Jump to content

U.S. Electoral College close to formally confirming Joe Biden's win


webfact

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It was extremely interesting, the man had a huge intellect and courage of his convictions.

Many fanatics do , dont make them perfect dinner party guests though IMHO.

Actually im a big history buff so would no doubt find it interesting ,but in these troubled times something lighter is in order.

Think I may work my way through the Flashman series again .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PatOngo said:

Regardless, it's all sounding absolutely pathetic! Trump LOST!

Just because they lost about 60 cases in court. You have to consider that Team Trump actually won 1! Anyway, I'm pretty sure that the legal standard for proving an election to be valid is 1000 to 1.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PatOngo said:
7 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Just because they lost about 60 cases in court. You have to consider that Team Trump actually won 1! Anyway, I'm pretty sure that the legal standard for proving an election to be valid is 1000 to 1.

You keep clutching at those straws, wave him goodbye on the 20th Jan! Winning 1 in 60 is the true mark of a loser!

From what I just read, the ONE case they won was overturned by the State Supreme Court. I'm sure if I misread the article, someone here will be happy to enlighten me.

 

If I read it right, then it's Elite Team 45 - 0, Truth - 60.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, PatOngo said:

You keep clutching at those straws, wave him goodbye on the 20th Jan! Winning 1 in 60 is the true mark of a loser!

Really? Well, how about this in Pennsylvania? Just because the Democrats requested about 3 times as many mail in ballots as Republicans, still there should have been no significant differences between the tally of mail-in ballots vs the tally of those votes cast on election day at polling stations. A very wise Trump supporter put the likelihood of there being a significant difference at about a quadrillion to one.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

Really? Well, how about this in Pennsylvania? Just because the Democrats requested about 3 times as many mail in ballots as Republicans, still there should have been no significant differences between the tally of mail-in ballots vs the tally of those votes cast on election day at polling stations. A very wise Trump supporter put the likelihood of there being a significant difference at about a quadrillion to one.

Forget it, it's OVER, done and dusted, finito, LOST! You can carry on all you like, the majority have spoken! Get over it!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

7 hours ago, PatOngo said:

Forget it, it's OVER, done and dusted, finito, LOST! You can carry on all you like, the majority have spoken! Get over it!

I was hoping that the increasingly deranged cascade of comments I was making might clue you in to where I actually stand on the issue. That said, given the bizarre denialism of Trump supporters, maybe it's just plain impossible to detectibly parody their claims.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

I'd certainly support changing the U.S. system to electing presidents by national popular vote -- instead of the current archaic and dis-representative Electoral College system.  How about you?

 

Especially since trump is trying to con them into disregarding the wishes of the voters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

I'd certainly support changing the U.S. system to electing presidents by national popular vote -- instead of the current archaic and dis-representative Electoral College system.  How about you?

 

Yes but the current system clearly favors the republicans so forget about it. It won't be changed by constitutional amendment. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, placeholder said:

Really? Well, how about this in Pennsylvania? Just because the Democrats requested about 3 times as many mail in ballots as Republicans, still there should have been no significant differences between the tally of mail-in ballots vs the tally of those votes cast on election day at polling stations. A very wise Trump supporter put the likelihood of there being a significant difference at about a quadrillion to one.

Well, that might have been true if Trump had not turned early voting into a political issue as he did with wearing masks in an attempt to slow the spread of COVID.  Early polling of democrats and republicans showed that the democrats were by far leaning more to voting by mail, while republicans were much more likely to say they were going to vote in person at the polling both on voting day.   Trump obviously knew this as he appointed someone that did his best to slow the mail... so the Trump side obviously realized democrats were more likely to vote by mail early - otherwise this move made no sense (the result is now the Christmas season is upon the post office and effectively they have turned the post office into the post office run by the grinch).   In the end, turning this political and not encouraging Trump voters to vote early locking in the vote -- may just have been one of the reasons why Trump lost the election. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.











×
×
  • Create New...