Blackvegetable » 11 Mar 2025, 8:01 am » wrote: ↑ Tied for 13th?
I bet 2XWorse than Buchanan would kill for that rank.
There's the narrative..*Huey » 11 Mar 2025, 8:33 am » wrote: ↑ Forced off the ticket....
His administration policies were tossed out by the voting public with 312 electoral votes, lost all swing states, and lost the popular vote (totals are linked in my sig box)
Blackvegetable » 11 Mar 2025, 8:35 am » wrote: ↑ There's the narrative..
Then there's "2XWorse than Buchanan"
2XWorse than Buchanan is a fact...
Blackvegetable » 11 Mar 2025, 8:42 am » wrote: ↑ 2XWorse than Buchanan is a fact...
As is "Tied for 13th"..
It was TWO surveys.*Huey » 11 Mar 2025, 9:36 am » wrote: ↑ Yes, it also a fact that it was ONE survey.
These are irrefutable facts:
327 electoral votes
Won the popular vote, no matter by how much.
Won all the swing states.
Acknowledge those facts.
I don't see the popular vote margin.....the smallest since the early 70s.*Huey » 11 Mar 2025, 9:58 am » wrote: ↑ Ok fine, two surveys.
You still have not acknowledged this:
These are irrefutable facts:
327 electoral votes
Won the popular vote, no matter by how much.
Won all the swing states.
First time I posted this on this thread I reminded you that the link to the totals is in my sig box. And I didn't lie. This isn't the old college football poll. A win is a win is a win.Blackvegetable » 11 Mar 2025, 10:00 am » wrote: ↑ I don't see the popular vote margin.....the smallest since the early 70s.
Why do you lie by omission?
What **** good do they do there?*Huey » 11 Mar 2025, 10:06 am » wrote: ↑ First time I posted this on this thread I reminded you that the link to the totals is in my sig box. And I didn't lie. This isn't the old college football poll. A win is a win is a win.
But, as usual, you refuse to acknowledge facts. You do this so you can continue to lie about a narrative.
Blackvegetable » 11 Mar 2025, 10:09 am » wrote: ↑ What **** good do they do there?
I never ask for a link to them.
Do you read your own ****, Melty?*Huey » 11 Mar 2025, 10:31 am » wrote: ↑ I don't a rat's *** what you ask. I posted them to once. I am not going to post them every time you demand them. The fact is regardless of what the spread is a win is a win is a win.
Now acknowledge the fact Trump won the popular vote.
No, Tiny...*Huey » 11 Mar 2025, 10:41 am » wrote: ↑ Acknowledge that trump won the popular vote. Anything else is spin.
And there is your reframe. I did not use the word mandate.Blackvegetable » 11 Mar 2025, 10:44 am » wrote: ↑ No, Tiny...
Turning an unusually small popular vote margin into a "mandate" is "spin".
The vote totals are what they are.
3.5, please....*Huey » 11 Mar 2025, 10:54 am » wrote: ↑ And there is your reframe. I did not use the word mandate.
I said the following:
Acknowledge that trump won the popular vote. Anything else is spin.
You want to talk about the popular vote, without talking about the popular vote...
Blackvegetable » 11 Mar 2025, 11:26 am » wrote: ↑ You want to talk about the popular vote, without talking about the popular vote...
Why else would you REPEATEDLY yap about the electoral votes, but only footnote the popular vote margin?*Huey » 11 Mar 2025, 11:28 am » wrote: ↑ Nope. You want to reframe it into a discussion of a mandate. That is not what I said. THe fact is, no matter how much it makes you want to cry, is Trump won the popular vote.
But, know that fact is established, by all means reframe and spin away....