Summations Only

I know about Twitter from trustworthy sources. Also about the infiltration of the Townhall meetings. But in my opinion anyone who is half conscious ought to know such things are rigged because we know he's very popular.

I'm not arguing from my own personal circle of family and friends, I'm arguing from what I see in those public venues, the HUGE support for Trump. Sure it's "plausible" that Trump supporters are in the minority but I know from the election that they aren't. When I see a poll that puts his popularity below 50% I know it's fake. Yes, I just know it. The same way you believe the lower percentages I believe they're fake. You can't prove it, you have to resort to the convoluted reasoning in your post that amounts to nothing. No evidence, no facts. We're both trusting in our intuition.

The other danger is that pulls on some strings. As was demonstrated in the election, they were manufactured depending upon who you was reporting the polls. And that's because they know they can manipulate how people think. Conservative pollsters were reporting that Trump was ahead while liberal pollsters were reporting that Hillary was ahead. Same data, different results. That's because there is nothing accurate about them. They are misleading and quite honestly irrelevant. How other people presume to vote should never be a consideration for how YOU want to vote or the reasons why.

As I said, the Rasmussen poll includes only people who intend to vote, while the Gallup poll does not. This could account for the difference. Trump is still very popular with his base, but his administration appears chaotic and disorganized, and Trump himself seems ignorant, impulsive, mean and inept. He has no experience in governing and it shows. To ignore it would be to ignore the elephant in the room, and so the media is not ignoring it.

Is the spelling problem actually in the original counter proposal?I guess they could have meant appose, but that would be weird.

About the Sweden remark by Trump.It isn't clear exactly what Trump was referring to, but it could have been lots of different reports on what is going on in Sweden. He said he got it from Fox News, and it's possible. He may have the date wrong. But there's SO much out there about the crime rate in Sweden going up because of the Muslim immigrants it could have come from anywhere.The focus on the specifics of Trump's misstatement or lack of clarity is of course a version in itself of fake news to distract from the important point, that Sweden is suffering a huge crime problem as a result of Muslim immigration, which Trump used as one example to explain why we need to be careful about taking in Muslim refugees.The problem turns out to be the stranglehold of political correctness on Europe and on Sweden. They cannot admit to the crime problem because that would be "racist." If it's racist we're talking about Muslim immigrants as the cause.

Right, smack dab in the middle. Which does surprise me somewhat since even I think of myself as identifiably on the right. But the reason I brought it up was that RAZD said I must be reading his chart from the point of view of the VERY far right and I don't think that's true. My midline score at least supports my idea that it's more likely that "Mainstream" has gone Leftist (and that EvC is SO far Left it looks neutral to y'all).

This one starts out with one minute showing Muslims destroying Christmas trees in shopping areas.

You didn't see the Muslims climbing up the tree in the second shot? Shouldn't the destruction of two Christmas trees by Muslims tell you something about Muslims wanting to destroy Christmas trees? The pictures are clear, your hopeful counterevidence is just hearsay.

The men climbing the tree in the second video are pulling things off it. The video identifies itself as being about Muslims. Brussels is in Europe is it not?What third video?

What I mean is, I have noticed a tendency to lump all of Europe together as if it were some mega-county, when something happens in Norway, let's say, I'll often see right-wing American media outlets say it shows how "Europe is spiraling out of control".

Long long list of headlines at bottom of the article, I'm copying out only maybe a quarter of them. They are all links to articles.

I knew it would be denied. Since the MSM won't report this stuff and the European press is also disposed to ignore and deny it, the only sources are such as Jihad Watch and the rest of us who care about it. If all you will accept are the MSM then I guess you'll just dismiss anything I can come up with.

Nevertheless, I don't know who among you has ever lived in an Arab country. I have [inaudible]. As far as I am aware, Jitka has been to Somalia and I have been [inaudible]. If you experience it for yourself, then you ascertain that you basically can talk about our values, about democracy and stuff like that, for as long as you want, but because the development there has been different, and those millenia of ancestral and tribal traditions, their stance toward [inaudible] male and female sex is absolutely different. They just don't grasp what we say to them. Either they don't want to grasp it, or they don't grasp it. Now I'm speaking from my own experience, from the interviews we did there. They mainly insist that their values are correct. They're not willing to accept that ours exist [inaudible]. What is happening now is... in Libya a million other refugees are waiting for somebody to bring them to Europe. Once they are here and once there are a lot of them, then they will have the tendency to actually, really advocate for their truth, their vision of the world, their religion, their rules. To tell you the truth, I don't know if any of you would want to live to see that - I don't know how old your children are, but I have a nine-year-old girl, and I wouldn't want her to have to wear a burka in 20 years, once she's 30, and to have no rights whatsoever. I really don't. Naturally, I'm aware that the refugees who are [inaudible] are victims and we should aid them. However, on the other hand, what is in that article is also true, that the state is not fulfilling its function, and the state is here to defend its borders and protect [inaudible]. At this moment, that is what the European Union should do and protect Schengen. However, we're just concerned that there can be a much bigger problem arising from this than we are aware of today. For the time being there are a couple hundred thousand of them here, maybe a million, I don't know, but in the moment when there will be many of them here, then they actually won't respect our rules. You all know yourselves that if you go to Saudi Arabia, it doesn't exist that you'd go outside without covering your face. That's what they will advocate here. They will want us to [inaudible]

I'd like to think that's common in Europe because the impression I get is that Europe is politically correct to the point of suicidal.If that message is so common in Europe how come I can't get anyone to agree there's a problem or that anyone in Europe even thinks there is a problem? How come so many national leaders in Europe deny there is a problem? That shows up in my videos along with all the pictures of Muslim violence.