About Those J6 “People”

[Political-Junkie]

Law enforcement did that.

No, they didn't release everything which is what the law called for.

 

[Robert W]

I want it released for them to prove they're not hiding anything.

You are willing to destroy the victims' cases if they look for legal help?

 

[Robert W]

No, they didn't release everything which is what the law called for.

 

[Robert W]

The law is to release all of it, with redactions as necessary.

 

[Political-Junkie]

Harris set the record?

Turnout may be the political world’s favorite buzzword. If you’ve ever heard a campaign say that “it’ll all come down to turnout,” you’ll know it has long since become a cliche. Whether they win or lose, candidates often credit (or curse) turnout. Case in point: the 2024 presidential race. Many observers pegged poor Democratic turnout as the primary cause for Kamala Harris’s loss to Donald Trump.

It will come as a surprise to many, then, that “turnout” often lacks a clear definition. There are many ways to look at turnout, ranging from the simplest raw vote totals to complex analyses using voter files and turnout rates from different hypothetical pools of voters. For the purposes of this article, turnout is calculated using the percentage of the citizen, voting-age population that voted in 2024. This allows for a comprehensive overview of the entire country, and a consistent method to calculate turnout across states that heavily vary in election administration and accessibility.

These estimates are not always perfect, as they rely on citizen voting-age population datasets from the Census, which can often be noisy, particularly when it comes to smaller counties. We encourage readers to focus on the broader picture, rather than individual counties, when it comes to our estimates.

In 2024, 65.1% of all voting-age citizens cast a ballot in the presidential election. This is down slightly from the 67.9% turnout in 2020, but is significantly higher than most other recent presidential elections. Across the country, familiar trends emerge: wealthier, and more educated areas tended to have higher turnout. The north, particularly the Upper Midwest and the Pacific Northwest, similarly have higher turnout than Appalachia and the Black Belt.

None of this is unusual, and it all tracks closely with similar turnout trends from previous elections. To get a clearer answer on how turnout impacted the 2024 results, then, we have to dive deeper.

Trump’s Turnout Advantage​

In terms of absolute turnout, there does not appear to be any particular correlation with partisanship. Counties that voted for Kamala Harris by 40 points or more had almost the same absolute turnout as counties that voted for Donald Trump by 40 points or more, at 63% for both. However, when we look at the change in turnout from 2020, a different picture emerges.

Trump +40 or higher counties were the only category to achieve greater turnout than 2020. Harris +40 or higher counties saw a decrease of 4.2 percentage points. The overall trendline shows that more Democratic counties generally saw worse turnout relative to 2020 than more Republican counties.

Well in 2020, Democrats comprised 37% of the electorate. But in 2024 that dropped to 31%, the lowest I could find. That translates into about 59 million Democrats voting in 2020 compared to about 48 million in 2024 with about 94% of them voting for Harris. That's a pretty significant drop.

 

[Political-Junkie]

Trump authorized them earlier than that. He does not mess around. Sund reported to congress he wanted them and Bowser said no due to optics. It would not have harmed Bowser to say yes to the offer. While Trump could have gone above her, she said something such as she would handle it. Did Bowser handle that day?

Sund never said they were offered to him by Trump.

 

[Political-Junkie]

View attachment 1269320

We're talking about presidential elections, not midterms.

 

[Political-Junkie]

Cowardly judges

You also can't prove fraud when you are not allowed to submit evidence of fraud.

What actual evidence was there that courts wouldn't look at?

 

[Political-Junkie]

You are willing to destroy the victims' cases if they look for legal help?

With redactions, how does that hurt any cases? They've released a lot to date. Do you have any evidence of any cases destroyed as a result?

 

[Political-Junkie]

View attachment 1269322

So they were a month late in releasing what they did and have still not released everything.

 

[Alweysrite!]

The law is to release all of it, with redactions as necessary.

You wouldn't be satisfied with the redactions. Face it you have two and a half more years of trump and then JD Vance is going to be president. Suck it up kid

 

[Alweysrite!]

I want it released for them to prove they're not hiding anything.

I've already proven that there's nothing there for you
You didn't answer. Should all criminal files and investigations be released for everyone?

 

[Robert W]

So they were a month late in releasing what they did and have still not released everything.

Tell us all what was not released?

 

[Political-Junkie]

You wouldn't be satisfied with the redactions. Face it you have two and a half more years of trump and then JD Vance is going to be president. Suck it up kid

I haven't complained about the redactions so I can't say I understand where your comment comes from. As far as Vance in 2028, who did you predict would win in 2020?

 

[Political-Junkie]

I've already proven that there's nothing there for you
You didn't answer. Should all criminal files and investigations be released for everyone?

You've proven no such thing. Regarding the Epstein files, the law should be upheld and all should have been released last December.

 

[Robert W]

With redactions, how does that hurt any cases? They've released a lot to date. Do you have any evidence of any cases destroyed as a result?

So you are actually satisfied with what they released.
In my many years on forums, including this forum, I have encountered many strange people. This forum is not as bad. Since you do not know me, given your less than stellar way of talking, I have had to study law for my license. Our professor was fond of saying to us all, the courts will decide.

Defense lawyers seek all holes in all cases. You are asking for all cases conceived by victims to be declared invalid thanks to all data exposed on your say so.

 

[Alweysrite!]

You've proven no such thing. Regarding the Epstein files, the law should be upheld and all should have been released last December.

I told you Biden is the proof that there's nothing for you in the Epstein files. The proof is that he held on to the files and did not prosecute anyone even when he was going crazy with lawfare against Trump. That means there's nothing there. You know I just love shutting people like you up, it's truly a pleasure. Thank you

 

[Robert W]

I haven't complained about the redactions so I can't say I understand where your comment comes from. As far as Vance in 2028, who did you predict would win in 2020?

Democrats love to say Trump fell in polls, yet polls prove it is Democrats who dropped out of sight.

Vance is the perfect candidate to follow Trump. He is going after fraud. He is not boisterous. He commands a good following. He sure beats whoever plans to run as a democrat for president. By the way, who would that be? As the forum political junkie, who do you predict will be that democrat?

 

[Robert W]

I told you Biden is the proof that there's nothing for you in the Epstein files. The proof is that he held on to the files and did not prosecute anyone even when he was going crazy with lawfare against Trump. That means there's nothing there. You know I just love shutting people like you up, it's truly a pleasure. Thank you

Your wisdom as a 69-year-old sure tops the Democrats lack wisdom.

 

[Political-Junkie]

Tell us all what was not released?

Blanche said they had to go through 6 million pages. The released about 3½ million.