• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

The Race For 2024

Donald Trump, the former U.S. president who's running in this year's White House race on the Republican ticket, has surprised many with his embrace of bitcoin and crypto this year.


Trump's support of bitcoin—a complete flip from 2019 when he railed against crypto—comes after he made millions from a series of crypto-based digital trading card collections and puts him alongside Wall Street giants and Shark Tank billionaire Mark Cuban as a crypto convert.


Now, after Treasury secretary Janet Yellen admitted her fears over the future of the U.S. dollar, Trump has floated the possibility of using bitcoin to pay off the U.S.'s $35 trillion debt pile—which is adding $1 trillion every 100 days and could fuel a bitcoin price boom.
 
Seems like the idea that Hillary "had it in the bag" was even more delusional if the polls still showed the race was close.
But it was. I'm not sure how that's delusional.
Much much closer than the polling even a few days earlier.

Honestly, I think that the biggest miscalculation the Clinton campaign made was putting too much stock in the polling. They became over confident. Instead of focusing on the swing states, like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania they put too much effort into flipping purple states.
And people who were appalled by Trump were so sure that Clinton would win they didn't vote for her. They stayed home, wrote in Sanders, voted third party, whatever. Whatever they did, what they were doing was voting "Whoever wins" which turned out to be Trump.

I hope that doesn't happen again.
Tom
 
By the way, ignore the polls. I keep seeing people talking about polls but everyone already knows the polls made it seem like Hillary was going to win in 2016 and she didn't. No idea why people still take them seriously. Screw the fucking polls.
What "everyone knows", and what actually occurred, are (as so often) barely nodding acquaintances.

Polls have never been infallible and absolute predictions of the future. They allow us to get a vague idea of the odds.

Hillary was most likely going to win in 2016, according to the information available ahead of the election; But nobody presented data that said it was a 100% sure thing, except the simpletons of the news media, who can't handle nuance, and are utterly clueless about probability.

538.com gave Trump a 28.6% chance of victory; That's better than 4:1 against.

Anyone who picks the favourite in a horse race, only to have it lose to a 4:1 outsider, is going to have a very hard time convincing me that he isn't an idiot, if he claims to have been misled by the bookmakers odds into thinking the eventual winner had no chance at all.

4:1 shots win plenty of races. Nobody should be surprised. 71.4% is a LONG way short of a certainty.

That casinos are highly profitable businesses, demonstrates that most people are shit at understanding how probabilities work. The hand-wringing over how "we can't take the polls seriously" is more of the same; We CAN take the polls seriously, but first we need to understand what they say - and what they don't say.
 
By the way, ignore the polls. I keep seeing people talking about polls but everyone already knows the polls made it seem like Hillary was going to win in 2016 and she didn't. No idea why people still take them seriously. Screw the fucking polls.

The polls were actually quite accurate in 2016, and on election eve it was indicated that Trump was slightly behind in the popular vote but within the margin of error of the polls, and that the Electoral College was a tossup.

Seems like the idea that Hillary "had it in the bag" was even more delusional if the polls still showed the race was close.

They did, but I think most people could not even comprehend the idea that a monster like Donald Trump might actually win, so everyone kind of assumed Hillary would prevail. And she did win the popular vote by 3 million, but no one really anticipated the election would be sabotaged by the idiotic Electoral College, though the same thing had happened in 2000 and several other times in U.S. history.
 

OK, so I was wondering, who has their hand on the waist of the woman on the left?

It's not the woman next to her, or DJT, both of whom have their right arms out front and fully visible. Unless, of course, one of them has multiple left elbows, and arms of radically differing lengths.

The only other viable candidates are the woman in the black dress on the other side of Trump, who has her left arm tucked behind her back, and who apparently has an eight foot long left forearm; Or the one in white, even further along the line, who has a ten foot long right arm.

This I find even more disturbing than the apparently random allocation of extra fingers to the various visible hands.
 
Last edited:
In case anyone is still thinking about voting for RFK, here's something you should bear in mind:

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Mastermind Behind Viral Central Park Bear ... Supposed to Amuse!!

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s copping to a viral mystery that once had New Yorkers baffled ... admitting he dumped a dead bear carcass into Central Park and tossed a bike on top of it as a joke.

The independent candidate for president posted a video to his official X account Sunday describing the incident seemingly to get ahead of a story soon to be published by The New Yorker.
In the bizarre video, RFK Jr. is sitting in a dining room explaining he once went to Goshen, New York on a falconing trip and while driving there he claims a woman in front of him hit and killed a bear cub.

Kennedy, not one to waste good bear meat, says he grabbed the cub and tossed it in his car -- an action he says is allowed under New York state law.
 

OK, so I was wondering, who has their hand on the waist of the woman on the left?

It's not the woman next to her, or DJT, both of whom have their right arms out front and fully visible. Unless, of course, one of them has multiple left elbows, and arms of radically differing lengths.

The only other viable candidates are the woman in the black dress on the other side of Trump, who has her left arm tucked behind her back, and who apparently has an eight foot long left forearm; Or the one in white, even further along the line, who has a ten foot long right arm.

This I find even more disturbing than the apparently random allocation of extra fingers to the various visible hands.

Me, I like how they are all taller than him. Ha Ha
Trump needs AI and photoshop to get close to women that everyone knows he’s a rapist.
 

OK, so I was wondering, who has their hand on the waist of the woman on the left?

It's not the woman next to her, or DJT, both of whom have their right arms out front and fully visible. Unless, of course, one of them has multiple left elbows, and arms of radically differing lengths.

The only other viable candidates are the woman in the black dress on the other side of Trump, who has her left arm tucked behind her back, and who apparently has an eight foot long left forearm; Or the one in white, even further along the line, who has a ten foot long right arm.

This I find even more disturbing than the apparently random allocation of extra fingers to the various visible hands.

It could be a black midget lady standing behind the two ladies on Trump's left, who got squeezed out of the shot at the second.
 
Then a bunch of people who couldn't get into the rally, due to it reaching capacity, claimed they were purposely being kept outside. Gee. Don't they know anything about the safety issues with over filling a stadium. They tried to blame U. of Georgia for being to liberal to let them in or some bullshit like that. There were some anti Trump protesters outside, so the police had to put up fencing to keep the two groups apart. At least there was no violence. That was the best part.
Video I've seen of the rally showed lots of empty seats.
 

Clearly this visual helps perpetuate the stereotype of the Midwest being populated by overweight poorly dressed and uninformed rubes.

I am not even kidding.

I'm not sure I even get what the message is. I keep looking for a video link or something to see what it is they are supposed to be saying, but not finding it. Someone help me out here.

Me either which makes me think the visual is the message

Yep. Fat, dumb people who live in flyover states. Par for the course on this forum.

No, I literally live on the other side of the planet and I think this makes sense. So maybe you can educate me on what I'm missing.
 
Trump has floated the possibility of using bitcoin to pay off the U.S.'s $35 trillion debt pile...
I don't think bitcoin works that way. If it's even possible, buying $35 trillion worth would inflate the price. And the minute you try to pay off the debt, bitcoin would crash. Taking the US treasury with it. If you can find the cash to buy $35 trillion worth, why not just pay off the debt with the cash?
 
Last edited:
In the news polls show Harris gaining ground on Trump. Independents are moving to Harris.

The number of democrats who say they are likely to vote is going up.
 
Back
Top Bottom