the ****? Why is it still so big?

It's genetic.

That's what she said........

It's genetic, unless it's not genetic. In either case, don't ask tang, as he'll loudly claim whichever fits his argument best - at least until he realizes he's wrong then tries to explain why he was wrong yet still right. What a laughingstock. Maybe I do need to read more of his humor.

Seems like all3 is projecting a little bit.