Only because the mail in vote wasn't counted from the start...thanks to you know who. When all the votes are in we will see how close the electoral is.
No, that’s not thanks to you know whom.
It is state by state. What you know who did was plant the seed of the idea that counting should be concluded on election night
Taking time to count ballots is ordinary course of business, but often the gap is large enough that the outcome is known on election night
Lots of things to blame on the few days after Halloween remains of the great pumpkin but this isn’t one
Well that’s disappointing. Seems like it’s just gonna be the same thing all over again. Republicans saying no to Democrats. Democrats asking Republicans for alternatives. Republicans on Fox complaining that Democrats aren’t getting anything done. Democrats trying again. Republicans saying no. Democrats asking for alternatives. Republicans complaining Democrats aren’t getting anything done. Democrats trying again... and on and on and on.
Yeah, you’re right.
But Joe Biden will be president instead of Donald Trump. That alone is an enormous stabilizing influence.
Don’t lose sight of what matters.
__________________ ”All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you.”
Rowan Roy W-M - February 15, 2024
Last edited by GreenLantern2814; 11-05-2020 at 12:54 AM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to GreenLantern2814 For This Useful Post:
Why is the general public so bad at understanding polling? Math literacy is just...awful.
Well, I don't think the statisticians have helped with this. I heard Nate Silver on CBC leading up to this, and he kept repeating this BS that "a 90% chance of a Biden win means if you did the election 10 times, he would win 9 times out of 10."
That's not correct. Even if there is a multi-verse, we only live in one dimension. There is only one election result. The population for that event is the people who actually voted. When polling, you are taking a sample of the voting population, and that results in sample error. The 9/10 for Biden actually means there's a 10% chance that your sampling didn't capture the true population.
Now in this case, where in back-to-back Presidential elections the sampling error reared its ugly head, you have to ask if maybe they are systematically under-estimating their sampling error.
My guess is that they are. And if they're under-estimating their sampling error, I don't think it's wrong to say they are wrong.
The books in Arizona are being cooked. The last two stacks that have been processed has seen Trump chip away at Biden's lead. The remaining votes require Trump taking 58% of the vote, which is exactly the result of the last stack. What makes me believe the books are cooked, neither of the last two stacks has moved the needle on the Kelly/McSally race. Biden and Kelly's numbers were very consistent before the shenanigans began, but only Biden's numbers have dropped. It does not make sense for Kelly's numbers to not follow Biden's as Trump supporters are NOT going to vote for what is considered a liberal Democrat in Mark Kelly. The numbers should be consistent and when it is not, that is an indicator of manipulated data. Something everyone needs to watch and be aware of.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
