Election Thread

[Enguin Enguin Enguin Enguin]

12 minutes ago, Ryusei the Morning Star said:

My lane is very clear. There's enough shit that I can see off, and the margins are small enough. But at the same time I'm one dude, in one district, in one state, all of which came through for the President. So it's out of my control.

I can hope others in the relevant areas will pick up the fight. Maybe they will, maybe they wont

alright come on what is this "came through for the president" angle, as if inherently all citizens are bound to the current leader and a vote against the incumbent is a betrayal of the nation 

obviously i am dramatising a bit, a lot? but it's such poor language choice if this connotation is unintentional 

i have stayed awake way too long doing this, i only wish this site's active hours were more compatible with my time zone

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

1 minute ago, Enguin said:

alright come on what is this "came through for the president" angle, as if inherently all citizens are bound to the current leader and a vote against the incumbent is a betrayal of the nation 

obviously i am dramatising a bit, a lot? but it's such poor language choice if this connotation is unintentional 

i have stayed awake way too long doing this, i only wish this site's active hours were more compatible with my time zone

I mean, my District flipped Blue to Red, my Senate Race stayed Red, and statewide my State went Red

 

I delivered for the POTUS in that IA02 going Red would have been feverdream stuff a decade ago. So as a Right winger (might as well just accept I'm a DINO now), I did my job

[Enguin Enguin Enguin Enguin]

winter has done it

i would like for you to address the fact that you called out a 6 year old tweet for not expounding on democratic gerrymandering as if that was a legitimate point 

i have picked this incident to highlight as we are now beginning page 12 and so far it's free of nonsense so we should give it a kick start by acknowledging the most recently brushed off stupid thing that's been said

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

23 minutes ago, Enguin said:

winter has done it

i would like for you to address the fact that you called out a 6 year old tweet for not expounding on democratic gerrymandering as if that was a legitimate point 

i have picked this incident to highlight as we are now beginning page 12 and so far it's free of nonsense so we should give it a kick start by acknowledging the most recently brushed off stupid thing that's been said

You completely miss the point. It was that the left's outrage about 2020 is pretty dicey when you consider how they threw a fit about 2014 and 2016

You asked me what I meant by "coming through" and I think I explained it well enough

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

 

IL Dems should go for this. IL-12 might backfire given the trends, but it's still a strong gerrymander that knocks off 2 republicans 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

 

Stuff of beauty 

[Phantom Roxas]

https://www.mlive.com/politics/2020/11/federal-lawsuit-seeks-to-throw-out-12m-votes-flipping-michigan-for-trump.html

Trump wants to throw out 1.2 million votes across three Michigan counties, just to flip the state in his favor.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/usps-staffer-richard-hopkins-told-agents-project-veritas-penned-his-ballot-tampering-claim

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/postal-worker-hopkins-ballot-pennsylvania/2020/11/11/c9b70eda-2470-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html

Further following up on the Richard Hopkins story. When he was asked if he still stood by his claim of backdating ballots, he answered "At this point? No." He did agree to sign an affidavit that would undercut his earlier affidavit. The earlier affidavit had been drafted by Project Veritas, and Hopkins was not fully aware of its contents.

"In the interview with federal agents, though, Hopkins said he overheard only a few portions of a conversation between the postmaster and another worker. The two were standing at a distance that made it difficult to hear the full conversation, but Hopkins said he could make out three phrases: “ballots on the 4th,” “all for the 3rd,” and “one postmarked on the 4th.”

“My mind probably added the rest,” he told the investigators, before acknowledging that he never heard anyone use the word “backdate.”"

So just so we're clear, there is no evidence for this specific scandal. It's just one guy making assumptions, and Project Veritas trying to get a new grift in.

[Enguin Enguin Enguin Enguin]

yes winter you did explain well what you meant by coming through for the president thank you 

if you could take from it the lesson of answer the question that is asked rather than expand the scope of the conversation until a basis to talk about something else appears it would be less entertaining but more productive 

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

1 hour ago, Enguin said:

if you could take from it the lesson of answer the question that is asked rather than expand the scope of the conversation until a basis to talk about something else appears it would be less entertaining but more productive 

I mean what's really our goal here

[Horu]

If the votes are frauds, does it really matter how many of them there are? Michigan has a population of roughly 10 million. 

Marquette has a population of 21,000

Grand Rapids has a population of roughly 201,000

Flint has a population of roughly 96,000

Lansing has a population of roughly 119,000

Detroit has a population of roughly 673,000

673+201=874+119=993+96=1,089+21=1,110

So Biden won 11.1% of Michigan.

I'm not sure but I would think that the guy that won the 88.9% of the state would be the clear winner.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

14 minutes ago, Horu Ishayuki said:

If the votes are frauds, does it really matter how many of them there are?

There is literally no concrete evidence of the votes being fraud, let alone over a million of them.

Cool math tho.

[Enguin Enguin Enguin Enguin]

49 minutes ago, (GigaDrillBreaker) said:

I mean what's really our goal here

i want sense to prevail 

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Just now, Enguin said:

i want sense to prevail 

Lofty goals.

[Enguin Enguin Enguin Enguin]

16 minutes ago, Horu Ishayuki said:

If the votes are frauds, does it really matter how many of them there are? Michigan has a population of roughly 10 million. 

Marquette has a population of 21,000

Grand Rapids has a population of roughly 201,000

Flint has a population of roughly 96,000

Lansing has a population of roughly 119,000

Detroit has a population of roughly 673,000

673+201=874+119=993+96=1,089+21=1,110

So Biden won 11.1% of Michigan.

I'm not sure but I would think that the guy that won the 88.9% of the state would be the clear winner.

i don't understand this post, what are these figures you're adding and where are they from? 

to elaborate as i realise that's an unclear question, why are you totting these up arriving at that percentage and then saying trump is backed by 8.9 million people in michigan with no citations 

[Enguin Enguin Enguin Enguin]

3 minutes ago, (GigaDrillBreaker) said:

Lofty goals.

you'll obviously never have everyone but strive to have as many people as you can actually think about what they're saying 

[Horu]

55 minutes ago, Enguin said:

i don't understand this post, what are these figures you're adding and where are they from? 

to elaborate as i realise that's an unclear question, why are you totting these up arriving at that percentage and then saying trump is backed by 8.9 million people in michigan with no citations 

The numbers are the populations of the districts won by Biden.This is assuming everyone voted. Also, rounded to the nearest thousand to account for surrounding areas. But yeah. Trump won nearly 90% of Michigan based on the electoral map, yet the state was awarded to Biden. So if you take into account the population won. Trump should've gotten the Michigan vote.

 

Also, yes, I do understand that people voted for other candidates but since their combined votes made up less than 1% of the total, I'm only counting the Democrat vs Republican race. So ignoring other parties, Trump would have the vast majority and I believe that's what he is pointing out.

 

Now if we look, If Biden was able to secure 51% of that 1,110,000, that gives him at least 566,100 votes in those areas. Now Trump clearly secured 51% of the vote in the other areas. So assuming Trump was able to secure 51% of 8,890,000 votes, that gives him over 4.5 million votes. That is ridiculous gap to fill.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

17 minutes ago, Horu Ishayuki said:

This is assuming everyone voted. Also, rounded to the nearest thousand to account for surrounding areas. But yeah. Trump won nearly 90% of Michigan based on the electoral map, yet the state was awarded to Biden. So if you take into account the population won. Trump should've gotten the Michigan vote.

 

Also, yes, I do understand that people voted for other candidates but since their combined votes made up less than 1% of the total, I'm only counting the Democrat vs Republican race. So ignoring other parties, Trump would have the vast majority and I believe that's what he is pointing out.

First off, no, not everyone voted.

Second, you seem to be implying that every district was won unanimously? Within the state, it's the popular vote tallied, not whatever nonsense your doing. 

[Enguin Enguin Enguin Enguin]

23 minutes ago, Horu Ishayuki said:

This is assuming everyone voted. Also, rounded to the nearest thousand to account for surrounding areas. But yeah. Trump won nearly 90% of Michigan based on the electoral map, yet the state was awarded to Biden. So if you take into account the population won. Trump should've gotten the Michigan vote.

 

Also, yes, I do understand that people voted for other candidates but since their combined votes made up less than 1% of the total, I'm only counting the Democrat vs Republican race. So ignoring other parties, Trump would have the vast majority and I believe that's what he is pointing out.

??? 

do you understand your election system, genuinely i am not american so i have had to look into it prior and if you sincerely believe this you must just not 

in rough terms

each county awards a winner based on the proportional winner there, like say a 1000 people live in detroit 500 biden 400 trump biden wins 50% to 40%

it's not the county awarding a winner that then takes those votes and the losers are discounted as the logic of your thinking here suggests

in a trump county it could be 50% to 49.9% and each of those votes count towards their respective candidates totals but the county appears red on the map

a state being blue or red does not indicate anything other than the candidate who received more votes in that area

[Horu]

I am aware of that. Also, only about 60% of Michigan voted. So assuming the 40% that didn't vote was under 18 or not registered, that really cuts the number of potential votes in half. So technically, while we see a map where Trump clearly would've won given that 100% of the population could vote, that isn't the case because the as stated, only 60% of the population voted. So given that roughly 3% of that population voted for another party, that means the other 57% of the population voted between Trump and Biden. So technically, if Biden was able to sway 28.51% of the population, he would've won. Also, that tally should add up based on that fact. But based on the numbers saying Biden has roughly 50+% of the vote, that means he was able to sway just over 30% of the population. This should check out if you look at the electoral map.

[Enguin Enguin Enguin Enguin]

man what the fuck

i'm sorry i can't see myself being able to help you more than my prior post, you're just doing maths poorly based on misunderstandings i am sorry again i can't do more than just tell you you are miles off how this works

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

5 minutes ago, Horu Ishayuki said:

I am aware of that. Also, only about 60% of Michigan voted. So assuming the 40% that didn't vote was under 18 or not registered, that really cuts the number of potential votes in half. So technically, while we see a map where Trump clearly would've won given that 100% of the population could vote, that isn't the case because the as stated, only 60% of the population voted. So given that roughly 3% of that population voted for another party, that means the other 57% of the population voted between Trump and Biden. So technically, if Biden was able to sway 28.51% of the population, he would've won. Also, that tally should add up based on that fact. But based on the numbers saying Biden has roughly 50+% of the vote, that means he was able to sway just over 30% of the population. This should check out if you look at the electoral map.

Do you understand that biden got votes in places other than what you listed?

You seem to be very confused

[Horu]

1 minute ago, (GigaDrillBreaker) said:

Do you understand that biden got votes in places other than what you listed?

You seem to be very confused

I am aware of that. But I listed the places he won simply for the fact that he got more than 50% of the vote there (again assuming this is Biden vs Trump).

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

1 minute ago, Horu Ishayuki said:

I am aware of that. But I listed the places he won simply for the fact that he got more than 50% of the vote there (again assuming this is Biden vs Trump).

That proves nothing. You are making huge false assumptions and burying it in useless math.

 

Do I have to break it down county by county to show you how biden reached the total he did?

[Enguin Enguin Enguin Enguin]

at this point i would want to say you have to be trolling but to be completely fair

i was wrong before to say i couldn't help further because if you literally just understand that each 1 individual person in an electoral area who votes casts 1 vote and these are all added and the candidate with the most votes wins then you will understand why all your maths is meaningless 

[Horu]

6 minutes ago, Enguin said:

at this point i would want to say you have to be trolling but to be completely fair

i was wrong before to say i couldn't help further because if you literally just understand that each 1 individual person in an electoral area who votes casts 1 vote and these are all added and the candidate with the most votes wins then you will understand why all your maths is meaningless 

Yes. I do understand that each person counts as a vote (if they vote). That's kinda how it works. The reason I chose those areas was to show places obvious preferred Biden. Had even 1 of those places favored Trump, it would be a different story. Hell, If Trump would've gotten Detroit, he would've won Michigan. But It is still the point that while most of the state favored Trump, Biden was still able to get just enough of the population to vote for him to gain that small lead. I can't call Michigan out on fraud because the number of votes actually falls well below the population of those areas. That's why I mentioned that only those areas.