US politics general thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
NarrowBandFtw said:
No difference whatsoever = identical
30 votes (of a total max of 538) need to change to make it identical = virtually identical
Click to expand...

When you won by 77 odd votes, I difference 30 votes (where the **** are you getting this number from?) is virtually identical?
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
Already covered in previous posts, now reflect on the fact that had Obama lost only 30 votes, they would all have gone to Romney and the result would be identical to Trump's.

No difference whatsoever = identical
30 votes (of a total max of 538) need to change to make it identical = virtually identical


Why would you? The source that was so summarily rejected specifically said: "electoral landslide"
Click to expand...

This is getting sad, NBFTW. I mean, your argument is basically "if Obama had hypothetically gained 30 electoral votes less I would have something near a point, so there!"

Yes, if some things were different, some other things would also be different...
 
Hamish McPanji said:
Landslide, you said?
Click to expand...
Not me, Gateway Pundit. Given the dictionary definition of "landslide" doesn't specify any exact parameters the use of the word is subjective. If I had 34% more of anything than someone else I might consider that a big difference. 34% longer total race distance around Le Mans is undeniably a landslide victory.

I'm merely bemused that the statement would be considered that ridiculous that it warrants disqualification from further reading. Again: it is a subjective term.
 
Last edited:
NarrowBandFtw said:
Not me, Gateway Pundit. Given the dictionary definition of "landslide" doesn't specify any exact parameters the use of the word is subjective. If I had 34% more of anything than someone else I might consider that a big difference. 34% longer total race distance around Le Man is undeniably a landslide victory.

I'm merely bemused that the statement would be considered that ridiculous that it warrants disqualification from further reading. Again: it is a subjective term.
Click to expand...
Look, cut them some slack, they have nothing better to lead with... :whistle:
 
Hamish McPanji said:
When you won by 77 odd votes, I difference 30 votes (where the **** are you getting this number from?) is virtually identical?
Click to expand...
Jesus Christ, let me crayon it up for you and take it slow:
- I have a liter of water at 10 degrees Celsius
- I have another liter of water at 70 degrees Celsius

I mix them together, how far from either 10 or 70 degrees Celsius is the combined 2 liters' temperature? Did it move 60 or 30 degrees?
 
OrbitalDawn said:
This is getting sad, NBFTW. I mean, your argument is basically "if Obama had hypothetically gained 30 electoral votes less I would have something near a point, so there!"
Click to expand...
Lol, no my argument is it's nonsensical to dismiss information just because you happen to disagree with a single subjective statement it makes. But I can understand how you would miss that entirely ;)
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
34% more electoral votes than the nearest competition is not a landslide?
Click to expand...


NarrowBandFtw said:
Does it matter? A 34% difference in any context can realistically be described as a landslide. Obama's 2012 victory margin is virtually identical to Trump's and it WAS described as a landslide. So what?
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/nov/30/news/la-pn-how-big-was-obamas-win-20121130
Click to expand...

Wait.....what? ^^^^

NarrowBandFtw said:
Not me, Gateway Pundit. Given the dictionary definition of "landslide" doesn't specify any exact parameters the use of the word is subjective. If I had 34% more of anything than someone else I might consider that a big difference. 34% longer total race distance around Le Man is undeniably a landslide victory.

I'm merely bemused that the statement would be considered that ridiculous that it warrants disqualification from further reading. Again: it is a subjective term.
Click to expand...

Except when one is expected to win by more as a matter of course, then it isn't a landslide. If I win a running race by 24 minutes...it's a big deal. Unless, the normal winning margin is 30 minutes. Then it's not so great
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
Jesus Christ, let me crayon it up for you and take it slow:
- I have a liter of water at 10 degrees Celsius
- I have another liter of water at 70 degrees Celsius

I mix them together, how far from either 10 or 70 degrees Celsius is the combined 2 liters' temperature? Did it move 60 or 30 degrees?
Click to expand...
So you concede that Trump won the college by 7%
 
I bet NarrowBand would refuse to call Obama's victories a landslide. He's already tried to downplay them with the pathetic "but if 30 votes went to someone else" whataboutism. I guess a liberal election landslide is just fake news to him, since he obviously has zero regard for facts.
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
227 (Hildebeest) + 34% = 304 (Orange menace)
Click to expand...
Hey, i thought you were dividing it by 2. Oh yeah...1 maths for the Kenyan and another math for the Orange.

And you forget, the number of seats as you mentioned earlier is 538. So that % becomes cocktail sausage size. Ffs, I've done all the maths for you already...you just have to read it
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
Just for kicks I will concede, IF you concede that Trumps victory margin is virtually identical to Obama's, based on the same logic ;)
Click to expand...
Of course I won't. Because it's not anywhere close. A 60% difference

/waits for the imaginary 30 votes to be brought up again
 
The_Assimilator said:
I bet NarrowBand would refuse to call Obama's victories a landslide. He's already tried to downplay them with the pathetic "but if 30 votes went to someone else" whataboutism. I guess a liberal election landslide is just fake news to him, since he obviously has zero regard for facts.
Click to expand...
:crylaugh:
 
Hamish McPanji said:
Of course I won't. Because it's not anywhere close. A 60% difference
/waits for the imaginary 30 votes to be brought up again
Click to expand...
Fascinating, you're willing to accept my logic for explaining why the margin is not that significant in order to state Trump's margin over Hillary is not that significant. Yet the exact same logic is not permitted to be applied to Obamessiah?

Fascinating.
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
That's exactly how it works, lies, damn lies and statistics. It is entirely valid to represent it in this way, just as alternatives would also be valid.
Click to expand...

Uum, no. If your starting point isn't the 538 electoral colleges seats, you'll have to redo this entire semester of maths 101 in the new year.
 
greg0205 said:
Uum, no. If your starting point isn't the 538 electoral colleges seats, you'll have to redo this entire semester of maths 101 in the new year.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. If Hillary asks her campaign manager "by how many % points do I need to improve my current base to catch Trump?" the answer would be 34, it is irrelevant whether or not that amount is even hypothetically available.
 
greg0205 said:
Roger Stone, check. Infowars, check. Sean Hannity, check. OT thread that way ----->
Click to expand...
If infowars are banned we should also ban CNN. The fakenews level on those 2 are about equal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X