- This topic has 84 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 2 months ago by
svelte.
-
AuthorPosts
-
-
November 7, 2020 at 9:10 AM #23014
-
November 7, 2020 at 9:34 AM #820120
sdduuuude
ParticipantProbably more than one recount will happen, but yes – we will be getting kicked in the left nut instead of the right nut for a few years.
-
November 7, 2020 at 9:58 AM #820121svelteParticipant
I’m OK with most presidents.
The one who is just wrapping up his term was so so so terrible that anything at all will be better than what we have. Horrendous.
-
November 7, 2020 at 10:35 AM #820123
Coronita
Participantuntil trump, I’ve never voted across party lines at the national level. But I’ve been waiting 4 years to be able to say 3 simple words to Mr. Trump.
Mr. Trump,
YOU’RE FIRED, ASSHOLE!
-
November 7, 2020 at 10:48 AM #820124Participant
I suspect his inability to lose gracefully is going to end up being worse than anything he has said or done in the past. Although – check out my next post on Benford’s law. Maybe some fraud is going on.
And Biden going to borrow trillions from our children to “save” the country from Covid.
Maybe conservatives are smart to vote for him. It seems he has been set up to fail – handed an economy that can’t possibly stay afloat.
CNN and MSNBC aren’t going to have anything to cover for the next 4 years. I hope their revenue goes in the shitter. They deserve it. FOX, too.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:44 AM #820126svelteParticipant
[quote=sdduuuude]I suspect his inability to lose gracefully is going to end up being worse than anything he has said or done in the past. Although – check out my next post on Benford’s law. Maybe some fraud is going on.
.[/quote]So your theory is what – that a Democrat gave a false total as the result from each precinct and that’s why it doesn’t conform to “Benford’s Law”? Because, you’d think that if they had fed fake ballots through the system, that would have conformed to Benford’s Law and ended up with a 1 in the first digit most of the time.
Not buying it.
Also kinda looks like someone handpicked a small set of precincts to show.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:58 AM #820127Participant
I’m a numbers guy. I’m not saying the Dems did anything. Maybe the republicans somehow shed votes for Biden. Whoever made these charts brought data – and it is quite compelling.
I agree, I would like to see all of them. If all of them do conform to BL and these are the only outliers, then it makes it even more suspect. If they are all over the board, then maybe less. If always for the same candidate, maybe more.
Still, the fact that all the other candidates tallies follow the law and one doesn’t is very very odd.
-
November 7, 2020 at 12:06 PM #820129Participant
I replied to your “fake ballots” comment in the other thread.
https://www.piggington.com/benfords_law_and_voter_fraud#comment-292041
-
November 7, 2020 at 2:04 PM #820134
Rich ToscanoKeymasterI’m shutting down this Benford’s Law nonsense right now, as described here: https://www.piggington.com/benfords_law_and_voter_fraud#comment-292046
-
November 7, 2020 at 5:11 PM #820135Participant
And if you look even further, you would see that there is a rebuke to that article by Walter Mebane, at the University of Michigan.
““Benford’s Law and the Detection of Election Fraud” raises doubts about whether a test based on the mean of the second significant digit of vote counts equals 4.187 is useful as a test for the occurrence of election fraud. The paper mistakenly associates such a test with Benford’s Law, considers a simulation exercise that has no apparent relevance for any actual election, applies the test to inappropriate levels of aggregation, and ignores existing analysis of recent elections in Russia. If tests based on the second significant digit of precinct-level vote counts are diagnostic of election fraud, the tests need to use expectations that take into account the features of ordinary elections, such as strategic actions. Whether the tests are useful for detecting fraud remains an open question, but approaching this question requires an approach more nuanced and tied to careful analysis of real election data than one sees in the discussed paper.”
I agree with your “luinatic” edit, though.
Since the Michigan guy says it is an “open question” I’ll change my statement from “proof positive” to “worth looking at.”
It’s data. Someone brought data. I don’t think it should be ignored and I don’t think you should have closed the thread.
-
November 7, 2020 at 5:29 PM #820137Participant
[quote=Rich Toscano]I’m shutting down this Benford’s Law nonsense right now, as described here: https://www.piggington.com/benfords_law_and_voter_fraud#comment-292046%5B/quote%5D
It isn’t “Benford’s Theory.”
It is “Benford’s Law”
Dismissing it outright as a conspiracy theory is not right.By the way, here is a syllabus to mebane’s class at Michigan:
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/ps485/ps485_syl/ps485_syl.html
And that includes references to several studies, papers and lectures regarding the application of Benford’s Law to elections. Admittedly, I haven’t read them all, but they are every much academic papers as the one you cited:
Pericchi, Luis Raúl and David Torres. 2011. “Quick Anomaly Detection by the Newcomb-Benford Law, with Applications to Electoral Processes Data from the USA, Puerto Rico and Venezuela.” Statistical Science 26 (Nov, 4): 502-516. (in file STS0703-006R4A0.pdf).
Mebane, Walter R., Jr. 2014. “Can Votes Counts’ Digits and Benford’s Law Diagnose Elections?” In Steven J. Miller, The Theory and Applications of Benford’s Law, Princeton UP, 206-216. (in file miller13.pdf).
Mebane, Walter R., Jr. 2013. Election Forensics, chapters 9, 10 and 12. (in files Chapter9.pdf, Chapter10.pdf and Chapter12.pdf).
Mebane. 2007. “Election Forensics: Statistics, Recounts and Fraud,” Presented at the 2007 Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 12-16. http://www.umich.edu/~wmebane/mw07.pdf
Wendy K. Tam Cho and Brian J. Gaines. 2007. “Breaking the (Benford) Law: Statistical Fraud Detection in Campaign Finance.” The American Statistician, 61 (August): 218-223.
Mebane. 2008. “Election Forensics: The Second-digit Benford’s Law Test and Recent American Presidential Elections.” In R. Michael Alvarez, Thad E. Hall and Susan D. Hyde, eds., Election Fraud: Detecting and Deterring Electoral Manipulation. Washington, DC: Brookings Press, 2008, pp. 162-181.
http://www.umich.edu/~wmebane/fraud06.pdfMebane. 2006. “Election Forensics: Vote Counts and Benford’s Law,” Presented at at the 2006 Summer Meeting of the Political Methodology Society, UC-Davis, July 20-22.
http://www.umich.edu/~wmebane/pm06.pdf -
November 7, 2020 at 9:00 PM #820140Rich ToscanoKeymaster
Haha, I know it’s Benford’s Law (not Theory). I’m not denying the mathematical law. I was denying that proves voter fraud in a way that somehow eluded election experts, but was only noticed by a guy with an unhinged Trump-worshipping propaganda site.
I quickly founding a paper questioning the premise, and you have found counters to that. Fair enough. But the fact remains that people who actually have expertise in how elections work are not concerned. I think it’s important not to draw strong conclusions in an area that’s not your area of specialty, when those who do specialize in it say something different.
Meanwhile, there are hyper-partisan propaganda outlets, along with our soon to be ex president, spreading verifiable lies about voter fraud. This is dangerous and harmful and honestly makes me pretty upset. I don’t want anything even adjacent to that on this site…. and this conversation was adjacent enough that I just didn’t want it here. Thanks for taking it in stride.
-
November 7, 2020 at 10:43 PM #820141Participant
[quote=Rich Toscano]Haha, I know it’s Benford’s Law (not Theory). I’m not denying the mathematical law. I was denying that proves voter fraud in a way that somehow eluded election experts.[/quote]
I thought it would provoke interesting mathematical discussions. My biggest concern would be – did he use the right data or just make it up – which would be voter fraud fraud.
It’s all pretty damn interesting to me. After browsing through some of those papers, it seems that 2BL is a much better test- that is, checking the distributions of the 2nd digit because you get better distribution of the 2nd digit across data that is not spread across multiple orders of magnitude.
I almost didn’t post the conservative commentary link. Shouldn’t have. Should have just posted the data because it is really fascinating.
It doesn’t really prove fraud, but it certainly suggests an anomaly.
-
November 7, 2020 at 10:46 PM #820143
SDNative2
ParticipantWow, I thought TDS would subside now that Biden appears to have it in the can.
BTW and FWIW, the media does not declare a president. It’s a constitutional, statutory process completed in December.
Al Gore litigated for 37 days in 2020.
Biden hasn’t won yet.
Censored in 3…2…
-
-
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:27 AM #820125Participant
I thought this was very interesting.
The percentage of blacks, latinos and women voting for trump all increased from 2016 to 2020.
The percentage of white males voting for trump went down.
See the “by gender and race” section:
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/11/politics/election-analysis-exit-polls-2016-2020/
-
November 7, 2020 at 5:12 PM #820136
TeCKis300
ParticipantTrumps actions in the last week epitomizes why he is unworthy and a failure.
No matter if I believed in any of his policies.
Lies, deceit, treachery. Qualities unbecoming of any leader let alone a sitting President. It’s been a sad time for the people of this nation, particularly the children, to witness such behavior. Even worse with many reflecting it in their own conduct.
Good riddance.
-
November 7, 2020 at 6:44 PM #820138
sunny88
ParticipantBoth parties are corrupt and Biden is not better than Trump. We need more parties so that the power is more balanced by forming coalitions. Most people are are somewhere in between and not being represented.
-
November 7, 2020 at 8:26 PM #820139Participant
I agree. We need a functional government. The parties are self serving rather than having the better interest of the country.
That point is distinct and different however – there is a better man between the two. My vote was strictly on character this time as it has to start with that. Before we can address anything else.
-
-
November 7, 2020 at 10:44 PM #820142svelteParticipant
Thank you Rich.
I’m honestly quite confused. How did we get here as a society, where we have a significant part of our society buying into conspiracy theories? Do they honestly believe that multiple states were infiltrated? My god, how much damage has this president done?
Can you imagine the pandemonium in this country if the courts invalidated the voters in five states to award the presidency to Trump? Citizens would come unglued. There could possibly be no more United States. There has been no point in my lifetime where I felt I had to stand up and risk all for what is right. If the courts overrule voters on this election – that would be my moment.
-
November 7, 2020 at 10:58 PM #820145Participant
[quote=svelte]Thank you Rich.
I’m honestly quite confused. How did we get here as a society, where we have a significant part of our society buying into conspiracy theories? [/quote]
You mean – how did we get to a point where data and mathematical laws are mistaken for conspiracy theories ? I can’t imagine – but you and Rich need to show more of an interest in math (that’s supposed to be funny and lighten the mood).
I can’t imagine the courts hold up any of Trump’s lawsuits but I can’t imagine he goes away quietly either.
Even Chris Christie gave him a face-palm on his election night speech.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:01 PM #820146
spdrun
ParticipantBenford’s Law depends on the initial data set. Let’s say we have a set of states with 6,000,000 voters that tend to vote close to 50/50. Would their results follow Benford’s Law, or would 2 and 3 be the most common (likely only) first digits, without fraud?
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:12 PM #820149Participant
[quote=spdrun]Benford’s Law depends on the initial data set. Let’s say we have a set of states with 6,000,000 voters that tend to vote close to 50/50. Would their results follow Benford’s Law, or would 2 and 3 be the most common (likely only) first digits, without fraud?[/quote]
Yes, but you don’t have that. The data seemed to come in low level within a county. And, as presented, Trump and the third and fourth and even fifth place followed Benford’s Law.
So the race was close and Trump’s numbers followed Benford’s law but Biden’s didn’t, in the data I saw.
After some reading, it seems that using the second digit avoids the problem you mention.
See – it is interesting, ya ?
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:20 PM #820150Participant
This explains it better than I can … basically, it’s an extension of the size issue that I mentioned previously:
Looking at the actual Chicago data at https://www.chicagoelections.gov/en/election-results-specifics.asp by precinct as of late November 7, the charts for Chicago look credible but the assumption that Benford’s law should apply do not, at least for Biden/Harris or the minor candidates.
Of the 2069 precincts (most of which are of broadly similar size), Biden/Harris won fewer than 100 votes in 12 precincts, and more than 999 votes in 4 precincts. All the rest (more than 99%) had three digits for their votes, violating the requirement that natural data satisfying Benford’s law should span several orders of magnitude. More than half the precincts (1100) gave Biden/Harris from 300 through to 499 votes, making 3 and 4 the most common first digits (the chart reflects this and is close to showing the actual frequencies by hudreds of votes, so 300-399 was the most common).
For Trump/Pence, votes were more widely dispersed: 99 precincts with 1-9 votes, 1339 precincts with 10-99, and 633 precincts with 100 or more votes. This dispersion over orders of magnitude allowed a greater chance of coming closer to matching Benford’s law.
For the minor candidates, they only reached double digits in a very small number of precincts (and got 0 votes in hundreds of precincts – not shown on the charts) so the charts are close to showing their actual vote distribution with censoring of 0 and 10+; again you would not expect Benford’s law to apply.
Chicago was an odd choice to investigate for suspected cheating in 2020 where the gap in Illinois was 12 percentage points (1960 when it was 0.2 percentage points might have been more interesting). I suspect it was chosen simply because the data is publicly available and the distortions caused by similar precinct size led to this non-Benford law result. You will see this elsewhere for similar reasons: in 2019 very few British MPs won a number of votes starting with 5-9, as their constituencies are of broadly similar sizes and the winners usually got in the range from 10,000 to 49,999 votes, again failing the spanning several orders of magnitude requirement.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:31 PM #820152Participant
[quote=spdrun]This explains it better than I can … basically, it’s an extension of the size issue that I mentioned previously … [/quote]
Very good, spdrun. Very good.
See, now if Rich had just posted that in the Benford’s Law thread I started specifically to discuss that set of data instead of closing the thread down we wouldn’t have to have all these posts in the Biden Wins thread.
I’d love to see the 2nd digit analysis on these numbers. I bet they clean right up.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:25 PM #820153svelteParticipant
[quote=sdduuuude]
Yes, but you don’t have that. The data seemed to come in low level within a county. And, as presented, Trump and the third and fourth and even fifth place followed Benford’s Law.So the race was close and Trump’s numbers followed Benford’s law but Biden’s didn’t, in the data I saw.
After some reading, it seems that using the second digit avoids the problem you mention.
See – it is interesting, ya ?[/quote]
You’re cruisin’ for a bannin’.
As I said, this is my moment. This is where I choose to make a stand.
If the lifted 4×4 crowd decides to overrule the American people, we’ll take it to the limit. You lost. Put on your big boy pants.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:30 PM #820154Participant
For what it’s worth, SDNative2 was the one who posted the troll about TDS yip-yap-yip-yap, not sdduuuude. sdduuuude appears ready to listen to reason — why Benford’s Law is useless in this instance.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:32 PM #820155Participant
[quote=spdrun]For what it’s worth, SDNative2 was the one who posted the troll about TDS yip-yap-yip-yap, not sdduuuude. sdduuuude appears ready to listen to reason — why Benford’s Law is useless in this instance.[/quote]
The link you posted shows a 2nd digit analysis that fails and 2nd digit analysis doesn’t require multiple orders of magnitude.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:38 PM #820158Participant
Whoever picked the axes for the second-digit analysis of Alleghany County needs to have some decency beat into them with a large slide rule. Lying With Graphs 101.
They used a y-axis range of 14 for Trump’s data (making it look more compressed) and a 4.5 range for Biden’s data.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:52 PM #820161Participant
[quote=spdrun]Whoever picked the axes for the second-digit analysis of Alleghany County needs to have some decency beat into them with a large slide rule. Lying With Graphs 101.
They used a y-axis range of 14 for Trump’s data (making it look more compressed) and a 4.5 range for Biden’s data.[/quote]
OMG. Yes, I see that. There is a formal way to determine conformity to the expected curve. Having that would help immensely. I’m curious to see if that Michigan prof will ever publish an analysis of this election.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:34 PM #820156Participant
[quote=svelte] You lost.[/quote]
You seem to have mistaken me for a Trump fan.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:43 PM #820159svelteParticipant
[quote=sdduuuude][quote=svelte] You lost.[/quote]
You seem to have mistaken me for a Trump fan.[/quote]
You talk like a Trump fan.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:50 PM #820162Participant
[quote=svelte][quote=sdduuuude][quote=svelte] You lost.[/quote]
You seem to have mistaken me for a Trump fan.[/quote]
You talk like a Trump fan.[/quote]
You listen like a deaf child.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:55 PM #820163Participant
I know you are, but what am I?
I know you are, but what am I?
I know you are, but what am I?Trump has caused half of Americans to de-evolve into middle-school students.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:56 PM #820164svelteParticipant
[quote=spdrun]I know you are, but what am I?
I know you are, but what am I?
I know you are, but what am I?Trump has caused half of Americans to de-evolve into middle-school students.[/quote]
lol.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:58 PM #820165
-
November 8, 2020 at 12:02 AM #820167Participant
[quote=spdrun]I know you are, but what am I?
I know you are, but what am I?
I know you are, but what am I?Trump has caused half of Americans to de-evolve into middle-school students.[/quote]
How the left and the right fight:
https://fb.watch/1DnQFtxiAM/
-
-
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:06 PM #820144Participant
I shouldn’t be arguing with an asshat blathering being “TDS”, but I’m bored and here goes:
There isn’t one close state that would flip the election like in 2000. Do you really think that multiple (3-4) states threw their elections as to favor Biden, while no fraud occurred to favor Trump?
If this election is handed to Trump, despite the will of the American people that it be otherwise, I hope that it will result in the American people taking matters into their own hands.
Thank God for COVID — it makes developing respiratory symptoms and staying home until a test comes back (in many states it takes 7+ days) very easy. Now imagine this beautiful fact being used to organize a nationwide strike or sickout! You can’t be fired for being too careful, know what I mean?
This should be the first step. If the next step involves the US tearing itself to pieces, so be it. If this country is handed to a scumbag with Fascist tendencies, it’s better off breaking up.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:07 PM #820147Participant
[quote=spdrun]There isn’t one close state that would flip the election like in 2000. Do you really think that multiple (3-4) states threw their elections as to favor Biden, while no fraud occurred to favor Trump?[/quote]
Certainly not. And I don’t think I presented the information in a way that suggests it.
I put the probability that there is zero material (i.e. changes the outcome) election fraud in the US at 0 and I wouldn’t suggest either party to be more likely the cause of it than the other.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:14 PM #820148Participant
I was replying to “SDNative2”, not you, unless you have a sockpuppet account.
Anyway, we have WI, PA, NV, AZ, and GA, all of which have much larger margins of votes than Florida did in 2000 … a recount only changed Florida by about 1200 votes! The chances of Trump flipping 3-4 states are basically nil, unless the courts engage in outright manipulation — in which case, “by any means necessary” becomes the order of the day.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:19 PM #820151Participant
[quote=spdrun]I was replying to “SDNative2”, not you, unless you have a sockpuppet account.
[/quote]I had to look that up. No, I don’t.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:34 PM #820157
flyer
ParticipantVoted for the lesser of the two evils, so we’ll see how it goes.
Other than not having to listen to the ramblings of our current president, and a possibly better COVID response, sadly–very few voters lives will change for the better in any meaningful way–especially with a Congress, and a country still so divided. The rich will continue to get richer, the poor will get poorer, and I don’t think that is going to change any time soon.
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:48 PM #820160svelteParticipant
[quote=flyer]Voted for the lesser of the two evils, so we’ll see how it goes.
Other than not having to listen to the ramblings of our current president, and a possibly better COVID response, sadly–very few voters lives will change for the better in any meaningful way–especially with a Congress, and a country still so divided. The rich will continue to get richer, the poor will get poorer, and I don’t think that is going to change any time soon.[/quote]
Let’s see. We’ll have a president that condemns white supremacists. We’ll have a president who takes COVID seriously. We’ll have a president who doesn’t lie in every speech he gives. We’ll have a president who doesn’t separate us into blue states and red states. And we’ll have a president who doesn’t think he’s trying to “put your husbands back to work” but instead chooses a female Vice President.
I think it is quite a distance – perhaps here to the moon? – from choosing the lesser of two evils.
-
November 8, 2020 at 8:26 AM #820170Participant
[quote=flyer]Voted for the lesser of the two evils, so we’ll see how it goes.
Other than not having to listen to the ramblings of our current president, and a possibly better COVID response, sadly–very few voters lives will change for the better in any meaningful way–especially with a Congress, and a country still so divided. The rich will continue to get richer, the poor will get poorer, and I don’t think that is going to change any time soon.[/quote]
Sometimes in life, people figure out money isn’t the most important thing. Especially for people who really have a lot of it and don’t have insecurity issues about it…A lot of “poorer” people are pretty happy as they don’t have the mentality that money is a yardstick for one’s self worth… -
November 8, 2020 at 9:00 AM #820171svelteParticipant
[quote=Coronita]
Sometimes in life, people figure out money isn’t the most important thing. Especially for people who really have a lot of it and don’t have insecurity issues about it…A lot of “poorer” people are pretty happy as they don’t have the mentality that money is a yardstick for one’s self worth…[/quote]So true Coronita.
I would say that if I were to sum up this election in two words, they would be “Character Matters”.
Credit to Berke Breathed.
https://www.facebook.com/berkeleybreathed/photos/a.114529165244512/3814327575264634/
-
November 8, 2020 at 10:00 AM #820173Participant
I think even if money matters to some people, being alive to spend it and having places to spend it safely ALSO matters.
-
November 8, 2020 at 10:19 AM #820174svelteParticipant
[quote=spdrun]I think even if money matters to some people, being alive to spend it and having places to spend it safely ALSO matters.[/quote]
True.
Just read this article. I think it is probably pretty accurate:
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/07/this-f-ing-virus-inside-donald-trumps-2020-undoing-434716
Sounds to me like three things led to a Biden victory:
1. COVID (health became a primary issue)
2. Trump’s response to COVID (showed his weak leadership skills)
3. VP Selection (money just poured into the Biden campaign after Harris was selected)It’s so tough to unseat a sitting president, I doubt Biden would have won if one of those things were missing.
-
November 8, 2020 at 11:04 AM #820175Participant
4. Trump managed to alienate Arizonans (11 votes) due to his mistreatment of McCain and Georgians (16 votes) due to his boycott of Rep. Lewis’s funeral (to be fair, Lewis also boycotted Trump’s inauguration) and comments about Lewis. Biden had some level of birth-state advantage in PA. In Michigan (16 votes), his feeding and defending the nutbags who wanted to kidnap and hang Gov. Whitmer for “treason” likely didn’t help his cause.
Hoist. Petard. He lost 43 votes by hacking off the branch that he was sitting on with a coal-rollin’ chainsaw.
-
-
-
November 7, 2020 at 11:58 PM #820166Participant
I’m pleased to see so many people post comments like “I’m not happy with either choice” on this thread.
Seems like this is the time for a 3rd party to emerge.
-
November 8, 2020 at 12:11 AM #820168svelteParticipant
[quote=sdduuuude]
Seems like this is the time for a 3rd party to emerge.[/quote]
Now that I can agree with!
If you look at the increase in undeclared, it seems the evidence supports this position.
The New Bull-Moose Party.
Actually I don’t feel a strong need to belong to any group. I’m perfectly happy evaluating the individual and not the party.
-
November 8, 2020 at 12:13 AM #820169Participant
[quote=svelte][quote=sdduuuude]
Seems like this is the time for a 3rd party to emerge.[/quote]
Now that I can agree with!
If you look at the increase in undeclared, it seems the evidence supports this position.
The New Bull-Moose Party.
Actually I don’t feel a strong need to belong to any group. I’m perfectly happy evaluating the individual and not the party.[/quote]
But the person will never win the nomination if they aren’t closely aligned with one of the parties.
And you have to watch that video on the left and right fighing. It’s super-duper.
-
-
-
November 8, 2020 at 12:37 PM #820176Participant
This is just how I like it – party A in the executive, party B in the court, and congress is split.
The gov can get less done this way, and they are best when they do less.
-
November 8, 2020 at 12:47 PM #820177Participant
[quote=sdduuuude]This is just how I like it – party A in the executive, party B in the court, and congress is split.
The gov can get less done this way, and they are best when they do less.[/quote]
yup
If only the same could be said about CA the state.
Trump was successful in turning blue california, even even more blue.
Thanks Trump. 🙁
-
November 8, 2020 at 12:59 PM #820178Participant
A 50/50 Senate is still a possibility … a lot of effort and money will be put into the runoff seats in Georgia, plus the 2022 election will decide another 1/3 of Senate seats. Our government gets a lot done … it’s just best at hurting people via endless wars, bloated military budgets, and mass incarceration. Imagine if that money were redirected to healthcare for all, reasonably priced (offline) college for those who get in, and fixing our disgraceful infrastructure.
-
-
November 8, 2020 at 6:00 PM #820184Participant
My feelings exactly, sdduuuude.
-
November 8, 2020 at 6:01 PM #820185Participant
[quote=sdduuuude]This is just how I like it – party A in the executive, party B in the court, and congress is split.
The gov can get less done this way, and they are best when they do less.[/quote]
My feelings exactly.
-
-
November 8, 2020 at 3:14 PM #820179
phaster
Participantwonder what TRUMP is going to tweet on Jan 20, 2021
-
November 8, 2020 at 3:37 PM #820181Participant
I agree with all of the positive elements mentioned wrt the president elect, that’s why, as an independent, I voted for him this time.
Of course, money isn’t the most important thing. Never has been to me, and never had to worry about it, just glad we can help family and friends live better lives, but with the constant whining we hear about wealth inequality, it must be important to many voters (Gallup Polls reported 80% of voters are concerned about their finances) so it will be interesting to see if this mega issue can also be solved by the new administration in any measurable way.
-
November 8, 2020 at 7:41 PM #820186
utcsox
Participant[quote=flyer]I agree with all of the positive elements mentioned wrt the president elect, that’s why, as an independent, I voted for him this time.
Of course, money isn’t the most important thing. Never has been to me, and never had to worry about it, just glad we can help family and friends live better lives, but with the constant whining we hear about wealth inequality, it must be important to many voters (Gallup Polls reported 80% of voters are concerned about their finances) so it will be interesting to see if this mega issue can also be solved by the new administration in any measurable way.[/quote]
Except, Gallup Polls reported no such things.
“The 55% who say they are better off today is also similar to the 53% who rate their personal financial situation as either excellent or good, down only slightly from before the pandemic. ”
https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/321992/americans-economic-attitudes-election.aspx
-
November 9, 2020 at 1:31 AM #820192Participant
[quote=utcsox][quote=flyer]I agree with all of the positive elements mentioned wrt the president elect, that’s why, as an independent, I voted for him this time.
Of course, money isn’t the most important thing. Never has been to me, and never had to worry about it, just glad we can help family and friends live better lives, but with the constant whining we hear about wealth inequality, it must be important to many voters (Gallup Polls reported 80% of voters are concerned about their finances) so it will be interesting to see if this mega issue can also be solved by the new administration in any measurable way.[/quote]
Except, Gallup Polls reported no such things.
“The 55% who say they are better off today is also similar to the 53% who rate their personal financial situation as either excellent or good, down only slightly from before the pandemic. ”
https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/321992/americans-economic-attitudes-election.aspx%5B/quote%5D
Edit
You are absolutely correct. I was looking at a Gallup Poll from 2018.While checking on that, I found some other fun facts published in 2020 concerning finances in America.
Now, of course, money is not the source of our happiness–we all know that. It is simply a means to an end–a bridge to our dreams–a fortress that gives us a sense of security–or whatever else we may want to call it, but out of 122-128 million households (via various reports) in the US, there are only about 11.8 million millionaire households. (Per NY Post–excluding primary residence.)
Shockingly low stat, considering the number of households in the country. On that basis, it would be interesting to know, per your example above, what the criteria was for who those who claim their personal financial situation is either excellent or good. Without having that criteria and the actual numbers they are referring to, it would be hard to judge how relevant and valid the poll really is.
An extreme example would be someone polled might believe that having a $100K net worth would be enough to fund a 30-year retirement, so they responded to the poll saying that their financial situation is either excellent or good. My point is, without knowing the criteria, polls, including the one I referenced, are meaningless. That said, the millionaire headcount would seem to be far more accurate, and very revealing wrt the actual financial status of Americans.
-
-
-
November 8, 2020 at 4:26 PM #820182Participant
It sounds like it’s important to you to constantly bring up you inherited a lot of money…
-
November 8, 2020 at 4:28 PM #820183Participant
I wonder if Melania voted for him…
-
November 8, 2020 at 7:59 PM #820188svelteParticipant
“Early indications suggest that Biden won a full 10 percent of Arizona Republicans.”
DT lost Arizona all on his own, through his own behavior.
Cindy never forgot what he said about John.
Arizona Republicans never forgot what he said about John.
I never forgot what he said about John.https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/08/john-mccain-arizonas-gop-defeat-donald-trump-434913
Don’t mess with Cindy.
Look at her eyes in that first photo. She was out for blood and I don’t blame her one bit.
-
November 8, 2020 at 8:49 PM #820189Participant
[quote=svelte]”Early indications suggest that Biden won a full 10 percent of Arizona Republicans.”
DT lost Arizona all on his own, through his own behavior.
Cindy never forgot what he said about John.
Arizona Republicans never forgot what he said about John.
I never forgot what he said about John.https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/08/john-mccain-arizonas-gop-defeat-donald-trump-434913
Don’t mess with Cindy.
Look at her eyes in that first photo. She was out for blood and I don’t blame her one bit.[/quote]
yeah, when Dump went after McCain and Romney, that was over the top.
Romney is actually a pretty decent guy. a few of us rudely interrupted his dinner one time in LJ because a colleague of mine who was a huge fan (democrat moderate friend) spotted him. He asked him if he was planning on running in 2020.. Romney laughed…
-
November 9, 2020 at 5:55 AM #820195svelteParticipant
[quote=Coronita]
Romney is actually a pretty decent guy. a few of us rudely interrupted his dinner one time in LJ because a colleague of mine who was a huge fan (democrat moderate friend) spotted him. He asked him if he was planning on running in 2020.. Romney laughed…[/quote]I have always liked Romney. Always liked McCain too.
They do their own thinking and don’t take a position just because it is in their party platform. They chart their own course which I admire greatly.
-
November 9, 2020 at 8:55 AM #820204
ltsddd
Participant[quote=svelte][quote=Coronita]
Romney is actually a pretty decent guy. a few of us rudely interrupted his dinner one time in LJ because a colleague of mine who was a huge fan (democrat moderate friend) spotted him. He asked him if he was planning on running in 2020.. Romney laughed…[/quote]I have always liked Romney. Always liked McCain too.
They do their own thinking and don’t take a position just because it is in their party platform. They chart their own course which I admire greatly.[/quote]
Mostly agree. Especially with McCain. I do have some reservation with Romney on how he made money with Bain Capital by buying distressed companies, laid people off and sell the parts for profits. He ran for president on “bring overseas jobs back” platform. I think he would have made a better president than what we have the last 4 years.
As for McCain, every true American, regardless of their political views, should have been disgusted the way he was mocked by the prez as a POW.
-
-
-
November 8, 2020 at 11:54 PM #820193Participant
Mebane, the Michigan prof, chimed in.
Haven’t read this yet but thought those interested would like to see it. -
November 9, 2020 at 11:13 AM #820207svelteParticipant
Rut-roh.
Trump’s temper tantrum has started.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/09/politics/trump-fires-esper/index.html
-
November 9, 2020 at 11:43 AM #820208Participant
I hope that his firing of Esper doesn’t mean that he’s firing everyone who doesn’t support using martial law to enforce his (Trump’s) attempts to steal the election. The last thing we need is Federal “baby-killers” being sent to states who refuse to rig their elections to fit Trump’s narrative…
Esper had been on shaky ground with the White House for months, a rift that deepened after he said in June that he did not support using active-duty troops to quell the large-scale protests across the United States triggered by the death of George Floyd at the hands of police. Esper also said military forces should be used in a law enforcement role only as a last resort.
-
-
November 9, 2020 at 12:41 PM #820209Participant
Ah… Ben Carlson and David Bossie tested positive for covid…. I never would have thought…..
-
November 9, 2020 at 3:20 PM #820213svelteParticipant
Looks like Georgia’s Republican senators want the Georgia Secretary of State to resign simply because the election did not go their way.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/09/loeffler-perdue-georgia-secretary-state-resign-435484
-
November 9, 2020 at 6:05 PM #820216Participant
The McCain’s were friends of my parents. Great people. The Romney family is, overall great, too. My kids, although they are quite a bit younger, are friends with a couple of his kids and their families.
Sadly, being rude is in vogue (obvious signs of a weak, insecure person) that’s why I can’t stand most politicians or most of the media, but, regardless of how much I can’t stand people, I refrain from making rude comments, especially publicly, so I could’t believe what was said about McCain. That, the handling of the virus and a few other issues are what pushed me to vote as I did. At this point in time, really had no other choice.
-
November 19, 2020 at 8:12 PM #820272svelteParticipant
OK. This is just too bizarre not to mention.
Trump’s top lawyer, head of his legal team, on TV sweating profusely, eyes bulging, hair dye running down his face.
This is what has become of the Trump Fiasco.
Truly amazing stuff.
-
November 20, 2020 at 2:05 AM #820274Participant
You know, this Trump thing isnt going away after Biden assumes the presidency. Trump isn’t really a Republican, but he’s managed to pull off “cult status”.
There’s got to be ways to exploit his cult status and make money off of these idiotic people ….
-
November 20, 2020 at 5:55 AM #820275svelteParticipant
[quote=Coronita]You know, this Trump thing isnt going away after Biden assumes the presidency. Trump isn’t really a Republican, but he’s managed to pull off “cult status”.
There’s got to be ways to exploit his cult status and make money off of these idiotic people ….[/quote]
Absolutely. Except for the “loser” label part I think he would actually prefer not to be president so he can hit the links and have more freedom while still controlling his followers like puppets.
Interesting dynamics – by saying he’ll run in 2024, he’s basically locked out most if not all other GOP contenders because his minions will attack them like traitors if they do any prep work at all for a 2024 run.
-
November 20, 2020 at 6:32 AM #820276Participant
[quote=svelte][quote=Coronita]You know, this Trump thing isnt going away after Biden assumes the presidency. Trump isn’t really a Republican, but he’s managed to pull off “cult status”.
There’s got to be ways to exploit his cult status and make money off of these idiotic people ….[/quote]
Absolutely. Except for the “loser” label part I think he would actually prefer not to be president so he can hit the links and have more freedom while still controlling his followers like puppets.
Interesting dynamics – by saying he’ll run in 2024, he’s basically locked out most if not all other GOP contenders because his minions will attack them like traitors if they do any prep work at all for a 2024 run.[/quote]
Brainstorming a few t-shirt and baseball cap designs..A few questions though..
1.Where is a good place to get tshirts and caps printed at wholesale cost? I think $20-22 is probably how much people would be willing to pay for a trump 2024 t-shirt or cap.
2. What’s the best way to reach the trumpster audience to get them to buy? I’m thinking first hitting the Facebook trump groups….
-
November 20, 2020 at 7:05 AM #820277svelteParticipant
[quote=Coronita][quote=svelte][quote=Coronita]You know, this Trump thing isnt going away after Biden assumes the presidency. Trump isn’t really a Republican, but he’s managed to pull off “cult status”.
There’s got to be ways to exploit his cult status and make money off of these idiotic people ….[/quote]
Absolutely. Except for the “loser” label part I think he would actually prefer not to be president so he can hit the links and have more freedom while still controlling his followers like puppets.
Interesting dynamics – by saying he’ll run in 2024, he’s basically locked out most if not all other GOP contenders because his minions will attack them like traitors if they do any prep work at all for a 2024 run.[/quote]
Brainstorming a few t-shirt and baseball cap designs..A few questions though..
1.Where is a good place to get tshirts and caps printed at wholesale cost? I think $20-22 is probably how much people would be willing to pay for a trump 2024 t-shirt or cap.
2. What’s the best way to reach the trumpster audience to get them to buy? I’m thinking first hitting the Facebook trump groups….[/quote]
I usually have t-shirts printed by these sites:
They offer baseball cap printing also.
-
November 21, 2020 at 9:01 AM #820278
sdrealtor
Participant[quote=Coronita][quote=svelte][quote=Coronita]You know, this Trump thing isnt going away after Biden assumes the presidency. Trump isn’t really a Republican, but he’s managed to pull off “cult status”.
There’s got to be ways to exploit his cult status and make money off of these idiotic people ….[/quote]
Absolutely. Except for the “loser” label part I think he would actually prefer not to be president so he can hit the links and have more freedom while still controlling his followers like puppets.
Interesting dynamics – by saying he’ll run in 2024, he’s basically locked out most if not all other GOP contenders because his minions will attack them like traitors if they do any prep work at all for a 2024 run.[/quote]
Brainstorming a few t-shirt and baseball cap designs..A few questions though..
1.Where is a good place to get tshirts and caps printed at wholesale cost? I think $20-22 is probably how much people would be willing to pay for a trump 2024 t-shirt or cap.
2. What’s the best way to reach the trumpster audience to get them to buy? I’m thinking first hitting the Facebook trump groups….[/quote]
You know Im in. Maybe we can get a struggling investor in Vegas to set up a road side stand. Just make sure it has a sleek, euro design
-
November 21, 2020 at 9:44 AM #820279Rich ToscanoKeymaster
[quote=sdrealtor]Maybe we can get a struggling investor in Vegas to set up a road side stand. Just make sure it has a sleek, euro design[/quote]
Brilliant… 😀
-
-
-
November 21, 2020 at 11:58 AM #820280Participant
I’ll share a few tshirt designs here, and we can make this a pigg side business…
I mean, we might as well capitalize on this disinformation trend and sell shit to people who want to believe the earth is flat.
For example, here’s one:
[img_assist|nid=27285|title=t2024iwr|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=500|height=219]
Feedback?
We have a few other catchy phrases, but we wanted to try to trademark them before actually making them public. You know kind of like how Taylor Swift wants to trademark “Shake it off”….
I wish I knew of a trademark attorney…
*Disclaimer. Part of the proceeds will be donated to the DNC and BLM initiatives….
-
November 21, 2020 at 1:00 PM #820281Rich ToscanoKeymaster
[quote=Coronita]I’ll share a few tshirt designs here, and we can make this a pigg side business…
I mean, we might as well capitalize on this disinformation trend and sell shit to people who want to believe the earth is flat.
For example, here’s one:
[img_assist|nid=27285|title=t2024iwr|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=500|height=219]
Feedback?
We have a few other catchy phrases, but we wanted to try to trademark them before actually making them public. You know kind of like how Taylor Swift wants to trademark “Shake it off”….
I wish I knew of a trademark attorney…
*Disclaimer. Part of the proceeds will be donated to the DNC and BLM initiatives….[/quote]
Spreading disinformation for profit isn’t ok, regardless of whether you believe the disinformation. Also that shirt is profoundly ugly.
-
November 21, 2020 at 1:51 PM #820282Rich ToscanoKeymaster
[quote=Rich Toscano]Also that shirt is profoundly ugly.[/quote]
OK on further thought… that might not put off the target demographic.
But still, like I said above — the disinformation about election fraud is seriously harmful and dangerous, in my view. Don’t be a part of the problem!
-
November 21, 2020 at 3:50 PM #820283Participant
Sadly we’ve been beaten to the punch.. Google Trump 2024 shirt and many results return
-
-
-
November 22, 2020 at 9:39 AM #820284svelteParticipant
With well-known political candidates, it will be hard to come up with an original t-shirt and harder yet to sell more than a handful. Too much existing competition.
The first rule of thumb when getting a trademark: don’t bother getting one unless you have the money to defend it. Otherwise you’ve just thrown your money away.
-
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.