Damn! Dems almost pulled off the upset of the century by close vote in, wait for it, YES Georgia.

F'ing Georgia almost went democratic! Holy libs Batman!

Keep Trump going. The best thing to ever happen to dems is Trump!

Trump Train LOL! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Damn! Dems almost pulled off the upset of the
> century by close vote in, wait for it, YES
> Georgia.
>
> F'ing Georgia almost went democratic! Holy libs
> Batman!
>
> Keep Trump going. The best thing to ever happen
> to dems is Trump!


It's not over yet. The runoff could very well lead to a big dem win.

Dude got 48.1% of the vote.
The closest Republican contender only got 19.78% of the vote.

It's going to a run-off election in June. I'm sure Trump can cluster fuck and goat rope just enough to get this Democrat into the win column.

Spoiler alert - America won.

I'm sure the repub candidate said "Oh fuck no! Tell me Trump didn't do those damn robo calls.. Fuck!!!"

Next Alabama elects a black democrat for Gov.

All most but they didn't lolz. They spent millions and could not beat the 11 Republican contenders. The June election he will lose and lose big. Democrat party is fucking pathetic.

So a failure to win is actually winning? He got less than half of the vote. That means most of the people didn't want him. I think you understand how the popular vote works since we keep hearing about Hillary.

Great with me. The more of Soros' billions they can be made to waste, the better off we will be.

Update Please. The Dem fucker lost the special runoff as usual.

Almost winning isn't winning. It's losing.

Gunlover Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Update Please. The Dem fucker lost the special
> runoff as usual.

The runoff AIN'T UNTIL NO JUNE.

The Democrat in the runoff did pull 48.1 % of the total vote. The other Democratic candidates did not pull even one per-cent combined. The Democratic total was 48.89%, thus not a majority even for the Democrats as a whole.

The lead Republican pulled only 19% of the vote. In a blatant attempt to lie with statistics and proving what Disraeli supposedly said about them, OP is trying to show that the Republicans fell far behind the Democrats. That is false.

This was an open election. All candidates went on the same ballot, regardless of party affiliation. Several Republicans polled above 1%, several below it. The Republican total was 51.02%. The Republicans received a majority of the votes. The Independents pulled .9% of the vote.

If you assume that the Republican candidate gets all the votes that went to the various Republicans and that the Democrats unite behind their lead vote getter, the Republican wins, even if you throw all the independents to him.

The margin is fairly narrow, so we will see who wins.

Your numbers don't add up.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2017 11:31AM by Gerrymanderer2.

Also one of the Republican candidates is a well known Anti Trump Republican.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your numbers don't add up.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2017 11:31AM by Gerrymanderer2.


You had to edit that? You're a stupid muslim fucker!

Too many older and wiser retirees are moving into Georgia who don't want the same garbage Democrap governance with all the high taxes that they just fled from up North.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your numbers don't add up.

They do, retard.

Democrats 48.89
Republicans 51.02
Independents .9
equals 100.81

I think you mean Independents had .09 of the vote. Then it would be 100.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your numbers don't add up.


Typo. The Independent total should be .09%, as you correctly indicate. Typos are a lot like shit: each one happens.

It was an instinct response. Anyone can see that 51.02 and 48.89 are almost a hundred by just looking at it and .9 will take it over a hundred. I didn't bother to correct you and just typed the obvious until you insisted and called me a retard.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It was an instinct response.
> I didn't bother to correct you and just typed the
> obvious until you insisted and called me a retard.


I did not call you a "retard". AHAHAHa!-whatever-his-name-is AIN'T me. Also, the guy who called you an Islamic who has an unnatural relationship with a female parent AIN'T ME, NEITHER, just for the record.

My post is an honest disagreement with OP and Gunlover.

I was assuming that you were joining the honest part of the discussion, as you correctly indicated that my numbers did not add up. Further, you supplied a pertinent contribution to the discussion by informing the participants that one of the Republicans is anti-Trump.

I meant no hostility toward you, not on this thread, at least. I may not agree too much with you, but if you want an honest discussion of an issue and have points to contribute, I am willing to discuss honestly. From three of the four posts that you have put up, it appears that you are a participant in the honest discussion and have something to contribute to it.

I understand that you may fling abuse at those who fling it at you, and, will assume, for now, that anything abusive that you post is not directed at me, until you give me reason to assume otherwise.

The identification of the anti-Trump Republican could be significant, depending on which one it is, when it comes to the runoff. While, as a rule, it would not be unreasonable to assume that the supporters of the failed Republican candidates would rally to the top Republican vote getter, your information invites a re-examination and an inquiry into the lead Republican candidate. If he is pro-Trump, and, if the anti-Trump Republican was one of the significant vote getters (do understand that "significant" is a relative term in this special election, especially among the Republicans), the runoff could, indeed, tilt to the Democrat.

The electoral history of this country is littered with examples of extreme candidates whose party members voted for the opponent in the election because their party's candidate was so distasteful to them. The furthest back that I can go in my experience was the Max Rafferty/Alan Cranston Senatorial election in California in 1968. Four years later came the Nixon/McGovern contest that went the other way.

The point that you raise merits examination. I was not aware of it

One correction: the lead Republican is a "she". I posted "he".

David Abroms, ally of Evan McMullin(was on the ballot against Trump) was openly against Trump during the primary.

He only got .85 percent of the vote. If you deduct that from the Republican percentage the difference between the Democrats and Republicans becomes 1.28 percent.

If you flip Abroms votes to Democrats then the Republicans will remain ahead in the total by .43 of a percentage point. Razor thin.

Who knows if this will be the final vote count but if it is this close it may end up going to a recount.

Please excuse me if I came across the wrong way. You can't differentiate anon names and I am trolled obsessively.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/29/2017 09:16PM by Gerrymanderer2.
Attachments:

Then you got a Republican Mohammed Ali Bhuiyan with a Muslim name that got .22 percent of the vote too. If you flip those to Democrat as well then its a tie.

Ironically, David Abroms the Trump hater and the Muslim Republican may have saved that seat for a run off. lmao

I am not familiar with Georgia Law on the subject, but it would not be unreasonable to assume that if there is, indeed, a .43% difference, the "loser" could demand a re-count.

Do you, off the top of your head, know what Handel thinks of Trump or if she has said anything about him? If not, I suppose that I could research it.

You have those other Democrats too though. Two things, it's a traditional Republican district that Price just won by over 20 points vs can Handel make up the difference up from only 19.78 percent.

Handel has invited Trump to campaign for her and Trump is in fact actively mentioning his support for her candidacy.

how much did trump win that district by? I heard it was about the same as the combined republicans this time. so nothing has really changed.

Although Handel says she does want to be seen with Trump, she skipped out on the opportunity at the NRA convention that just occurred in Atlanta.

Trump sending out fundraiser emails for Handel. He's doubled down and tripled down on this race.
Attachments:

Trump also held a private fundraiser for Handel while he was in Atlanta. Maybe thats what he really went to Atlanta for and concealed it with the NRA speech.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/330580-trump-to-fundraise-for-handel-in-ga

"Tickets to the fundraiser reportedly start at $2,700, with host sponsorship costing $25,000. According to the report, the invitations were sent out to the Republican donors in the state on Tuesday evening."

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Then you got a Republican Mohammed Ali Bhuiyan
> with a Muslim name that got .22 percent of the
> vote too. If you flip those to Democrat as well
> then its a tie.


You can not necessarily give the Moslem vote to the Democrats. Moslems are socially conservative. To be sure, there is the perception among the Moslems that the Republicans don't want them here and that the ultra-Right considers "Islamic terrorist" to be redundant, which would go far to drive the Moslems into the Democratic camp, but it does not always work that way.

In fact, the Moslems, similar to many immigrants, have been working to make the Right understand that they are as good Americans as any.


I THINK that I get your point about the Moslem and Abroms. Not necessarily off the mark, but that part of it has played out. This assumes that I understand your point.

If Handel can make up the difference, she would have to pull much support that went originally to Osoff. My money would not be on that one.


I am aware that some here troll you, and, as I am not a registered user....well, you get the idea.

That answers THAT question. I would assume, then that some of the Abroms vote goes to Osoff, some of it stays home and the smallest per-centage goes to Handel. My money would be on the largest per-centage of its staying home, but, again, I do not know that much about that part of Georgia. It is, however, an almost universal truth of electoral politics that if no candidate can excite or convince a voter, or, if all viable candidates repel a voter, he stays home.


The last is one thing, of several, that cost Clinton 1600.

Depressed voter turn out. Even Rush Limbaugh turned on Trump's immediate caving on the wall recently. They know the man is a joke. Does time bring on less Republican turn out? Will Trump make a horrible mistake? Will there be charges brought against Flynn? Will new revelations surface about Russian collusion? Will Democratic voter excitement and organization continue to increase? Democratic fund raising eclipsed 8 million small dollar donations for this race. It's why Trump is trying to raise money for Handel.

Guess we'll find out. Trump is terrified of losing this little race in Georgia with good reason. It will have political and perception ramifications.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/29/2017 10:01PM by Gerrymanderer2.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> this little race in Georgia
> will perception ramifications.


In politics as in persuading someone to part with his money, perception trumps all.

Federal Judge rules Georgia must open voter registration rolls for runoff election

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/judge-orders-georgia-reopen-voter-registration-6th-district-runoff

36 million dollars has been spent on this little house race. The most expensive house race in history. And rising.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 36 million dollars has been spent on this little
> house race. The most expensive house race in
> history. And rising.

Most of it Dem money.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 36 million dollars has been spent on this little
> house race. The most expensive house race in
> history. And rising.


All that money spent and libtards still lose. Just like Hillary.
Attachments:

^^^^^^^Love that photograph of the Clinton book in the cutout bin.