Potus ???

[GarethM]

And I'm sure your the fountain of all internet sh1t, like a poo flavoured chocolate fountain of knowledge then.

 

Off you pop to Google and your daily dose of MSM approved Kamala worship.

[peds]

[AHPP]

I assume the opiner in question is that Gary bloke who looks like he should live on a narrow boat at Hackney Wick and keep his economic illiteracy to himself? I can’t watch him. I can’t even run the risk of watching him.

Here’s a start:

1. If we must have centrally issued currency, at least return to a gold standard. 

2. Scrap planning restrictions. 
 

It’ll undo the land monopoly and give people space to breathe and asses the rest of the problem.

[AHPP]

I’m telling you now, the rest of the problem is the rest of the state but you have to let people get there on their own. 

[peds]

44 minutes ago, AHPP said:

I assume the opiner in question is that Gary bloke who looks like he should live on a narrow boat at Hackney Wick...

 

I think you got sidetracked on your way to the News thread. Garyconomics is in there.

Only men wearing makeup and bootlickers in this thread.

[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.