Is 2022 Elections going to be a Red Tidal Wave?

[oze]

I figure suburban women will all vote for Gavin Newsom in 2024, that's who will be president as a follow on to Joe.

He's hot.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

You make a good point, but your anecdotal experience would indicate that displeased Repubs stayed home in 2020, but that's not what the numbers show. Trump gained 10 million votes over 2016 totals, and stay-in-the-basement Joe garnered 12.6 million more than Hillary. That's not a believable reality for me.

Votes in 2016 Votes in 2020 New Votes
Trump 63.0 million 73.0 million +10.1 million
Clinton 65.8 million Biden 78.5 million Biden +12.6 million

For some reason, this forum software strips out the extra spaces I put in to line up the columns.

.

Why popular vote outside of the context of winning electoral votes is not meaningful:

California	2008	2012	2016	2020
Democrat	8,274,473	7,854,285	8,753,788	11,110,250
Republican	5,011,781	4,839,958	4,483,810	6,006,429
	3,262,692	3,014,327	4,269,978	5,103,821

IMO, in 2020, the "hate" for Trump exceeded the "love" for Obama in either of his races.

Trump gets out the Democratic base like no other. Trump got more votes in California than any other recent Republican... but also lost by the most votes.

 

[printcraft]

I figure suburban women will all vote for Gavin Newsom in 2024, that's who will be president as a follow on to Joe.

I'm telling you, newsom/bigmikeobama. Not necessarily in that order.

 

[Ingomike]

What does AJC get wrong (or miss) in this news article covering the alleged election fraud in the 2020 election?

Georgia 2020 election: Here are 5 fraud claims and what investigators found

Former President Donald Trump and his supporters have made many allegations of voting fraud in Georgia. Investigators determined there was no evidence to support them. Here’s a look at what investigators found about five fraud claims.

www.ajc.com

Everything

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Everything

Let's take just one that's easy to understand... "dead voters".

For starters, matching people between large databases is prone to error. Databases of millions of people are bound to include different people with the same names and birth dates. And publicly available voter data includes only a person’s birth year, making such matches even more dubious.

That and other flaws yielded wildly exaggerated findings of fraud. For example, one Trump analyst concluded that 10,315 dead Georgians voted in the November 2020 election. When the secretary of state’s office investigated, it found four dead voters.

Trump matched death rolls with the voter rolls by name and YEAR OF BIRTH, not even full month/day/year of birth, and came up with 10,315 "dead voters". But they weren't, of those 10,315 only four (though it should be zero) had died prior to the election.

THAT one was especially facetious, and I stopped even bothering to look after that, when it happened after the election.

Just a bald-faced lie from Trump to try and cling to power and it was the beginning of the end for Trump and my future votes. Nope!

And, because Kemp and Raffensperger wouldn't buy into this steaming pile of bovine excrement, I'm supposed to be against THEM. Nope... buh-bye Trump.

 

[Ingomike]

Let's take just one that's easy to understand... "dead voters".

Trump matched death rolls with the voter rolls by name and YEAR OF BIRTH, not even full month/day/year of birth, and came up with 10,315 "dead voters". But they weren't, of those 10,315 only four (though it should be zero) had died prior to the election.

THAT one was especially facetious, and I stopped even bothering to look after that, when it happened after the election.

Just a bald-faced lie from Trump to try and cling to power and it was the beginning of the end for Trump and my future votes. Nope!

And, because Kemp and Raffensperger wouldn't buy into this steaming pile of bovine excrement, I'm supposed to be against THEM. Nope... buh-bye Trump.

I will put you down as good with suitcases of ballots being brought out after all the poll watchers were sent home, the media was told there was a plumbing backup and they were shutting down. Then inexplicable numbers were posted from that counting, again when no one was supposed to even be counting.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

I will put you down as good with suitcases of ballots being brought out after all the poll watchers were sent home, the media was told there was a plumbing backup and they were shutting down. Then inexplicable numbers were posted from that counting, again when no one was supposed to even be counting.

I'm sorry that you've bought into the conspiracy theory... the fact of the matter is that the counting was going to stop at 10 PM and the counter's put the ballots in locked storage containers under the counting desks. The watchers we not told to leave, they were told that counting was ending for the night.

The SoS found out, called and told them to keep counting. THAT was the "suitcases", retrieving the ballots from the storage containers, AND the watchers were called that counting was going to resume, and they returned.

So, NO, I'm not ok with "suitcases" of ballots being brought in... but I'm also not ok with such fairytales when the whole thing was recorded on video... the putting away and the retrieving.

There were no "suitcases", another Trump lie to cling to power after he lost.

 

[Ingomike]

I'm sorry that you've bought into the conspiracy theory... the fact of the matter is that the counting was going to stop at 10 PM and the counter's put the ballots in locked storage containers under the counting desks. The watchers we not told to leave, they were told that counting was ending for the night.

The SoS found out, called and told them to keep counting. THAT was the "suitcases", retrieving the ballots from the storage containers, AND the watchers were called that counting was going to resume, and they returned.

So, NO, I'm not ok with "suitcases" of ballots being brought in... but I'm also not ok with such fairytales when the whole thing was recorded on video... the putting away and the retrieving.

There were no "suitcases", another Trump lie to cling to power after he lost.

Always got an answer… Nevermind.

 

[Twangbanger]

Great advice, NOT! The biggest enemies of conservatives and constitutionalists are, suburban women, especially unmarried suburban women.

Think that sounds strident? It is. They are the ones pushing all the crap most conservatives despise. Why on earth would we sell out to them. Conservatives need to work to align themselves with other similarly conservative groups, blacks and Hispanics. That coalition is the only way conservatives can beat back the rising communism…

Both these groups are still a strong win for Democrats. Something around 60% for Hispanics, and 85% blacks even in a year where the Republican generic and turnout advantage was in the +4/+5 range.

It's part of the reason why this midterm result was so puzzling for those expecting a Red Wave. Republicans did indeed "run up" their minority votes compared to before. But the problem is, many of those black and hispanic voters in the South are corraled by the Voting Rights Act into "Majority-Minority" districts guaranteed to elect democrats. It's part of how Republicans out-pulled Democrats in the popular vote, but still did poorly overall. The votes they gained are concentrated in areas where they don't do them any good. The same way Hillary ran up the score in California in 2016, but it did her no good. She was running up the score in places where she'd already won. Similarly but opposite, Republicans were upping their numbers in places they were still guaranteed to lose. The Voting Rights Act probably needs to be scrapped. It doesn't achieve its stated goal. In an 80% black district, it gives black voters a Rashida Taliban to represent them. It doesn't assure minority voters get to elect someone who looks like them. It just ensures they get a Democrat. It's more likely to be a white liberal or a woman who's not originally from America, than an indigenous minority person.

Nothing matters on the Republican minority vote until it becomes a majority of those groups. Blacks and Hispanics are not going to save the Republican Party from one-party Democrat rule. It's totally up to White People to accomplish that. And Trump is making sure that every white liberal shows up on election day. He energizes the Democrat base like nothing else.

 

[jamil]

Edit: This applies to Mike's post where he referenced the credit bureau that was hacked a few years ago. I should have quoted that post to make it more evident.


Did you ever read the judge’s ruling on the credit reporting agency that was hacked? It was gross negligence. They were using a known flawed version of an ancient web framework, and the hackers used that exploit for the breach. They did not take the care to protect the data.

It doesn’t matter what kind of voting system you use. Paper. Scantron. Whatever. It’s exploitable if the requisite care is not taken to ensure integrity.

If election officials want to cheat, they’ll cheat. But as far as GA in 2020, you’re relying on reports from organizations who are highly motivated to present a narrative that you will accept without scrutiny. You desperately want to believe Trump could not lose fairly. And I don’t believe he did. But there’s no verifiable evidence of the Kraken. There are claims, and there are people desperate to believe them.

The way I think Trump lost unfairly in GA was the mail-in ballots and vote harvesting, otherwise known as GetOutTheVote. Plus the efforts of the “cabal” who later admitted they all colluded to make Biden the victor.

GetOutTheVote was heavily financed by the Cabal by their own admission. That stuff is verifiable. They pay people to go door to door and apply whatever pressure it takes to get them to sign a ballot. I don’t have to believe wild ass tails.

 

[jamil]

Always got an answer… Nevermind.

Really? Isn’t answering in a way that makes you say that, evidence that critical thought has been put into the answer? Maybe your exasperation is frustration that someone doesn’t so readily accept wild ass claims without scrutiny. But wild ass claims requires proportionate wild ass proof.

 

[jamil]

Both these groups are still a strong win for Democrats. Something around 60% for Hispanics, and 85% blacks even in a year where the Republican generic and turnout advantage was in the +4/+5 range.

It's part of the reason why this midterm result was so puzzling for those expecting a Red Wave. Republicans did indeed "run up" their minority votes compared to before. But the problem is, many of those black and hispanic voters in the South are corraled by the Voting Rights Act into "Majority-Minority" districts guaranteed to elect democrats. It's part of how Republicans out-pulled Democrats in the popular vote, but still did poorly overall. The votes they gained are concentrated in areas where they don't do them any good. The same way Hillary ran up the score in California in 2016, but it did her no good. She was running up the score in places where she'd already won. Similarly but opposite, Republicans were upping their numbers in places they were still guaranteed to lose. The Voting Rights Act probably needs to be scrapped. It doesn't achieve its stated goal. In an 80% black district, it gives black voters a Rashida Taliban to represent them. It doesn't assure minority voters get to elect someone who looks like them. It just ensures they get a Democrat. It's more likely to be a white liberal or a woman who's not originally from America, than an indigenous minority person.

Nothing matters on the Republican minority vote until it becomes a majority of those groups. Blacks and Hispanics are not going to save the Republican Party from one-party Democrat rule. It's totally up to White People to accomplish that. And Trump is making sure that every white liberal shows up on election day. He energizes the Democrat base like nothing else.

This is obviously true. The numbers don’t lie. Republicans did great in red states, where they would win anyway. The MAGA candidates Trump supported didn’t do so great in blue states, with some notable exceptions.

The only surprise, if a surprise can be expected, is that FL is officially a red state now, because of competent Republican leadership. Having a F5 hurricane turn out to be a yawner aftermath, compared to other storms, because of competent leadership, probably was more important than the don’t say gay bill. FL R’s got **** done and were rewarded for it by a lot of people who normally vote D.

 

[jamil]

This is objectively false. You don't seem to have even a rudimentary grasp of logic. Once something becomes violent, it's not a protest anymore. It may not rise to the level of an insurrection. But we don't get to call people breaking and entering and crushing other people a protest just because the Looney Left calls it that. Objective Reality is still a thing.

I want to see the violent BLM'ers punished, same as the 1/6 cretins. But it turns out that doing something violent in the Capitol in broad daylight in front of cameras, where rich, powerful people go to work, garners more consequences than doing it in sh!thole neighborhoods under cover of darkness. Failing to grasp that is pretty f_cking stupid, if you ask me.

The 1/6 cretins did it to themselves. They are not due a single bit of pity. They did as much harm to this country as the people they were there to protest. Every single one of them oughta be smacked sh!tless for it. In terms of moving the country toward one-party rule, they are the Timothy McVeighs of their time. Bill Clinton was on the political ropes before the Oklahoma City bombing. TMV reset his Presidency for him. The 1/6 cretins did the same thing for Trump, just retroactively and in a different direction.

While I agree that it was not simply a protest, that it was a violent riot, the idea that it was an insurrection orchestrated by Trump himself, is not a fact in evidence. So I do think that’s a fair litmus test to determine if the person you’re talking to is capable of having an honest conversation about it.

But also referring to it seriously as a mostly peaceful protest is every bit as delusional. The fact that the left got away with calling BLM riots “mostly peaceful” doesn’t make excusing 1/6 any more believable.

ETA: I just wanted to make it clear that the only utility in knowing that the claims of insurrection are far fetched is as the litmus test in determining if the person you're listening to is capable of having an honest conversation. Politically, it's of no practical use because it's a polarizing, though delusional belief among left leaning independents.

 

[KG1]

Really? Isn’t answering in a way that makes you say that, evidence that critical thought has been put into the answer? Maybe your exasperation is frustration that someone doesn’t so readily accept wild ass claims without scrutiny. But wild ass claims requires proportionate wild ass proof.

Like SD4L or not he does counter with some good arguments IMO that I don't just dismiss out of hand. I'm sure IM is getting weary of arguing over the same square inch of ground and it appears he made that comment out of frustration or maybe he just ran out of answers.

 

[jamil]

Also, if someone believes Republicans are losing the votes of educated white people, is it 'saner' to have a candidate with demonstrated success at attracting non-whites into the tent by advocating America First or go with a candidate who will be seen as a shill for Club for Growth policies

First, about R's losing the educated white vote, the devout Trumpers seem to be stuck in the same monolithic thinking as the nutty lefty identitarians. It's obviously not *all* educated white people. We are both in that category, and I'm very confident neither of us voted for D's. It is obviously what the exit polling shows, even the polling from right wing sources. It's not in dispute that educated white people tend to vote Democrat more than Republican, and in this election, it was especially true for unmarried, educated white women. No one is shocked by that.

Okay. is it 'saner' to have a candidate that is successful in attracting non-whites? Sure. But, it's even better to not to turn off independents in blue districts so much that it costs you votes that could have propelled more R's to win seats. You know, someone like DeSantis, who did quite well in heavily D areas compared with, say, how the Trump endorsed candidates did in purple districts. Competent leadership turned Florida deep red.

As far as a shill for CFG, you already do see him as that because there's nothing else. DeSantis has competently executed just about everything he's touched, which has made him a front runner. CFG is all you got if you're a Trumper. Maybe DeSantis will turn out to be just another CoC/neocon. I don't know. We'll see. But you already assume he is because you are helplessly devoted to Trump and DeSantis is ahead of Trump in many polls.

To me, I consider DeSantis as just my current front runner. If DeSantis turns out to be a bona fide CoC/Neocon, Eric Holcomb/ Mike Pence style Republican, then I'll have to find another. I'm not on a team where it has to my guy. I don't have a my guy. I have zero devotion to DeSantis or any candidate. I think it's better not to have unwavering loyalty to a person. Trump could do anything and not lose your loyalty.

 

[jamil]

I figure suburban women will all vote for Gavin Newsom in 2024, that's who will be president as a follow on to Joe.

Oh I hope not.

 

[Leadeye]

I don't see Joe running in 2024, some dc machine lawyer will visit him and explain that for the good of the machine he needs to step down in favor of Newsom. He'll get a little more than "10% for the big guy" as a consolation prize, but he is looking to old for the optics big tech/media wants to project in leadership. Kamala will simply disappear into the "also rans" box of politicians and maybe hit the talk shows after being shelved. Another dc machine lawyer will advise her to take whatever "bone" she gets and shut up as she heads for obscurity.

Who Newsom will have to fight for POTUS will be up against what will probably be the best funded, unified, and most powerful democrat campaign in a long time. It's going to take a charismatic, smart, well financed candidate who stays on message to beat him.

 

[Ingomike]

Like SD4L or not he does counter with some good arguments IMO that I don't just dismiss out of hand. I'm sure IM is getting weary of arguing over the same square inch of ground and it appears he made that comment out of frustration or maybe he just ran out of answers.

I am weary of this battle. @jamil is correct, “kracken“ did not materialize, though there was evidence it was used. I do believe it was used. We were told by multiple respected former generals that it is called hammer and scorecard, a program the CIA uses to manipulate elections and that they saw evidence it was used. If TPTB use the software in other countries why wouldn’t they use it here to rid themselves of an outsider.

This activity was confirmed by an analysis done by sources that create software that analyzes millions of financial transactions searching for cortuption. Once that corruption is found it is good enough to be the basis for probable cause investigations. Not good enough for election fraud though.

I have also found that there is no way I know of to even search for results from back then as the major search engines will only return results from MSM sources.

Anyone waiting for a DOJ/FBI press conference to tell you they found vote fraud are going to be waiting a looong time...

 

[Ingomike]

Edit: This applies to Mike's post where he referenced the credit bureau that was hacked a few years ago. I should have quoted that post to make it more evident.


Did you ever read the judge’s ruling on the credit reporting agency that was hacked? It was gross negligence. They were using a known flawed version of an ancient web framework, and the hackers used that exploit for the breach. They did not take the care to protect the data.

It doesn’t matter what kind of voting system you use. Paper. Scantron. Whatever. It’s exploitable if the requisite care is not taken to ensure integrity.

If election officials want to cheat, they’ll cheat. But as far as GA in 2020, you’re relying on reports from organizations who are highly motivated to present a narrative that you will accept without scrutiny. You desperately want to believe Trump could not lose fairly. And I don’t believe he did. But there’s no verifiable evidence of the Kraken. There are claims, and there are people desperate to believe them.

The way I think Trump lost unfairly in GA was the mail-in ballots and vote harvesting, otherwise known as GetOutTheVote. Plus the efforts of the “cabal” who later admitted they all colluded to make Biden the victor.

GetOutTheVote was heavily financed by the Cabal by their own admission. That stuff is verifiable. They pay people to go door to door and apply whatever pressure it takes to get them to sign a ballot. I don’t have to believe wild ass tails.

You write this post as if there was one breach of the credit agencies. I used to have an article from, maybe Forbes or Fortune, about five years ago that detailed fourteen major breaches of the credit agencies at that time.

I guarantee you that this election software is not world class security. We saw dozens of examples reported of how insecure it really is.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Like SD4L or not he does counter with some good arguments IMO that I don't just dismiss out of hand. I'm sure IM is getting weary of arguing over the same square inch of ground and it appears he made that comment out of frustration or maybe he just ran out of answers.

I have no animosity with @Ingomike over this. I get it... In November/December of 2020 I was in the same place he still is... I was angry about the election being stolen.

Then I started looking at the actual claims and was like, WTF? "Where's the beef?" These are b*****t claims just to rile people up.

Then I was angry, and still am, at Trump for making false claims.

And, it taints any and all attempts at gaining election integrity. Look at the firestorm over very rational laws in Georgia. It taints actions against unsolicited ballot mailings. It taints actions against ballot harvesting. It taints actions against non-governmental drop boxes. It taints actions against states that don't maintain their registration rolls and have millions of incorrect registrations.

And, the earlier question about do I think 81 million people voted FOR BIDEN... no I don't. BUT, I do believe that many, or close enough to it, voted AGAINST TRUMP.

Hilary lost to Trump in 2016 in big part because she was the most despised candidate for president in my lifetime... well, until 2020 and that is why Trump lost.