ADVERTISEMENT

Why Did The Dems Do So Bad In The Senate and House?

You originally said...

What I find interesting are the ballots that only voted for President. That, and the record number of registration of voters over 90 years of age

I saw that as you claiming that a record number of people over 90 had BEEN REGISTERED to vote,in the interim from 2016 and 2020. But what you're talking about is maintaining voter rolls, which is (IMHO) a completely different animal. I don't care about that particular issue at all, in fact, I think it's a joke that failure to vote (a RIGHT) for a certain number of elections can jeopardize your registration status.

I've had it happen to me before and it's a hassle. I can certainly see why for certain POC or minorities who had enough difficulty getting registered initially being removed from the rolls and having to endure the inconvenient process all over again could be daunting. Which is of course the reason it's such a hot button issue for the GOP, as it's a legal means to suppress (or attempt to suppress) the vote...

So I read the Jan 7, 2020 RCP article, but that's basically a year old and has no connection to the recent election. It talks about a failure to remove voters from the rolls, but basically says it's more of a "funding issue" than a partisan issue. Something tells me that "Judicial Watch" singling out primarily Dem counties in PA is not just a coincidence...

From the article...

"Partisan considerations aside, one factor in the sorry state of America’s voter rolls is the cost. Last year after Judicial Watch also threatened a federal lawsuit over Kentucky’s inability to keep accurate voter rolls, the office of Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes blamed a lack of “proper funding” and “budget shortfalls” for why the state had fallen behind.

The upshot is that after decades of neglect, hundreds of counties in this country have millions upon millions of inaccurate voter registrations – and the problem is widespread in Republican “red” and Democratic “blue” counties alike. "

Btw, the article also details problems in Orange Co, CA and I'm pretty sure that's an area controlled by Republicans which elected Republicans in 2020. In addition, the 5 states JW chose to sue comprised 11 counties of the 378 they determined were not in compliance...

This seems like a manufactured issue on your end anyway. As usual, the claims of "voter fraud are always directed towards only battleground states supposedly controlled by Dems, but both GA and AZ have Legislatures controlled by the GOP as well as Republican Governors.

And neither of those GOP Governors is moderate in the vein of a Holcomb or DeWine, as Ducey and Kemp are both pro-Trump and both appointed pro-Trump women to fill Senate seats with McSally and Loeffler... Btw neither of those appointments seemed favorable to the constituents they served. Loeffler is involved in a race she could well lose tomorrow, and McSally was initially rejected by AZ voters in 2018, then lost again in 2020 when she was forced to defend the seat she was appointed to.

And statistically don't most 90 yr olds tend to support Trump anyway? I mean pre-Covid Trump in 2016 and for most of his reign seemingly enjoyed a higher % of support among senior citizens. So are you claiming that after Covid hit and Trump's approval with seniors took a hit that Dems who seemingly would want to minimize Trump supporters 90+ yrs of age decided to reverse course and keep all those 90 yr olds on the rolls in hopes they would turn on Trump? That's basically how stupid most of these conspiracy theories surrounding "voter fraud" seem to me...
I don't know what you think I said. But I provided links to show record numbers of registrations of 90 year olds, compared to previous elections.

Maybe you missed them? If not, please review or, if you can't find them, I'll post them again.
 
LOL. "Triggered" is always where folks like you go when you have no answer.

Truth is I'm just saddened that you thought this was a serious avenue of inquiry. Americans should be better than that. You're not.
Aw, I'm sad that you're sad.

Buck up, lil guy.
 
I don't know what you think I said. But I provided links to show record numbers of registrations of 90 year olds, compared to previous elections.

Maybe you missed them? If not, please review or, if you can't find them, I'll post them again.

Many of us registered back in the ancient days of paper. Many of the paper forms did not include a birthdate option. When everything was computerized, states just input a generic date for all those people. They may well not be 90, they might be 60, but the system has no idea. https://www.detroitnews.com/story/n...life-into-false-dead-voter-claims/6243962002/

Tracy Wimmer, a spokesperson for Michigan’s secretary of state’s office, told The AP that on rare occasions a ballot received from a voter may be recorded as though that person is too old to be alive. This can occur when an incorrect birth year is entered on voter rolls.​
When the birthdate is entered, numbers could be accidentally flipped or simply mistyped, according to Tammy Patrick, a former Arizona election official who now works for the Democracy Fund, a foundation that works on voting issues.​
“Some states have a default ‘year of birth’ that they entered for registrations that lacked a year of birth on the old paper forms when voter registration was moved from paper to computer,” Roberts, the political science professor, explained in an email. “Those never get updated and as time goes on the voters with this issue look ‘older’ whether they are or not.”​

We know that Trump repeatedly claimed rampant fraud in 2016. He formed a commission to look into it. They didn't find very much at all and quietly disbanded.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IU_Hickory
Many of us registered back in the ancient days of paper. Many of the paper forms did not include a birthdate option. When everything was computerized, states just input a generic date for all those people. They may well not be 90, they might be 60, but the system has no idea. https://www.detroitnews.com/story/n...life-into-false-dead-voter-claims/6243962002/

Tracy Wimmer, a spokesperson for Michigan’s secretary of state’s office, told The AP that on rare occasions a ballot received from a voter may be recorded as though that person is too old to be alive. This can occur when an incorrect birth year is entered on voter rolls.​
When the birthdate is entered, numbers could be accidentally flipped or simply mistyped, according to Tammy Patrick, a former Arizona election official who now works for the Democracy Fund, a foundation that works on voting issues.​
“Some states have a default ‘year of birth’ that they entered for registrations that lacked a year of birth on the old paper forms when voter registration was moved from paper to computer,” Roberts, the political science professor, explained in an email. “Those never get updated and as time goes on the voters with this issue look ‘older’ whether they are or not.”​

We know that Trump repeatedly claimed rampant fraud in 2016. He formed a commission to look into it. They didn't find very much at all and quietly disbanded.
I believe the Democrats claimed fraud in 2016 and it took a Special Prosecutor 2 1/2 years to prove it wrong.
 
I believe the Democrats claimed fraud in 2016 and it took a Special Prosecutor 2 1/2 years to prove it wrong.

I don't know if anyone said fraud. Some said collusion (you can look back, I said I did not believe collusion). We've had a lot of strange things from this election. Sharpiegate out in Arizona (turned out to be nothing). Dead people voting in Michigan (turned out to be living people with the same name), 200 year old people voting in PA (turned out to be 1800 was used as the birthdate for victims of domestic violence and the occasional key entry error), more people voting in some Michigan precincts than lived there (turned out the analysis used Michigan vote totals and Minnesota counties). We had a Trump lawyer claim no one from the campaign was allowed to watch the count in PA, then tried changing that when questioned by the judge to a "non-zero number" campaign officials were watching the counting. Clearly throwing everything against the wall is the strategy being used. I am sure the blame really falls to our lizard men overlords, the moon hoax, Obama's fake birth certificate, the round-earth conspiracy, the people who fabricated the Newtown shooting, and the government employees involved in carrying out 9/11.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cosmickid
I don't know if anyone said fraud. Some said collusion (you can look back, I said I did not believe collusion). We've had a lot of strange things from this election. Sharpiegate out in Arizona (turned out to be nothing). Dead people voting in Michigan (turned out to be living people with the same name), 200 year old people voting in PA (turned out to be 1800 was used as the birthdate for victims of domestic violence and the occasional key entry error), more people voting in some Michigan precincts than lived there (turned out the analysis used Michigan vote totals and Minnesota counties). We had a Trump lawyer claim no one from the campaign was allowed to watch the count in PA, then tried changing that when questioned by the judge to a "non-zero number" campaign officials were watching the counting. Clearly throwing everything against the wall is the strategy being used. I am sure the blame really falls to our lizard men overlords, the moon hoax, Obama's fake birth certificate, the round-earth conspiracy, the people who fabricated the Newtown shooting, and the government employees involved in carrying out 9/11.
I know what I saw election night when there were reporters on the ground, interviewing election officials who weren't allowed anywhere near the tabulation tables. That's not even in doubt.

I saw the counting stopped in the early morning and then, less that 5 hours later, hundreds of thousands of Democrat votes counted. Do you have an explanation for that?

Biden was being given 10s of thousands of votes when the count was released, with few or no Trump votes. Does that make sense to you, statisically?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 76-1
Trump was the easiest target in history.

Why no negative coat-tails?

Republicans have 50 in the Senate already - likely 51, maybe 52 - which would be a zero gain or a -1 for Dems.

And in the House, the Dems are already down 8, with 5 still out and Republicans leading in 3 of those.

How could winning the White House from a 1-term Trump not produce better results in the Legisative branches?

This is NOT what was predicted.

So what gives?


google "ES&S"
 
I saw the counting stopped in the early morning and then, less that 5 hours later, hundreds of thousands of Democrat votes counted. Do you have an explanation for that?

Biden was being given 10s of thousands of votes when the count was released, with few or no Trump votes. Does that make sense to you, statisically?
And I saw the early vote count in Ohio with Biden up pretty big, then Trump came storming back and won the state. You know why I don't cry fraud? I understood that Ohio counted their mail-in votes first and then counted the election day voting. Just as you should understand that states like Pennsylvania counted their election day votes first then counted their mail-in votes (explaining the several hour delay of having to retrieve the mail-in votes that were kept locked up then transported to the counting facility). Wow, you can't be this stupid to understand how this election cycle worked. Didn't the news outlet you were watching fill you in that certain states allowed mail-in voting to be counted first, while other states couldn't start counting their mail-in votes until after the election day votes had been counted? Discrepancies occurred because our elections are run by the individual states with their own set of rules and regulations.

I love how all of you arm chair republicans are screaming fraud, when none of the republicans who were on the front lines and in charge of their states election are claiming any irregularities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: outside shooter
And I saw the early vote count in Ohio with Biden up pretty big, then Trump came storming back and won the state. You know why I don't cry fraud? I understood that Ohio counted their mail-in votes first and then counted the election day voting. Just as you should understand that states like Pennsylvania counted their election day votes first then counted their mail-in votes (explaining the several hour delay of having to retrieve the mail-in votes that were kept locked up then transported to the counting facility). Wow, you can't be this stupid to understand how this election cycle worked. Didn't the news outlet you were watching fill you in that certain states allowed mail-in voting to be counted first, while other states couldn't start counting their mail-in votes until after the election day votes had been counted? Discrepancies occurred because our elections are run by the individual states with their own set of rules and regulations.

I love how all of you arm chair republicans are screaming fraud, when none of the republicans who were on the front lines and in charge of their states election are claiming any irregularities.
Tell me how hundreds of thousands of votes can be counted when the vote counting is stopped.

You're right - in states like Forida and Ohio, which were swing states, the mail-in votes were counted before election day, at least in Florida. And those states were very much in doubt before the election.

In other swing states that counted mail-in votes after the polls closed on election day, every one went for Biden.

I love how you Democrats are so blind to the obvious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 76-1
In other swing states that counted mail-in votes after the polls closed on election day, every one went for Biden.
Except that's not even remotely true, even allowing for hyperbole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fro
Except that's not even remotely true, even allowing for hyperbole.
It's not remotely true the other swing states went for Biden and they didn't count the mail-in votes until after the polls closed? Sorry, Unc, it's 100% right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 76-1
It's not remotely true the other swing states went for Biden and they didn't count the mail-in votes until after the polls closed? Sorry, Unc, it's 100% right.
All those votes didn't go to Biden, though. A majority did, as expected.
 
Why does it matter when mail in votes were counted? They were still legal votes
 
Where did I say all the votes went to Biden. I said he took those states. Are you feeling OK, Unc?
I could have misinterpreted what you wrote. It could have been read a couple different ways.
 
I could have misinterpreted what you wrote. It could have been read a couple different ways.
Let me try again: All the swing states that counted their mail-in votes as they came in went to Trump. All the swing states that started counting mail-in votes after the polls closed went to Biden.

Make of it what you will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 76-1
Let me try again: All the swing states that counted their mail-in votes as they came in went to Trump. All the swing states that started counting mail-in votes after the polls closed went to Biden.

Make of it what you will.
The “swing” states you’re referring to are Ohio and Florida and frankly Florida has increasingly been turning red, mainly from the Cubans who tend to vote republican, and Ohio has always been more red than blue. Now, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin are true swing states and Trump won all 3 of those in 2016 by a very narrow margin. In other words, it’s not at all a surprise how it went down. Georgia and AZ were the big surprises.
 
Let me try again: All the swing states that counted their mail-in votes as they came in went to Trump. All the swing states that started counting mail-in votes after the polls closed went to Biden.

Make of it what you will.

I make it that all the state were following their rules.

The mail in votes were cast on time in every state. Make of it what you will.
 
I make it that all the state were following their rules.

The mail in votes were cast on time in every state. Make of it what you will.
Pennsylvania didn't. They weren't supposed to count votes that came in after Nov. 3, per the Pennsylvania legislation. The Court ruled it was OK. Even though election rules are determined by the legislature.

Many instances in Atlanta of election monitors being blocked.

You have to be blind not to draw the obvious conclusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 76-1
The “swing” states you’re referring to are Ohio and Florida and frankly Florida has increasingly been turning red, mainly from the Cubans who tend to vote republican, and Ohio has always been more red than blue. Now, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin are true swing states and Trump won all 3 of those in 2016 by a very narrow margin. In other words, it’s not at all a surprise how it went down. Georgia and AZ were the big surprises.
Biden was ahead in the polls in Florida and Ohio. They were 'true swing states'.
 
Let me try again: All the swing states that counted their mail-in votes as they came in went to Trump. All the swing states that started counting mail-in votes after the polls closed went to Biden.

Make of it what you will.
What do you make of it? I make nothing of it whatsoever.
 
Pennsylvania didn't. They weren't supposed to count votes that came in after Nov. 3, per the Pennsylvania legislation. The Court ruled it was OK. Even though election rules are determined by the legislature.

Many instances in Atlanta of election monitors being blocked.

You have to be blind not to draw the obvious conclusion.

Yet fraud is never brought in court by trump's lackeys.

You have to be an idiot to not draw the obvious conclusion.

I will give you a hint, no one wants to put their license on the line by lying to a judge. Lying to the American people is totally different though.
 
I know what I saw election night when there were reporters on the ground, interviewing election officials who weren't allowed anywhere near the tabulation tables. That's not even in doubt.

I saw the counting stopped in the early morning and then, less that 5 hours later, hundreds of thousands of Democrat votes counted. Do you have an explanation for that?

Biden was being given 10s of thousands of votes when the count was released, with few or no Trump votes. Does that make sense to you, statisically?

Your stupidity and blind faith in everything trump is the only thing that doesn't make sense.
 
Go bed, little boy. You're obviously up way past your bedtime.

Dealing with the insane rantings of a senile old man can be tiring. Maybe you should get back on your meds.

By the way, correct English is "go to bed", unless you are trying to be Tarzan.
 
Biden was ahead in the polls in Florida and Ohio. They were 'true swing states'.
Come on, Ohio and Florida have had republican governors and senators for years. The other swing states all have democratic governors. Can a democrat even win a statewide election in Ohio or Florida?
 
Come on, Ohio and Florida have had republican governors and senators for years. The other swing states all have democratic governors. Can a democrat even win a statewide election in Ohio or Florida?
It's funny they were considered swing states before Trump won them.
 
It's funny they were considered swing states before Trump won them.

"I think that Ohio really isn't a representative of the whole country the way that it once was," said Mark Caleb Smith, a professor of political science at Cedarville University in Ohio.

"Ohio now is a much more red state than it is a purple state," Smith said. "If you look at recent elections, statewide, presidential or gubernatorial, Republicans have done extremely well. I just think that means Ohio has taken a different turn. I think Ohio has shifted a little bit, and it's no longer that middle part of the country — it's probably a little more on the right, traditional, conservative side."


Looking at recent articles, Floridians still consider it a swing state and I guess since Trump won by just 3.3% they might be right, but they currently have a Republican governor and both Senators are Republicans, so they seem pretty RED to me. Oh, and Trump won Ohio by 8%, so they're definitely not trending the swing state category.
 

"I think that Ohio really isn't a representative of the whole country the way that it once was," said Mark Caleb Smith, a professor of political science at Cedarville University in Ohio.

"Ohio now is a much more red state than it is a purple state," Smith said. "If you look at recent elections, statewide, presidential or gubernatorial, Republicans have done extremely well. I just think that means Ohio has taken a different turn. I think Ohio has shifted a little bit, and it's no longer that middle part of the country — it's probably a little more on the right, traditional, conservative side."


Looking at recent articles, Floridians still consider it a swing state and I guess since Trump won by just 3.3% they might be right, but they currently have a Republican governor and both Senators are Republicans, so they seem pretty RED to me. Oh, and Trump won Ohio by 8%, so they're definitely not trending the swing state category.
Easy to say after the fact. All the more reason to suspect states that delayed counting their mail-in ballots.
 
From ABC affiliate in Des Moines: "U.S. Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks asks Congress to dismiss complaint filed by Rita Hart"
They need to put this to bed.
 
Easy to say after the fact. All the more reason to suspect states that delayed counting their mail-in ballots.
Except as has been noted in numerous other threads,it was the GOP (and Trump in particular) who were determined to count mail votes last in each of those states. Can't have a "red mirage" to confuse folks if the mail votes are counted first and the Dems have an insurmountable lead on election night... From Sept 2020...

"A top Democratic data and analytics firm told "Axios on HBO" it's highly likely that President Trump will appear to have won — potentially in a landslide — on election night, even if he ultimately loses when all the votes are counted.

Why this matters: Way more Democrats will vote by mail than Republicans, due to fears of the coronavirus, and it will take days if not weeks to tally these. This means Trump, thanks to Republicans doing almost all of their voting in person, could hold big electoral college and popular vote leads on election night.

  • Imagine America, with its polarization and misinformation, if the vote tally swings wildly toward Joe Biden and Trump loses days later as the mail ballots are counted.
  • That is what this group, Hawkfish, which is funded by Michael Bloomberg and also does work for the Democratic National Committee and pro-Biden Super PACs, is warning is a very real, if not foreordained, outcome.
What they're saying: Hawkfish CEO Josh Mendelsohn calls the scenario a "red mirage."

  • "We are sounding an alarm and saying that this is a very real possibility, that the data is going to show on election night an incredible victory for Donald Trump," he said.
  • "When every legitimate vote is tallied and we get to that final day, which will be some day after Election Day, it will in fact show that what happened on election night was exactly that, a mirage," Mendelsohn said. "It looked like Donald Trump was in the lead and he fundamentally was not when every ballot gets counted."

The Dems were very good and had an excellent legal team in place anticipating most of Trump's tricks. But even they could not fathom the degree of his raw power grab and his determination to resist to the point where he actually incited a movement to "storm the Capitol"...

 
  • Like
Reactions: outside shooter
NYT has a pretty good interactive map that shows the shift from 2016.
SALT & $750k on mortgage interest killed the GOP in the NYC suburbs.
 
Democratic toss up
CA-21
IA-01
IA-02
MN-07
NM-02
NY-11
NY-22
OK-05
UT-04
Republican toss up
AR-02
AZ-06
CA-25
IL-13
IN-05
MI-03
MN-01
MO-02
NE-02
NJ-02
NY-02
NY-24
OH-01
PA-10
TX-10
TX-21
TX-22
VA-05
Republicans won every single one
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
Trump was the easiest target in history.

Why no negative coat-tails?

Republicans have 50 in the Senate already - likely 51, maybe 52 - which would be a zero gain or a -1 for Dems.

And in the House, the Dems are already down 8, with 5 still out and Republicans leading in 3 of those.

How could winning the White House from a 1-term Trump not produce better results in the Legisative branches?

This is NOT what was predicted.

So what gives?

This thread was before the Dems won both runoff Senate races in Georgia.

These two victories which followed the Capitol raid turned the Senate election from a lemon to a lemonade for the Dems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: largemouth
Trump was the easiest target in history.

Why no negative coat-tails?

Republicans have 50 in the Senate already - likely 51, maybe 52 - which would be a zero gain or a -1 for Dems.

And in the House, the Dems are already down 8, with 5 still out and Republicans leading in 3 of those.

How could winning the White House from a 1-term Trump not produce better results in the Legisative branches?

This is NOT what was predicted.

So what gives?
Badly
 
Rep. Ron Wright passed away due to COVID-19 & cancer. Yet another life tragically cut short.
His passing will trigger a Louisiana Rules Top Two special election for TX-06...R+9 but increasingly competitive.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT