Here you go. Straight from the horses mouth.

https://cha.house.gov/2024/9/transcr...rately-ignored

What exactly is lol about what I sent you? This is such a lame dodge. I sent you specific facts, whether it’s on wikipedia or not is irrelevanf.

That’s not at all what was happening. What was supposed to happen is Pence was supposed to either accept the alternate slate or pretend he couldn’t tell which slate of electors was the legitimate one, sending it back to the states. If the states didn’t recertify in time, then their state wouldn’t count and neither candidate would secure a majority of the votes. This would send it back to the congress.

The problem was, the documents were forged and 5/7 represented themselves as a real slate of electors.

Can you cite a source as to your claim?

Lastly, remember what we’re talking about here: throwing out millions of votes because you didn’t like the result. That is hugely authoritarian, especially in this day and age when that’s not how votes are decided.


Pence had already told him he wouldn’t go along with the plan and would count the legal slate of electors. He was putting pressure on Pence. That’s why he said that they have to go to the capitol to remind the “weak republicans” of their duty, essentially to overturn the election. That’s exactly what he communicated in his speech.

He wanted 10000 national guard there to protect his people, not the capital. That’s what he communicated to everyone. People didn’t want them there if they were going to be used as thugs to protect Trump supporters, yes. Every other election that national guard wasn’t needed until Trump sent his supporter at the Capitol and would neither call them off nor call the national guard when they started rioting and breaking into the Capitol.

Also what power does any congress person have to call on the National Guard. If Trump had intelligence that said there were going to be attacks and he didn’t call them in, he’s the damn commander in chief. He’s the commander of the National Guard bro!

He sat there encouraging Pence to overturn the election with people begging him to tell his supporters to go home. He did nothing because he wanted it to happen.

My predictions are better than anyone you know or have seen on tv. You must have missed it when I deconstructed the flaws in 538's predictions on Trump some years ago - before the outcome of course. The only thing I've got wrong ITF is was Russia going to invade Ukraine. You show me one poster who actually makes predictions harder than will the sun come up tomorrow and who has a good record. Most of you are too scared to make predictions, just coming in after saying oh I knew it.

I predict you got an erection while you were typing that.

At the risk of getting of getting told it’s just high school math from a guy who won’t be able to tell you the odds of a coin coming up exactly heads exactly 2 out of 4 flips, the 538 model in 2016 with Trump a 2:1 dog was basically correct. Unless you want to pretend like it was obvious Hilary would win the popular vote and lose swing states by 10k.

And in the same sentence that we got the Russia will not invade all the people that think so are kittens we got trump will not not get arrested so not off to a great start.

People make predictions in this forum all the time. Most people are correct some of the time and incorrect some of the time. But you are the only poster who is correct virtually every time. It's astonishing. I feel so grateful and blessed that you use your profound intellect to reveal the future to us.

Does Deuces approve of this outcome?

silver model in 2016 was correct ex ante with the info available at the time, ie he collated info properly.

we then understood polls at least back then underestimated trump systematically, so ex post no he wasn't correct, and I am not talking in a result oriented way, just he missed what everyone else missed which was how to properly assess for "shy trump voters".

pretty sure silver himself acknowledged that.

but yes all other polls aggregators were democratic party puppets who went with Clinton at 99% demonstrating their complete lack of morals and statistical ability

Surely it's one or the other.

If I was a democratic party operative, why would I put Clinton’s chance to win at 99% and potentially suppress the votes?

because pundits and the campaign didn't think it was about "getting out the vote", they thought they had it in the bag completely and they wanted to make it as clear as possible in order to cancel the oddity of trump which they thought at the time they were able to very easily which is why they lolled and mocked him for months and had everyone in their pockets (most media, most "experts) saying that publicly.

they had no clue because their internal polling didn't correct for the "shy trump voter" and they didn't realize Clinton was despised by blacks as much as she was (to the point many didn't go to vote in Wisconsin and elsewhere).

silver got assassinated by leftists when he dared to claim Trump had decent chances.

I think you missed my point.

they had no stat skills to begin with, which would have allowed them to come out with any number with no shame.

then they went with 99% pro Clinton because that's the number the DNC ordered them to come out with

All seems a bit conspiratorial. Deuces is rubbing off on you.

Hyperbolic much?

Pure tin foil hat stuff. Doesn't even make sense as a plan.

do you remember the character assassination (that's an expression used exactly for cases like this, not my concoction) that happened back then? because I do.

they felt betrayed as if by saying what he did say, he "caused" the outcome.

which is why to this day, the fact he puts trump at higher chances than 538 does, is seen by leftists as a kind of confirmation of the betrayal.

some people on twitter are even discussing the idea Nate silver role is to build models to justify the election is stolen if trump has decent chances and then loses. I am talking Twitter threads with huge amount of likes.

a lot of literature tells us that undecided people will tend to vote for the perceived winner, that's why several countries ban polls from being published close to election day (Italy among them).

in a vacuum, people want to vote for the winner. contearians exist but they are a minority.

it's very useful for a campaign to convince people you ate in front and you are going to win

Nice yap. So they wanted to say she was 99% to embarrass Trump? And she didn’t take him seriously that’s why she called him a threat to democracy and that he should never have access to a nuke?

You don’t even try to make sense.

check the reply above yours

the one where you completely change your argument?

the One where I explain why the DNC ordered their troops to claim the election was in the bag

K. Have fun with your very stable genius conspiracy theories.

I was talking about the primary. But keeping bashing me 20 more times for the one prediction I got wrong. It doesn't look at all like you resent someone who has the balls to make predictions and is good at it.

Some liberal, years ago, hated my guts on a sports forum because I attacked him from the left. He resented my record as a handicapper as well. He put up 15k against my 5K that I couldn't pick 60% over an nfl season ats, 5 games a week. He thought I had been getting lucky in years past and it couldn't last. It came down to the last weekend, but he lost.

What is it with the liberals and their absolute hatred of the Left? Is it because we see right through your self deception and confront you with it?