Author Topic: Election Results  (Read 112108 times)

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #50 on: November 04, 2020, 08:54:36 AM »
Also you're telling us all to dig in and also complaining about the lack of responses. Don't worry, sweetheart, I'm pretty sure most of us will give just the reaction you want, no matter who wins.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #51 on: November 04, 2020, 08:54:58 AM »
If Biden holds Arizona, Nevada, and Wisconsin he can escape with just taking Michigan or Penn. And the super long shot outcome right now is Nevada, Arizona and NC go to Biden with Trump getting the rest and we get a 269/269 tie.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #52 on: November 04, 2020, 08:58:37 AM »
With all the claims about democratic voter fraud. Can the Republicans here state clearly that Trump exceeding the polls by around 4% indicates that Democrats do not engage in any type of wide spread voter fraud?

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #53 on: November 04, 2020, 09:05:40 AM »
With all the claims about democratic voter fraud. Can the Republicans here state clearly that Trump exceeding the polls by around 4% indicates that Democrats do not engage in any type of wide spread voter fraud?

I for one think it''s obvious on the face of it that the Demoncrats cheated the vote by 6 percent.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #54 on: November 04, 2020, 09:06:47 AM »
Latest update shows Biden taking a slight lead in Michigan. Very good news for Biden. The Nevada, Wisconsin, Michigan trio is his clearest path to a squeaker of a victory.

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #55 on: November 04, 2020, 09:11:29 AM »
I'm just trying to have a polite conversation, and yet you keep condescending to me. And yet you're the one complaining about people being...atheists? Believing in God? Friendly advice, your message there is a bit confused. If you were annoyed with both of those categories I could probably give you a thumbs up.

I'm not quite sure why you think he's destined to win in Penn  or Michigan.

Lighten up, DJ.  I'm simply disagreeing with you.  I didn't complain about people being atheists, I expressed sympathy.  I'm not annoyed with anyone right now.  You're simply wrong.  Welcome to Ornery. 

I'm not saying Trump is DESTINED to win Pennsylvania or Michigan.  I'm saying that he's WINNING.  In this case I am able to differentiate between what IS, and what is POSSIBLE.  What IS is always more real than what is POSSIBLE.  It's POSSIBLE for Biden to still win Pennsylvania and Michigan.  But right now, Trump IS winning.  For Biden to win in Penn, he better pull out one hell of an absentee vote share.  That is possible, but it's not guaranteed. 

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #56 on: November 04, 2020, 09:25:28 AM »
Latest update shows Biden taking a slight lead in Michigan. Very good news for Biden. The Nevada, Wisconsin, Michigan trio is his clearest path to a squeaker of a victory.

That escalated quickly.  I expect Biden to win Nevada and Wisconsin.  If he takes Michigan, it may be that he doesn't need Pennslyvania because he took Arizona.  It's still razor thin in Michigan, BUT, Trump is no longer WINNING.  Now Biden is. 

I don't think this changes the story that Trump won Florida, and I expect him to win Georgia and North Carolina.  Trump still overperformed the polls. 

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #57 on: November 04, 2020, 09:25:50 AM »
First of all, you demanded it so obviously because you did I'm now contractually obliged to listen up. You did afterall say thanks for that, I had trouble listening up before you came along. Thanks for your thanks!

You're up in here looking to make fun of Dems and, if they give you the opportunity, Reps due to the election. We all understand lol. You're just a lower tier *censored* unwilling to take a side and properly happy to run in there and take advantage of what did work out.

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #58 on: November 04, 2020, 09:27:59 AM »
Please. Pick a *censored*ing lane.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #59 on: November 04, 2020, 09:28:56 AM »
With as close as NV, MI and WI are I would assume there will be an automatic recount?

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #60 on: November 04, 2020, 09:30:23 AM »
I'm not sure why one would think Michigan is in the bag - Trump is only up 0.5% and Detroit is only 66% reporting.  It would be surprising if Biden didn't take Michigan at this point.  With Biden taking Arizona, he doesn't even need Penn, but Penn's outstanding mail-in votes are more than enough to keep Penn in play.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #61 on: November 04, 2020, 09:34:02 AM »
Hmmm... I think people need to take a nap.

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #62 on: November 04, 2020, 09:38:08 AM »
Hmmm... I think people need to take a nap.

I sometimes do but I feel it's a bit rude to just say it out in public whilst pretending something else.

Also. "Someone need's a nap." There is no other explanation or introduction that is...

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #63 on: November 04, 2020, 09:38:58 AM »
First of all, you demanded it so obviously because you did I'm now contractually obliged to listen up.

I formally REQUEST, PLEASE, with all due respect and admiration, for you to lighten up, not "listen up". Or at least drink less coffee. 

Quote
You're just a lower tier *censored* unwilling to take a side and properly happy to run in there and take advantage of what did work out.

I find this highly insulting.  I am NOT a lower tier *censored*.  I am a High High tier *censored*.  I am the highest tiered *censored* on this board.  Who is the bigger *censored* than me?  Is there no-one? 

And I did take a side.  I voted.  But I can objectively watch an election without letting my "side" effect my judgement.  It is true that my general philosophy is that all people, which includes both Democrats and Republicans, are pretty crazy, in proportion to how hard they take a "side". 

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #64 on: November 04, 2020, 09:40:33 AM »
Hmmm... I think people need to take a nap.

I sometimes do but I feel it's a bit rude to just say it out in public whilst pretending something else.

Also. "Someone need's a nap." There is no other explanation or introduction that is...

Also you really grinded my gears on that, thinking I could have had a word with you but yeah, we all need to protect each other nowdays.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #65 on: November 04, 2020, 10:16:22 AM »
With as close as NV, MI and WI are I would assume there will be an automatic recount?
I think it is a bit early to assume they will be that close...

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #66 on: November 04, 2020, 10:40:09 AM »
Some early post-election thoughts.

1.  It looks like Biden is going to win.

2.  It's clear that both campaigns have internal polling that is far more accurate than what is available publicly.  Not clear if they generate it, or if the have deals with third parties for the "good stuff."  As evidence look back at how much of an issue calling Arizona for Biden caused.  Both Biden and Trump mentioned it (Biden seemed to have gone to bed right after that), and at least Fox was repeatedly challenged on the call.  Why?  Because it's pretty clear that both campaigns knew for certain that without it Trump was going to lose.  It'll be interesting after the tally is done and ignoring PA's 20 (if it goes for Biden) whether Biden gets to 270 minus those 11 electoral college votes.  If he doesn't, then you know for certain that they pretty much knew how the rest of the states were going to fall.  In that scenario Biden wins with either PA or Arizona falling his way.  That's how close this was.

3.  Clear repudiation of a national mandate for either team.  Will that cause any humility?  Doubt it.

4.  Despite all the media hate and manipulation that they could generate,  the shear hatred of Trump by so many, and using average Joe as a trojan horse to pretend the Dems are moderates, the support for Trump seems to have increased, including with minorities.

5.  Whether or not there was ballot fraud, or even massive ballot fraud, once the media "calls it" for Biden, there will be no ability to undo the results. 

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #67 on: November 04, 2020, 11:03:31 AM »

Are they though?  There's a lot of bluster about what Trump is "going to do" or how he's "destroying the Constitution" or "obviously a criminal" yet it's all panned out to what exactly?

Where has Trump trampled the Constitution, or even threatened it?

A very easy example: When he said he'll try running again for a third term in 2024 after he gets reelected in 2020.

So your "easy example" is a statement that possible 4 years from now he'd negotiate to try and run again?   Lol.  I agree it would take a Constitutional Amendment, which was never going to happen, to make that happen.

Quote
Can you show you have some self-respect Seriati and admit such an attempt would be blatantly unconstitutional? Or will you refuse to do so?

I would think anyone demanding some-one else show they have some "self-respect" should take a closer look at who they are and what they believe.  In what way are you entitled to cast aspersions on my supposed character based on political disagreement? 

Quote
Trump wants to be a president for life like his love monkeys Putin, Erdogan, Orban, Kim and the like.

Lol.  So what?  I said Trump has followed the Constitution and you're pointing to something that has not happened and was never going to happen as some kind of proof?  What about the repeated statements by the Democrats that they will make DC a state?  Not clear under the Constitution that they can do so without an amendment, which amendment is not going to happen, and which effort to make DC a State may happen.

Or how about how Democrats routinely violate the Constitution where it delegates exclusive authority to set election rules to the state legislatures by using the courts and administrative officials to change them in their favor on the fly?  Or how Obama purported to enter into Treaties, such as the Paris Accord (which Biden has promised to re-enter), without the Constitutionally required advice and consent of the Senate? 

No, you don't actually care about who is or is not violating the Constitution, and I'm not convinced you even understand when it's being violated, you just care about tarring and feathering those with whom you disagree.

Quote
Quote
Has he promised to pack the courts?  Or add new states?

Neither of these are unconstitutional, especially not the latter, which frankly ought be an imperative for any democratic citizen.

True not unconstitutional in respect of court packing, just illegitimate.  As far as adding states, adding DC as a state may be unconstitutional, adding Puerto Rico would not be.

Quote
Trumpists don't want Puerto Rico to become a new state, because it's not white majority, not because it'd be supposesly unconstitutional (it wouldn't)

Honestly, never cared one way or the other about Puerto Rico becoming a state.  Unlike Democrats I don't believe that just because its filled with Hispanic people that means its going to vote Democrat for forever.  Republican policies, especially Trump's are better for Hispanic people than Democrat policies.  That'll play out in the long run, more than the entitlement thinking that dominates the left.

Sorry, Seriati.  It's not just the media that is causing the stink in this Administration.

Go review the "Message from the President..." thread.  At least half of the posts quoting Trump are directly from the President himself via Twitter.  No filter.  No media twisting his words.  They are his own unadulterated stupidities.  No middleman required. :)

And?  Anyone with five minutes can compile a list of pure stupidity with Biden's own words.  I've watched Trump press conferences, I've seen the media manipulation and hostility that colors every interaction with him.  I've seen him answer the same question 11 times in a row and the media run with a partial quote that completely misrepresents what he said and what they knew he said.  Some of his own words are stupid, some of the things he believes I don't agree with, but none of that changes that when asked to point to policies all you did was wave your hand at some place else.  Do you really not even know why exactly you disagree with him?

Quote
If you haven't figured out how bad this Presidency has been yet, there's no arguing with you.  You've made up your mind.  But so have I, and right now, my cat would make a better President than Donald J. Trump.  And I don't even like her that much.  ;D

Soundbite, just like I said.  Fact is people were better off under Trump.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #68 on: November 04, 2020, 11:05:20 AM »
Some early post-election thoughts.

1.  It looks like Biden is going to win.

Probably, the mail in vote and where the vote is outstanding in the key states seem to favor Biden. But I would feel a lot better with the margins being larger.

Quote
2.  It's clear that both campaigns have internal polling that is far more accurate than what is available publicly.  Not clear if they generate it, or if the have deals with third parties for the "good stuff."  As evidence look back at how much of an issue calling Arizona for Biden caused.  Both Biden and Trump mentioned it (Biden seemed to have gone to bed right after that), and at least Fox was repeatedly challenged on the call.  Why?  Because it's pretty clear that both campaigns knew for certain that without it Trump was going to lose.  It'll be interesting after the tally is done and ignoring PA's 20 (if it goes for Biden) whether Biden gets to 270 minus those 11 electoral college votes.  If he doesn't, then you know for certain that they pretty much knew how the rest of the states were going to fall.  In that scenario Biden wins with either PA or Arizona falling his way.  That's how close this was.

Arizona wasn't a secret. Without it Trump needed to flip Wisconsin or Michigan which were less likely than Penn.

Quote
3.  Clear repudiation of a national mandate for either team.  Will that cause any humility?  Doubt it.

Humility from Trump, yeah Doubt it. Can you imagine him being as candid as Obama after 2010's shellacking comment. But failure to expand their house lead and take the senate is going to temper some of the democratic enthusiasm.

Quote
4.  Despite all the media hate and manipulation that they could generate,  the shear hatred of Trump by so many, and using average Joe as a trojan horse to pretend the Dems are moderates, the support for Trump seems to have increased, including with minorities.

Opposition to a wanna be dictator for life has increased as well.
Quote
5.  Whether or not there was ballot fraud, or even massive ballot fraud, once the media "calls it" for Biden, there will be no ability to undo the results.

Trump and you have no evidence of any voter fraud but you'll claim it anyway despite the fact that democrats underperformed polls. You would think with massive voter fraud the democrats could at least come close to matching polling data. Unless all the massive ballot fraud is being committed by Republicans.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #69 on: November 04, 2020, 11:09:38 AM »
With all the claims about democratic voter fraud. Can the Republicans here state clearly that Trump exceeding the polls by around 4% indicates that Democrats do not engage in any type of wide spread voter fraud?

No, cause Dems do engage in wide spread voter fraud.  I did find it interesting how vote counting stopped (of mail in ballots) in multiple places where in person voting needed to finish.  Any chance someone decided they needed to know how many votes were necessary to flip the states involved?   Honestly, probably not, that would be so blatant that it'd be hard not to catch.  But it hardly matters when you can harvest the large amount of mailed votes without any poll observers involved and already have them sitting there to be counted.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #70 on: November 04, 2020, 11:19:44 AM »
No, the Republicans commit widespread voter fraud.  Rubber.  Glue. (if it's not obvious: /sarc)

You sound like wmLambert, Seriati.

Evidence-free assertions just make you look silly.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #71 on: November 04, 2020, 11:22:29 AM »
Quote
But it hardly matters when you can harvest the large amount of mailed votes without any poll observers involved and already have them sitting there to be counted.

And how are they going to account for where these votes came from?  They have voter rolls; they know how many ballots they should have; they checked names off and check signatures for each ballot.  I don't see how you can throw in a "large" number of ballots without having a "large" discrepancy between how many you should have and how many you do. ;)

Idle speculation about how somebody "could" "maybe" "possibly" "might" "imaginably" commit "wide spread" voter fraud doesn't help matters at all.  If it is actually happening, find the evidence.  Flip one of the conspirators.  Get a pile of fraudulent ballots.  Show how it was actually done.  If there is so much of it going on, you should be able to show numerous instances where it made a significant impact on the results.  Otherwise, you're just repeating "just so" stories meant to rile up the bases and perhaps inspire civil war in this country.

Give us actual facts, not speculation.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #72 on: November 04, 2020, 11:22:50 AM »
With all the claims about democratic voter fraud. Can the Republicans here state clearly that Trump exceeding the polls by around 4% indicates that Democrats do not engage in any type of wide spread voter fraud?

No, cause Dems do engage in wide spread voter fraud.  I did find it interesting how vote counting stopped (of mail in ballots) in multiple places where in person voting needed to finish.  Any chance someone decided they needed to know how many votes were necessary to flip the states involved?   Honestly, probably not, that would be so blatant that it'd be hard not to catch.  But it hardly matters when you can harvest the large amount of mailed votes without any poll observers involved and already have them sitting there to be counted.

It is the thing Trump is failing to address or even attempt to communicate. I'm agreed any fraud that was going to happen in this election has already happened and likely rests among all the mailed in ballots. However, detection of that is basically impossible, so that's a wash.

More generally, it looks like it'll be a Biden win at this point, but as it also looks like the Republicans may manage to hold onto the Senate I'm a little less concerned about the prospects of what might happen in the next two years.

Hard to pack the courts with the opposition party in control of the Senate, and hard to admit new states to the Union which haven't met the standard of 50%+1 of all eligible voters voting in favor of statehood when there's an opposition party in control of one of the relevant legislative bodies that would have to vote against its interests to make it happen.

Honestly for me the nail biter at this point is seeing how the Senate pans out at this point, several of the seats yet to be called are caught up in the same limbo as the electoral votes for their respective state.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #73 on: November 04, 2020, 11:25:58 AM »
With all the claims about democratic voter fraud. Can the Republicans here state clearly that Trump exceeding the polls by around 4% indicates that Democrats do not engage in any type of wide spread voter fraud?

No, cause Dems do engage in wide spread voter fraud.
Provide evidence that Dems engage in wide spread voter fraud. Because if they do they suck at it. Republicans are winning almost every close senate race, many of the close house races, and Trump outperformed polls by about 4% in most states.
Quote
I did find it interesting how vote counting stopped (of mail in ballots) in multiple places where in person voting needed to finish.  Any chance someone decided they needed to know how many votes were necessary to flip the states involved?   Honestly, probably not, that would be so blatant that it'd be hard not to catch.  But it hardly matters when you can harvest the large amount of mailed votes without any poll observers involved and already have them sitting there to be counted.

Seriously? Its a mystery to you why mail in vote counting would slow down on election day. Do you think it may have something to do with the people who run elections needing to actually run the election on election day?

Mail in ballots are processed (at least in my state) in semi-public ways. I've seen multiple news reports with cameras running inside of the mail in voting processing centers.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #74 on: November 04, 2020, 11:27:10 AM »
With more of wayne County/Detroit trickling in, Biden's lead in Michigan has increased to 0.7%.  But Wayne county is still under-reporting as compared to the rest of the state (76% vs 92%) so Biden's lead is likely to increase.  It's also unclear where Michigan stands with mail in ballots at this stage, but that is unlikely to help Trump.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #75 on: November 04, 2020, 11:27:53 AM »
Opposition to a wanna be dictator for life has increased as well.

Since that's a fake story, that's a fake claim.  Nothing about the Trump admin has been run as a dictatorship.  On the other hand, you can  look to the Democrat controlled cities to find the brown shirt rampages endorsed by local governments to intimidate their opposition, which endemnic of real dictatorships, not to mention the oppression of speech through violence (by the left) and even efforts to criminalize political opposition (by the left).

There is a special kind of media induced delusion in operation here.  Very 1984.

Quote
Trump and you have no evidence of any voter fraud but you'll claim it anyway despite the fact that democrats underperformed polls. You would think with massive voter fraud the democrats could at least come close to matching polling data. Unless all the massive ballot fraud is being committed by Republicans.

In absolute fairness you are correct.  I won't have any evidence that you'd accept of voter fraud (I mean we have testimonials by those who did it, we have actual fraudsters caught, we even have an election being re-run because of voter fraud, but nothing you're going to accept - hard to accept things you could see while wearing a blindfold), because voter fraud is nearly impossible to catch with a secret ballot and even more so with a massive amount of mailed ballots. 

Can you even articulate a sensible way to try and catch it?  Why is PA and elsewhere did Dems fight so hard to invalidate signature requirements or identity requirements?  To ensure that fraud couldn't be stopped of course.  There were always reasonable verification alternatives, but the Dem goal was no limits.

But I question whether you are remotely accurate in your premise that Dems underperformed polls.  Dem turn out was massive, more than for Hillary, there's no legit way to translate that to underperforming polls.  No the polls were wrong because they undercounted Trump support, not because they over counted Dem support.

By the way that last point should have been obvious with even two seconds of thought on the point.  Why did you not only skip the thinking but actually go so far as to claim it as evidence as if you'd verified it?

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #76 on: November 04, 2020, 11:31:18 AM »
I have successful avoided all news other then a few head lines.
Not interested in any analyses or speculation, just final results

Something I felt yesterday as I read some of Seriati/wmLambert  comments was how they view all Democrats as being the enemy consciously and intentionally supporting criminal behavior and the destruction of the country.  A something to be vanquished

This is something that disturbs me. If many on the right or left hold this view I don't see how we come out of it

I think this will be my last comment on things. My opinions won't change the results and I don't think its worth spending any more oxygen on

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #77 on: November 04, 2020, 11:31:34 AM »
Provide evidence that Dems engage in wide spread voter fraud. Because if they do they suck at it. Republicans are winning almost every close senate race, many of the close house races, and Trump outperformed polls by about 4% in most states.

The Republicans have recently gotten better at getting out the vote - they actually learned something from the Obama years, and successfully put what they learned to good use in 2016 and this year.

Combine that with the Democrats foregoing any in-person efforts until late in the cycle (due to respecting COVID restrictions) and you can attribute a large part of that difference to the ground game.


Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #78 on: November 04, 2020, 11:41:08 AM »

Are they though?  There's a lot of bluster about what Trump is "going to do" or how he's "destroying the Constitution" or "obviously a criminal" yet it's all panned out to what exactly?

Where has Trump trampled the Constitution, or even threatened it?

A very easy example: When he said he'll try running again for a third term in 2024 after he gets reelected in 2020.

So your "easy example" is a statement that possible 4 years from now he'd negotiate to try and run again?   Lol.  I agree it would take a Constitutional Amendment, which was never going to happen, to make that happen.

And if Trump had spoken about a Constitutional Amendment that would permit him to do so, he wouldn't be threatening to trample the constitution -- but he never did so. What he said was:
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/08/18/politics/donald-trump-third-term-2024/index.html
"We are going to win four more years," Trump said at a rally in Oshkosh, Wisconsin on Monday. "And then after that, we'll go for another four years because they spied on my campaign. We should get a redo of four years."

There, a clear statement that he's going to violate the constitution.
And he's made these statements consistently and repeatedly, so nobody can pretend that he doesn't mean them. No, he NEVER speaks about a constitutional amendment to allow such, he's just saying he's gonna do a third term because he 'deserves it' (and, presumably, just *censored* the constitution).

Quote
I said Trump has followed the Constitution and you're pointing to something that has not happened and was never going to happen as some kind of proof?

No, you asked not only about Trump trampling the constitution but even just "threatening" it.
Now you got a statement where Trump says (effectively) "I'm going to violate the constitution", and you're saying that's not a threat to the constitution. Okay, dude.

Quote
"What about the repeated statements by the Democrats that they will make DC a state?"
Quote
Not clear under the Constitution that they can do so without an amendment, which amendment is not going to happen, and which effort to make DC a State may happen.

To me, as far as I can tell, it seems clear that the power to do so seems to be granted to Congress by the US constitution. (Article IV, Section 3)
"New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress."

None of the restrictions here seem to apply to Washington DC. So what exactly makes you think it isn't "clear"?

Anyway, I think my example was much much clearer and much more straightforward than yours.

Quote
No, you don't actually care about who is or is not violating the Constitution, and I'm not convinced you even understand when it's being violated, you just care about tarring and feathering those with whom you disagree.

I fully confess that I don't *always* understand when it's being violated, as I'm not an American and don't really care about every little minutia of US constitutional law (e.g. I have no idea if Obama violated the constitution or not by signing the Paris treaty), but as often happens the case with Trump, this guy is BLATANT about everything, and he similarly BLATANTLY says he'll violate the constitution, in a way that even an ignoramus like me can tell. HE WANTS TO VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION AND RUN FOR A THIRD TERM.

You will try to deny it, but the simple truth is just that.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #79 on: November 04, 2020, 11:43:13 AM »
Opposition to a wanna be dictator for life has increased as well.

Since that's a fake story, that's a fake claim.  Nothing about the Trump admin has been run as a dictatorship.  On the other hand, you can  look to the Democrat controlled cities to find the brown shirt rampages endorsed by local governments to intimidate their opposition, which endemnic of real dictatorships, not to mention the oppression of speech through violence (by the left) and even efforts to criminalize political opposition (by the left).
Except for Trump multiple times opining abut how he deserve a make up term for the Mueller investigation. Sorry if I believe he wants that when he says it.
Quote

Quote
Trump and you have no evidence of any voter fraud but you'll claim it anyway despite the fact that democrats underperformed polls. You would think with massive voter fraud the democrats could at least come close to matching polling data. Unless all the massive ballot fraud is being committed by Republicans.

In absolute fairness you are correct.  I won't have any evidence that you'd accept of voter fraud (I mean we have testimonials by those who did it, we have actual fraudsters caught, we even have an election being re-run because of voter fraud, but nothing you're going to accept - hard to accept things you could see while wearing a blindfold), because voter fraud is nearly impossible to catch with a secret ballot and even more so with a massive amount of mailed ballots. 

Show me the testimonials of people who claim to have committed massive organized voter fraud (not the random Joe voting twice in some way). What fraudsters were caught? Trump and the justice department could have made this a priority over the last four years.

The only election I know of that was rerun as a result of fraud was a 2018 NC house race and that was Republican voter fraud. Or are you talking about the NJ primary? The only state I really suspect of massive widespread voter fraud is Georgia. They magically had their election servers erased right after being ordered to turn them over to the courts about 4 or 5 years ago. They use a touch screen voting system that is nearly impossible to audit after the fact.

As to how to detect massive widespread mail in voter fraud. Take 1,000+ names of people who mailed in a vote and contact them to ask if they voted by mail. If you get lots of "no's" then you have evidence of voter fraud (hard to say who committed it or who it benefited) but it wouldn't be that expensive or time consuming to do an audit like that to see if there was massive fraud to begin with.


Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #80 on: November 04, 2020, 11:46:17 AM »
Something I felt yesterday as I read some of Seriati/wmLambert  comments was how they view all Democrats as being the enemy consciously and intentionally supporting criminal behavior and the destruction of the country.  A something to be vanquished

No, not at all.  Quite the contrary, I think Democratic voters are almost uniformly good people who mean well, I just think they overwhelming succomb to a relatively unexamined analysis of "good team" and "bad team."  It's a virtue signalling to the extreme.  They've literally tied their entire identity as a "good person" into voting to support Democrats.

They're absolutely sure Trump is a criminal, but they can't actual show any evidence that supports this (they have all manner of inuendo they believe, but when it comes to evidence is always some form of it's been proven).  They're absolutely sure that somehow Trump is unique in the history of the world is his obvious evilness and rudeness, despite that they watched him for years on tv and never noticed it, despite that the politicians they admire took money for him and valued him socially, and despite the very real fact that prominent Democrat politicians are every bit as nasty in what they say about Trump and even about Republicans generally, and media and entertainment talking heads are even worse.  They believe every rumor they hear about him and repeat it.  They honestly believe that hiding criminal activity about Biden is a good thing to do, and that violating the Constitution to get dirt on Trump is totally okay (though its criminal if Trump gets dirt on his opponent).

I believe that most voters have poorly considered the actual issues.  For Dems that's heavily tied into virtue signally that's putting people into power who are more monstrous than what they believe Trump is.

Quote
This is something that disturbs me. If many on the right or left hold this view I don't see how we come out of it

I find it interesting that Lambert and I bother you, but you don't say peep about those painting all Trump supporters as racist, white supremesists.  That the default position on the left is that Trump is evil and a criminal - despite the complete an utter failure to find any actual evidence thereof.  Effectively, Trump is a witch because they say he's a witch.

That polarization and really hard core ideology that leads to things like antifa showing up at a political rally and punching the teeth out of someone expressing a political opinion.  And that's not a big issue, yet we spent half of yesterday discussing a Biden Supporter's run in with a Trump supporter in a pick up that got "too close" to a bus and that's an outrage.

The fact that you believe the "default" is that the left is right and Trump is evil, rather than we have two groups of voters who meanwell but think different policies get us to the best solution is exactly why we are where we are.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #81 on: November 04, 2020, 11:48:53 AM »
To me, as far as I can tell, it seems clear that the power to do so seems to be granted to Congress by the US constitution. (Article IV, Section 3)
"New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress."

None of the restrictions here seem to apply to Washington DC. So what exactly makes you think it isn't "clear"?

Anyway, I think my example was much much clearer and much more straightforward than yours.

I'd argue that what remains of the the "OG" Washington D.C. is nominally part of Maryland held as a Federal Reservation with a "special consideration" via a constitutional amendment granting it electoral votes in its own right.

So if nothing else, any effort to turn Washington D.C. into its own state should require the consent of the Legislature of the State of Maryland, which is nominally controlled by Democrats, so not too much of a hurdle to clear right?

I think the better, more legitimate, and simpler solution to the Washington D.C. issue regarding statehood is return residential portions of the Federal District to the state from which it came, so it becomes a city/county of Maryland and they can enjoy having a senator and voting representative in the house, by way of the State of Maryland.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #82 on: November 04, 2020, 11:56:26 AM »
There, a clear statement that he's going to violate the constitution.

Nope.  Just a political rallying call.  Again, talk to me when you find a violation of the Constitution.

Quote
To me, as far as I can tell, it seems clear that the power to do so seems to be granted to Congress by the US constitution. (Article IV, Section 3)

Wrong section, take a look at the section about DC (not to mention the amendment about DC).  Establishes the district as separate from the states and directly controlled by the Federal Government.  Not clear cut, but there's a lot of actual issues with pretending that it's simple to make DC a state.

Quote
I fully confess that I don't *always* understand when it's being violated, as I'm not an American and don't really care about every little minutia of US constitutional law (e.g. I have no idea if Obama violated the constitution or not by signing the Paris treaty), but as often happens the case with Trump, this guy is BLATANT about everything, and he similarly BLATANTLY says he'll violate the constitution, in a way that even an ignoramus like me can tell. HE WANTS TO VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION AND RUN FOR A THIRD TERM.

You will try to deny it, but the simple truth is just that.

Lol.  A Constitutional violation requires a Constitutional violation, not a political statement.  Regardless of what you think, Trump would not be eligible to run for a third term without an amendment to the Constitution, so you're literally projecting on top of projecting on top of misconstruing.  Exactly what my original point was - when asked to point to the problems with Trump its all soundbites and fake news.

If your real problem is he said he would run for a third term then you'd just be a terribly uninformed single issue voter.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #83 on: November 04, 2020, 12:15:11 PM »
Something I felt yesterday as I read some of Seriati/wmLambert  comments was how they view all Democrats as being the enemy consciously and intentionally supporting criminal behavior and the destruction of the country.  A something to be vanquished

No, not at all.  Quite the contrary, I think Democratic voters are almost uniformly good people who mean well, I just think they overwhelming succomb to a relatively unexamined analysis of "good team" and "bad team."  It's a virtue signalling to the extreme.  They've literally tied their entire identity as a "good person" into voting to support Democrats.

They're absolutely sure Trump is a criminal, but they can't actual show any evidence that supports this (they have all manner of inuendo they believe, but when it comes to evidence is always some form of it's been proven).  They're absolutely sure that somehow Trump is unique in the history of the world is his obvious evilness and rudeness, despite that they watched him for years on tv and never noticed it, despite that the politicians they admire took money for him and valued him socially, and despite the very real fact that prominent Democrat politicians are every bit as nasty in what they say about Trump and even about Republicans generally, and media and entertainment talking heads are even worse.  They believe every rumor they hear about him and repeat it.  They honestly believe that hiding criminal activity about Biden is a good thing to do, and that violating the Constitution to get dirt on Trump is totally okay (though its criminal if Trump gets dirt on his opponent).

I believe that most voters have poorly considered the actual issues.  For Dems that's heavily tied into virtue signally that's putting people into power who are more monstrous than what they believe Trump is.

Quote
This is something that disturbs me. If many on the right or left hold this view I don't see how we come out of it

I find it interesting that Lambert and I bother you, but you don't say peep about those painting all Trump supporters as racist, white supremesists.  That the default position on the left is that Trump is evil and a criminal - despite the complete an utter failure to find any actual evidence thereof.  Effectively, Trump is a witch because they say he's a witch.

That polarization and really hard core ideology that leads to things like antifa showing up at a political rally and punching the teeth out of someone expressing a political opinion.  And that's not a big issue, yet we spent half of yesterday discussing a Biden Supporter's run in with a Trump supporter in a pick up that got "too close" to a bus and that's an outrage.

The fact that you believe the "default" is that the left is right and Trump is evil, rather than we have two groups of voters who meanwell but think different policies get us to the best solution is exactly why we are where we are.

So this will be the last :)
Your reading minds again.  I don't believe in the default that the left is always right - I do believe that Trump is unfit to be president and that their is plenty of evidence of why that is so but we are not going to agree on that. And that's fine

I don't believe everyone that thinks Trump is fit for office and defends his policies is the enemy that needs to be vanquished. 
That is the difference I see between Lambert and myself and not quite sure where you are on that, I think you lean towards seeing anyone who views Trump as unfit for office as the enemy to vanquish.  But I can't read your mind

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #84 on: November 04, 2020, 12:19:53 PM »
Quote
Regardless of what you think, Trump would not be eligible to run for a third term without an amendment to the Constitution, so you're literally projecting on top of projecting on top of misconstruing.

Uh, yes, I KNOW FULL WELL Trump would not be eligible to run for a 3rd term, that's EXACTLY why what he said is a threat to violate the constitution. If he was eligible, it wouldn't be such.

You have a weird circular logic eh? You're saying it'd be unconstitutional for Trump to run for a third term (agreed), so therefore you argue when Trump said he'd run a third term he couldn't have possibly meant it, because that'd be unconstitutional, and Trump wouldn't say he'd do something unconstitutional, even when he actually says he'd do something unconstitutional. So, there it's proven by definition that Trump would never do anything unconstitutional, because if it's unconstitutional, that's proof that Trump wouldn't do it. /s

Quote
Nope.  Just a political rallying call.

Yes, a political rallying call where he says that he's going to violate the constitution and people cheer him for it, because Trumpists *love* the audacity of Trump openly saying he's going to violate the constitution.

Thankfully he's almost certainly going to lose tonight, so we'll never get to see him attempt to violate the constitution in this exact manner, and the logical loops several people here (perhaps even you) would be jumping through 4 years from now in order to explain why it turns out it's perfectly fine for him to run a 3rd term, even without a constitutional amendment.

Quote
If your real problem is he said he would run for a third term then you'd just be a terribly uninformed single issue voter.

Oh, I have a LOT of problems with Trump. His love for dictators and other presidents-for-life. He telling non-white people (ones born in the USA) to go back to their "countries". His opposition to NATO. His love for promoting conspiracies. His support for Confederate statues, and having military bases have confederate names. His isolationism. His buffoonery.

It's a long long list.

But you didn't ask about the reasons I despise Trump, you asked about why I think he threatens the constitution.

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #85 on: November 04, 2020, 12:33:48 PM »
First of all, you demanded it so obviously because you did I'm now contractually obliged to listen up.

I formally REQUEST, PLEASE, with all due respect and admiration, for you to lighten up, not "listen up". Or at least drink less coffee. 

Quote
You're just a lower tier *censored* unwilling to take a side and properly happy to run in there and take advantage of what did work out.

I find this highly insulting.  I am NOT a lower tier *censored*.  I am a High High tier *censored*.  I am the highest tiered *censored* on this board.  Who is the bigger *censored* than me?  Is there no-one? 

And I did take a side.  I voted.  But I can objectively watch an election without letting my "side" effect my judgement.  It is true that my general philosophy is that all people, which includes both Democrats and Republicans, are pretty crazy, in proportion to how hard they take a "side".

Well obviously. You all should probably know me by now. I do not at all trust myself or anything I might say. I never trust myself for anything lol. That doesn't mean what I said. Just didn't half the back-up.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #86 on: November 04, 2020, 12:38:55 PM »
And back to the election results. Nevada, Wisconsin, and Michigan are all sitting at between 0.6% and 1% lead for Biden. Looking at where the ballots are outstanding and the fact that they are mail in means Biden is likely to hold onto that lead or expand it. Pennsylvania has a whole lot of ballots left to be counted, we'll see if the mail in vote was 2-1 for Biden as the polls indicated and if he can make up the current deficit. I think the race ends up really ugly if Trump comes back in one of those 3 and Biden makes up the ground in Pennsylvania.

oldbrian

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #87 on: November 04, 2020, 01:18:26 PM »
TheDeamon:
[q] hard to admit new states to the Union which haven't met the standard of 50%+1 of all eligible voters voting in favor of statehood when there's an opposition party in control of one of the relevant legislative bodies that would have to vote against its interests to make it happen.[/q]

Are you saying that there is a way to admit a new state even when more than half of the area's populace voted against it?  Or am I parsing that incorrectly?

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #88 on: November 04, 2020, 01:23:01 PM »
Are you saying that there is a way to admit a new state even when more than half of the area's populace voted against it?  Or am I parsing that incorrectly?

Puerto Rico has voted previously with a decision in favor of becoming a state. No action was taken because 1) less than 50% of eligible voters even participated 2) Republican Congress.

Part of the justification the Dems are using for admitting PR as a state is that "they voted for it already" and we're being undemocratic by not acting on it. (That it benefits them is irrelevant)

I think they voted on it again this cycle, haven't looked into that just yet.

That said, there is no historical situation I'm aware of where a state didn't join without majority support for statehood. But I don't think there is anything legally prohibiting it from happening. They have normally taken efforts to make sure the territory in question wants to be a state, hence 50% of voters need to at least vote on the matter.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2020, 01:25:53 PM by TheDeamon »

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #89 on: November 04, 2020, 01:44:10 PM »
So, checking on PR's statehood initiative for this year. USA Today claims they have 2.36 million eligible/registered voters. Current results with >95% of votes tallied, as per Business Insider as of this posting:
https://www.businessinsider.com/puerto-rico-statehood-referendum-live-results-2020

They have 1,026,333 votes counted. They're not going to reach 50% voter participation this year, even with 52.29% of those who voted having voted in favor of Statehood.

oldbrian

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #90 on: November 04, 2020, 01:47:35 PM »
Seriati:
Quote
No, not at all.  Quite the contrary, I think Democratic voters are almost uniformly good people who mean well,
good start.  As a random voter who mostly goes (D), I appreciate that stance

Quote
I just think they overwhelming succomb to a relatively unexamined analysis of "good team" and "bad team."  It's a virtue signalling to the extreme.  They've literally tied their entire identity as a "good person" into voting to support Democrats.
rather than examining the facts and simply coming to an honest conclusion you happen to disagree with. 

Quote
They're absolutely sure Trump is a criminal, but they can't actual show any evidence that supports this (they have all manner of inuendo they believe, but when it comes to evidence is always some form of it's been proven).
Immoral? yes.  Unethical?  Absolutely.  Illegal? Apparently not.  And the proof is in his own books, where he brags about it.  He calls it being a good businessman. 

Quote
They're absolutely sure that somehow Trump is unique in the history of the world is his obvious evilness and rudeness, despite that they watched him for years on tv and never noticed it,
Not even close to unique.  But 'not the worst' is hardly an endorsement.  And I did notice it from his time on TV and even earlier.  But I'M not the one who thought he would make a good president.

Quote
despite that the politicians they admire took money for him and valued him socially, and despite the very real fact that prominent Democrat politicians are every bit as nasty in what they say about Trump and even about Republicans generally, and media and entertainment talking heads are even worse.
Did I mention how poorly you are coming across when you assume that Democratic voters are simply pulling the (D) lever without thinking about issues or character?  Or that I admire the politician some other state elected?

Quote
They believe every rumor they hear about him and repeat it.
like all of stories about the microchips in the vaccines, or the pedophiles operating out of the back rooms of pizza parlors?

Quote
They honestly believe that hiding criminal activity about Biden is a good thing to do,
Nope.  And again you are supposedly talking about the average voter here.  So you think that roughly half the population is so morally bankrupt that we would do anything to get a Democrat - any Democrat - into office.  Rather than looking at the shreds of evidence which have been released so far and saying 'man I wish whoever is sitting on the rest would release it so we could see what is actually going on'. 
Remind me, who is sitting on that evidence?  Who has the ability to broadcast it to the entire world but instead decided to release it to a single tabloid?

Quote
and that violating the Constitution to get dirt on Trump is totally okay (though its criminal if Trump gets dirt on his opponent).
Nope again.  However, reasonable people CAN look at the same evidence and come to differing conclusions.
Man, the (D) voters in your part of the country seem like a bunch of *censored*.  Assuming they even exist.  You did quite a job of disproving your initial statement.  I no longer believe that you see the average (D) voter as "almost uniformly good people who mean well"  You can't have that many derogatory opinions of them, of their intelligence, of their moral standards, or of their gullibility and still think we mean well.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2020, 01:53:23 PM by oldbrian »

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #91 on: November 04, 2020, 02:08:15 PM »
Did I mention how poorly you are coming across when you assume that Democratic voters are simply pulling the (D) lever without thinking about issues or character?

Don't mean to jump in on your conversation with Seriati, but come on. This is so true. The proof is in the pudding when you take note of the rhetoric following Bernie losing the primary to Hillary; everyone was being told (mostly successfully) that they needed to get on board with Hillary, who many Democrat voters hated, to make sure the Democrats still won. I guess you could argue it was to keep Trump out, but I think it would have been the same had it been Cruz instead of Trump. I think I asked in a thread at one point which Republican candidates, or even type of candidate, Democrat/liberal voters here would actually vote for over a D candidate, and the answer wasn't much of a surprise.

The West Wing's last season had a great campaign trail storyline, where both R and D presidential candidates were really excellent. Aside from the fact that in our day and age this is a pipe dream, the American landscape was also a bit different back then. It was perhaps fathomable that a really admirable R candidate could get support from D voters, or that a D president would so respect his opponent that he'd bring him on as part of the team. But the terrain is so partisan and divided now I don't even believe the fictional scenario in The West Wing could occur any more. I legitimately do think that voters hit D and R and that it's irrelevant who the candidate is or what the platform is. In fact this latter point has been born out in spades with both Hillary and Biden quite reluctant to make overly specific campaign promises, instead mostly campaigning on being better than Trump, and being a liberal bastion. It really is just trench warfare now.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #92 on: November 04, 2020, 02:28:25 PM »
Interesting nugget, apparently ABC has moved Arizona back to undecided from a Biden call.  I didn't see it happen though, just read about it and went to ABC's site where it's in the uncalled section.  If Arizona flips back to Trump things could get interesting.

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #93 on: November 04, 2020, 02:34:42 PM »
AP has called Wisconsin for Biden.  It seems likely that Trump campaign will demand a recount, though I read they can't do that formally until the results are certified on Dec 1. 


DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #94 on: November 04, 2020, 02:43:46 PM »
CNN hadn't called Arizona yet, but CNN seems to be less "call-y".

Wisconsin was reporting 99% and CNN was still not calling it for Biden.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #95 on: November 04, 2020, 02:48:00 PM »
AP still has Nevada Arizona called for Biden. Trump trails there significantly, hard to see him making up the ground with 84% of the vote already in. Biden has a better shot in Georgia with all of the outstanding vote coming from the Atlanta area and absentee ballots received near election day. And I don't think Biden is going to flip NC or Georgia. Pennsylvania is the only toss up remaining because there is so much of the vote left to be counted but Trump looks strong there. I'm expecting a 270-268 electoral college win for Biden.

Edit: Correcting state I'm talking about.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2020, 02:52:30 PM by yossarian22c »

oldbrian

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #96 on: November 04, 2020, 02:59:12 PM »
Fenring -
 The tone of his post was that democrats in particular do this, from some sort of virtue signaling impulse.  Just mindless drones, trying to impress each other with how virtuous we are by way of … an anonymous vote....

Also, how many voters went Green or Libertarian?  I don't remember 4 years ago, but both of those parties had someone on the ballot in PA this year.

I voted for Sanders in 2016 anyway.  Actually, I voted for him this time, too.  I almost voted for one of the 3rd parties, just to give them a boost.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #97 on: November 04, 2020, 03:29:08 PM »
You have a weird circular logic eh? You're saying it'd be unconstitutional for Trump to run for a third term (agreed), so therefore you argue when Trump said he'd run a third term he couldn't have possibly meant it, because that'd be unconstitutional, and Trump wouldn't say he'd do something unconstitutional, even when he actually says he'd do something unconstitutional. So, there it's proven by definition that Trump would never do anything unconstitutional, because if it's unconstitutional, that's proof that Trump wouldn't do it. /s

No, I said bring me evidence of an actual Constitutional violation and you're arguing about an offhand comment that wouldn't even be relevant until 2024, would require the complicity of the Republican party (which would have to ignore its own rules on nominations), and HAS NOT HAPPENED.

Again, it's an argument from delusion.

Quote
Oh, I have a LOT of problems with Trump. His love for dictators and other presidents-for-life. He telling non-white people (ones born in the USA) to go back to their "countries". His opposition to NATO. His love for promoting conspiracies. His support for Confederate statues, and having military bases have confederate names. His isolationism. His buffoonery.

It's a long long list.

But you didn't ask about the reasons I despise Trump, you asked about why I think he threatens the constitution.

Actually I did ask, and I flat out implied that those opposing him have little to no real basis in policy.  I mean honestly, "his love for dictators" is different in real time from the policies of countless European countries and prior Presidents how exactly?  US foreign policy is overwhelmingly a story of propping up friendly dictators in the classic establishment Democratic and Republican versions.  Can you describe some concession that Trump made to a dictator?  No.  Can you describe the treaty where he gave a dictator some advantage?  No.  All you really are complaining about is that he didn't continue nuclear brinkmanship with North Korea.  The supposed relationship with Putin is a myth, and he's been tougher against Russian interests than Obama was - and we may have just elected Biden to restore the friendly US posture to the Chinese authoritarian government, not to mention the Iranian terrrorist government, and probably even the Russian aggressive government.  But yeah, its Trump that's in love with dictators.

I agree he shouldn't have used that language with the squad.  They're anti-American and pursue policies that are destructive of America and detrimental to America's future, but telling them to go back where they came from was not okay.  Not even against a backdrop where the very countries their families (in several cases) fled from are the ones destroyed by the very policies they are seeking to import.  99% of the media outrage on this was designed to prevent a legitimate discussion about how awful those policies are by side tracking the country into yet another debate about racism (funny how often racism is showing up to short circuit ANY legitimate discussion on policy).

He's not opposed to NATO.  He's opposed to Europe willingly ignoring all NATO obligations and still receiving the benefits of NATO.

His love for promoting conspiracies.  You have to be kidding.  Four years of an invented Russian collusion scandal, breathless anonymous reporting (that turned out to be fake, misleading or just flat out lies), 4 years of whining about all the crimes that Trump's done if only we could violate the law and take all his records we'd surely find proof of something, four years of Trump is guilty it's just a matter of finding the crime he committed.  Conspiracy theories have been the entire, and I mean the entire, operation of the Democrat party for four years.

His support for confederate statues?  Really, maybe you missed that in 2018 about 60% of the country said the statues should stay, even in 2020 polls differ on whether there is majority support to keep them or destroy them.  They are a part of history, and not everything offensive in history should be white washed.  Do you remember the outrage the world felt when the Taliban destroyed the Buddhas?  What's the difference in your head?  Is it just you view -at the moment- of good guys and bad guys?  It's a complicated issue, and what did we get out of it?  Four years of the media lying about what Trump said, no matter how debunked they were.

Baffoonery I won't dispute.

In fact, I think someone else said Trump is not worthy of being President.  I agree.  But where they go off the rails is believing that Clinton was worthy, or that Biden is worthy (at least with Biden you could reasonably argue that he might have been 10 years ago before he was senile, but only if you ignore his and his family's corruption and abuse of office).  This country often does not put forward people who are worthy of being President, we still have to choose between them and it's far better to choose based on policy than some kind of high school popularity contest.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #98 on: November 04, 2020, 03:31:10 PM »
Fenring -
 The tone of his post was that democrats in particular do this, from some sort of virtue signaling impulse.  Just mindless drones, trying to impress each other with how virtuous we are by way of … an anonymous vote....

Didn't he also say that most voters probably vote for stupid reasons, but that the particular reasons the D voters do it is to virtue signal? It sounds like their particular brand of stupidity may irk him more than the other brand, but I'm not sure Seriati was implying that R voters are magically more virtuous or well-intentioned than D voters are.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Election Results
« Reply #99 on: November 04, 2020, 03:35:56 PM »
Interesting voting trend in Pennsylvania:

Trump's lead:
Reporting  percent   count
75%      11.4%   618,840
80%      8.1%   463,710
82%      6.6%   388,889