Potus ???

[AHPP]

I did. They all blur into one. 

[Yournamehere]

If I told you that Trump has dubbed himself 'The Fertilization President' you wouldn't believe me would you?

[Yournamehere]

2 hours ago, GarethM said:

No, it just shows like every other election.

 

They vote for the leader they like, but locally the person they trust. As per any local elections here, you vote for the councillor not the useless party they are from.

 

No fraud just reality of they didn't like Kamala.

Yeah, I take the point regarding local/national elections I would have made the same point myself but to have a voting share fall from 80% to zero: do you not find that interesting?

Especially on the heels of the Bullet Votes anomalies (Bullet votes where voters just tick for the president and leave the rest of the card unmarked) whereby a background level (all elections all states) of 1% rose to ~7% in favour of trump in a number of crucial swing states.

If this was rigging the vote it was also very sloppy.

And still no one questions that massive data gathering exercise that Muskie undertook with prizes of $1m just before the election. Nor what he did with the data.

Are you questioning the data or the messenger on this one? Because however you look at it it IS anomalous: it is the definition of anomalous: that is what makes it interesting. If the Kamala vote had dropped to 60% or 40% that would be a bad night at the polls; 20% would be like Liz Truss getting her arse handed to her on that plate (but bear in mind Kamala is popular outside of politics, many would vote for her from affection); but zero? zero is interesting; and yet instead of sharing your insight/analysis you just scream bullshit. Again.

You seem to pass up every opportunity to share what you know. Why is that? Why do you share so little?

 

[Steven P]

But there is no fraud, and nothing wrong with the process because the right guy won.

[GarethM]

5 minutes ago, Yournamehere said:

Yeah, I take the point regarding local/national elections I would have made the same point myself but to have a voting share fall from 80% to zero: do you not find that interesting?

Especially on the heels of the Bullet Votes anomalies (Bullet votes where voters just tick for the president and leave the rest of the card unmarked) whereby a background level (all elections all states) of 1% rose to ~7% in favour of trump in a number of crucial swing states.

If this was rigging the vote it was also very sloppy.

And still no one questions that massive data gathering exercise that Muskie undertook with prizes of $1m just before the election. Nor what he did with the data.

Are you questioning the data or the messenger on this one? Because however you look at it it IS anomalous: it is the definition of anomalous: that is what makes it interesting. If the Kamala vote had dropped to 60% or 40% that would be a bad night at the polls; 20% would be like Liz Truss getting her arse handed to her on that plate (but bear in mind Kamala is popular outside of politics, many would vote for her from affection); but zero? zero is interesting; and yet instead of sharing your insight/analysis you just scream bullshit. Again.

You seem to pass up every opportunity to share what you know. Why is that? Why do you share so little?

Whilst I've said as much already, I don't know if staffers are banned from voting or if it was one of those places the UK labour party helped to staff so it might have hindered.

 

What you limey's trying to do yadah yadah, merica, tipping tea into the harbour, yeehaw etc.

 

But the total votes was 500 ish, now if that was 1k+ I might be a bit more sceptical.

 

As unsurprisingly the data didn't say if there was a 3rd party, spoilt votes or even refusing to vote, or even how big the population is to get such a pathetic turnout.

[Steven P]

Get your point about statistical significance and low numbers of voters, 500 starts to become significant I think though.

 

However, assuming they are the same voters in both, it doesn't look right that they want a blue local candidate but a red president (OK, orange for the semantics), particularly in an election where Trump was polarising the electorate the way he was. Compared to the national result, doesn't ring true either... though of course I don't know the area where this result was

[tree-fancier123]

good to see Farage is not just another nodding dog

 

“It’s quite right to aim for peace, but we can’t have a peace that turns Putin into a winner,” Farage told the BBC. And he said of Trump: “I would not be 100 percent with where his team is right now, absolutely not.”

 

 

Trump’s giving Putin ‘far too much,’ says UK ally Nigel Farage – POLITICO

WWW.POLITICO.EU

---

Reform UK leader says any Ukraine peace deal has to be “equitable.”

 

[sime42]

He also said that chlorinated Chicken from American is okay. Not exactly the famers friend with views like that.

[Steven P]

He is slow by about 3 years but eventually his words are echoing the thoughts in the constituency that he represents.

 

Not sure if he went over to see Trumpy whether he would come back saying the same, a feeling that he'd to the Putin lie

[Steven P]

I see today the Vance is accompanying his Mrs Vance to Greenland, only a day visit of about 10,000 miles. Better talk to Musk because I am sure there are better ways to spend the millions especially when Zoom exists.