Really, really bad.
it’s not determinative. It’s obviously relevant, as shown among other ways by impassioned cries from Trumpworld that it’s “IRRELEVANT!!”ConsRule » 08 Aug 2023, 12:07 pm » wrote: ↑ Damn...you just shot a huge hole in the liberal argument that the individual's vote doesn't count equally. Apparently you are the liberal who understands.
However, the TOTAL popular vote YOU referenced in your initial post is completely irrelevant and nothing more than a hash total. So, it you understand how the Presidential elections work, why did you make yourself look stupid as **** by referencing something that is irrelevant?
Do you really believe the absolutely untruthful **** that you try and erect as reality.....Bruce » 08 Aug 2023, 12:38 pm » wrote: ↑ Really, really bad.
Trump got caught trying to steal the electoral votes of seven states he lost.
Wow, are the 82 million Biden voters pissed off, you cannot imagine it.
They’d hang him higher than he’d have hanged Mike Pence if he’d caught old Mikey.
Mike Pence gets to testify now.
That ought to make the blood of Democrats boil.
People on both sides whine over that irrelevant number. It is NOT indicative of anything. People in solid states (red or blue) who only care about President may not go vote if the know the other party will get the state's electoral votes. That is especially true if there is bad weather, long lines, they had to work late or something else came up. Conversely, if there is a tight race elsewhere on the ballot that can draw people in who decide to vote for President while there.jack » 08 Aug 2023, 12:41 pm » wrote: ↑ it’s not determinative. It’s obviously relevant, as shown among other ways by impassioned cries from Trumpworld that it’s “IRRELEVANT!!”
That was my question and she posted THAT crap to try and cover over the HOLE SHE DUG for herself.ConsRule » 08 Aug 2023, 12:07 pm » wrote: ↑ Damn...you just shot a huge hole in the liberal argument that the individual's vote doesn't count equally. Apparently you are the liberal who understands.
However, the TOTAL popular vote YOU referenced in your initial post is completely irrelevant and nothing more than a hash total. So, it you understand how the Presidential elections work, why did you make yourself look stupid as **** by referencing something that is irrelevant?
If TDS is your reference, pal, the mirror is not your friend.ConsRule » 08 Aug 2023, 12:07 pm » wrote: ↑ Damn...you just shot a huge hole in the liberal argument that the individual's vote doesn't count equally. Apparently you are the liberal who understands.
However, the TOTAL popular vote YOU referenced in your initial post is completely irrelevant and nothing more than a hash total. So, it you understand how the Presidential elections work, why did you make yourself look stupid as **** by referencing something that is irrelevant?
Based on that comment alone, further explanation is a waste of time. Clearly, reading comprehension is a challenge for you, you have demonstrated the inability to differentiate people from a number and I would be shocked if you know what a hash total is. Of course, now you have a change to have your Mommy help you look up "hash total" and attempt to surprise the majority of the posters on the site.jack » 08 Aug 2023, 2:21 pm » wrote: ↑ If TDS is your reference, pal, the mirror is not your friend.
So the majority of American voters are a “hash total”. Nice.
scotch tape will not fix your leaking anusrazoo » 08 Aug 2023, 2:05 am » wrote: ↑ "To facilitate the efficient production of discovery to the defense, the Government proposed a reasonable protective order consistent with current practice in this District," the special counsel's team wrote.
"To safeguard witness privacy and the integrity of these proceedings, the Court should enter the Government's proposed protective order."
In contrast, the special counsel argued, Trump's proposed protective order "would lead to the public dissemination of discovery material."
Late Monday night, Judge Chutkan responded to the filing by ordering the special counsel and Trump's legal team to give her two proposed dates and times by Tuesday at 3 p.m. for a hearing on their dueling protective order motions.
The judge said she wants the hearing to take place before Friday, and is not requiring Trump's appearance.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/proposed-prot ... =102084393