(12-07-2020 12:44 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (12-07-2020 11:55 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (12-03-2020 01:08 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting thread...scroll through and you'll see that trump lost votes from 2016 in every single state...many of which all in the neighborhood of 2-3 percent, red and blue states alike. Sort of throws the fraud angle out the window. But we already knew this.
Lol. So your expert says Trump lost 2.8 percent of his voters in every state but somehow ended up with 10 million more votes than 2016. I’ll pass on that fake news thread.
Ummm...dude....you do realize there were 22.6 million more votes cast so far in 2020 than 2016, right? 
#MathIsHard
lol. Math seems to be a tough concept for you. I'll make it as simple as possible. If when you return to the house, you have MORE money in your wallet than when you left---you didnt "lose" any money. Now--apply that concept to votes.
#MathsAreHard
(12-07-2020 12:44 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (12-07-2020 11:55 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (12-03-2020 01:08 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting thread...scroll through and you'll see that trump lost votes from 2016 in every single state...many of which all in the neighborhood of 2-3 percent, red and blue states alike. Sort of throws the fraud angle out the window. But we already knew this.
Lol. So your expert says Trump lost 2.8 percent of his voters in every state but somehow ended up with 10 million more votes than 2016. I’ll pass on that fake news thread.
Ummm...dude....you do realize there were 22.6 million more votes cast so far in 2020 than 2016, right?
#MathIsHard
What's the largest increase in number of voters from one election to the next?
Statistically, an increase this large is concerning.
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
(12-07-2020 12:44 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (12-07-2020 11:55 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (12-03-2020 01:08 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting thread...scroll through and you'll see that trump lost votes from 2016 in every single state...many of which all in the neighborhood of 2-3 percent, red and blue states alike. Sort of throws the fraud angle out the window. But we already knew this.
Lol. So your expert says Trump lost 2.8 percent of his voters in every state but somehow ended up with 10 million more votes than 2016. I’ll pass on that fake news thread.
Ummm...dude....you do realize there were 22.6 million more votes cast so far in 2020 than 2016, right?
#MathIsHard
What's the largest increase in number of voters from one election to the next?
Statistically, an increase this large is concerning.
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
(12-07-2020 12:44 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (12-07-2020 11:55 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (12-03-2020 01:08 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting thread...scroll through and you'll see that trump lost votes from 2016 in every single state...many of which all in the neighborhood of 2-3 percent, red and blue states alike. Sort of throws the fraud angle out the window. But we already knew this.
Lol. So your expert says Trump lost 2.8 percent of his voters in every state but somehow ended up with 10 million more votes than 2016. I’ll pass on that fake news thread.
Ummm...dude....you do realize there were 22.6 million more votes cast so far in 2020 than 2016, right?
#MathIsHard
What's the largest increase in number of voters from one election to the next?
Statistically, an increase this large is concerning.
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
(12-07-2020 07:32 PM)maximus Wrote: [ -> ] (12-07-2020 12:44 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (12-07-2020 11:55 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (12-03-2020 01:08 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting thread...scroll through and you'll see that trump lost votes from 2016 in every single state...many of which all in the neighborhood of 2-3 percent, red and blue states alike. Sort of throws the fraud angle out the window. But we already knew this.
Lol. So your expert says Trump lost 2.8 percent of his voters in every state but somehow ended up with 10 million more votes than 2016. I’ll pass on that fake news thread.
Ummm...dude....you do realize there were 22.6 million more votes cast so far in 2020 than 2016, right?
#MathIsHard
What's the largest increase in number of voters from one election to the next?
Statistically, an increase this large is concerning.
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
Its got to be far and away the biggest increase.
(12-07-2020 07:19 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (12-07-2020 12:44 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (12-07-2020 11:55 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (12-03-2020 01:08 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting thread...scroll through and you'll see that trump lost votes from 2016 in every single state...many of which all in the neighborhood of 2-3 percent, red and blue states alike. Sort of throws the fraud angle out the window. But we already knew this.
Lol. So your expert says Trump lost 2.8 percent of his voters in every state but somehow ended up with 10 million more votes than 2016. I’ll pass on that fake news thread.
Ummm...dude....you do realize there were 22.6 million more votes cast so far in 2020 than 2016, right?
#MathIsHard
lol. Math seems to be a tough concept for you. I'll make it as simple as possible. If when you return to the house, you have MORE money in your wallet than when you left---you didnt "lose" any money. Now--apply that concept to votes.
#MathsAreHard
Dude, quit while you're behind. You're embarrassing yourself.
#PercentagesForTwoThousandAlex
(12-08-2020 07:18 AM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (12-07-2020 07:19 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (12-07-2020 12:44 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (12-07-2020 11:55 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (12-03-2020 01:08 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting thread...scroll through and you'll see that trump lost votes from 2016 in every single state...many of which all in the neighborhood of 2-3 percent, red and blue states alike. Sort of throws the fraud angle out the window. But we already knew this.
Lol. So your expert says Trump lost 2.8 percent of his voters in every state but somehow ended up with 10 million more votes than 2016. I’ll pass on that fake news thread.
Ummm...dude....you do realize there were 22.6 million more votes cast so far in 2020 than 2016, right?
#MathIsHard
lol. Math seems to be a tough concept for you. I'll make it as simple as possible. If when you return to the house, you have MORE money in your wallet than when you left---you didnt "lose" any money. Now--apply that concept to votes.
#MathsAreHard
Dude, quit while you're behind. You're embarrassing yourself.
#PercentagesForTwoThousandAlex
ewe just proved his/our point....the overall %increase is a statistic anomaly in a handful of counties that contributed to an outrageous %donk value...
#mathsAintHard
@muhMail-inns
Other ways the election was not "free and fair."
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl...44798.html
The media really was banana republic.
"...There are common international standards about what makes an election “free and fair.” These criteria, summarized by the Inter-Parliamentary Union, include: the “absolute” right to a secret ballot; the right to “express political opinions without interference; [t]o seek, receive and impart information and to make an informed choice”; the right of candidates to “equal opportunity of access to the media”; the “right of candidates to security”; freedom of association, and others.
Many of these were violated in 2020.
“Fraud” was not as important as what Democrats were able to accomplish legally, for example, by pushing the country to adopt vote-by-mail on a massive scale...."
Actually Tom, he's right.
Said simply... What you're arguing is that 100mm people can vote and the nation basically breaks down 51/49... but the states break down (on average) 46/54. We add 20mm people to the voter rolls, and they break down 60/40? That's a statistical anomaly. It doesn't prove anything, but it certainly would give any statistician concern.
If you were to predict how those 20mm additional people would vote, it would be +/- 51/49 and not 60/40.
(12-08-2020 02:29 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: [ -> ]Actually Tom, he's right.
Said simply... What you're arguing is that 100mm people can vote and the nation basically breaks down 51/49... but the states break down (on average) 46/54. We add 20mm people to the voter rolls, and they break down 60/40? That's a statistical anomaly. It doesn't prove anything, but it certainly would give any statistician concern.
If you were to predict how those 20mm additional people would vote, it would be +/- 51/49 and not 60/40.
It's only an anomaly if you assume that the voters who voted in both 2016 and 2020 all voted the exact same way...and that's ridiculous and you know that.
I know the polls aren't fully to be relied on at all, but they showed that trump lost voters from 2016. Not to mention the higher turnout can most rightly be attributed to those who wanted trump out of office. And that's further illustrated in the fact the the GOP did well down ballot.
Your problem is the same one team trump has had in court when they bring in experts. They testify to something that looks interesting or odd, but they fail to show that it proved anything.
(12-08-2020 02:43 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]It's only an anomaly if you assume that the voters who voted in both 2016 and 2020 all voted the exact same way...and that's ridiculous and you know that.
Not really
Quote:I know the polls aren't fully to be relied on at all, but they showed that trump lost voters from 2016. Not to mention the higher turnout can most rightly be attributed to those who wanted trump out of office. And that's further illustrated in the fact the the GOP did well down ballot.
Unless you look at the large number of 'top of ballot only' votes... which again were a statistical anomaly.
Quote:Your problem is the same one team trump has had in court when they bring in experts. They testify to something that looks interesting or odd, but they fail to show that it proved anything.
Except that I've admitted that the statistical analysis alone doesn't prove anything.... meanwhile you've made wild ass assertions with no PROOF at all of them, and when challenged, your PREMISE is the PROOF. I.e... You believe Trump lost votes because the polls tell you that... but you ignore that the polls are based on a small number of actual responses and then numerous assumptions about voter behavior... AND you ignore that after being so wrong that they missed their prediction on the last election... so they adjusted their biases... and then STILL missed the outcome quite badly. By that I mean they had Biden +12 and he won by +3 in some states. Had they kept the last elections models, they would have had Biden +20, and he STILL would have only won by +3.
Trump once again outperformed the individual state polls by a WIDE margin, so why are you so comfortable using that demonstrably flawed polling data to imply that he 'lost' votes?
2020 Trump gets 5.9mm votes. Biden gets 5.3mm votes. 2016, Trump gets 4.7mm votes and Hillary gets 3.9mm. Interestingly, Trump got 52% of the vote both times. Biden outperformed Hillary by almost 3.5%. Meanwhile we look at the polls, who on average (according to 538) had Trump winning 48.6 to 47.4. They got Biden's percentage almost right... and missed Trumps by the same 3.5 points... so even with the upward adjustments from 2016, they under-estimated Trump.
and YOUR conclusion is that Trump did worse, yet somehow got exactly the same percentage as last time... because the polls tell you that??
Statistical analysis as I said IMPLIES things, but PROVES absolutely nothing... but without an allegation, it is almost impossible to do the sort of investigation that COULD prove something. That's a big part of what statistics is used for. Computers do it constantly... and they would balk at this.
The beatings will continue until morale improves....
(12-07-2020 12:24 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]A 2 percent swing is easily accounted for, and quite frankly about what I had feared in the election.
When you think about it, to endure 4 years of non-stop character assassination and only lose 2 percent would be a pretty amazing performance.
Stop me if you've heard this before...team trump lost...again. Womp womp
Quote:A Pennsylvania appellate court on Wednesday denied the latest in a string of legal challenges seeking to roll back certification of the election results, ending the last active court battle in the state over the outcome of the race.
In a four-page opinion, Commonwealth Court President Judge Mary Hannah Leavitt (EDIT: A Republican) dismissed the suit brought by a group of nine GOP state lawmakers, led by Rep Daryl Metcalfe (R., Butler), saying they had waited too long to file their challenge.
They “are unable to demonstrate a clear right to relief or likelihood of prevailing on the merits because their underlying action … is really an improper and untimely election contest,” she wrote.
Metcalfe’s suit, filed Friday, followed a string of other recent lawsuits filed by President Donald Trump’s allies in the GOP, even as Trump himself appears to have abandoned his campaign’s efforts to bludgeon its way to victory through the courts.
Pa. appellate court delivers another loss to Trump’s GOP allies seeking to void the state’s election results
(12-08-2020 04:55 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-08-2020 02:43 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]It's only an anomaly if you assume that the voters who voted in both 2016 and 2020 all voted the exact same way...and that's ridiculous and you know that.
Not really
This gets at the heart of a lot of the assumptions on here. Many people do seem to assume that everyone is going to blindly vote for a single political party every year, on every part of the ballot. That is simply not the case. I say this as one of the people who did not vote for Hillary in 2016 (I'm a registered Libertarian, FWIW) but voted Biden this year because I thought it was that important to get Trump out of office. I don't know why it's difficult to imagine that there are a lot of us who fell into this boat.
What a load...