And having a password does not mean Wikileaks' documents haven't been tampered with before release. In fact, we know for sure that the metadata has been altered. In fact many of the most allegedly damaging emails have no metadata at all. Now why would Wikileaks take all that out, but leave passwords and social security numbers and addresses in?
The Ecuadorian ambassador was quoted as saying, "Julian never cleans his room or puts his dishes in the dishwasher, and he keeps trying to feel up the housekeepers. He better shape up, mister, or next time it's going to be the Playstation. He'll have to start contributing around here. It's not like we work for the broadband company."
At the times of Watergate, journalists relied on illegally-obtained information to bring down a Republican President. That was and remains deemed heroic and brought them accolades and Pulitzer Prizes.
Before those Pulitzers were given, before the journalists published those "illegally"-obtained documents, those journalists actually verified that the documents were fucking real, which is something no one has proven with the Guccifer 2.0 or #PodestaEmails19.
he EC was created because the size of the US 250 years ago (yes, smaller then it is now, but still very large) meant that reliably getting a popular vote to a central location was damn near fricking impossible, so instead you voted for electoral college candidates who would then go to DC and cast their vote for president.
So, you're saying they believed it was easier to send a human being to Washington DC than it was to send a letter that said, "The vote total was..."
So then why was an electoral college needed in states like Virginia and Maryland which are walking distance from Washington DC?
People have to remember that Nate Silver is using statistics based on assumptions, and those assumptions may or may not be valid.
And he's also using statistics based on data and there is a whole lot more (and much much better) data during a national general election than there is of the individual parties state-by-state.
I bet if you think about it, you'll figure out how the general and the primaries can't really be compared.
Anyway, we also have assumptions made by Real Clear Politics:
Slashdot Mirror
Wait, I thought she was hiding emails from the FBI. Now you're telling me they really have them?
Lock her up.
Wait, you're trying to tell me that Hillary pays people that work for her campaign?
Lock her up.
I doubt that we're going to get any before the election. I can't imagine North Carolina law enforcement is going to bust their ass on this one.
And not trying to bomb an apartment complex in Kansas or setting a Reichstag fire in North Carolina.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
I'm not sure sex with Trump is going to sway a lot of voters. I mean, isn't that part of the reason he's so far behind?
And having a password does not mean Wikileaks' documents haven't been tampered with before release. In fact, we know for sure that the metadata has been altered. In fact many of the most allegedly damaging emails have no metadata at all. Now why would Wikileaks take all that out, but leave passwords and social security numbers and addresses in?
"We Open Governments"
Yes.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pini...
The Ecuadorian ambassador was quoted as saying, "Julian never cleans his room or puts his dishes in the dishwasher, and he keeps trying to feel up the housekeepers. He better shape up, mister, or next time it's going to be the Playstation. He'll have to start contributing around here. It's not like we work for the broadband company."
He gets an allowance, but it takes time to convert it from rubles to sucre to pounds sterling.
A hero that lives in his Ecuadorian mom's basement.
By the way, I heard from a Wikileaks source that the reason he lost his internet is because he wouldn't do his chores.
Those links show that the phone was hacked. That's not even close to being the same thing as saying that the documents Wikileaks released are real.
That liberal North Dakota government is trying to take away our First Amendment rights. Thanks a lot, Obama.
Surely, you jest.
http://www.breitbart.com/
Has anyone suggested that Assange should try rebooting his router? Sometimes that works for me.
My internet goes down twice a week and nobody starts a hashtag and pushes out press releases for me.
Before those Pulitzers were given, before the journalists published those "illegally"-obtained documents, those journalists actually verified that the documents were fucking real, which is something no one has proven with the Guccifer 2.0 or #PodestaEmails19.
Assange is going to have to move out of his Ecuadorian mom's basement some time.
How do you make it through the day, believing the entire world is out to get you?
My point is that it's time for a Constitutional Convention, because the Founders done fucked up.
But they all show Hillary winning.
So, you're saying they believed it was easier to send a human being to Washington DC than it was to send a letter that said, "The vote total was..."
So then why was an electoral college needed in states like Virginia and Maryland which are walking distance from Washington DC?
I didn't say it was great. I'm just pointing out that it isn't an evil conspiracy hatched by George Soros and Saul Alinsky.
And he's also using statistics based on data and there is a whole lot more (and much much better) data during a national general election than there is of the individual parties state-by-state.
I bet if you think about it, you'll figure out how the general and the primaries can't really be compared.
Anyway, we also have assumptions made by Real Clear Politics:
http://www.realclearpolitics.c... ...and assumptions made by people who are actually betting their own money on the election:
https://electionbettingodds.co...