Well I'm sorry but many of your posts come across that way. I have asked you a question about your prediction on the EC and you've just responded with nonsense.
"I can't count up to 270."
"goo goo." (This was your reply before your edit)
Try some adult discourse. Again I ask can you tell us what you think the EC numbers will be that will get Harris over the line? It's not difficult and in your opinion who will win PA? Who will win NC? Who will win NV? Who will win GA? Who will win AZ?
I noticed that but understood what he meant and let it go. I didn't need to go there. He clearly was ignoring the actual effects that restrictive abortion laws have not just on women's health but their very lives.
Right to Buy was introduced almost 45 years ago. What have Labour (and Mirror readers) done to fix the issue since then?
Also I thought local authorities could retain a large percentage of the sale proceeds. They were not banned from using those funds to build new social housing.
One thing is constant in US presidential elections: early reports will announce heavy turnout. Even if the eventual numbers show average turnout.
The reason for these erroneous reports of heavy turnout is because of the great turnover in media, which means that a lot of reporters are seeing their first presidential election. They compare the lines with the lines for the earlier primary election (or the governor's election 2 years before) and the November lines look huge.
So expect early reports of huge turnout, but don't believe those reports.
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now