Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

No candidate gets 128K votes 100% straight up. Fraud.

This happened in MI last night.

https://twitter.com/MattMackowiak/status/1323992377380450309

From Ahead of the Curve on the other (all caps) thread about this:

It's not even that, its that in all likelihood some intern is manually entering the numbers into a tracking DB on whatever website he took a screenshot from and they are going to enter one person and then the other, if you take a snapshot at the perfect times it will look like one candidates numbers jumped and the others didn't change.

It one of those things if you have a basic understanding of technology it isn't even remotely interesting. Plus it's not even an official election website, it's some 3rd party website that's aggregating data from state election sites. Even in the extremely remote chance this website was able to link to all 50 state sites and create a script that updated everything automatically at periodic intervals, there is still processing time and people possibly entering that data manually.

Racket wrote:

highhoppingworm wrote:

You are being disingenuous. 538 does not just “take polls” they have a model that factors in incumbency, fundraising, the generic ballot, uncertainty etc. to come up with a probabilistic score. I will agree with the trumpers that their model is indeed garbage as was much of the polling that was a factor in it.

You don't seem to understand exactly what 538 does or what a probability is so maybe you should calm down lol

The two main electoral college models, 538 and Economist, use "fundamentals" as part of their initial projection but taper down to being entirely poll-based by election day. The issue is that there were apparently surprisingly large misses in the polling data and that the models didn't deal with this particularly well.

Andrew Gelman, one of the principle authors of the Economist model has something of a preliminary postmortem blog post this morning on how things might have gone south and what might be done about it:

For what it's worth, he also does a rough estimate suggesting Biden has about 79% chance of winning at the moment.

Gina wrote:

LOCK HIM UP.

https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/usps-didnt-comply-with-a-judges-order-heres-what-could-happen-to-the-postmaster-general-in-court/

This is why we should encourage voting in person.

Recounts and delays favor the incumbent, unfortunately. I foresee a possible 2000 Bush/Gore screw-job again (if this isn’t already a screw job via USPS vote suppression). Hard to consider the US an actual Democratic Republic anymore.

Fat hurts wrote:

Since NYT is no longer updating its needle, I've taken it upon myself to do the math for Georgia. If I'm right, NYT was just extrapolating the outstanding vote for each county and giving each candidate the same percentage as already reported.

I did this for large counties in Georgia where there was a lot of outstanding vote left to count. I don't have time to input all the counties and I could have missed something, but here is what I have as of now:

Trump wins Georgia by 4,567 votes.

So to really get a better prediction, I would need better data like precinct numbers and mail-in ballot numbers and trends for those.

I think Georgia is headed for a recount.

Interesting post, thank you. Pretty surprising from Georgia.

I do not. You are assuming a margin of victory that is much slimmer than it will be in reality.

Trollminator wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

Minor PA update, with an additional 1% in (76% total) Biden bit 30k out of the gap. It's now 589k.

Biden takes another massive bite out of PA.. another 1% (now 77% counted) and the gap closed by a further 39k. It's now 550k. There are 1.6m votes to count still.

Updates:

PA - 78% in and another 30k made up for Biden, 512k gap now

MI - 90% in and lead extended another 12k to 35k total

testosteronedoesi wrote:

Gina wrote:

LOCK HIM UP.

https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/usps-didnt-comply-with-a-judges-order-heres-what-could-happen-to-the-postmaster-general-in-court/

This is why we should encourage voting in person.

Recounts and delays favor the incumbent, unfortunately. I foresee a possible 2000 Bush/Gore screw-job again (if this isn’t already a screw job via USPS vote suppression). Hard to consider the US an actual Democratic Republic anymore.

No it's actually just a dysfunctional US system, often different across counties within the same state.

AP says MI has 96% in with 45,413 lead for Biden.

If Joe Biden ekes out a victory in the presidential race, and the Repubs retain their majority in the Senate, what happens if a vacancy on the Supreme Court opens up? Sleepy Joe would be under enormous pressure to nominate a very far-left judge for the top Court. Especially after the recent Barrett confirmation as well as the Kavanaugh and Gorsuch confirmations. The Left is not going to settle for a middle-of-the-road liberal for the Court. Would the Senate repubs acquiesce and confirm such a far-left justice? Or would they play hardball and refuse to even vote on such a justice? Could we have no Supreme Court confirmations over the next 4 years?

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

No candidate gets 128K votes 100% straight up. Fraud.

This happened in MI last night.

https://twitter.com/MattMackowiak/status/1323992377380450309

Mathematically impossible. Lawsuits are coming.

You’d know all about mathematically impossible. Where’s your landslide gone?

Sally Vix wrote:

If Joe Biden ekes out a victory in the presidential race, and the Repubs retain their majority in the Senate, what happens if a vacancy on the Supreme Court opens up? Sleepy Joe would be under enormous pressure to nominate a very far-left judge for the top Court. Especially after the recent Barrett confirmation as well as the Kavanaugh and Gorsuch confirmations. The Left is not going to settle for a middle-of-the-road liberal for the Court. Would the Senate repubs acquiesce and confirm such a far-left justice? Or would they play hardball and refuse to even vote on such a justice? Could we have no Supreme Court confirmations over the next 4 years?

If the Republicans didn't even vote on Merrick Garland, they won't vote on anyone.

No SC vacancy will get filled unless the President and the Senate are the same party. This will be Mitch's legacy.

Sally Vix wrote:

If Joe Biden ekes out a victory in the presidential race, and the Repubs retain their majority in the Senate, what happens if a vacancy on the Supreme Court opens up? Sleepy Joe would be under enormous pressure to nominate a very far-left judge for the top Court. Especially after the recent Barrett confirmation as well as the Kavanaugh and Gorsuch confirmations. The Left is not going to settle for a middle-of-the-road liberal for the Court. Would the Senate repubs acquiesce and confirm such a far-left justice? Or would they play hardball and refuse to even vote on such a justice? Could we have no Supreme Court confirmations over the next 4 years?

You don't know what the "left" will do or not do. Have you admitted yet that you didn't know what "berated" meant? You are such a loser. You would rather have everyone know that you are an unwashed a**hole for berating your wife instead of just admitting you were too stupid to know what that word meant.

Sally Vix wrote:

If Joe Biden ekes out a victory in the presidential race, and the Repubs retain their majority in the Senate, what happens if a vacancy on the Supreme Court opens up? Sleepy Joe would be under enormous pressure to nominate a very far-left judge for the top Court. Especially after the recent Barrett confirmation as well as the Kavanaugh and Gorsuch confirmations. The Left is not going to settle for a middle-of-the-road liberal for the Court. Would the Senate repubs acquiesce and confirm such a far-left justice? Or would they play hardball and refuse to even vote on such a justice? Could we have no Supreme Court confirmations over the next 4 years?

McConnell won’t hold hearings. If Clarence Thomas is out on January 21, McConnell won’t hold hearings.

I am a wordsmith. I know what every word means. Smorbun it is time for you to grow up and cease (that means end) with the insults. I have been wondering why you, Flagpole and Trollminator always have to resort to insults when you have lost the argument. Take a look at this ...

Now that we've lived through an election largely fought—and won—on the basis of insults, it's time for an epidemiology of the put-down. What is the underlying psychology of insults—and why do they suddenly seem to be everywhere?

Motivated by Anger?

Chickens are famous for having a pecking order, in which the bottom chicken in the hierarchy is pecked by everyone else and the top chicken is not picked on by anyone. The chicken hierarchy is settled by physical aggression.

In a verbal society, such as the human one, physical aggression is less often used to settle issues of status: These are mostly deferred to verbal interactions. An insult can thus be interpreted as an attempt to reduce the social status of the recipient and raise the relative status of the insulter.

If that logic is correct, we can assume that insults are often motivated by anger surrounding issues of status insecurity. Many insults are reactive: They are responses to real or imagined slights from others, such as a person accidentally cutting in front of someone else in a line.

We live in a period of extreme concern about how we are perceived by others; social psychologists are charting a steady increase in narcissism among college students.1 There is little consensus about why this is happening, but some scholars believe that the more children are measured on evaluative scales—aptitude tests, IQ scores, and GPA—the more sensitive they are to threats to their social rank.

Of course, this narcissism trend is only accentuated by social media, where participants are subject to unrelenting evaluation by other network members who encourage participants to inflate their egos, often at the expense of others.1 Concern with how one is perceived creates social insecurity that may be relieved by lashing out at other chickens (or people) in the area. Social networks are replete with individuals who deliver stinging rebukes because they enjoy doing so and because they are mostly exempt from the reprisals that one might expect for real-world put-downs.

Content: Status, Competence, Sex, and Hygiene

The purpose of a put-down is to reduce someone else in the imaginary status hierarchy. So it is hardly surprising that insults will often refer to a person's social status in terms of ancestry, lack of prestige, or membership in a despised out-group; for example, Nazis or vagrants. Otherwise, the content of insults across the ages is monotonously predictable: Many insults feature a sexual component, refer to sexual organs, or bring up shameful or ineffectual sexual behavior. In addition to status and sexuality, insults inflict shame by mentioning unappealing traits—fatness, shortness, baldness, spottiness, and contagious diseases.

Another way of taking a person down is by questioning their intelligence or general mental competence; for insult purposes, recipients are invariably "stupid" or "crazy."

The pecking-order logic of insults means that if the recipient is shamed, then the insulter rises in status relative to the victim: The insulter is the one doing the pecking rather than getting pecked. Not all insults are equal, of course: Some pecks miss their mark and have no impact upon relative status.

Trollminator wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

Biden takes another massive bite out of PA.. another 1% (now 77% counted) and the gap closed by a further 39k. It's now 550k. There are 1.6m votes to count still.

Updates:

PA - 78% in and another 30k made up for Biden, 512k gap now

MI - 90% in and lead extended another 12k to 35k total

Updates:

PA - 80% in and another 46k made up for Biden, 466k gap now - every chunk that comes in is like 90% Biden's

GA - 93% in and 16k made up for Biden, 86k gap now. Trump loses if every new batch is like this

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

If I were a Dementia Joe voter, I would be scared & stop projecting 306 EV for him too.

KAG2020

Do you wait for the official results delivered by the states in December to quit Let's Run or will you go away as soon as Nevada confirms with the final votes in Clack County?

As much as I like having a conservative-majority SC, I would not be hip on not having hearings. The whole system is broken if that happens.

Jeff Wigand wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

If Joe Biden ekes out a victory in the presidential race, and the Repubs retain their majority in the Senate, what happens if a vacancy on the Supreme Court opens up? Sleepy Joe would be under enormous pressure to nominate a very far-left judge for the top Court. Especially after the recent Barrett confirmation as well as the Kavanaugh and Gorsuch confirmations. The Left is not going to settle for a middle-of-the-road liberal for the Court. Would the Senate repubs acquiesce and confirm such a far-left justice? Or would they play hardball and refuse to even vote on such a justice? Could we have no Supreme Court confirmations over the next 4 years?

McConnell won’t hold hearings. If Clarence Thomas is out on January 21, McConnell won’t hold hearings.

^ Correct, same thing they did to Obama

Gina wrote:

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

Mathematically impossible. Lawsuits are coming.

You’d know all about mathematically impossible. Where’s your landslide gone?

Desperate tzees pointing to screenshots of a refreshed vote count page as proof of cheating, LOLz.