transplantbillsfan

I'll try to read it eventually. I just don't understand why it's so difficult to post what should be at most one or two links, especially if you found and added them yourself. The OP in that thread that you started doesn't inspire confidence considering it's a Twitter post from some dude making a vague claim that he doesn't support with any credible evidence.

Ignored you, clicked "show this post," and just have to respond: If the bolded is the understood way it works here--and note that after your whining I did provide a link and just obliterated the argument you were trying to make as you launched into evasive maneuvers--then I would expect @Buffalo_Gal would thus expect to be held to the same standards in providing that direct link. Aloha!

You linked me to a 74 page thread. Would you scroll through a 74 page thread? You seem awfully sure of the sourcing to so confidently say most of Trump's money is from small donors, all I asked for was a direct link to the source, not a 74 page thread that may or may not contain a link to what may or may not be a credible source. Regardless, from what I can find that's not true. But despite what some posters might believe--like recently ignored ones--I'm completely accepting of facts that are actual facts.

Not surprising at all if it's primarily big money donors. Citizens United has done its damage to the Democratic party in the money-raising competition, clearly. You guys seem to be claiming Trump gets most of his money from small dollar donors. I would like to see where you get that information. Right about what? He's not predicting anything there.

Well color me skeptical then. Time is something I don't have if it takes time to find it. Here's what I found: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-fundraising-q3/ Comparing the parties in 2019 so far The Democratic Party is putting a lot of weight on grassroots fundraising this election cycle. That’s in part because of ActBlue, an online Democratic fundraising tool that has raised over $3 billion for the party by helping to fuel a surge of small-dollar donations.1 When the Democratic National Committee made fundraising a criterion in determining which candidates qualify for the party’s first debates, it specified a minimum number of donors per candidate but not a minimum dollar number, prioritizing candidates who could demonstrate broad national support even if their fundraising totals were relatively low.2 No one is doing better with small donors than Bernie Sanders, who raised $43.0 million, or 57.8 percent of his total, from donors who gave $200 or less.3 Overall this year, 40.1 percent of Democrats’ funding came from small donors. For Trump, 15.2 percent of his total haul came from people who gave less than $200. Here’s the breakdown for all the Democrats as a group and for Trump on his own for the first, second and third quarters. What follows that excerpt is a chart that I can't copy and past that shows that for Trump, 15.2% of his money from the first 3 quarters is from small donors, 15.8% is from big donors, 67.8% is from transfers and 1.1% is "other" By contrast, for Dems 40.1% is small donors, 36.3% is big donors, 7.7% is transfers and 15.6% is "self funding," which is Steyer, I'm guessing. But again I'd be curious to see what you cited... legitimately. I'm not trying to call you out here, but with all due respect, I got absolutely slammed on here by some idiot for not linking a site when I posted something I claimed was a fact. I was told that's not how it's done here.

I always get nervous about playing teams when they switch QBs that week... Oh well, this should be an easy W by NFL standards.

Read that thread? Yeah, I'd rather not go through 74 pages to find that. Most of his donations are small donors? I googled it and it's oddly difficult to pin down and it seems like there's some variance in numbers. The couple I found look like Dems are vastly outraising Trump in small donors less than $200 per donation... like 40% vs 15%. So if you have a link, I'd appreciate it

Trump's getting plenty of big money and obviously will because that's what drives the Republican party. How much of his money is from small dollar donations? $5.3 million from 182,000 individual donations less than $30 on average is likely a much different path than Trump is taking to get his money. And yes, I think that really, really matters.

https://apnews.com/db01cb07afed4f82831c04127542c019 Biden reaps $5.3M online donation surge amid Trump attacks WASHINGTON (AP) — Joe Biden raised $5.3 million in October in a surge of small-dollar online contributions that rolled in after President Donald Trump launched unfounded attacks against the former vice president over his son’s Ukrainian dealings. The swell of cash was raised from through 182,000 donations, with an average amount of about $28, according to figures provided to The Associated Press by Biden’s presidential campaign.

At this point with you, 1 of 2 things are very, very clear. 1) You're a troll 2) Your life really sucks. Probably a combination of both. Welcome to ignore since you never post anything useful, anyway

You're an idiot.

And again. Yes. That was the word I meant. One cannot show ability to become President until one actually is President. One does not do all the things required to be President until he sits in the Oval Office. It was the word I meant and the meaning I meant. But nice try at a gotcha moment, moron. You should probably try going outside to get some Sun. Your life just seems miserable.

Answer = yes Answer = yes

You really believe the President is the mental Titan he thinks he is? Yes, any Democratic candidate has the mental aptitude to beat Trump. The question, honestly, is whether the same thing happens during this election cycle as it did with Hillary with the same serendipitous timing for Trump to be elected.

Somewhere in this thread I posted numerous gaffes by Trump. Find it, read and watch them and tell me Trump is playing with a full deck. Let's be real about this, Trump's own mental ineptitude will cancel out Biden's missteps.

Because it was supposed to be much more substantial and it's been slowing for awhile thanks in large part to the policies of the guy in the oval office--tariffs in particular.

No. Number 1: We have a much easier schedule. We still play the Redskins, Dolphins, Broncos, Steelers, Browns and Jets. We will win a MINIMUM of half of those games if not all 6. I have full confidence in that. That'd bring us to 8 wins minimum, possibly as high as 11 if we won all of them. Number 2: The debacle on Sunday and the issues that it exposed in terms of our players can be resolved easier than we initially thought. We all thought our run D sucked because of talent. Well, as Joe B laid out with video evidence pretty well in his most recent All-22, Star wasn't actually our problem, it was largely an issue of gap responsibility and over pursuit--and hasn't that been the resounding criticism of our young MLB? McDermott clearly saw that on film, which is why he said they were going back to fundamentals. Number 3: And then there were just some terrible coaching decisions. Daboll's PC the other day made it look like he was made aware of them in his film sessions and I'm sure Frazier was the same. I like McDermott and the staff he's put together and believe they'll resolve their issues. Number 4: Although Josh's fumbling is a major concern, he's been a lot better about throwing the football in the last 3 games. 6 TDs to 1 INT. He's still learning the game and will continue to take his lumps, but he's progressing as a passer, even if his deep ball is still off (almost have to forgive that deep miss to Foster on Sunday with that wind). Number 5: Do you really have any games on our schedule at this point that you've circled as absolute Ls? The Patriots? But we only lost by 6 to them even losing our starting QB for the entire 4th quarter and giving up a mind-numbing Special Teams TD. Dallas? Are they really that good? The Ravens? Along with us winning a minimum of 3 of the above games, I strongly believe we will win at least 1 of these games, bringing us to a MINIMUM of 9 wins this year. So no, 9-7 minimum would NOT be like 2008 or 2011 all over again.

The reason at this point the election might go differently than I expect is if Gabbard actually runs as a 3rd Party Candidate, which would bode very well for Trump considering he won the last election because of 3rd Party Candidates for people to vote for rather than Clinton. Even though she claimed she wouldn't run as anything other than the Democratic nominee, she just gave up her congressional reelection in order to focus on her Presidential run as she's sitting in the back of the field, so something is up there. So I'll give you that. If we get Gabbard as a 3rd Party Candidate, the bet's still on, but I concede I'm much more likely to have a Trump avatar next year.

Please direct my attention to the posts where I want the country to fail. I can compartmentalize pretty easily. Wanting a new President because I think Trump is terrible as a President isn't me wishing for the country to fail. It's not even me wanting Trump to fail. So if you're going to point to my above post as me wishing for the country to fail. Guess what, it's not. It's just me pointing out the fact that Trump is failing at one of his biggest promises. You really like to paint crap in black and white, don't you? Man, this failing Trump Presidency must be getting to you.

If you believe the post of mine you just quoted is doing that--clearly your partisanship is assuming I'm celebrating a slowing economy where people are going to start suffering down the road... that's on you--then there are countless posts where you do exactly that. If you deny that, you're being disingenuous. Look through your own posting history. Seems like you could use the self-reflection.

Yeah right... Obama killed this country. It was him that was responsible for our economic slowdown before he got into office!!! The fact that he couldn't stop the freight train that was the economic collapse that was in full swing before he got into office quick enough and allowed job losses on his watch as he got into office is inexcusable!!! Let's forget that all this economic growth started with him!!! OBAMA BAD!!! You guys are always good for a laugh with your hypocrisy

What a laugh coming from this board--how hypocritical. The economy was honestly the one thing I was hopeful for when Trump became President. I always thought his proclamation that he'd be able to get the economy to 5 or even 6 percent was a joke, but I honestly thought he'd managae to push it up steadily above 3%. Instead, he's one of the primary instigators of a global slowdown.