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.
@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.
-
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.
-
@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.
@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!
-
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?
-
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.
-
@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
Only non-witches get due process.
- Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
-
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
@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:
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@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:
@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.
-
It’s perfectly legitimate to ask to see those registrations....
-
-
George - where did you get that info?
This is from county.milwaukee.gov:
You can't see the heading, but the first number is Biden second is Trump:
Same site, registration vs votes cast:
Interestingly I found a file from the Wisconsin elections site from 11/1 showing registrations by ward and the numbers were already higher than the ones in your graphic. And that obviously can't include same-day registrations.
