Biden got 81 million votes because trump was just that unpopular and hated, right?

[Faun]

View attachment 487283

Makes total sense. No reason whatsoever to question the legitimacy of the election results in any way

It’s mind boggling to me that someone could look at this and critical thought doesn’t at the very least lead them to question a single thing about it. I can’t even ascertain how those numbers make any statistical sense if nothing else

Yes, Trump was just that bad... Also the US Population increased by about 30 million people over the last decade. Did you consider that?

And biden still only won about 1/2 the counties that Obama did....BIDEN SO FUCKING LOSS---if you look at the chart, it is obvious cheating went on in the 477 counties showing for Biden...someone was tossing in a LOT OF EXTRA VOTES..

^^^ Another idiot

Counties don't elect presidents -- states do.

Actually electors do. But you knew that and decided to be a moron anyway. Some states have split electors. Are you ever not a complete fucking idiot?

Nope, the states do. The states pick the electors to cast their vote for them.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

View attachment 487283

Makes total sense. No reason whatsoever to question the legitimacy of the election results in any way

It’s mind boggling to me that someone could look at this and critical thought doesn’t at the very least lead them to question a single thing about it. I can’t even ascertain how those numbers make any statistical sense if nothing else

Yes, Trump was just that bad... Also the US Population increased by about 30 million people over the last decade. Did you consider that?

And biden still only won about 1/2 the counties that Obama did....BIDEN SO FUCKING LOSS---if you look at the chart, it is obvious cheating went on in the 477 counties showing for Biden...someone was tossing in a LOT OF EXTRA VOTES..

^^^ Another idiot

Counties don't elect presidents -- states do.

Actually electors do. But you knew that and decided to be a moron anyway. Some states have split electors. Are you ever not a complete fucking idiot?

Nope, the states do. The states pick the electors to cast their vote for them.

So electors don't pick our president? Are you stating this as your official position? And voters pick what states do so then voters decide? How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go, retarded parrot?

 

[Faun]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

 

[Faun]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

Really? OK Retarded parrot.

Here you go....You said 5%....but only 2% voted 3rd party in 2020 when so many more voted overall. By your math it should have been a lot more or did you not say 5%? Retarded Parrot.

You lose again!

2016​
DJT	65,853	48%​
HRC	62,985	46%​
3rd	7,157	5%​
Total	135,995	100%​
2020​
Biden	81,269	51%​
DJT	74,217	47%​
3rd	2,898	2%​
Total	158,384	100%​

​

 

[Faun]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

Really? OK Retarded parrot.

Here you go....You said 5%....but only 2% voted 3rd party in 2020 when so many more voted overall. By your math it should have been a lot more or did you not say 5%? Retarded Parrot.

You lose again!

2016​
DJT	65,853	48%​
HRC	62,985	46%​
3rd	7,157	5%​
Total	135,995	100%​
2020​
Biden	81,269	51%​
DJT	74,217	47%​
3rd	2,898	2%​
Total	158,384	100%​

​

I also said 10% for 2016 but the actual number was half that at 5%. To that, I account for the margin of error among polls. Still see nothing unusual.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

Really? OK Retarded parrot.

Here you go....You said 5%....but only 2% voted 3rd party in 2020 when so many more voted overall. By your math it should have been a lot more or did you not say 5%? Retarded Parrot.

You lose again!

2016​
DJT	65,853	48%​
HRC	62,985	46%​
3rd	7,157	5%​
Total	135,995	100%​
2020​
Biden	81,269	51%​
DJT	74,217	47%​
3rd	2,898	2%​
Total	158,384	100%​

​

I also said 10% for 2016 but the actual number was half that at 5%. To that, I account for the margin of error among polls. Still see nothing unusual.

Your margin of error is 50%? LMAO

Retarded parrot. So 22.4mil more voted by 5mil fewer voted 3rd party and nothing to see here? The percentage of those voting 3rd party declined by 147%! But you don't see that as a statistical anomaly? Your polls predicted 8mil votes for 3rd party. Moron.

 

[Faun]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

Really? OK Retarded parrot.

Here you go....You said 5%....but only 2% voted 3rd party in 2020 when so many more voted overall. By your math it should have been a lot more or did you not say 5%? Retarded Parrot.

You lose again!

2016​
DJT	65,853	48%​
HRC	62,985	46%​
3rd	7,157	5%​
Total	135,995	100%​
2020​
Biden	81,269	51%​
DJT	74,217	47%​
3rd	2,898	2%​
Total	158,384	100%​

​

I also said 10% for 2016 but the actual number was half that at 5%. To that, I account for the margin of error among polls. Still see nothing unusual.

Your margin of error is 50%? LMAO

Retarded parrot. So 22.4mil more voted by 5mil fewer voted 3rd party and nothing to see here? The percentage of those voting 3rd party declined by 147%! But you don't see that as a statistical anomaly? Your polls predicted 8mil votes for 3rd party. Moron.

LOL

ShortBus ... how does something decrease by more than 100%??

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

Really? OK Retarded parrot.

Here you go....You said 5%....but only 2% voted 3rd party in 2020 when so many more voted overall. By your math it should have been a lot more or did you not say 5%? Retarded Parrot.

You lose again!

2016​
DJT	65,853	48%​
HRC	62,985	46%​
3rd	7,157	5%​
Total	135,995	100%​
2020​
Biden	81,269	51%​
DJT	74,217	47%​
3rd	2,898	2%​
Total	158,384	100%​

​

I also said 10% for 2016 but the actual number was half that at 5%. To that, I account for the margin of error among polls. Still see nothing unusual.

Your margin of error is 50%? LMAO

Retarded parrot. So 22.4mil more voted by 5mil fewer voted 3rd party and nothing to see here? The percentage of those voting 3rd party declined by 147%! But you don't see that as a statistical anomaly? Your polls predicted 8mil votes for 3rd party. Moron.

LOL

ShortBus ... how does something decrease by more than 100%??

Don't dodge.....how do you explain this?

And to answer your question it is basic math....the delta is 147% not the number of votes you moron. What % of decrease is it when you go from 7 to 5?
You really are a moron. WOW

If I hit 40 home runs one season and 15 the next, what is my % of decline in home runs? It is 167%!

You are an idiot.

 

[Slade3200]

View attachment 487283

Makes total sense. No reason whatsoever to question the legitimacy of the election results in any way

It’s mind boggling to me that someone could look at this and critical thought doesn’t at the very least lead them to question a single thing about it. I can’t even ascertain how those numbers make any statistical sense if nothing else

Yes, Trump was just that bad... Also the US Population increased by about 30 million people over the last decade. Did you consider that?

And biden still only won about 1/2 the counties that Obama did....BIDEN SO FUCKING LOSS---if you look at the chart, it is obvious cheating went on in the 477 counties showing for Biden...someone was tossing in a LOT OF EXTRA VOTES..

No it’s not obvious and it’s not probable. You turds have tried everything including the kitchen sink and can’t get anything to stick. It’s pathetic

 

[Slade3200]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

Really? OK Retarded parrot.

Here you go....You said 5%....but only 2% voted 3rd party in 2020 when so many more voted overall. By your math it should have been a lot more or did you not say 5%? Retarded Parrot.

You lose again!

2016​
DJT	65,853	48%​
HRC	62,985	46%​
3rd	7,157	5%​
Total	135,995	100%​
2020​
Biden	81,269	51%​
DJT	74,217	47%​
3rd	2,898	2%​
Total	158,384	100%​

​

I also said 10% for 2016 but the actual number was half that at 5%. To that, I account for the margin of error among polls. Still see nothing unusual.

Your margin of error is 50%? LMAO

Retarded parrot. So 22.4mil more voted by 5mil fewer voted 3rd party and nothing to see here? The percentage of those voting 3rd party declined by 147%! But you don't see that as a statistical anomaly? Your polls predicted 8mil votes for 3rd party. Moron.

Did you factor in population growth? And a hyper engaged electorate?

 

[Faun]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

Really? OK Retarded parrot.

Here you go....You said 5%....but only 2% voted 3rd party in 2020 when so many more voted overall. By your math it should have been a lot more or did you not say 5%? Retarded Parrot.

You lose again!

2016​
DJT	65,853	48%​
HRC	62,985	46%​
3rd	7,157	5%​
Total	135,995	100%​
2020​
Biden	81,269	51%​
DJT	74,217	47%​
3rd	2,898	2%​
Total	158,384	100%​

​

I also said 10% for 2016 but the actual number was half that at 5%. To that, I account for the margin of error among polls. Still see nothing unusual.

Your margin of error is 50%? LMAO

Retarded parrot. So 22.4mil more voted by 5mil fewer voted 3rd party and nothing to see here? The percentage of those voting 3rd party declined by 147%! But you don't see that as a statistical anomaly? Your polls predicted 8mil votes for 3rd party. Moron.

LOL

ShortBus ... how does something decrease by more than 100%??

Don't dodge.....how do you explain this?

And to answer your question it is basic math....the delta is 147% not the number of votes you moron. What % of decrease is it when you go from 7 to 5?
You really are a moron. WOW

If I hit 40 home runs one season and 15 the next, what is my % of decline in home runs? It is 167%!

You are an idiot.

LOLOL

I've already explained it. Among the reasons, it was too important an election to throw away a vote AND it's typical for 3rd party candidates to get fewer votes in a race with an incumbent.

Of course, I'm explaining this to a fucking moron who actually thinks something can decrease more than 100%.

And ShortBus, a drop from 7 to 5 is a 29% decrease, a drop from 40 to 15 is a 63% decrease, and a drop from 7,157 to 2,898 is 60%, not 147%.

And you claim to be in banking.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

Really? OK Retarded parrot.

Here you go....You said 5%....but only 2% voted 3rd party in 2020 when so many more voted overall. By your math it should have been a lot more or did you not say 5%? Retarded Parrot.

You lose again!

2016​
DJT	65,853	48%​
HRC	62,985	46%​
3rd	7,157	5%​
Total	135,995	100%​
2020​
Biden	81,269	51%​
DJT	74,217	47%​
3rd	2,898	2%​
Total	158,384	100%​

​

I also said 10% for 2016 but the actual number was half that at 5%. To that, I account for the margin of error among polls. Still see nothing unusual.

Your margin of error is 50%? LMAO

Retarded parrot. So 22.4mil more voted by 5mil fewer voted 3rd party and nothing to see here? The percentage of those voting 3rd party declined by 147%! But you don't see that as a statistical anomaly? Your polls predicted 8mil votes for 3rd party. Moron.

LOL

ShortBus ... how does something decrease by more than 100%??

Don't dodge.....how do you explain this?

And to answer your question it is basic math....the delta is 147% not the number of votes you moron. What % of decrease is it when you go from 7 to 5?
You really are a moron. WOW

If I hit 40 home runs one season and 15 the next, what is my % of decline in home runs? It is 167%!

You are an idiot.

LOLOL

I've already explained it. Among the reasons, it was too important an election to throw away a vote AND it's typical for 3rd party candidates to get fewer votes in a race with an incumbent.

Of course, I'm explaining this to a fucking moron who actually thinks something can decrease more than 100%.

And ShortBus, a drop from 7 to 5 is a 29% decrease, a drop from 40 to 15 is a 63% decrease, and a drop from 7,157 to 2,898 is 60%, not 147%.

And you claim to be in banking.

View attachment 489110

LMAO....You cannot percents. You are an idiot.

what is 5*1.4?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

Really? OK Retarded parrot.

Here you go....You said 5%....but only 2% voted 3rd party in 2020 when so many more voted overall. By your math it should have been a lot more or did you not say 5%? Retarded Parrot.

You lose again!

2016​
DJT	65,853	48%​
HRC	62,985	46%​
3rd	7,157	5%​
Total	135,995	100%​
2020​
Biden	81,269	51%​
DJT	74,217	47%​
3rd	2,898	2%​
Total	158,384	100%​

​

I also said 10% for 2016 but the actual number was half that at 5%. To that, I account for the margin of error among polls. Still see nothing unusual.

Your margin of error is 50%? LMAO

Retarded parrot. So 22.4mil more voted by 5mil fewer voted 3rd party and nothing to see here? The percentage of those voting 3rd party declined by 147%! But you don't see that as a statistical anomaly? Your polls predicted 8mil votes for 3rd party. Moron.

Did you factor in population growth? And a hyper engaged electorate?

That is subjective not objective. I am only looking at it objectively as a math problem. I am sure there are many explanations for it.

 

[Faun]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

Really? OK Retarded parrot.

Here you go....You said 5%....but only 2% voted 3rd party in 2020 when so many more voted overall. By your math it should have been a lot more or did you not say 5%? Retarded Parrot.

You lose again!

2016​
DJT	65,853	48%​
HRC	62,985	46%​
3rd	7,157	5%​
Total	135,995	100%​
2020​
Biden	81,269	51%​
DJT	74,217	47%​
3rd	2,898	2%​
Total	158,384	100%​

​

I also said 10% for 2016 but the actual number was half that at 5%. To that, I account for the margin of error among polls. Still see nothing unusual.

Your margin of error is 50%? LMAO

Retarded parrot. So 22.4mil more voted by 5mil fewer voted 3rd party and nothing to see here? The percentage of those voting 3rd party declined by 147%! But you don't see that as a statistical anomaly? Your polls predicted 8mil votes for 3rd party. Moron.

LOL

ShortBus ... how does something decrease by more than 100%??

Don't dodge.....how do you explain this?

And to answer your question it is basic math....the delta is 147% not the number of votes you moron. What % of decrease is it when you go from 7 to 5?
You really are a moron. WOW

If I hit 40 home runs one season and 15 the next, what is my % of decline in home runs? It is 167%!

You are an idiot.

LOLOL

I've already explained it. Among the reasons, it was too important an election to throw away a vote AND it's typical for 3rd party candidates to get fewer votes in a race with an incumbent.

Of course, I'm explaining this to a fucking moron who actually thinks something can decrease more than 100%.

And ShortBus, a drop from 7 to 5 is a 29% decrease, a drop from 40 to 15 is a 63% decrease, and a drop from 7,157 to 2,898 is 60%, not 147%.

And you claim to be in banking.

View attachment 489110

LMAO....You cannot percents. You are an idiot.

what is 5*1.4?

LOLOL

7.

ShortBus, if something is worth 66.08 and drops 2.32 to 63.76, what percentage did that drop, displayed with 2 decimal places?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

Really? OK Retarded parrot.

Here you go....You said 5%....but only 2% voted 3rd party in 2020 when so many more voted overall. By your math it should have been a lot more or did you not say 5%? Retarded Parrot.

You lose again!

2016​
DJT	65,853	48%​
HRC	62,985	46%​
3rd	7,157	5%​
Total	135,995	100%​
2020​
Biden	81,269	51%​
DJT	74,217	47%​
3rd	2,898	2%​
Total	158,384	100%​

​

I also said 10% for 2016 but the actual number was half that at 5%. To that, I account for the margin of error among polls. Still see nothing unusual.

Your margin of error is 50%? LMAO

Retarded parrot. So 22.4mil more voted by 5mil fewer voted 3rd party and nothing to see here? The percentage of those voting 3rd party declined by 147%! But you don't see that as a statistical anomaly? Your polls predicted 8mil votes for 3rd party. Moron.

LOL

ShortBus ... how does something decrease by more than 100%??

Don't dodge.....how do you explain this?

And to answer your question it is basic math....the delta is 147% not the number of votes you moron. What % of decrease is it when you go from 7 to 5?
You really are a moron. WOW

If I hit 40 home runs one season and 15 the next, what is my % of decline in home runs? It is 167%!

You are an idiot.

LOLOL

I've already explained it. Among the reasons, it was too important an election to throw away a vote AND it's typical for 3rd party candidates to get fewer votes in a race with an incumbent.

Of course, I'm explaining this to a fucking moron who actually thinks something can decrease more than 100%.

And ShortBus, a drop from 7 to 5 is a 29% decrease, a drop from 40 to 15 is a 63% decrease, and a drop from 7,157 to 2,898 is 60%, not 147%.

And you claim to be in banking.

View attachment 489110

LMAO....You cannot percents. You are an idiot.

what is 5*1.4?

LOLOL

7.

ShortBus, if something is worth 66.08 and drops 2.32 to 63.76, what percentage did that drop?

You are an idiot who doesn't understand math but we are off topic. So to you the math doesn't look weird? OK....that makes you an idiot. 4.5mil fewer vote 3rd party when 22.7mil more vote. You are one dumb mother fucker.

 

[Faun]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

Really? OK Retarded parrot.

Here you go....You said 5%....but only 2% voted 3rd party in 2020 when so many more voted overall. By your math it should have been a lot more or did you not say 5%? Retarded Parrot.

You lose again!

2016​
DJT	65,853	48%​
HRC	62,985	46%​
3rd	7,157	5%​
Total	135,995	100%​
2020​
Biden	81,269	51%​
DJT	74,217	47%​
3rd	2,898	2%​
Total	158,384	100%​

​

I also said 10% for 2016 but the actual number was half that at 5%. To that, I account for the margin of error among polls. Still see nothing unusual.

Your margin of error is 50%? LMAO

Retarded parrot. So 22.4mil more voted by 5mil fewer voted 3rd party and nothing to see here? The percentage of those voting 3rd party declined by 147%! But you don't see that as a statistical anomaly? Your polls predicted 8mil votes for 3rd party. Moron.

LOL

ShortBus ... how does something decrease by more than 100%??

Don't dodge.....how do you explain this?

And to answer your question it is basic math....the delta is 147% not the number of votes you moron. What % of decrease is it when you go from 7 to 5?
You really are a moron. WOW

If I hit 40 home runs one season and 15 the next, what is my % of decline in home runs? It is 167%!

You are an idiot.

LOLOL

I've already explained it. Among the reasons, it was too important an election to throw away a vote AND it's typical for 3rd party candidates to get fewer votes in a race with an incumbent.

Of course, I'm explaining this to a fucking moron who actually thinks something can decrease more than 100%.

And ShortBus, a drop from 7 to 5 is a 29% decrease, a drop from 40 to 15 is a 63% decrease, and a drop from 7,157 to 2,898 is 60%, not 147%.

And you claim to be in banking.

View attachment 489110

LMAO....You cannot percents. You are an idiot.

what is 5*1.4?

LOLOL

7.

ShortBus, if something is worth 66.08 and drops 2.32 to 63.76, what percentage did that drop?

You are an idiot who doesn't understand math

Nah, you are. That's why you won't answer my question....

If something is worth 66.08 and drops 2.32 to 63.76, what percentage did that drop?

Answer that with two decimal places and I will expose what a flaming retard you are since nothing can decrease more than 100%.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

~20mil more voted but 3 mil fewer voted for the Libertarian is insane?

That anyone voted for the LIbertarians is insane, but they just went back to their Pre-2016 % of the vote total.

The 2020 election was too important to throw away a vote on a 3rd party candidate.

That’s subjective. So 2016 wasn’t important? I am speaking basic statistics, retarded parrot. How many more people voted in 2020 vs. 2016?

All elections are important. Some, more than others. For the sake of America's future, 2020 was so important, it inspired some 25 million additional Americans to vote.

And yet the Libertarian got ~3mil fewer votes.

So?

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

There's nothing suspect about it. It reflects how important this election was that Americans didn't want to waste a vote on a candidate who had absolutely no chance.

Subjective. Mathematically speaking only if you just look at numbers it looks suspect. You need to learn the difference between objective and subjective, retarded parrot. Mathematics alone without context, it looks bizarre as my post stated. There are mathematical anomalies, I am not saying there was anything nefarious just that it looks odd simply from a statistical POV.

So statistically speaking that doesn't make sense. I am sure you have your subjective thoughts on it but mathematically speaking it is bizarre.

ShortBus, voting patterns are more than just numbers.

I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot. I am discussing mathematics. For example...of the total US population 6% are black males but the NBA is comprised of 85% of black males. There isn't anything nefarious there. The NBA is not racist. But to someone who doesn't live in the US or follow the NBA the mathematics would look odd. You once again don't understand the difference between subjective and objective. You are a very stupid retarded parrot.

View attachment 489080

"I am not discussing "patterns" retarded parrot."

LOL

I know, ShortBus, you're ignoring them.

Explain the "pattern" between 2016 and 2020. What specifically are you referring to, retarded parrot?

Already explained it, ShortBus. If you weren't such a moron, you'd understand it.

Nope. You didn't. You gave a subjective response to what you believe it was. I can counter with a similar subjective response. Still don't know the difference between subjective and objective, eh retarded parrot?

Poor ShortBus, even before the election, it was predicted 3rd party candidates would do worse in 2020 than in 2016.

Polls reflected this. Between Hillary and Trump, polls showed them getting about 90% of the vote; leaving almost 10% for other candidates. But in 2020, polls showed Biden and Trump getting 95% of the vote, leaving half of what other candidates were predicted to get in 2016.

OK but 25mil more voted...so 5% of that is 1.25Mil already. Based on your math above, nearly 8mil should have gone to the 3rd party candidates. Libertarian barely got 2mil

Dumbfuck, again, you're counting all the 3rd party votes in 2016 and comparing them to one candidates vote in 2020. And again, there were 34 other candidates in 2020 besides the Democrat and Republican. And again, it was expected 3rd party candidates would do poorly in 2020.

I'm no fan of Vox, but they called this one...

Why third parties likely won’t be a big deal this year

A combination of incumbency and Trump has dampened the impact of third-party voting in 2020.

www.vox.com

... they point out 3rd party candidates tend to do better in elections when there is no incumbent running. Yet another factor which eludes you.

Compare all 3rd party votes. How many voted 3rd party in 2016 vs. 2020, retarded parrot?

LOL

That's your job to figure out, ShortBus -- you're the one complaining about it. It's my job to point out you're a retard for comparing ALL third party candidates in 2016 with ONE candidate in 2020.

I did my job, now you do yours.

Really? OK Retarded parrot.

Here you go....You said 5%....but only 2% voted 3rd party in 2020 when so many more voted overall. By your math it should have been a lot more or did you not say 5%? Retarded Parrot.

You lose again!

2016​
DJT	65,853	48%​
HRC	62,985	46%​
3rd	7,157	5%​
Total	135,995	100%​
2020​
Biden	81,269	51%​
DJT	74,217	47%​
3rd	2,898	2%​
Total	158,384	100%​

​

I also said 10% for 2016 but the actual number was half that at 5%. To that, I account for the margin of error among polls. Still see nothing unusual.

Your margin of error is 50%? LMAO

Retarded parrot. So 22.4mil more voted by 5mil fewer voted 3rd party and nothing to see here? The percentage of those voting 3rd party declined by 147%! But you don't see that as a statistical anomaly? Your polls predicted 8mil votes for 3rd party. Moron.

LOL

ShortBus ... how does something decrease by more than 100%??

Don't dodge.....how do you explain this?

And to answer your question it is basic math....the delta is 147% not the number of votes you moron. What % of decrease is it when you go from 7 to 5?
You really are a moron. WOW

If I hit 40 home runs one season and 15 the next, what is my % of decline in home runs? It is 167%!

You are an idiot.

LOLOL

I've already explained it. Among the reasons, it was too important an election to throw away a vote AND it's typical for 3rd party candidates to get fewer votes in a race with an incumbent.

Of course, I'm explaining this to a fucking moron who actually thinks something can decrease more than 100%.

And ShortBus, a drop from 7 to 5 is a 29% decrease, a drop from 40 to 15 is a 63% decrease, and a drop from 7,157 to 2,898 is 60%, not 147%.

And you claim to be in banking.

View attachment 489110

LMAO....You cannot percents. You are an idiot.

what is 5*1.4?

LOLOL

7.

ShortBus, if something is worth 66.08 and drops 2.32 to 63.76, what percentage did that drop?

You are an idiot who doesn't understand math

Nah, you are. That's why you won't answer my question....

If something is worth 66.08 and drops 2.32 to 63.76, what percentage did that drop?

Answer that with two decimal places and I will expose what a flaming retard you are since nothing can decrease more than 100%.

4% retarded parrot.