Won't be long now!

[Wut]

Jimmy Carter got 55% of the electoral, what happened there?

jesus. don't go too far back into history?

Yes, Carter was ancient history. You didn't answer the question.

i think i was 10 when carter ran. i don't really remember the mood of the country.

We're not talking about people's moods, we're talking about your claim that only enough republicans show up to ensure victory.

How about Bush-Gore, it came down to a few hundred votes in Florida. Are you saying that the republican hive is so precise that it turned out just enough voters to flip Florida?

see yoiu keep trying to look at it from the end result. that's not the game at all. its state by state. it just so turned out that florida was the deciding state.

And according to your theory, just enough republicans decided to show up to vote to take the state and the rest stayed home because their votes weren't needed?

[Animal]

exactly.

[Wut]

but you can bet your ass if the voters in texas thought that gore might win texas, then more republicans would have voted. they got bush to carry the state and that was enough. the texas voters can't do anything about the votes in florida.

And if democrats thought they could take Texas more would have showed up to vote.

[Wut]

exactly.

That's absurd.

And what supports your claim besides your feelings?

[Animal]

exactly.

That's absurd.

And what supports your claim besides your feelings?

well, if you really want some data to study, go back and study the last several elections. and compare the electoral vote to the popular vote.

[Wut]

exactly.

That's absurd.

And what supports your claim besides your feelings?

well, if you really want some data to study, go back and study the last several elections. and compare the electoral vote to the popular vote.

That really doesn't prove your claim, all it shows is that the republican got the right distribution of votes in two elections to take the electoral vote without winning the popular vote. It in no way proves that republicans show up in just enough volume to win with others not voting because their votes weren't needed.

Please explain to me how the voters in florida that stayed home because their vote wasn't needed, knew that their vote wasn't needed.

[Animal]

exactly.

That's absurd.

And what supports your claim besides your feelings?

well, if you really want some data to study, go back and study the last several elections. and compare the electoral vote to the popular vote.

That really doesn't prove your claim, all it shows is that the republican got the right distribution of votes in two elections to take the electoral vote without winning the popular vote. It in no way proves that republicans show up in just enough volume to win with others not voting because their votes weren't needed.

Please explain to me how the voters in florida that stayed home because their vote wasn't needed, knew that their vote wasn't needed.

no. don't just look at wins. look at the losses, too. it works both ways. if they don't think they are going to win they don't waste their time giving consolation votes. like the obama win in 2008. just study the numbers. you will see it.

[AnalHamster]

So why did Bush win texas in a landslide with up to 90% of the vote in some counties? Isn't that the opposite of what you say should happen?

[Wut]

exactly.

That's absurd.

And what supports your claim besides your feelings?

well, if you really want some data to study, go back and study the last several elections. and compare the electoral vote to the popular vote.

That really doesn't prove your claim, all it shows is that the republican got the right distribution of votes in two elections to take the electoral vote without winning the popular vote. It in no way proves that republicans show up in just enough volume to win with others not voting because their votes weren't needed.

Please explain to me how the voters in florida that stayed home because their vote wasn't needed, knew that their vote wasn't needed.

no. don't just look at wins. look at the losses, too. it works both ways. if they don't think they are going to win they don't waste their time giving consolation votes. like the obama win in 2008. just study the numbers. you will see it.

No, let's look at this specific election and you tell me how the voters in this specific election knew that their vote was not needed.

[Animal]

So why did Bush win texas in a landslide with up to 90% of the vote in some counties? Isn't that the opposite of what you say should happen?

obviously nothing is absolute. bush was an overwhelming texas favorite. former owner of the rangers baseball. governor. texan. etc. he was going to get a landslide no matter what. probably most of his votes were from democrats.

[Animal]

exactly.

That's absurd.

And what supports your claim besides your feelings?

well, if you really want some data to study, go back and study the last several elections. and compare the electoral vote to the popular vote.

That really doesn't prove your claim, all it shows is that the republican got the right distribution of votes in two elections to take the electoral vote without winning the popular vote. It in no way proves that republicans show up in just enough volume to win with others not voting because their votes weren't needed.

Please explain to me how the voters in florida that stayed home because their vote wasn't needed, knew that their vote wasn't needed.

no. don't just look at wins. look at the losses, too. it works both ways. if they don't think they are going to win they don't waste their time giving consolation votes. like the obama win in 2008. just study the numbers. you will see it.

No, let's look at this specific election and you tell me how the voters in this specific election knew that their vote was not needed.

i don't live in florida, so i dont' know how they get their news. i just know in my state we always know before the voting which one is going to win. don't you know that in your state?

[AnalHamster]

So why did Bush win texas in a landslide with up to 90% of the vote in some counties? Isn't that the opposite of what you say should happen?

obviously nothing is absolute. bush was an overwhelming texas favorite. former owner of the rangers baseball. governor. texan. etc. he was going to get a landslide no matter what. probably most of his votes were from democrats.

I see, so it's not just an evidence free theory, you'll actually ignore facts that contradict it. Well, I can see you've thought this one through.

[Animal]

i'm not trying to explain to you why this or that candidate won an election. i'm just trying to explain to you how foolish it is to look at popular vote and wave it around like it means something. so what if 200,000 people vote for a democrat in california if that person has already won the state. those extra 200,000 don't change the electoral votes that person gets. democrats vote like sheep because they are told to go vote and that every vote matters and blah blah blah. that game doesn't work on republicans.

[Wut]

So why did Bush win texas in a landslide with up to 90% of the vote in some counties? Isn't that the opposite of what you say should happen?

Same point on a state level, why did enough voters turn out in Wyoming to give trump 68% of the vote when he needed only 50% plus one vote?

[AnalHamster]

i'm not trying to explain to you why this or that candidate won an election. i'm just trying to explain to you how foolish it is to look at popular vote and wave it around like it means something. so what if 200,000 people vote for a democrat in california if that person has already won the state. those extra 200,000 don't change the electoral votes that person gets. democrats vote like sheep because they are told to go vote and that every vote matters and blah blah blah. that game doesn't work on republicans.

It was 1.5 million republican sheep in Texas the year you choose as an example..

[Animal]

So why did Bush win texas in a landslide with up to 90% of the vote in some counties? Isn't that the opposite of what you say should happen?

obviously nothing is absolute. bush was an overwhelming texas favorite. former owner of the rangers baseball. governor. texan. etc. he was going to get a landslide no matter what. probably most of his votes were from democrats.

I see, so it's not just an evidence free theory, you'll actually ignore facts that contradict it. Well, I can see you've thought this one through.

correct me again on what percentage of the elctoral vote obama got in 2008.

[Animal]

i'm not trying to explain to you why this or that candidate won an election. i'm just trying to explain to you how foolish it is to look at popular vote and wave it around like it means something. so what if 200,000 people vote for a democrat in california if that person has already won the state. those extra 200,000 don't change the electoral votes that person gets. democrats vote like sheep because they are told to go vote and that every vote matters and blah blah blah. that game doesn't work on republicans.

It was 1.5 million in Texas the year you choose as an example..

half of those 1.5 million were probably democrats.

[AnalHamster]

Why would the democrats have voted for the republican?

[Wut]

So why did Bush win texas in a landslide with up to 90% of the vote in some counties? Isn't that the opposite of what you say should happen?

obviously nothing is absolute. bush was an overwhelming texas favorite. former owner of the rangers baseball. governor. texan. etc. he was going to get a landslide no matter what. probably most of his votes were from democrats.

I see, so it's not just an evidence free theory, you'll actually ignore facts that contradict it. Well, I can see you've thought this one through.

Probably most of his votes were from democrats? Where did you pull that out of?

[Wut]

i'm not trying to explain to you why this or that candidate won an election. i'm just trying to explain to you how foolish it is to look at popular vote and wave it around like it means something. so what if 200,000 people vote for a democrat in california if that person has already won the state. those extra 200,000 don't change the electoral votes that person gets. democrats vote like sheep because they are told to go vote and that every vote matters and blah blah blah. that game doesn't work on republicans.

It was 1.5 million in Texas the year you choose as an example..

half of those 1.5 million were probably democrats.

See, I can say 100% of them were probably republican and it has the same validity as your statement.

[Animal]

Why would the democrats have voted for the republican?

because they are texans. they loved him as the governor. why else? you don't have to vote for your party candidate.

[Animal]

So why did Bush win texas in a landslide with up to 90% of the vote in some counties? Isn't that the opposite of what you say should happen?

obviously nothing is absolute. bush was an overwhelming texas favorite. former owner of the rangers baseball. governor. texan. etc. he was going to get a landslide no matter what. probably most of his votes were from democrats.

I see, so it's not just an evidence free theory, you'll actually ignore facts that contradict it. Well, I can see you've thought this one through.

Probably most of his votes were from democrats? Where did you pull that out of?

that surprises you? have you ever had a very well liked governor of your state run for president?

[AnalHamster]

Why would the democrats have voted for the republican?

because they are texans. they loved him as the governor. why else? you don't have to vote for your party candidate.

You don't have to register for a party at all if you don't feel strongly about it. You're looking like a fool here, claiming 50% of republican voters came from democrats because that's what you need to say to support your starting conclusion.

[Wut]

So why did Bush win texas in a landslide with up to 90% of the vote in some counties? Isn't that the opposite of what you say should happen?

obviously nothing is absolute. bush was an overwhelming texas favorite. former owner of the rangers baseball. governor. texan. etc. he was going to get a landslide no matter what. probably most of his votes were from democrats.

I see, so it's not just an evidence free theory, you'll actually ignore facts that contradict it. Well, I can see you've thought this one through.

Probably most of his votes were from democrats? Where did you pull that out of?

that surprises you? have you ever had a very well liked governor of your state run for president?

What surprises me is that you are defending your assumption without supporting it.

[Animal]

So why did Bush win texas in a landslide with up to 90% of the vote in some counties? Isn't that the opposite of what you say should happen?

obviously nothing is absolute. bush was an overwhelming texas favorite. former owner of the rangers baseball. governor. texan. etc. he was going to get a landslide no matter what. probably most of his votes were from democrats.

I see, so it's not just an evidence free theory, you'll actually ignore facts that contradict it. Well, I can see you've thought this one through.

Probably most of his votes were from democrats? Where did you pull that out of?

that surprises you? have you ever had a very well liked governor of your state run for president?

What surprises me is that you are defending your assumption without supporting it.

i have supported it. i'm not going to type out the election results from every election in the past 20 or 30 years. you can see them. they are clear as day.