DILBERT MERCHANT THREAD

Damn…this gets me fucking hyped.

I'm not to sure about any of this guys….I mean I'm not trying to sound like I've lost all hope but what chance do we still have? Clinton is leading in most of the polls.

Hello first post Jew who now waits wait longer to reply. You are filtered now.

Im not worried, Ive seen those pictures of Clinton Rallies, the hag cant even cobble together 1k people consistently to show up. The polls are rigged as all hell, inflated to favor clinton. More likely they are even, but you cant discount how stupid people get swayed by the bias and narrative pushing of the press.

Once Trump is in I hope to god he brings down fire and brimstone on these fucks.

This election is following the monomyth pretty closely.

Who was the wise old man to guide the Don on his journey? Was there a moment of doubt and refusal?
Does pol wanna mad Trump's arc?

SCOTT ADAMS IS A PROVEN SOCK-PUPPET POSTER

google Scott Adams Planned Chaos

SCOTT ADAMS IS A PROVEN SOCK-PUPPET POSTER

google Scott Adams Planned Chaos

SCOTT ADAMS IS A PROVEN SOCK-PUPPET POSTER

google Scott Adams Planned Chaos

SCOTT ADAMS IS A PROVEN SOCK-PUPPET POSTER

google Scott Adams Planned Chaos

Precisely, whenever someone brings up da polls, I reply with campaign rallies, where Trump is constantly getting 30,000 people or more, where people wait 12 hours like they're on line for a concert, and people even get turned away. Compare that to Clinton, who had to cancel an Ohio event due to nobody showing up, despite her having a "lead" there.

However, I don't know exactly how the polls are rigged. Is it because they don't include Stein and Johnson, so Shrillary gets more votes? Or is it like that one college survey where they had almost 1,000 replies, but axed 85% of them and managed to get the result they wanted?

Part of me can't help but wonder if Scott is captive to his own biases on this one. He prays at the alter of Persuasion and Cialdini is the messiah. To not believe that Cialdini is magically persuading people would lead to him having a crisis of faith. Another part of me thinks Scott understands that crafting a continuing narrative is what is driving so much traffic to his blog and increasing his influence.

Im gonna guess the old wise man was Bobby Knight. Trump said Knight called or wrote to him begging him to run before Trump announced he candidacy.

archive.is/0JAHt

That's a great article - what is the problem?

Every thread that even mentions the guy you post this in, makes me wonder if there really might be something to his whole "persuasion" schtick?

Just kidding, I already know there is. Whether or not Scott has taken sides, he has given us quite the arsenal with which to fight back against the shills and manipulators (such as picture related), and that's enough for me.

The debates, Jeb, Carson, Marco, Cruz. Trump had crossed into the other world at this point with little hope of return.

Looks like we're at ordeals, death, and rebirth. This will be the true test of Trump's might, the test that changes him forever.

Refusal would have been rejecting Gingrich's $200 million. He rejected a lot of people, like the Republican jews offering him money during the primaries, but I think this one is the most symbolic, also had the biggest price tag attached.

I also like to think of Pence as the cowardly rogue sidekick easily bossed around by the hero. Perhaps he'll get redemption for his cuckservative actions? Hell, maybe Jeb too?

That gave me the goose bumps. Redemption of a rogue always hits me somewhere.

Anyone else notice that the longroom poll site that bad Trump barely ahead is down? How long has it been? Server error or (((coincidence)))?

Both of these ideas are plausible.

Ironically, Scott himself talked about confirmation bias on his blog earlier, saying that everyone has their own "filters" through which they see the world and therefore they'll interpret the same events differently.

Either Scott hasn't considered the idea that the polls are rigged because he's viewing everything through the "master persuader" filter and Hillary has chosen arguments that, according to his training, SHOULD work…

Or, and I think this is more likely, he's intentionally trying to create a narrative where Trump is the plucky underdog who is struggling to beat an overwhelmingly strong and clever opponent. Oh no! Hillary is crushing Trump in the polls by calling him a racist, which of course is a super-effective insult that hasn't lost its edge at all from being used constantly! How will Trump persuade his way out of this one? You'd better visit Scott Adams' blog to find out! And also buy his book!

Scott doesn't even seem to consider the possibility that, quite aside from being a master persuader, Trump's platform is simply the best one that appeals to most Americans. He keeps insisting that Trump has no policies, when he's outlined them in detail. In short, he, too, is crafting a narrative. It's just that in Scott's version, Trump is going to win. (And he gets to look clever for having predicted it and explained exactly how he did it, even if that explanation is largely bullshit.)

Fun fact: a few "unprofessional" polls have been done using much larger sample sizes than the (((media))) ones, and they consistently put Trump as having around 70% of the vote vs Hillary's 20%. I doubt Godzilla is nearly as big a deal as Scott Adams wants us to think. (But maybe it's best that everyone still THINKS it's a horrifyingly close race that Hillary is winning, so they're all motivated to get out and vote.)

There are different ways. One way is to throw all the independents into the Hillary column, which is something akin to what Reuters was doing. Others have been asking people that either normally cannot vote (illegals) or those with an obvious bias (iilegals again). I can imagine other forms of number manipulation may be occuring as well. Why so much emphasis on the polls? Because in the primaries, trump was fond of using the polls to play on the confirmation bias of the people to create consensus. Hillary is trying to use this as well but can't into confirmation bias since such would require being able to see things from another perspective other than your own and leftists are always off in their own world trying to force their world view on people instead of persuading people so she has not been able to utilize the power of confirmation bias. In any case, they want to neuter Hillary while giving power to Hillary but Hillary is unable to utilize this information due to her own ignorance and lack coordination among her people.

I am thankful for the power struggles that occur within the Clinton camp. I'm sure it is neutering some for the shit he has been doing for them.

It would take someone incredibly persuasive to convince me that the sky isn't blue. I think the face that we still have 50% or so of voters still supporting this witch is proof that Scott isn't wrong. But their lies can't hold out, even with persuasion.

Ah, alright. I said they were probably conducting polls in Starbucks or other liberal hangouts. But now I can mention they are doing them in the spic-filled ghettos too. And I see what you mean, Trump loved the polls when he broke his 30% ceiling, and went higher and higher. So now they are doing everything they can to make the polls look bad. Luckily we know they're full of crap.

I think Scott said something along the lines of "Polls are only rigged when there's lots of money and power to be gained, then it's guaranteed." This is a really bad paraphrase, but you get the idea. I've noticed he's really big into implying rather than saying, which I guess makes sense for a so-called "master persuader" to let our minds fill in the blanks for us.

This is honestly by design. It allows him to look like he is above the fray and allows him to avoid commenting on the pros and cons of these policies. It is part of persuasion actually, since he has said that outright at one point so again, it is a persuader talking about the persuasion a persuader is doing while utilizing persuasion tactics to do so.

This however plays into Trump's hands since the idea that is gaining steam is that whenever Trump talks about specifics, the media ignores it (this is actually ) true. The significance of this is that such proves what Trump has said about his campaign, that a lot of the bluster and noise was done to direct attention to his stance on things and that talking purely policy would result in people ignoring him. This narrative is supported by Adam's own blog, the MSM, and the manner in which Trump trounced the the republican primary field. I personally think Trump should signal to this more since it will show how biased the media has been with him, further eroding people's faith in them.

The 50k poll you're referring to has been posted everywhere, and the sources I've seen are laughable. I have not seen a halfway decent source if you are to share. I agree with Scott's logic - ALL the polls can't be rigged. Consider Brietbart.

Other than that I think that Scott is sometimes trolling, sometimes thinking. He does have a fascination with Trump and a similar ego. He also has a fascination with Anonymity according to self check

checked, praise Kek

I guess Adams reads Conservative Treehouse too.

I meant they want to neuter Trump.

I can see them doing this too. Even in reporting the demographics of a poll, they can hide what part of town they are getting the numbers from, despite that info being out there. Texas is a good example of how polls can be skewed merely by location. Houston is a better example of this.

By itself I would agree, but it's not the only one. Other nonstandard ways of gathering data - the survey of laundry owners in particular jumps to mind - had similar results. Ordinarily this wouldn't seem significant, but the numbers being SO close to the 50k poll struck me as odd.

americancoinop.com/articles/survey-majority-vended-laundry-owners-favor-trump-ticket (won't archive for some reason).

One pattern that has been observed is that the "random sampling" of people used by the polls all tend to be in Democrat strongholds. Also, taking several different polls and keeping the one with the "right" results. And of course, embed related.

At any rate, whether or not you believe the independent polls, the truth is apparently pretty far off from what the news channels are showing.

As has been observed before, this does not necessarily mean that they are all working for Hillary - they want an exciting neck and neck race so they can keep reporting on it for ratings. When "underdog" Trump wins by a landslide in November, they want it to be a surprise.

this will happen and no one will care
this will happen and some people will care
this could happen, maybe if Russia is involved
Trump won't cuck out and (((take advice))) or love the illegal americans ever
this has already happened
won't happen, Trump has tons of contingency plans
wild card it faggot.
this happens EVERY FUCKING DAY and nobody cares
this will happen

I think Trump will destroy Hillary in the debates.

The woman has not had to experience any hardship this entire race, not asked a single hard question, had the media basically cover for her ass, and even Bernie went full cuck for her.

Trump vs Hillary will be like a pampered poodle having to fight a bulldog that's been kicked around by it's owner. She's going to get destroyed, she might even malfunction and pass out in the debate.

Before or after
COUGHING FIT
PANTS OF SHIT
?

When you consider that her side has requested the debates be held sitting rather than standing (likely due to her failing health) this is a real possibility.

This is true too. That said, I also remember the pollsters being vexed about how the polling on the phones or in person differed from the polling online, even in random polling, with Trump doing well, especially among white males online than in person. This has been a serious point of consternation and fear among the left and pollsters in general so much so the media threw fit about it. In fact, their little fit was right before Reuters changed their methodology and suddenly all these polls became pro-Hillary.

Checked and accurate.

You make some good points here.

This. She can't even answer easy ones. Remember the "I've always tried to tell the truth" comment? That was in a cozy, pro-Hillary setting too. She fumbled the keystone pipeline question months ago so if she is worse, I can't imagine what would happen when she gets hit with a hard one.

I can see Trump acting presidential but also firm. Watch him conduct the debate like a business meeting with a subordinate who has fucked up. He'll be professional but grill her on her mistakes.

The moderators are going to do everything in their power to give her the advantage. Her questions will be softballs and Trump's questions will all be gotcha or flatout lies

She will lose immediately.

This is what scares me. I know that the first debate will be like that Fox News debate where they had videos and shit. They'll probably have video of puppies and ask Hillary which one is her favorite.

Part of me wants them to drag out Don Lemon if only because no one likes him, his bias is obvious, and he can't control himself and loves to interrupt people. Maybe even Van Jones because of how overly emotional he is.

Also worth mentioning again is that Trump is very heavily modelling his campaign after Ronald Reagan's 1980 run.

Reagan, too, was mocked by the press as being a "joke candidate", and labelled by the Dems as a crazy right-wing radical. And he was trailing in the polls all the way up to the election, when he won in a landslide so massive that his opponent surrendered before all the votes were even counted.

Also, the lugenpresse don't seem to realize that, as things stand now, every dishonest thing they do is HELPING Trump. Scott Adams is absolutely right about confirmation bias, and Trump's yuge following will react to any debate-rigging shenanigans with "stupid dishonest media!"

This is a potential threat, but I think the best defense against it as a major concern is the fact that Trump himself has shown many signs of being a Master Persuader yet Hillary has only EMPLOYED Master Persuaders into her retinue. She can't think outside the box, she can't react quickly to flip a scenario to her benefit like he can (see Trump's "Rosie O'Donnell" comment for a good example of this)

One example.

Usually it's oversampling the party of the person they want to win. The pic attached features a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll which used 51% Democratic sampling and only 36% Republican, lol. Plus about 14% Independents. In reality, the current numbers are about evenly divided in thirds, believe it or not. At any rate, it is amusing that Shrillary couldn't get more than 44% even with over 50% Democrats included.

I'm very suspicious of the current Kikebart poll which shows Clinton around five points ahead of Trump, because they DON'T include anywhere the party distribution spread information. Also they said it was "weighted for voter something something"–no explanation. Fuck them. Give me the damn party breakdown so I can see for myself.

if anyone is overly worried about the election just remember the primaries.

the media is going to go ballistic every time trump manspreads because they're not use to seeing a white man overtly throw his weight around. I haven't been on Holla Forums lately myself but the latest thing I heard them freaking out about turned out to be literally nothing.

Just stay calm, the truth about Hillary will come out slowly but surely. Anyone who had questionable dealings with her, or might have got screwed or in her line of fire in the past is seeing everything else coming out about her and asking themselves if they should say something too.

What if Hillary is playing 5d chess and is faking being sick?

Very true.

I don't think we're going to see a lot of Hillary's dirty laundry come out in the media until after the election when they realize the tides have well and truly turned; then the floodgates will open.

Speaking of the primaries, it's also worth mentioning that the Primary Model claims that Trump is 90% going to win, though by a far more narrow margin than we'd like to see. And their method has correctly calculated the outcome of almost every presidential election since 1912 (1960 is the only one it got wrong).

Where is that sitting down info actually from? Everybody talks about it but it seems to have come out of nowhere. A source–even a fringey one–would be great.

That's an angle I haven't heard before. It's hard to see what she stands to gain from it, but who knows what's going on behind closed doors.

You know, I haven't seen a hard source for it myself either. I mean I believe it, but like you said it'd be nice to see some evidence.

Funny thought but not likely.

Scott Adams retweeted Cernovich I think saying this. Where he got his sources for I am not sure but I don't mind the rumour mill turning on this since it forces her to go into this standing and makes sure Trump does not take the bait and agree to a sitting debate.

But all of them? That seems unlikely.

I just saw a USA Today headline saying that young people (((millennials))) are fleeing Trump in droves. Now I get why young women might as they think for whatever reason Hillary is more in touch with them, and there are a lot of cuckish nu males out there, but they're saying 26-55% advantage for Hillary in that demo/age range? Sounds fishy. Like:

says, polls are easily manipulable between social sciences professors, interns, volunteers and grad students administering them and feeding broad strokes to the media about what is and isn't significant.

My two biggest worries about the debate are
1) Trump will say something 'unpresidential' like crooked Hillary, or otherwise disrespectful and turn off people
or, a much bigger worry
2)The moderator will be biased towards Hillary and give Trump hard questions he may not know or ask him about statements he made in the past.

To preemptively counter >>>Holla Forums posters
What has been happening in the video games industry is a microcosm of what's happening in the entire press.
The difference is that the video games industry is filled with loose lipped people, and it's very easy to ferret out the liars and cheats.

Interesting poll.

Fair analysis but I'm 100% sure he'll win. Dems are literally saying they're scared of what's in the upcoming wikileak(e)s dump and if Hillary even makes it to the debates with her failing health, it will be an absolute slaughter. We've seen her shots against Trump on twitter and they're fucking pathetic, meanwhile she should be on trial right now. Plus she freezes like a deer in headlights at the slightest problem. Trump has forced these politicians to think on their feet in these debates and that's going to be extremely tough for her now.

What about the Shy Hillary Effect? There must be millions of people who don't say they're voting for Hillary because they don't want people to know they're in favor of a criminal over someone who can't control his tongue, and are too ashamed of their low moral fiber to publicly announce their support.

You would think, wouldn't you? But the thing here is that most of her voter base is formulated in Virtue Signaling, it's a status call rather than a definite platform.

Would be a good Hillary PR team tweet

It's been proven no one cares about the DNC or Hillary's corruption. They should, but that's beside the point. We've all heard the weak horse/strong horse quotes, and that will hold true for her health. People will absolutely not vote for a sickly old bag on the brink of dementia to run the country.

I really hope nothing health-wise happens to take Clinton out of the race. If she drops out on November 7th and Tim Kaine or Joe Biden take over, I could see Trump losing.

The problem is that Scott loves to say "The facts don't matter when it comes to the election, the facts never mattered and never will", yet it's abundantly clear to everyone here that Trump's success comes from him speaking about all the facts that even normies know about but never say out loud. Furthermore our entire reason for being here on Holla Forums and holding the worldview we have is because of certain facts that once learned about will never go away.

The facts matter and Scott doesn't want to admit that Trump's campaign objectively deals with the problems that voters are concerned about and that Hillary wont touch.

thats why i reeeeeeally hope she wears a brightly colored pants suit to the debates o its obvious when she pees out her asshole in the middle of a three hour live event

What would be great is if she and Trump get a chair for the debates, and Trump just stands the entire time.

I can't imagine someone getting attacked or getting fired for being a Hillary supporter, that's the reason why some people hold out on saying they don't like Trump
Most people don't care about the Clinton Crimes, they just think "Oh she deleted an Email, I do that too so what"

This. GG is part of the reason why I am not the least bit surprise. This is part 2 in many ways.

...

That's happened before like with the Nuclear Triad question and Trump still got big gains after that debate

Yes.

If the "professional experts", aka cuckademics say something explicit, they can be shown wrong.

I don't mind the cucks though, as it makes the ones that do dare, so much more influential.

abcnewsgo.co/2016/08/abc-live-poll-who-are-you-voting-for/

Is abcnewsgo.co actually ABC news?

Is abcnewsgo.co actually ABC news?>>7137975

Scott Adams has become an attention whore. Trump isn't really behind in the polls and he's going to win. The idea that Hillary Clinton could win any debate against Donald Trump is ridiculous. There's still a lot of undecided voters who are waiting for the 1st debate but meanwhile they're flooded with negative anti-Trump propaganda on TV on radio on Facebook, etc..

A serious majority of whites are ready to vote for Trump and they're just waiting for the first debate to decide if they're going to vote for him or stay home. (Nobody is going to watch the VP debate and there's definitely not going to be 3 debates between Clinton and Trump.)

cuckservative loser George Will is afraid Trump could win 70% of the white vote and turn the Republican Party into the party of white people. I think that's what's going to happen so even the vote fraud in Ohio won't matter, he will win in a landslide because he will win 70+% of the white vote.

And the day after the election the media will attack white people and you'll see articles on how horrible it is for Trump to win 70% of the white vote.

This is what the cuckservative wrote:

"[Former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney] got 17 percent – that's all – of the non-white vote," he continued. "Trump, by every measure, would do worse than that. Which means he would not have to get just the 65 percent of the white vote to win that Ronald Reagan got, sweeping 49 states. He would have to get 70 percent of the white vote."

Will concluded: "A, it won't happen and B, it would destroy the Republican Party by making it the party of white people."

Reagan got 65% of the white vote at a time when the economy wasn't that bad but somehow Trump wouldn't be able to get 70+% of the white vote at a time when the economy is bad and there's terrorism and there's a ton of illegal immigrants causing a ton of problems?

And don't forget that Romney lost to Obama simply because not enough white people voted for him:

archive.is/Opub2
cbsnews.com/news/in-2012-black-voter-turnout-surpassed-white-turnout/

"The 2012 data suggest Romney was a particularly weak GOP candidate, unable to motivate white voters let alone attract significant black or Latino support. Obama's personal appeal and the slowly improving economy helped overcome doubts and spur record levels of minority voters in a way that may not be easily replicated for Democrats soon.

Romney would have erased Obama's nearly 5 million-vote victory margin and narrowly won the popular vote if voters had turned out as they did in 2004, according to Frey's analysis. Then, white turnout was slightly higher and black voting lower.

More significantly, the battleground states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida and Colorado would have tipped in favor of Romney, handing him the presidency if the outcome of other states remained the same."

Thanks bro, got that one next in my book queue now.

nytimes.com/1988/07/26/us/dukakis-lead-widens-according-to-new-poll.html

What if…

Scott Adams is…

The real godzilla?

He is paid to meme that Trump is really behind in the polls. That, or he is just angling to get paid by a campaign ("maybe I take sides").

Either way he is a spineless faggot douchey clinging to relevance in a soon dead industry. Probably has a furry addiction and alimony payments and needs more money.

The polls aren't rigged. Breitbart just released one and Trump is leading nationally by 5 points. That's the confirmation bias people wanting to believe the polls are rigged.

They aren't. Sure there is some that slant democrat but the whole nation slants democrat and there are some outliers that make the whole thing look ridiculous, and reuters pulling their bullshit and the CBS one leaving out 18-35 helped confirm the bias that they're aren't rigged and are pointing in a general direction.

I love Trump don't get me wrong. He's up against powerful forces though. The whole MSM, Kikebook, google, twitter they manipulate everything that us as supporters get trending or move into the spot light.

We should embrace out status as the underdog and use it to understand we need to motivate others around us to vote even one more person is enough. The fact is if we want it we have to work for it.Personally I think the undecided and "margin of error" voters will push him over the line just barely.

...

Indeed.

...

Cuck eceleb thread #450: almost literal cuck edition

Didnt work for Scrottum Adams did it?

Spoken like a true materialist Jew.

I'm no materialist. But the body is material, and most of our thoughts are from that material as well. The spirit falsely identifies with matter. What I will complain about is the type of love that is a cause and effect phenomenon rather than something spiritual.

It looks to me like Trump isn't trying to win right now. He's not using the heavy ammunition on Hillary.

breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/15/dilberts-scott-adams-breitbart-trump-not-trying-win-moment/
archive.is/v7vKK

It's wrong to give Scott e-celeb credit for this sort of thing - I was thinking much the same thing and these people just bothered to write it down.

>It looks to me like Trump isn't trying to win right now.

Congratulations for letting Scott Adams persuade you that Trump isn't trying to win right now and that you came to that conclusion all by yourself.

The first debate is in what? 6 weeks?

I think you're giving Scott too much credit. Yup, the debate is in six weeks.

I'm going to post this pasta which I like.

LISTEN UP INCREASINGLY NERVOUS MEN

Donald Trump is a genius.

DITF is a technique well known to Donald Trump. It is a technique that he has utilized not only throughout his life but more notably throughout this campaign. For example, Trump's original "ban on all Muslims entering the United States" has now been replaced with a ban on "citizens from countries that have been compromised by terrorism." Such a proposal, despite being functionally similar to the original, has received widespread support from the public due to not only how it was rephrased, but more importantly by the fact that it was offered as a moderate, more palatable policy in comparison to a more extreme option. This is the essence of DITF, and we are witnessing Donald perform this on the nation once again.

Donald Trump knows that a general election pivot is necessary. He knows that continuing the strategy he used during the primaries will result in a loss of historic proportions. So why has he not yet performed this "pivot"? Why is he still making inflammatory comments that he knows the media, which is overwhelmingly stacked against him, will exploit?

(1/3)

praise Kek

Because he also recognizes another fact – appearing "presidential" is the only thing that his campaign is missing, and due to his life of straight shooting, no bullshit, offensive manner of speaking, appearing presidential is not something he's very good at . Further compounding this problem is that even if Trump were to act as presidential as he possibly could, he would still appear unsophisticated and amateurish compared to Hillary Clinton, who has spent her entire adult life learning and practicing what to say and how to say it in order to give an appearance of intelligence, competence, and reliability. Even though the majority of Americans know Hillary is a liar, and they know her policies have been failures, right now they prefer her simply because she looks and acts the part. That's how powerful the art of persuasion is. Human rationality can be completely bypassed through certain manners of behavior and speaking styles and Clinton, as well as politicians throughout history, have exploited this well.

So Trump has a conundrum. He knows his policies are popular. He knows Americans want drastic change. He knows they desperately want to choose someone other than Hillary Clinton. But he also knows he'll never be able to deliver his message as well as Clinton can deliver hers.

(2/3)

But he also knows how to perform DITF. And he is performing it as follows:

Donald Trump is trying to convince the American people to elect him as their President. By acting as unpresidential, unsophisticated, and as childish as possible, he knows that this is a request that the majority of Americans will turn down (and they are currently turning it down).

Donald will then present himself, likely within the next week or two, in the most presidential manner he can possibly muster. And the American people will eat it up. Trump will likely remain 10 points ahead for the rest of the election once this kicks in. Because Trump has now created a scenario in which "Presidential" Donald Trump will no longer be compared to "Presidential" Hillary Clinton – he will instead be compared to "Unresidential" Donald Trump. And compared to this Trump, the one we saw in the primary and, more notably, post-convention this new "Presidential" Donald Trump will be a breath of fresh air. He'll speak in full sentences, not streams on consciousness. He'll stay on topic, not wander towards irrelevant inconveniences. And, most importantly, he'll act like the leader of the Republican Party instead of a Hillary plant who wants to watch it sink to the bottom of the ocean.

This campaign will be studied for generations.

(3/3)

I think Adams has to fudge his narrative to account for the massive, massive shilling on the part of the biased media.
He's right about persuasion being important, but when he proposed his Trump Landslide theory he hadn't accounted for the sheer brute force of Die Lugenpresse. Now he has to account for the failure of his theory with larpy postulations.

(((They've))) really outed themselves this time. Just search "Trump" on an android device. Literally 7 articles lambasting Trump will pop up with a token Breitbart article. Trump whether he wins or loses, has done more to expose the (((underlying problems))) of our society than anyone in the past 50 years.