Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What did OP mean by “Lols” in their original “Polls and lols” title?
I am OP - I partially meant LOLs like we are all so traumatized by misreading the polls in 2016 that even talking about polling sometimes makes a person want to run away and shriek. By "a person" I mean me.
Mostly it was a response to the inevitable Trumpster response to any polling - "Polls? You believe polls? LOLOLOL Our great farty orange magician defies polling!"
Anonymous wrote:What did OP mean by “Lols” in their original “Polls and lols” title?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m just praying we don’t have pregnant chads again!
Nope, we are going to have court ordered destruction of millions of legally valid votes that were postmarked before 11/3 but didn't arrive before whatever court ordered arbitrary time is suggested. I guess we should ask Squi what day that should be.
You know I wonder just whether a state would comply. Some certainly would but I don’t believe all. Could you see Barr sending in the jackboots into to seize them for burning? Sheeeet
It wouldn't be that dramatic. It would be a ruling from SCOTUS that counting certain ballots is unconstitutional.
Interesting article on the shenanigans in PA.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/10/29/trumps-effort-steal-election-explained-by-democrat-fighting-against-it/%3foutputType=amp
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you look at the 2016 polls in a four person race it was a dead heat. National Poll Clinton was up +4 but it ended up being +2.
not sure why people think 2016 was such an upset when it really wasn't.
+1
Yuppies in NY and DC don’t realize how disliked HC was
Exactly. Trump had a 1 in 3 chance to win. Variables are quite different this year. He is a known evil buffoon and is still bungling a pandemic.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m just praying we don’t have pregnant chads again!
Nope, we are going to have court ordered destruction of millions of legally valid votes that were postmarked before 11/3 but didn't arrive before whatever court ordered arbitrary time is suggested. I guess we should ask Squi what day that should be.
You know I wonder just whether a state would comply. Some certainly would but I don’t believe all. Could you see Barr sending in the jackboots into to seize them for burning? Sheeeet
It wouldn't be that dramatic. It would be a ruling from SCOTUS that counting certain ballots is unconstitutional.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What did OP mean by “Lols” in their original “Polls and lols” title?
The Trafalgar poll would fit into that category.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What did OP mean by “Lols” in their original “Polls and lols” title?
The Trafalgar poll would fit into that category.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m just praying we don’t have pregnant chads again!
Nope, we are going to have court ordered destruction of millions of legally valid votes that were postmarked before 11/3 but didn't arrive before whatever court ordered arbitrary time is suggested. I guess we should ask Squi what day that should be.
You know I wonder just whether a state would comply. Some certainly would but I don’t believe all. Could you see Barr sending in the jackboots into to seize them for burning? Sheeeet
Anonymous wrote:What did OP mean by “Lols” in their original “Polls and lols” title?