California In Play
- Thread starter babe
- Start date
I'm still amazed he cited the 538 polling averages, where Biden leads by 29 points, as his evidence.
Don't be such an idiot. You're not the authority who can call anyone else "racist". You might be the most authentic "race baiter" in this forum, because you think you can play this issue as you please, with impunity.
There are some scientific facts about "race" whether it correlates with skin color or not. Some health issues are known to be correlated. The skin color has some fairly strong association with some survival issues in nature.
You are an ignoramus, really, on the subject of "race".
In the Philippines, there's a ethnic group called "Negritos" or various tribal affiliations that did not integrate or absorb with the later groups of newcomers. It is believed they are related to the Aurstralian natives (aborigines) or bushment. People of very small stature, but hair and skin color pretty much like African native stocks.
Other factors of physicial appearance are correlated with "blacks" racially around the world
Talking about correlations with characteristics besides skin color, like "intelligence" might be inflamamatory to some. The net result of that argument has been more to the effect of casting doubts on our measurements of "intelligence".
But in American, with the blacks who were "bred" for slave work across some hundreds of years, you do find a pretty strong correlation with stature and physical abilities. I don't think that affects their humanity, their respectability, or in any way makes them "superior" humans, but it is not your privilege to invoke "racism" and insunuate hatred or oppression or any other vice of the human soul because people talk about such stuff.
One night on the sidewalk near my home, while I was walking my dog, a mix of German Shepard and Coyote who was indded extremely "smart", a black man stopped to chat. He was seven feet at least, I thought, and I was not surprised when he told me he played for the Utah Jazz. I liked the man, I looked forward to seeing him on the court for the Jazz.
But I sure as hell believe he could outjump me, and I was oretty good as a high jumper. Sure I had a nice precise "roll" over the bar, but I could jump.
Anyone like you who wants to call "racism" on remarks like that is indeed a Neanderthal. Ha Ha.
Pretty sure you are all tied up in k nots witbh all your petty little rules about defining the sins of manki nd.
Whites are the mutants. Always remember that.
One Brow
Well-Known Member
I only play the issue when warranted.
No rules, just principles.
Everyone is a mutant, with 9 or so unique mutations that their parents did not have, on average.
Be amazed.
The CA Secretary of State reports an increase in registration, largely more democrats, widening the gaps ;by a couple of percent. 23M eligible voters.
I think that when Judicial Watch works over those rolls in the next years, it'll turn out less. culling the people who've moved out alone will take it down about 2M. Culling the non-citizens will take it down about 4M more. And then there's the Census.
A lot of Californians are concerned about the institutional fraud in the CA vote.
What I saw in the 538 polls, though criticized mightily as some sort of trash collection in some quarters, is...... an increase in like GOP representatives from CA.
Traditional patterns seem to be changing.
Last edited:
In 2016, just estimating from an assortment of facrts, I figured the Dem machines in CA added about 6M fake votes for Hillary. There was a 75% reported voter turnout. That means in ration to the voter registration rolls, 3 of 4 registered voters should have voted. But then Judicial Watch started looking at the voter rolls, and found millions of people who no longer lived in the place where they were registered. 2M in LA county alone (about 1/4 of CA total population. If that rate exists across the state, there were 8M of about 20M registered voters whose names should not have been on the rolls.
That simplifies to a reporrted 16M votes counted for the 12M legally registered voters who still live in the place where they registered.
LOL as people like Kicky who can't see the humor here, or the hubris in the 538 polls
I've been all over CA except the NW coastline areas. Including East LA and Milpitas. Just by my observations, I think Trump would get 56% of the vote this year. Not really "in play" but in significant transformation.
When Californians bet their vote honest, the Republicans will have a lot more elected officials in place. With the latino and black voters moving away from the Stockholm syndrome mentality, and the Dems can't just tell them "If you don't vote our way, you ain't black", it's pretty certain we'll be calling this state "Orange".
Play through the logistics on this, babe. What mechanism can make the scale of voter fraud you think is happening a reality? You can't just say a number like 3-4 MILLION people (more than the population of Utah) and act like it's easy to forge that many votes.
How do they do it? Not just some whimsical nonsense. Break down the logistics of how.
Bottom line is that you can't. The reason why you can't is because it isn't ****ing possible with humans. It's only possible as a fun little fantasy where it is as easy to say 3-4 million as it is to say 3-4 dozen.
Numbers have consequences. When you want to talk about millions of individual acts of fraud you need to be able to explain how that is even logistically possible because that's a monumental task. You can't just imagine it as some shadowy thing. Actual human being, just like you and me and all of us reading this, have to carry this out.
Make it work in reality, with all the moving pieces necessary or seriously, go back to your source and ask them to do it. It's not real.
IT. IS. NOT. REAL.
So to summarize, not only do the polls have to be fake, all of them, but there has to be actual forgery in the voting. The conservative polling has to be fake, the neutral (relative) polling has to be fake, the liberal polling has to be fake. People have to actively fake all of these different polls and also make them sort of kind of agree with each other. There can be no outlier from a reputable polling entity, nor a significant outlier in the actual votes.
Man, this goes down as another one of those "if 'they' can do this then I'd rather join them then fight them" because whoever could pull this type of **** off is in control of superhuman capability and no mere mortals could hope to stand against them. It would require FAR FAR FAR more than some pedestrian "deep state" to do the things you actually believe are happening.
Do you even get that, babe? Do you understand the actual scope of what you're suggesting? It doesn't seem like you do.
Man, this goes down as another one of those "if 'they' can do this then I'd rather join them then fight them" because whoever could pull this type of **** off is in control of superhuman capability and no mere mortals could hope to stand against them. It would require FAR FAR FAR more than some pedestrian "deep state" to do the things you actually believe are happening.
Do you even get that, babe? Do you understand the actual scope of what you're suggesting? It doesn't seem like you do.
With about half the "votes" counted, it's like 65% Dem "votes" judged by Biden, 32% Trump. Pretty close to registration stats by party.
Looks like the Rs keep a narrow majority in the US Senate so far, with Biden needing only NV, WI, and MI to reach 270.
I'm tired of your straw man arguments.
If you make your beer from straw, you're a damn good brewer.
No intelligent human should take political polling as "fact". Look at who does it, and what they want.
"Push polls" are the standard fare in commerce in the political gaming racket.
Most humans don't pay attention to the damn questions. Paid pollsters have biases or intended results, generally. Questions are set up to elicit the "right" answers, but what the hell, the tabulators don't have camera or voice recording monitors to check their honesty.
Some poll organizations do try to establish their reputation on correspondence with election results, but that assumes honest vote counting as well.
Maybe assumes other ****.
"Push polls" are the standard fare in commerce in the political gaming racket.
Most humans don't pay attention to the damn questions. Paid pollsters have biases or intended results, generally. Questions are set up to elicit the "right" answers, but what the hell, the tabulators don't have camera or voice recording monitors to check their honesty.
Some poll organizations do try to establish their reputation on correspondence with election results, but that assumes honest vote counting as well.
Maybe assumes other ****.
My "Math" for estimating vote fraud runs like this.
Get the Census data, and growth or change projections to estimate some basic numbers for the State or area you're talking about.
Get "Legal Resident" estimate the best you can, by more than one method if possible, to help estimate the number of eligible voters.
Get the State figures (Secretary of State Office) for registered voters. Get their number of %Voter Registration. See if the figure matches the raw data you have in estimating number of eligible voters.
If the State Registrations figures exceed your estimate or the number of eligible voters, do the math B-S=F. I think that's "cute" math, btw. I think it's "fair" to equate "F" (for Fake Voters with a matching number of Fake or Fraudulent Ballots.
Judicial Watch has been looking at a few CA voting rolls, county by county. The get the actual rolls, and then go out canvasing the addresses to see if the voter is there.
This is a helluva lot of work, and usually they just do some sort of supposedly representative "sample" and extrapolate to estimate the number of registered voters who just "aren't there".
The math is compelling. The election officials are claiming 75% voter turnout in 2016, and 85% voter turnout this year. But 20% of the claimed voter registrations are for people who just "aren't there". I don't think we ever do 100% voting. Here's a theoretical example: Election office brags about record registrations...... say 85% as in the case of CA this year, and about record voter turnout..... say 80%. So they report 8M votes tallied, of 10M registered, 5.5M for Biden, 2.5M for Trump.
Now JD goes out and finds 25% of registered voters just "aren't there"...... maybe never were there, or moved.
Now JD goes down the voter rolls and finds 20% are illegal registrants...... non-citizen, fake ID whatever.
I estimate the fraudulent vote as having 2M + 2.5M potential "fake voters. OK, so a what rate do people just move in California, varies a lot by area, age, work. So anyway, giving large generous estimates for moving and understating non-citizen populations...... you could have as few as 1M fraud votes or as many as 3M. 10M is about have the size of the CA registered voters...... So X2 could support perhaps 6M fraud votes in CA, but "for sure " 2M.
So it's a good thing to just update the voter rolls, as LA County agreed to do to settle the JD lawsuit. Takes time, job isn't done yet. They sent out a mailer people were supposed to sign and return, updating their personal info. Driver's Licenses could be computer data base to match voter registration/residence.....
Specific areas with tremendous non-citizen resident rates which still register more voters than the Census data would support....... another way of estimating fraud vote rates.....
A very necessary thing to "check" everything.
Get the Census data, and growth or change projections to estimate some basic numbers for the State or area you're talking about.
Get "Legal Resident" estimate the best you can, by more than one method if possible, to help estimate the number of eligible voters.
Get the State figures (Secretary of State Office) for registered voters. Get their number of %Voter Registration. See if the figure matches the raw data you have in estimating number of eligible voters.
If the State Registrations figures exceed your estimate or the number of eligible voters, do the math B-S=F. I think that's "cute" math, btw. I think it's "fair" to equate "F" (for Fake Voters with a matching number of Fake or Fraudulent Ballots.
Judicial Watch has been looking at a few CA voting rolls, county by county. The get the actual rolls, and then go out canvasing the addresses to see if the voter is there.
This is a helluva lot of work, and usually they just do some sort of supposedly representative "sample" and extrapolate to estimate the number of registered voters who just "aren't there".
The math is compelling. The election officials are claiming 75% voter turnout in 2016, and 85% voter turnout this year. But 20% of the claimed voter registrations are for people who just "aren't there". I don't think we ever do 100% voting. Here's a theoretical example: Election office brags about record registrations...... say 85% as in the case of CA this year, and about record voter turnout..... say 80%. So they report 8M votes tallied, of 10M registered, 5.5M for Biden, 2.5M for Trump.
Now JD goes out and finds 25% of registered voters just "aren't there"...... maybe never were there, or moved.
Now JD goes down the voter rolls and finds 20% are illegal registrants...... non-citizen, fake ID whatever.
I estimate the fraudulent vote as having 2M + 2.5M potential "fake voters. OK, so a what rate do people just move in California, varies a lot by area, age, work. So anyway, giving large generous estimates for moving and understating non-citizen populations...... you could have as few as 1M fraud votes or as many as 3M. 10M is about have the size of the CA registered voters...... So X2 could support perhaps 6M fraud votes in CA, but "for sure " 2M.
So it's a good thing to just update the voter rolls, as LA County agreed to do to settle the JD lawsuit. Takes time, job isn't done yet. They sent out a mailer people were supposed to sign and return, updating their personal info. Driver's Licenses could be computer data base to match voter registration/residence.....
Specific areas with tremendous non-citizen resident rates which still register more voters than the Census data would support....... another way of estimating fraud vote rates.....
A very necessary thing to "check" everything.
Fraud is such proportions would be humorously called "play", but really it's "criminal".
This is something a lot of Californians are taking seriously, and either moving out or trying to expose it.
Avery
Well-Known Member
Yep, I was wrong on the call. I figured Biden would pull of Florida but he got destroyed in Miami/Dade. Republicans have to be happy with how the Senate turned out as they quite frankly demolished some perceived strong challenges.
Possible we might know tonight a perceived winner - Nevada/Arizona leaning towards Joe but needs some more baking. PA could go either way depending on how strongly you believe the VBM tilt will be to D.
Avery
Well-Known Member
What's true about California is that it really does feel like two different states. The urban centers, especially SJ/SF are about as safe as D votes as anywhere in the country. However, head out into the country and it's heavily rural and R.
I personally don't like Newsom - I think he could very well get primaried within his own party.
I personally don't like Newsom - I think he could very well get primaried within his own party.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
I think it’s almost time to start your “Donald Trump 2024” thread.
I just want to know why the hell they won't follow through and kill daylight saving time.
I see. Still hung up on what "is" is.You don't even know what a straw man argument is, obviously.
You don't care to acknowledge what I actually said, and then you construct an absolutely silly argument to ruin your reputation with.
But that's OK in JFC.
Jason says it's OK if you believe it.
Jason says if you imagine **** is strawberries, that's what it'll taste like.