Replies

You are aware because I have so informed you that I cannot reply to you in private mail because that function has been suspended or, perhaps, terminated. Similarly, I cannot reply to you by public reply because so often those replies disappear into the black hole of censorship. So I am left the position in which you can slander me personally but I cannot effectively reply.

By way of example: in reply to your rather fatuous reply arguing that the recent polls are not to be believed, I offered two citations in separate replies to the averages compiled by Real Clear Politics showing unanimity in polls showing big leads beyond the margin of error in all cases but one by Hillary nationally and in battleground states. These replies were censored and never published yet today we see reference to the very same Real Clear Politics polls all over this forum. I attempted to answer your criticisms of me personally with the reference only to a reputable factual source hoping that that at least would get published here. No joy.

Today you compare me unfavorably to a traitor who was executed for her crime. How might I respond to that? With another factual reference which gets censored away? With a private reply, which is denied me?

Yet you accuse me of bellyaching about being zotted when you're fully aware of the limitations of my ability to reply to your personal slanders of me and you cynically and cravenly exploit the situation.

Jumping in on this reply because it is consecutive to the reply to me.

Two points.

1) I cannot remember where I read it (and given the volume of my online reading, if I haven't explicitly saved the URL I probably won't find it again)...but someone pointed out that according to these polls, Trump went up from +10 to -10 (a twenty-point swing) in little over one week. This does not happen in the absence of a 9-11 type event.

2) If one reads the internals of the polls, one finds things like oversampling of Democrats by 10% or 12%. Given that attendance at primaries is often decently correlated with general election enthusiasm, and that Triump gained more primary votes than any Republican in history (against a crowded field widely regarded as the most talented of all time), while Hillary's numbers are below the 2008 and 2012 numbers, this oversampling is at best...questionable.

3) If one further reads details of the polls, one finds that they are of "adults" or "registered voters" many times, not just of "likely voters". And some polls have been caught openly asking to speak to the youngest person of voting age in the household: the 34-and-below demographic is the *ONLY* one which shows a Clinton lead.

4) Trump leads by about 20% among men; and somewhere between 10%-12% among independents. In order for Hillary to really be showing the poll numbers she has, the surveys must be taking place among the staffs of Huffington Post and Jezebel.

5) If Hillary were really winning in a landslide, you'd find all the talking heads and all the online trolls crowing about her inevitability, and bragging about what they're about to do once she's elected: just as Obama did. Instead, you find her hiding from public appearances, spending tens of millions of dollars in the summer without appreciably affecting Trump's numbers, having Obama and Biden variously appear with her, and 24x7 coverage by ALL the MSM which makes Bush Derangement Syndrome appear like William F. Buckley's old Firing Line.

And her numbers never top about 40% favorability. That's the kiss of death for an incumbent (which she represents, being a member of the current administration).

Dukakis was up big at this point; and Carter was up by 9% in October.

Oh, yes. If this is an ironclad cinch for Clinton, why the f*ck are there numerous lawsuits to overturn voter ID laws the moment after Trump wins the GOP nomination? They're *scared sh!tless*.

I figured you had the ability to respond privately by now.

But I see that you still have restrictions placed on your account due to your misbehavior.

I maintain my assertion that you despise Donald Trump, can't find anything good to say about him, and that you continue to insert gratuitous insults towards both Trump and his supporters into virtually every posts.

I take no joy in comparing your posts to the actions of Tokyo Rose. It's simply an opinion I've formed based on your relentless tendency to put in negative context anything that happens in the Trump campaign.

The bottom line is, you're still carrying the torch for Ted Cruz, who has exhibited his abject selfishness and lack of concern for the future of this Republic.

You simply can't disguise your pathological disdain for Donald Trump; it suffuses everything you post on the topic.

Until you really embrace what's happening with this Revolution, which you have been dismissive of from the start, you will remain an incorrigible killjoy.

I'm not calling you a traitor, but your total inability to enthusiastically support this campaign negates any positive influence you could exert.

This remains Jim Robinson's site, so as long as you continue engaging in your slander of Jim, other FR members, and Donald Trump, I guess your posting privileges will remain curtailed.

Look at your tagline. You're still bitter. Until you let go of all that, nothing is likely to change vis-a-vis your relationship to this community.

I will personally ask Jim Robinson to restore your full posting privileges. Not that I have any control over him, but I WILL express my opinion.

Regardless, it remains the case that your "crusade" certainly possesses no monopoly on Truth, although you seem to think otherwise.

Have a nice day and please "learn to stop worrying and Love the Trump movement".

Vote Trump!