Calling the States
-
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 02:44 last edited by
Georgia is even odds:
-
@Larry said in Calling the States:
But it's time the Left got what they've been wanting for so long.
Who do you think are "the Left" and what do you think they have been wanting for so long?
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 02:53 last edited by@Axtremus said in Calling the States:
@Larry said in Calling the States:
But it's time the Left got what they've been wanting for so long.
Who do you think are "the Left" and what do you think they have been wanting for so long?
Sometimes your pure idiocy is just stunning.
-
Give it a rest. There is no mandate to pursue that agenda - far from it. If they try they will get slaughtered in 2022.
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 02:58 last edited by@Mik said in Calling the States:
Give it a rest. There is no mandate to pursue that agenda - far from it. If they try they will get slaughtered in 2022.
I'm not talking about the politicians. I'm talking about the voting public. I've lost faith in the American public.
-
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 03:04 last edited by
But AZ has tightened considerably. It was in the high 80s earlier
-
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 03:05 last edited by jon-nyc 11 May 2020, 03:05
Nate Silver says AP and Fox should reverse their AZ calls.
He says he still thinks it’s more likely Biden wins the state but it’s by no means sufficiently assured for the state to be called.
-
@Mik said in Calling the States:
Give it a rest. There is no mandate to pursue that agenda - far from it. If they try they will get slaughtered in 2022.
I'm not talking about the politicians. I'm talking about the voting public. I've lost faith in the American public.
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 03:08 last edited by@Larry said in Calling the States:
@Mik said in Calling the States:
Give it a rest. There is no mandate to pursue that agenda - far from it. If they try they will get slaughtered in 2022.
I'm not talking about the politicians. I'm talking about the voting public. I've lost faith in the American public.
Blame the media and the unquestioning nature of our citizenry.
-
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 03:11 last edited by
Maricopa... Trump took this last vote tally +18 and there’s still another 340K ballots left from there.
Something is up in Nevada regarding provisional ballots.
-
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 03:14 last edited by
This shows what’s happening in PA and AZ as they keep counting.
-
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 05:20 last edited by
Cool visuals.
-
@Mik said in Calling the States:
Give it a rest. There is no mandate to pursue that agenda - far from it. If they try they will get slaughtered in 2022.
I'm not talking about the politicians. I'm talking about the voting public. I've lost faith in the American public.
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 05:40 last edited by 89th 11 May 2020, 05:41@Larry said in Calling the States:
@Mik said in Calling the States:
Give it a rest. There is no mandate to pursue that agenda - far from it. If they try they will get slaughtered in 2022.
I'm not talking about the politicians. I'm talking about the voting public. I've lost faith in the American public.
I tried warning you!
-
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 08:40 last edited by
Quite an election you guys have going on this year. Whoever finally wins, I hope everything will quiet down quickly.
Quite a lot of media coverage on this locally here (that's the understatement of the day...). Especially a lot of disbelief about Trump's very early victory claim and his claim of massive voter fraud via the postal voting.
What exactly is the allegation here? I don't know enough about it, but from what I've read the postal votes are tracked through unique barcodes and signatures (which must match a signature obtained when the voter registered or something?). Does such a ballot form contain personal information (i.e. could one identify who filled out the form based on what's on it)? I would assume that that's possible, as it's similarly possible to identify who made a certain vote on an electronic voting machine if one would put in the effort to put all pieces of the puzzle together. It should also be possible in that way to check that the list of people who voted are all people with a legal right to vote in that state (and as well check that no dead people have voted for instance...).
So what is this massive fraud that Trump claims is happening? Would someone be generating Biden votes from registered voters that did not actually vote in this election? Surely, however the suggested fraud is being committed, if fraud like that would be happening on the massive scale that it would need to be happening according to Trump, there would be so many people involved that at some point this would leak and get reported?
-
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 10:29 last edited by George K 11 May 2020, 10:31
According to Ballotpedia, no American state in the period 2002-2018 has ever achieved a turnout rate of 80% or higher. -
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 11:07 last edited by
That guy needs to go on a statistics course before he starts throwing around words like "standard deviations" and "statistical impossibility".
This isn't a random process. If you make it much easier for people to vote, you shouldn't be surprised if a lot more people vote.
-
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 11:35 last edited by jon-nyc 11 May 2020, 11:41
@George-K - the state of Wisconsin puts their turnout at 71%, which is less than 2004.
The reason is WI uses same day registration, and it is quite popular.
So they measure 'turnout' by % of voting age population. It's worth noting that the very graph you posted is using WI data and calc method (%voting age population) for all of the data points except the last one.
https://elections.wi.gov/elections-voting/statistics/turnout
-
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 11:40 last edited by
-
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 12:08 last edited by
As it is, Biden/Harris already got well over three and a half million popular votes more than Trump/Pence. The majority of voters do prefer Biden/Harris.
-
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 12:11 last edited by
Trump claimed he only lost the popular vote in 2016 due to fraud.
He was a sore winner as well as a sore loser.
-
@George-K - the state of Wisconsin puts their turnout at 71%, which is less than 2004.
The reason is WI uses same day registration, and it is quite popular.
So they measure 'turnout' by % of voting age population. It's worth noting that the very graph you posted is using WI data and calc method (%voting age population) for all of the data points except the last one.
https://elections.wi.gov/elections-voting/statistics/turnout
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 12:53 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Calling the States:
The reason is WI uses same day registration, and it is quite popular.
I wonder if the voters who registered on election day account for this:
-
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 12:57 last edited by jon-nyc 11 May 2020, 12:57
Sweet Georgia.
-
@jon-nyc said in Calling the States:
The reason is WI uses same day registration, and it is quite popular.
I wonder if the voters who registered on election day account for this:
wrote on 5 Nov 2020, 13:01 last edited by@George-K said in Calling the States:
@jon-nyc said in Calling the States:
The reason is WI uses same day registration, and it is quite popular.
I wonder if the voters who registered on election day account for this:
It's their state, but nobody should be allowed to register on election day.
