Election Night Thread

sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Issa's seat was redistricted to include more liberal areas, true. I don't think it's correct to say it was "gerrymandered," because gerrymandering means politicians or political parties setting up district boundaries to protect themselves. Given that California uses an independent panel to set district boundaries, there's no real evidence a partisan gerrymander happened to Issa. It may just be a consequence of that whole area becoming more liberal in general as population grows.

Rohrabacher's seat was indeed rated as a "tossup" by 2018 election time, however in Rohrabacher's previous election he won 58-41. In the one before that he won 64-36. So this result is a big shift in a pretty short time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California%27s_48th_congressional_district
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wifeisafurd said:

Another Bear said:

My mom still lives in CA 48, Rohrabacher's old district. To say the switch over isn't a big deal is pure bull. The 48th is/was prime Reagan country but also home of John Wayne and a long tradition of GOP and hardline cold war warriors...not to mentioned a bunch of Birchers, Christian kooks (Crystal Cathedral) and wing nuts.

The one commonality might be level of education and I think that's the basis of the flip...educated people don't swallow horse pucky by the gallon, and women were fed up and po'ed. They looked the other way for economics for a long time but Trump ended that, as did the Russkies. Educated people tend to stop and ask questions, like if Rohrabacher is a Russkie asset and tool. Trump didn't help nor did Kavanaugh.

Also Issa's seat in CA 49 flipped and that's just as big of a deal given it borders southern OC and SD is more conservative then OC and includes Camp Pendleton.

Flipping 48 and 49 were big deals. Both were as solidly GOP as SF is Dem. Imagine if SF flipped...that's how big of a deal it is.


I'm assuming you make this stuff in the Dajo vain.

Maybe you should talk to your mom some more to get you facts straight.

Rohrbacker has not lost yet nor has the race been called. He probably losses but it will be real close. The District may be full of wing nuts since it voted for Obama and Clinton, and has a higher Dem registration than GOP registration. The District boundaries have changed a lot (in fact Issa was once the Congressman), but it never included (and is not geographically close) to the Crystal Cathedral. The District was not even rated red (Cook toss-up, Sabato's toss-up, and Inside Elections blue). Your thinking is decades old and full of stereotypes. Just like SF flipping. Yes, maybe 1950 SF flipping.

As for 49, it was a District, when created , that was held by 2 Democrats and a Republican, before Issa, who was gerrymandered out of the 48th (don't tell Dajo). The 49th District had then been gerrymandered to isolate all the GOP votes in one district so it included conservative portions of the Inland Empire and inland northern San Diego County giving Issa a strong base. But in 2012, the District was redrawn to take out the conservative inland areas, to include a small portion of very southern OC and the San Diego coast all the way down to La Jolla. Your talking the few SC cities that mostly voted for Obama and Kerry, and to the extent there are liberals in San Diego county, they are in these beach cities. Issa didn't run because he knew a Democrat would win. Again, this is not even close to your SF flipping scenario. I don't know where you get this cr@p.


I've owned you on these boards so many times it's nice to know I've got permanent space in your head.
wifeisafurd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

wifeisafurd said:

Another Bear said:

My mom still lives in CA 48, Rohrabacher's old district. To say the switch over isn't a big deal is pure bull. The 48th is/was prime Reagan country but also home of John Wayne and a long tradition of GOP and hardline cold war warriors...not to mentioned a bunch of Birchers, Christian kooks (Crystal Cathedral) and wing nuts.

The one commonality might be level of education and I think that's the basis of the flip...educated people don't swallow horse pucky by the gallon, and women were fed up and po'ed. They looked the other way for economics for a long time but Trump ended that, as did the Russkies. Educated people tend to stop and ask questions, like if Rohrabacher is a Russkie asset and tool. Trump didn't help nor did Kavanaugh.

Also Issa's seat in CA 49 flipped and that's just as big of a deal given it borders southern OC and SD is more conservative then OC and includes Camp Pendleton.

Flipping 48 and 49 were big deals. Both were as solidly GOP as SF is Dem. Imagine if SF flipped...that's how big of a deal it is.


I'm assuming you make this stuff in the Dajo vain.

Maybe you should talk to your mom some more to get you facts straight.

Rohrbacker has not lost yet nor has the race been called. He probably losses but it will be real close. The District may be full of wing nuts since it voted for Obama and Clinton, and has a higher Dem registration than GOP registration. The District boundaries have changed a lot (in fact Issa was once the Congressman), but it never included (and is not geographically close) to the Crystal Cathedral. The District was not even rated red (Cook toss-up, Sabato's toss-up, and Inside Elections blue). Your thinking is decades old and full of stereotypes. Just like SF flipping. Yes, maybe 1950 SF flipping.

As for 49, it was a District, when created , that was held by 2 Democrats and a Republican, before Issa, who was gerrymandered out of the 48th (don't tell Dajo). The 49th District had then been gerrymandered to isolate all the GOP votes in one district so it included conservative portions of the Inland Empire and inland northern San Diego County giving Issa a strong base. But in 2012, the District was redrawn to take out the conservative inland areas, to include a small portion of very southern OC and the San Diego coast all the way down to La Jolla. Your talking the few SC cities that mostly voted for Obama and Kerry, and to the extent there are liberals in San Diego county, they are in these beach cities. Issa didn't run because he knew a Democrat would win. Again, this is not even close to your SF flipping scenario. I don't know where you get this cr@p.


I've owned you on these boards so many times it's nice to know I've got permanent space in your head.
I'm not sure who has a bigger ego, Trump or you. You both seem to have propensity for just making **** up.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wifeisafurd said:

dajo9 said:

wifeisafurd said:

Another Bear said:

My mom still lives in CA 48, Rohrabacher's old district. To say the switch over isn't a big deal is pure bull. The 48th is/was prime Reagan country but also home of John Wayne and a long tradition of GOP and hardline cold war warriors...not to mentioned a bunch of Birchers, Christian kooks (Crystal Cathedral) and wing nuts.

The one commonality might be level of education and I think that's the basis of the flip...educated people don't swallow horse pucky by the gallon, and women were fed up and po'ed. They looked the other way for economics for a long time but Trump ended that, as did the Russkies. Educated people tend to stop and ask questions, like if Rohrabacher is a Russkie asset and tool. Trump didn't help nor did Kavanaugh.

Also Issa's seat in CA 49 flipped and that's just as big of a deal given it borders southern OC and SD is more conservative then OC and includes Camp Pendleton.

Flipping 48 and 49 were big deals. Both were as solidly GOP as SF is Dem. Imagine if SF flipped...that's how big of a deal it is.


I'm assuming you make this stuff in the Dajo vain.

Maybe you should talk to your mom some more to get you facts straight.

Rohrbacker has not lost yet nor has the race been called. He probably losses but it will be real close. The District may be full of wing nuts since it voted for Obama and Clinton, and has a higher Dem registration than GOP registration. The District boundaries have changed a lot (in fact Issa was once the Congressman), but it never included (and is not geographically close) to the Crystal Cathedral. The District was not even rated red (Cook toss-up, Sabato's toss-up, and Inside Elections blue). Your thinking is decades old and full of stereotypes. Just like SF flipping. Yes, maybe 1950 SF flipping.

As for 49, it was a District, when created , that was held by 2 Democrats and a Republican, before Issa, who was gerrymandered out of the 48th (don't tell Dajo). The 49th District had then been gerrymandered to isolate all the GOP votes in one district so it included conservative portions of the Inland Empire and inland northern San Diego County giving Issa a strong base. But in 2012, the District was redrawn to take out the conservative inland areas, to include a small portion of very southern OC and the San Diego coast all the way down to La Jolla. Your talking the few SC cities that mostly voted for Obama and Kerry, and to the extent there are liberals in San Diego county, they are in these beach cities. Issa didn't run because he knew a Democrat would win. Again, this is not even close to your SF flipping scenario. I don't know where you get this cr@p.


I've owned you on these boards so many times it's nice to know I've got permanent space in your head.
I'm not sure who has a bigger ego, Trump or you. You both seem to have propensity for just making **** up.
Why not just call it FAKE NEWS like TRUMP, the GOP and wing nuts. That's essentially what you're doing by calling things you disagree with as "made up". Not exactly hefty intellectual arguments, instead typical ignorant GOP no brain gibberish. It's Sarah Huckabee Sanders being flippant about facts. You know FCCK facts, they don't matter...just call stuff you don't like as made up or FAKE.

Frankly it's this lack of intellectual honesty and willful ignorance that now drives the GOP. If you don't like something, call it fake, disparage it. Trump does this daily.

The thing is, no one calls your arguments FAKE or made up here because most people understand it's a forum and BS and opinions fly. The sad thing is when arguments go south for you, you revert to this...calling something made up or fake, which is a TRUMP MOVE if there ever was one and it's complete and utter BS.
blungld
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wifeisafurd said:

You know a large portion of the country would say the very things about you and liberals.
You are way too smart to actually put forward a completely false equivalence. Of course a huge swath of FOX listeners will say that is all the same--precisely because they are repeating and not discerning the difference between journalism and propaganda, between facts and misinformation. It's as circular as using the Bible to prove Creation.

Every person and every organization has bias--but it is unreasonable to attribute the so-called liberal bias to an "agenda" and not recognize that the majority of credible journalists come to their progressive disposition through education and from years of experience and examining facts. Not as a careerist move.

Yes, of course, Liberal media and people have narratives they tell themselves and that can cross into belief, but that is in no way the same thing as an organized effort to suppress or manipulate truth/facts in order to rile emotion and drive people to certain ways of false thinking. That is propaganda.

Does MSNBC lean left? Of course. Does it try and have high ratings and so sensationalize their reporting and lace it with opinion their listeners are seeking? Yes. But is IS NOT the left equivalence of FOX. No honest assessment can put that forward in today's climate of selling Trump lies and providing him legal cover. There is a huge difference in cheerleading and active participation in crime. This goes way beyond ideology to stab at the heart of the American system, reality, and the Constitution itself.

If you believe the propaganda (FOX, InfoWars, BreitBart, Blaze, Drudge, etc), it is by in large not owing to objective study of fact. And you will see the "mainstream media" as far left and of having the same oppositional agenda you yourself have. Neither is true. The media like Democrats are mostly centrist, and it is the radicalization of the right that sees this as far left. Far left looks very different.

The Trump base, like Trump himself, has become pot calling the kettle black and each accusation tends to be a confessional of their own crimes or warped psychology and an ongoing testimony to cognitive dissonance that is causing a total destruction of American and civil norms. Don't justify it with a cute retort as above.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

wifeisafurd said:

sycasey said:

kjkbear said:

Scoreboard. That's it for last night. The next election is two years away. No new districts will be carved out or redone before 2020. Yes, there were other undercurrents at play last night. I like that the Democrats elected a lot of young candidates. Other than the youth issue, which is big enough, the other issues may or may not matter in two years. For last night, it still comes down to Scoreboard. I would like to see the Democrats replace Pelosi. That could bring actual change. Old does not necessarily mean most capable or effective.
Looking ahead to the next generation of politics, Republicans need to be nervous about their splits with younger voters:

https://www.cnn.com/election/2018/exit-polls

18-29 years old - +35 D
30-44 years old - +19 D

It wasn't any better for them during the Obama years. Eventually this will be the dominant generation.
This is true, but as you get older and pay taxes and have to deal with the government, you tend to become more conservative. And young voters are hard to get to the polls.

My impression is the Dems should have done better against Trump, met expectations for mid-terms, and everything else is just lipstick on a pig.
People do become more conservative, but those margins are pretty big and will be hard to reverse entirely. The Greatest Generation kept leaning Democratic for their entire lives, thanks to FDR.
Yes, young people tend to become more conservative as they age, but in these polarized times I don't know if past trends will continue. Without a middle, I don't see how people will gradually shift from one side to the other. I would speculate that tribalism will keep people in their designated tribes.
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

sycasey said:

wifeisafurd said:

sycasey said:

kjkbear said:

Scoreboard. That's it for last night. The next election is two years away. No new districts will be carved out or redone before 2020. Yes, there were other undercurrents at play last night. I like that the Democrats elected a lot of young candidates. Other than the youth issue, which is big enough, the other issues may or may not matter in two years. For last night, it still comes down to Scoreboard. I would like to see the Democrats replace Pelosi. That could bring actual change. Old does not necessarily mean most capable or effective.
Looking ahead to the next generation of politics, Republicans need to be nervous about their splits with younger voters:

https://www.cnn.com/election/2018/exit-polls

18-29 years old - +35 D
30-44 years old - +19 D

It wasn't any better for them during the Obama years. Eventually this will be the dominant generation.
This is true, but as you get older and pay taxes and have to deal with the government, you tend to become more conservative. And young voters are hard to get to the polls.

My impression is the Dems should have done better against Trump, met expectations for mid-terms, and everything else is just lipstick on a pig.
People do become more conservative, but those margins are pretty big and will be hard to reverse entirely. The Greatest Generation kept leaning Democratic for their entire lives, thanks to FDR.
Yes, young people tend to become more conservative as they age, but in these polarized times I don't know if past trends will continue. Without a middle, I don't see how people will gradually shift from one side to the other. I would speculate that tribalism will keep people in their designated tribes.
I suspect that the Millenial generation will completely destroy Trumpism as they age and bring the Republican party to heel. Once the Republican Party has moderated it will get support from aging Millenials.

We've seen this before with the Greatest Generation as they destroyed the economic system before FDR and once things like Social Security and Medicare were bipartisan, they supported Republicans. There is a reason they say Eisenhower and Nixon (from a policy perspective) would be considered moderate Democrats today. That was the Greatest Generation that did that to the Republicans.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

golden sloth said:

sycasey said:

wifeisafurd said:

sycasey said:

kjkbear said:

Scoreboard. That's it for last night. The next election is two years away. No new districts will be carved out or redone before 2020. Yes, there were other undercurrents at play last night. I like that the Democrats elected a lot of young candidates. Other than the youth issue, which is big enough, the other issues may or may not matter in two years. For last night, it still comes down to Scoreboard. I would like to see the Democrats replace Pelosi. That could bring actual change. Old does not necessarily mean most capable or effective.
Looking ahead to the next generation of politics, Republicans need to be nervous about their splits with younger voters:

https://www.cnn.com/election/2018/exit-polls

18-29 years old - +35 D
30-44 years old - +19 D

It wasn't any better for them during the Obama years. Eventually this will be the dominant generation.
This is true, but as you get older and pay taxes and have to deal with the government, you tend to become more conservative. And young voters are hard to get to the polls.

My impression is the Dems should have done better against Trump, met expectations for mid-terms, and everything else is just lipstick on a pig.
People do become more conservative, but those margins are pretty big and will be hard to reverse entirely. The Greatest Generation kept leaning Democratic for their entire lives, thanks to FDR.
Yes, young people tend to become more conservative as they age, but in these polarized times I don't know if past trends will continue. Without a middle, I don't see how people will gradually shift from one side to the other. I would speculate that tribalism will keep people in their designated tribes.
I suspect that the Millenial generation will completely destroy Trumpism as they age and bring the Republican party to heel. Once the Republican Party has moderated it will get support from aging Millenials.

We've seen this before with the Greatest Generation as they destroyed the economic system before FDR and once things like Social Security and Medicare were bipartisan, they supported Republicans. There is a reason they say Eisenhower and Nixon (from a policy perspective) would be considered moderate Democrats today. That was the Greatest Generation that did that to the Republicans.
Yes, multiple consecutive elections (Obama onward) show Millennials supporting Democrats by massive margins (20-30 points). And no, this was NOT true for prior generations. Boomers and Gen-Xers tended to be more split/swingy at like ages.

I don't think it's impossible for Republicans to win Millennials over in larger numbers at some point, but Trumpism isn't doing it.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wifeisafurd said:

dajo9 said:

I've owned you on these boards so many times it's nice to know I've got permanent space in your head.
I'm not sure who has a bigger ego, Trump or you. You both seem to have propensity for just making **** up.
Yeah, totally uncalled for, Dajo.
You just embarrassed yourself and weaken any future arguments you might make.
I don't even know what you are talking about, but going after someone like that on a chat room board is wrong.
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

wifeisafurd said:

dajo9 said:

I've owned you on these boards so many times it's nice to know I've got permanent space in your head.
I'm not sure who has a bigger ego, Trump or you. You both seem to have propensity for just making **** up.
Yeah, totally uncalled for, Dajo.
You just embarrassed yourself and weaken any future arguments you might make.
I don't even know what you are talking about, but going after someone like that on a chat room board is wrong.
Apparently it's only wrong when it's done by someone you don't agree with, it's not like WIF wasn't personally attacked here...
AunBear89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yawn! More faux outrage. "Apparently it's only..." "Whatabout..." "Stop being intolerant of my lack of tolerance!"
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
OneKeg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Arizona Senate race count of absentee ballots in Maricopa and Pima counties under way. Mostly Maricopa which has both very blue and very red areas. For what it's worth, Sinema (D) has erased the deficit to McSally (R) and now has a very slight lead. Could go either way.

47-53 in the Senate would be better than 46-54 for 2020.

https://results.arizona.vote/#/featured/4/0
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wifeisafurd said:

sycasey said:

wifeisafurd said:

sycasey said:

wifeisafurd said:

dajo9 said:

Anarchistbear said:

Democrats win Senate contests 20-13 is today's great headline in the Little Big Horn Express.
People Who Hate Democrats, Continue to Hate Democrats

News at eleven.
From NPR last night: The most interesting aspect is that the majority of seats flipped went to Dems when Obama won the "gerrymandered" [my add] district, went Republican when Trump took the District, and now went back in mid-terms. Probably a referendum on Trump, but that will become clearer when he is on the ballot in 2 years. Locally, in the "gerrymandered" districts in the OC, the great blue waive sweep doesn't look to have materialized. Levin took Issa's old seat on the strength of San Diego county, Walters appears to be holding her seat, the GOP surprised in North County (Asians vote in in greater numbers than Hispanics), and Rohrbacker probably is losing. A net gain of 1 vote rather than the expected 4 (note Walters and Rohrbacker races have not been called). (I would call the Rohrbacker a shift in political view rather than tied to Trump). In any event, this looks like a fairly typical mid-term, despite all the excuse making on this Board. The predicted Great Blue Wave looks more like this:

dog-with-attitude-on-the-beach-funny-photo-gm496158583-41359322
I'd just like to point out what you said about Rohrabacher's chances a year ago.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/6/topics/76744/replies/1423064



The problem with putting the thread in was I'd just like to point out what you said about Royce's seat. It works both ways. This points out the problem is that a year ago was eternity in political years, and things changed (particularly, this was an anti-Trump/Russia vote that resulted in Rohrbacker's very narrow loss, while the Royce seat problem had to do with Asians outvoting Latinos). Hard to predict without a crystal ball. Might also say that predictions on this board (and polls) saying OC was turning all blue didn't come true either, and the wave concept really didn't seem to apply.

I'm assuming I get the same number of likes, since we both blew it. .
Sooooo . . . on some of those outstanding California seats:



Per 538:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-16-races-still-too-close-to-call/

Quote:

  • Five of the races are in California: specifically, the 10th, 39th, 45th, 48thand 49th districts. It's not unusual for close races in California to still be uncalled even a couple days after the election. That's because mail ballots in California only have to be postmarked by Election Day; they can arrive at elections offices as late as Friday and still be counted. Since so many people in California vote by mail, that means that thousands of ballots are probably still in transit. Currently, the Republican candidates have leads of between 2 and 4 percentage points in four of the five districts. However, late-arriving ballots tend to lean Democratic in California, so those GOP leads will probably shrink, if not reverse entirely. Because of this, we're guessing that Democrats might win most, if not all, of these districts when all is said and done. The Democratic candidate already leads in one of them the California 49th which has prompted the Associated Press to call it for Democrat Mike Levin already.

We might not know how these have turned out until next month, though it seems likely they all tilt further Democrat. That probably means Denham falls in the 10th, and the 48th is gone too. The 39th and 45th will tighten, but we don't know by how much. Could be the Republicans hold on, could be they don't.
That is a good point. I suspect that a 2 to 4 percent lead will be difficult to overcome, and I don't see Levin losing either. But Rohrbacker could win with such a tight race if the late votes bucks the state wide trend (be interested to see what the late vote looks like in the OC traditionally).
Update:





Most election nerds like Wasserman and Cohn were saying that the late vote tends to break Democratic across California in general. Looks like no exception in the O.C. this year. Dems could actually wind up with all of these seats.
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The latest...

Sinema: 914,243 48.91%
McSally: 912,137 48.80%
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
B$tches Bomb Beto

White women back Cruz, 59-41%

77Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
okaydo said:

77Bear said:

I don't understand the amount of emotion many people put into elections. Are their lives and happiness that dependent upon which party happens to control the White House, the Senate or the House?

I don't get anybody who would downplay the importance of elections. I guess you've never been denied health insurance because you have a preexisting condition like allergies. If Obamacare didn't pass, the status quo would be maintained. Yes, it does affect your happiness if you have health insurance vs. not having health insurance, believe it or not.

I could go on and on....like how the Supreme Court affects people's lives, and such.

What kind of bubble do you live in where you're unaffected by what party has power?

Must be nice!


I never said I was unaffected by which party was in power. I was speaking to the seemingly excessive emotion some people put into politics. As one person, besides voting and donating to my preferred candidates, I cannot do much, if anything, to effect change.

FYI I have indeed been very personally affected by numerous political issues. I lost my individual health care insurance as a result of my insurer leaving the market because of Obamacare and am now paying about 60% more in premiums for lesser coverage versus pre-Obamacare.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

B$tches Bomb Beto

White women back Cruz, 59-41%


White chicks in Texass are a different breed.
OneKeg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
B.A. Bearacus said:

The latest...

Sinema: 914,243 48.91%
McSally: 912,137 48.80%

Hey B.A. B - no that is a total from a bit earlier in the afternoon and the lead has grown slightly for Sinema.

The current (7:45pm PST right now) totals can be found here: https://results.arizona.vote/#/featured/4/0

Kyrsten Sinema (D): 932,870 (49.10%)
Martha McSally (R): 923,260 (48.59%)

So as of right now, Sinema has a roughly 9.6k lead, having erased the previous 17k+ deficit, but that could change in a hurry if a batch of absentee/mail votes from a red corner of Maricopa goes next.
wifeisafurd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

wifeisafurd said:

sycasey said:

wifeisafurd said:

sycasey said:

wifeisafurd said:

dajo9 said:

Anarchistbear said:

Democrats win Senate contests 20-13 is today's great headline in the Little Big Horn Express.
People Who Hate Democrats, Continue to Hate Democrats

News at eleven.
From NPR last night: The most interesting aspect is that the majority of seats flipped went to Dems when Obama won the "gerrymandered" [my add] district, went Republican when Trump took the District, and now went back in mid-terms. Probably a referendum on Trump, but that will become clearer when he is on the ballot in 2 years. Locally, in the "gerrymandered" districts in the OC, the great blue waive sweep doesn't look to have materialized. Levin took Issa's old seat on the strength of San Diego county, Walters appears to be holding her seat, the GOP surprised in North County (Asians vote in in greater numbers than Hispanics), and Rohrbacker probably is losing. A net gain of 1 vote rather than the expected 4 (note Walters and Rohrbacker races have not been called). (I would call the Rohrbacker a shift in political view rather than tied to Trump). In any event, this looks like a fairly typical mid-term, despite all the excuse making on this Board. The predicted Great Blue Wave looks more like this:

dog-with-attitude-on-the-beach-funny-photo-gm496158583-41359322
I'd just like to point out what you said about Rohrabacher's chances a year ago.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/6/topics/76744/replies/1423064



The problem with putting the thread in was I'd just like to point out what you said about Royce's seat. It works both ways. This points out the problem is that a year ago was eternity in political years, and things changed (particularly, this was an anti-Trump/Russia vote that resulted in Rohrbacker's very narrow loss, while the Royce seat problem had to do with Asians outvoting Latinos). Hard to predict without a crystal ball. Might also say that predictions on this board (and polls) saying OC was turning all blue didn't come true either, and the wave concept really didn't seem to apply.

I'm assuming I get the same number of likes, since we both blew it. .
Sooooo . . . on some of those outstanding California seats:



Per 538:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-16-races-still-too-close-to-call/

Quote:

  • Five of the races are in California: specifically, the 10th, 39th, 45th, 48thand 49th districts. It's not unusual for close races in California to still be uncalled even a couple days after the election. That's because mail ballots in California only have to be postmarked by Election Day; they can arrive at elections offices as late as Friday and still be counted. Since so many people in California vote by mail, that means that thousands of ballots are probably still in transit. Currently, the Republican candidates have leads of between 2 and 4 percentage points in four of the five districts. However, late-arriving ballots tend to lean Democratic in California, so those GOP leads will probably shrink, if not reverse entirely. Because of this, we're guessing that Democrats might win most, if not all, of these districts when all is said and done. The Democratic candidate already leads in one of them the California 49th which has prompted the Associated Press to call it for Democrat Mike Levin already.

We might not know how these have turned out until next month, though it seems likely they all tilt further Democrat. That probably means Denham falls in the 10th, and the 48th is gone too. The 39th and 45th will tighten, but we don't know by how much. Could be the Republicans hold on, could be they don't.
That is a good point. I suspect that a 2 to 4 percent lead will be difficult to overcome, and I don't see Levin losing either. But Rohrbacker could win with such a tight race if the late votes bucks the state wide trend (be interested to see what the late vote looks like in the OC traditionally).
Update:





Most election nerds like Wasserman and Cohn were saying that the late vote tends to break Democratic across California in general. Looks like no exception in the O.C. this year. Dems could actually wind up with all of these seats.
Yes, Rohrbacker is toast. Looks like your earlier post is dead on.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And in a Florida update. (R) Rick Scott has sued two counties he is alleging is perpetrating election fraud.


Quote:

TALLAHASSEE, Florida Republican Florida Gov. Rick Scott on Thursday evening filed suit and asked for an investigation into ongoing ballot counts that he accused of being a partisan attempt by "unethical liberals" to steal the state's Senate election.

Scott, who ran against incumbent Democrat Sen. Bill Nelson, alleged that the Broward County and Palm Beach County supervisors of elections were engaging in "rampant fraud."

The governor requested that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigate the new ballot counts, which have narrowed his Election Night-lead.

"Every day since the election the left-wing activists in Broward County have been coming up with more and more ballots out of nowhere," Scott told reporters.

The tight Senate race was too close to call on Tuesday night, but as more votes were processed, Scott's lead fell below .5 percent, which could trigger an automatic machine recount. It is currently .2 percent fewer than 22,000 votes, according to NBC News. A final vote count is expected by noon on Saturday.


https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fla-gov-rick-scott-sues-broward-palm-beach-counties-accuses-n934286
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

And in a Florida update. (R) Rick Scott has sued two counties he is alleging is perpetrating election fraud.


Quote:

TALLAHASSEE, Florida Republican Florida Gov. Rick Scott on Thursday evening filed suit and asked for an investigation into ongoing ballot counts that he accused of being a partisan attempt by "unethical liberals" to steal the state's Senate election.

Scott, who ran against incumbent Democrat Sen. Bill Nelson, alleged that the Broward County and Palm Beach County supervisors of elections were engaging in "rampant fraud."

The governor requested that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigate the new ballot counts, which have narrowed his Election Night-lead.

"Every day since the election the left-wing activists in Broward County have been coming up with more and more ballots out of nowhere," Scott told reporters.

The tight Senate race was too close to call on Tuesday night, but as more votes were processed, Scott's lead fell below .5 percent, which could trigger an automatic machine recount. It is currently .2 percent fewer than 22,000 votes, according to NBC News. A final vote count is expected by noon on Saturday.


https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fla-gov-rick-scott-sues-broward-palm-beach-counties-accuses-n934286


This tells me he thinks Nelson has the votes.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OneKeg said:

B.A. Bearacus said:

The latest...

Sinema: 914,243 48.91%
McSally: 912,137 48.80%

Hey B.A. B - no that is a total from a bit earlier in the afternoon and the lead has grown slightly for Sinema.

The current (7:45pm PST right now) totals can be found here: https://results.arizona.vote/#/featured/4/0

Kyrsten Sinema (D): 932,870 (49.10%)
Martha McSally (R): 923,260 (48.59%)

So as of right now, Sinema has a roughly 9.6k lead, having erased the previous 17k+ deficit, but that could change in a hurry if a batch of absentee/mail votes from a red corner of Maricopa goes next.
I'm starting to like Sinema's chances. Seems like the vote count in D-leaning areas of Maricopa (Phoenix/Tempe basically) was low.

sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wifeisafurd said:

sycasey said:

wifeisafurd said:

sycasey said:

wifeisafurd said:

sycasey said:

wifeisafurd said:

dajo9 said:

Anarchistbear said:

Democrats win Senate contests 20-13 is today's great headline in the Little Big Horn Express.
People Who Hate Democrats, Continue to Hate Democrats

News at eleven.
From NPR last night: The most interesting aspect is that the majority of seats flipped went to Dems when Obama won the "gerrymandered" [my add] district, went Republican when Trump took the District, and now went back in mid-terms. Probably a referendum on Trump, but that will become clearer when he is on the ballot in 2 years. Locally, in the "gerrymandered" districts in the OC, the great blue waive sweep doesn't look to have materialized. Levin took Issa's old seat on the strength of San Diego county, Walters appears to be holding her seat, the GOP surprised in North County (Asians vote in in greater numbers than Hispanics), and Rohrbacker probably is losing. A net gain of 1 vote rather than the expected 4 (note Walters and Rohrbacker races have not been called). (I would call the Rohrbacker a shift in political view rather than tied to Trump). In any event, this looks like a fairly typical mid-term, despite all the excuse making on this Board. The predicted Great Blue Wave looks more like this:

dog-with-attitude-on-the-beach-funny-photo-gm496158583-41359322
I'd just like to point out what you said about Rohrabacher's chances a year ago.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/6/topics/76744/replies/1423064



The problem with putting the thread in was I'd just like to point out what you said about Royce's seat. It works both ways. This points out the problem is that a year ago was eternity in political years, and things changed (particularly, this was an anti-Trump/Russia vote that resulted in Rohrbacker's very narrow loss, while the Royce seat problem had to do with Asians outvoting Latinos). Hard to predict without a crystal ball. Might also say that predictions on this board (and polls) saying OC was turning all blue didn't come true either, and the wave concept really didn't seem to apply.

I'm assuming I get the same number of likes, since we both blew it. .
Sooooo . . . on some of those outstanding California seats:



Per 538:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-16-races-still-too-close-to-call/

Quote:

  • Five of the races are in California: specifically, the 10th, 39th, 45th, 48thand 49th districts. It's not unusual for close races in California to still be uncalled even a couple days after the election. That's because mail ballots in California only have to be postmarked by Election Day; they can arrive at elections offices as late as Friday and still be counted. Since so many people in California vote by mail, that means that thousands of ballots are probably still in transit. Currently, the Republican candidates have leads of between 2 and 4 percentage points in four of the five districts. However, late-arriving ballots tend to lean Democratic in California, so those GOP leads will probably shrink, if not reverse entirely. Because of this, we're guessing that Democrats might win most, if not all, of these districts when all is said and done. The Democratic candidate already leads in one of them the California 49th which has prompted the Associated Press to call it for Democrat Mike Levin already.

We might not know how these have turned out until next month, though it seems likely they all tilt further Democrat. That probably means Denham falls in the 10th, and the 48th is gone too. The 39th and 45th will tighten, but we don't know by how much. Could be the Republicans hold on, could be they don't.
That is a good point. I suspect that a 2 to 4 percent lead will be difficult to overcome, and I don't see Levin losing either. But Rohrbacker could win with such a tight race if the late votes bucks the state wide trend (be interested to see what the late vote looks like in the OC traditionally).
Update:





Most election nerds like Wasserman and Cohn were saying that the late vote tends to break Democratic across California in general. Looks like no exception in the O.C. this year. Dems could actually wind up with all of these seats.
Yes, Rohrbacker is toast. Looks like your earlier post is dead on.
I'll give this post a like for someone on the Internet actually being willing to admit when he was wrong.
BearNIt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In Arizona, Georgia, and Florida it would seem that republicans are in opposition to having all votes counted by. The comments and actions by Rubio, Scott, Kemp, and other show just how desperate some are and just how far they are willing to go to hold on to power.

Now democrat lawyers are descending on #Florida. They have been very clear they aren't here to make sure every vote is counted. - They are here to change the results of election; & - #Broward is where they plan to do it.

Marco Rubio

"The people of Florida deserve fairness and they deserve transparency and the supervisor of elections is refusing to give it to us," Scott said.

"I will not sit idly by while unethical liberals try to steal this election," he added.

Rick Scott


dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

wifeisafurd said:

dajo9 said:

I've owned you on these boards so many times it's nice to know I've got permanent space in your head.
I'm not sure who has a bigger ego, Trump or you. You both seem to have propensity for just making **** up.
Yeah, totally uncalled for, Dajo.
You just embarrassed yourself and weaken any future arguments you might make.
I don't even know what you are talking about, but going after someone like that on a chat room board is wrong.
If wiaf is going to say I make stuff up in a conversation I'm not even in, and without substantiation, then. . .

I think my post is valid.

Being accused of making things up without substantiation is a personal attack. These days, I don't complain about being personally attacked as it happens all the time. I just fire back.

Since we are sharing, I think you and I both want similar things for our country. However, I personally think your violent rhetoric about Trump is uncivil, unbecoming, and makes your arguments invalid. I assume it is hyperbole, but I don't think you are helping any of us anti-Trumpers with it.

Maybe we can both be better, but we probably won't.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I recently rewatched V for Vendetta. This kind of reminds me of the big reveal scene when 'V' tells the inspector of his plan to blow up parliament, his background, the government conspiracies and how he set everything up. The Wachowskis just show 'V' setting up domino after domino, every small little thing leading to another small little thing that leads to another that eventually leads to insurrection of the masses and the exploding of Parliament. I kind of feel that happening now, only instead of popular revolution the country is headed towards violent civil strife. Arguing over the fairness of the election was both entirely predictable and very serious.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

I recently rewatched V for Vendetta. This kind of reminds me of the big reveal scene when 'V' tells the inspector of his plan to blow up parliament, his background, the government conspiracies and how he set everything up. The Wachowskis just show 'V' setting up domino after domino, every small little thing leading to another small little thing that leads to another that eventually leads to insurrection of the masses and the exploding of Parliament. I kind of feel that happening now, only instead of popular revolution the country is headed towards violent civil strife. Arguing over the fairness of the election was both entirely predictable and very serious.
The country goes through a period like this every few decades or so. We're in one now. It's kind of what has to happen to bring long-needed changes.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/12/democratic-party-moves-left/573946/
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

Anarchistbear said:

B$tches Bomb Beto

White women back Cruz, 59-41%


White chicks in Texass are a different breed.
I've got two of them as cousins, and though I love them, I agree. They are so god damned partisan, can't consider another viewpoint, and it's evangelical-based.

Reminds me of a song, where folks bow their heads to assure themselves of their righteousness.

concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

concordtom said:

wifeisafurd said:

dajo9 said:

I've owned you on these boards so many times it's nice to know I've got permanent space in your head.
I'm not sure who has a bigger ego, Trump or you. You both seem to have propensity for just making **** up.
Yeah, totally uncalled for, Dajo.
You just embarrassed yourself and weaken any future arguments you might make.
I don't even know what you are talking about, but going after someone like that on a chat room board is wrong.
If wiaf is going to say I make stuff up in a conversation I'm not even in, and without substantiation, then. . .

I think my post is valid.

Being accused of making things up without substantiation is a personal attack. These days, I don't complain about being personally attacked as it happens all the time. I just fire back.

Since we are sharing, I think you and I both want similar things for our country. However, I personally think your violent rhetoric about Trump is uncivil, unbecoming, and makes your arguments invalid. I assume it is hyperbole, but I don't think you are helping any of us anti-Trumpers with it.

Maybe we can both be better, but we probably won't.

Sadly, I think I'd have to admit, you are probably right!
I hang my head in shame.

But wait, my head is suddenly filled with hope.
I rise my head, and smile at the thought, the dream, of a better tomorrow:



For the record, I don't think my posts have been "violent". They've been "graphic". I do not espouse violence.
And I apologize if my call out of you was uncalled for. I was at the time engaged in arguing with my cousin's wife in TX, and I was dancing the dance of not calling her out and not antagonizing her.
There's some truth in the health of not doing there here, too, but I'm not going to take the time to go back and parse the prior conversation you and wife had, so I'll just say maybe I should have shut up?

Anyways, peace to both you and wife.
wifeisafurd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

wifeisafurd said:

dajo9 said:

wifeisafurd said:

Another Bear said:

My mom still lives in CA 48, Rohrabacher's old district. To say the switch over isn't a big deal is pure bull. The 48th is/was prime Reagan country but also home of John Wayne and a long tradition of GOP and hardline cold war warriors...not to mentioned a bunch of Birchers, Christian kooks (Crystal Cathedral) and wing nuts.

The one commonality might be level of education and I think that's the basis of the flip...educated people don't swallow horse pucky by the gallon, and women were fed up and po'ed. They looked the other way for economics for a long time but Trump ended that, as did the Russkies. Educated people tend to stop and ask questions, like if Rohrabacher is a Russkie asset and tool. Trump didn't help nor did Kavanaugh.

Also Issa's seat in CA 49 flipped and that's just as big of a deal given it borders southern OC and SD is more conservative then OC and includes Camp Pendleton.

Flipping 48 and 49 were big deals. Both were as solidly GOP as SF is Dem. Imagine if SF flipped...that's how big of a deal it is.


I'm assuming you make this stuff in the Dajo vain.

Maybe you should talk to your mom some more to get you facts straight.

Rohrbacker has not lost yet nor has the race been called. He probably losses but it will be real close. The District may be full of wing nuts since it voted for Obama and Clinton, and has a higher Dem registration than GOP registration. The District boundaries have changed a lot (in fact Issa was once the Congressman), but it never included (and is not geographically close) to the Crystal Cathedral. The District was not even rated red (Cook toss-up, Sabato's toss-up, and Inside Elections blue). Your thinking is decades old and full of stereotypes. Just like SF flipping. Yes, maybe 1950 SF flipping.

As for 49, it was a District, when created , that was held by 2 Democrats and a Republican, before Issa, who was gerrymandered out of the 48th (don't tell Dajo). The 49th District had then been gerrymandered to isolate all the GOP votes in one district so it included conservative portions of the Inland Empire and inland northern San Diego County giving Issa a strong base. But in 2012, the District was redrawn to take out the conservative inland areas, to include a small portion of very southern OC and the San Diego coast all the way down to La Jolla. Your talking the few SC cities that mostly voted for Obama and Kerry, and to the extent there are liberals in San Diego county, they are in these beach cities. Issa didn't run because he knew a Democrat would win. Again, this is not even close to your SF flipping scenario. I don't know where you get this cr@p.


I've owned you on these boards so many times it's nice to know I've got permanent space in your head.
I'm not sure who has a bigger ego, Trump or you. You both seem to have propensity for just making **** up.
Why not just call it FAKE NEWS like TRUMP, the GOP and wing nuts. That's essentially what you're doing by calling things you disagree with as "made up". Not exactly hefty intellectual arguments, instead typical ignorant GOP no brain gibberish. It's Sarah Huckabee Sanders being flippant about facts. You know FCCK facts, they don't matter...just call stuff you don't like as made up or FAKE.

Frankly it's this lack of intellectual honesty and willful ignorance that now drives the GOP. If you don't like something, call it fake, disparage it. Trump does this daily.

The thing is, no one calls your arguments FAKE or made up here because most people understand it's a forum and BS and opinions fly. The sad thing is when arguments go south for you, you revert to this...calling something made up or fake, which is a TRUMP MOVE if there ever was one and it's complete and utter BS.
My problem with Trump is he just makes stuff up. Every president has shaded the truth or spun stuff (and even lied for legitimate reasons like national security). But the one or two times they got caught with an outright lie to the nation on something important to the public, they got creamed unlike Trump. Clinton saying he didn't have sex for example. But no other president of either party has behaved as Trump. He is trying to create an atmosphere, when combined with the internet, in which reality is irrelevant. Aside from volume, Trump's lies differ significantly from those of previous presidents. Some of his most frequent lies are demonstrably untrue and contrary to well-known and accepted fact, that no President would make. These lies undermine public confidence in the American government, and increase public cynicism. What they don't seem to do is come back at the guy making the false statements, or impact elections. And they emblazon people to just say anything they like such as a neutral or blue tending district for over decade or a gerrymandered trending blue district flipping is the same as SF voting GOP. That is just demonstrably false. Trump creates a psychology that "misinformation" so encoded in a person's mind, that they just say anything to support their views, and they brag about it, like Trump. And that is why my comment to Dajo.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wifeisafurd said:

And they emblazon people to just say anything they like such as a neutral or blue tending district for over decade or a gerrymandered trending blue district flipping is the same as SF voting GOP.
I will ask again: what is your evidence that Darrell Issa's former district (CA-49) was "gerrymandered?" I agree it's not the same as S.F flipping red, but no need to make stuff up here either.

Gerrymandering means that a politician or political party redrew district lines to benefit themselves. California's districts were redrawn by an independent commission, comprised of both Democrats and Republicans. How is that gerrymandering?
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

golden sloth said:

I recently rewatched V for Vendetta. This kind of reminds me of the big reveal scene when 'V' tells the inspector of his plan to blow up parliament, his background, the government conspiracies and how he set everything up. The Wachowskis just show 'V' setting up domino after domino, every small little thing leading to another small little thing that leads to another that eventually leads to insurrection of the masses and the exploding of Parliament. I kind of feel that happening now, only instead of popular revolution the country is headed towards violent civil strife. Arguing over the fairness of the election was both entirely predictable and very serious.
The country goes through a period like this every few decades or so. We're in one now. It's kind of what has to happen to bring long-needed changes.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/12/democratic-party-moves-left/573946/
Excellent read, well presented article. Makes sense to me, says things can change.
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wifeisafurd said:

Another Bear said:

wifeisafurd said:

dajo9 said:

wifeisafurd said:

Another Bear said:

My mom still lives in CA 48, Rohrabacher's old district. To say the switch over isn't a big deal is pure bull. The 48th is/was prime Reagan country but also home of John Wayne and a long tradition of GOP and hardline cold war warriors...not to mentioned a bunch of Birchers, Christian kooks (Crystal Cathedral) and wing nuts.

The one commonality might be level of education and I think that's the basis of the flip...educated people don't swallow horse pucky by the gallon, and women were fed up and po'ed. They looked the other way for economics for a long time but Trump ended that, as did the Russkies. Educated people tend to stop and ask questions, like if Rohrabacher is a Russkie asset and tool. Trump didn't help nor did Kavanaugh.

Also Issa's seat in CA 49 flipped and that's just as big of a deal given it borders southern OC and SD is more conservative then OC and includes Camp Pendleton.

Flipping 48 and 49 were big deals. Both were as solidly GOP as SF is Dem. Imagine if SF flipped...that's how big of a deal it is.


I'm assuming you make this stuff in the Dajo vain.

Maybe you should talk to your mom some more to get you facts straight.

Rohrbacker has not lost yet nor has the race been called. He probably losses but it will be real close. The District may be full of wing nuts since it voted for Obama and Clinton, and has a higher Dem registration than GOP registration. The District boundaries have changed a lot (in fact Issa was once the Congressman), but it never included (and is not geographically close) to the Crystal Cathedral. The District was not even rated red (Cook toss-up, Sabato's toss-up, and Inside Elections blue). Your thinking is decades old and full of stereotypes. Just like SF flipping. Yes, maybe 1950 SF flipping.

As for 49, it was a District, when created , that was held by 2 Democrats and a Republican, before Issa, who was gerrymandered out of the 48th (don't tell Dajo). The 49th District had then been gerrymandered to isolate all the GOP votes in one district so it included conservative portions of the Inland Empire and inland northern San Diego County giving Issa a strong base. But in 2012, the District was redrawn to take out the conservative inland areas, to include a small portion of very southern OC and the San Diego coast all the way down to La Jolla. Your talking the few SC cities that mostly voted for Obama and Kerry, and to the extent there are liberals in San Diego county, they are in these beach cities. Issa didn't run because he knew a Democrat would win. Again, this is not even close to your SF flipping scenario. I don't know where you get this cr@p.


I've owned you on these boards so many times it's nice to know I've got permanent space in your head.
I'm not sure who has a bigger ego, Trump or you. You both seem to have propensity for just making **** up.
Why not just call it FAKE NEWS like TRUMP, the GOP and wing nuts. That's essentially what you're doing by calling things you disagree with as "made up". Not exactly hefty intellectual arguments, instead typical ignorant GOP no brain gibberish. It's Sarah Huckabee Sanders being flippant about facts. You know FCCK facts, they don't matter...just call stuff you don't like as made up or FAKE.

Frankly it's this lack of intellectual honesty and willful ignorance that now drives the GOP. If you don't like something, call it fake, disparage it. Trump does this daily.

The thing is, no one calls your arguments FAKE or made up here because most people understand it's a forum and BS and opinions fly. The sad thing is when arguments go south for you, you revert to this...calling something made up or fake, which is a TRUMP MOVE if there ever was one and it's complete and utter BS.
My problem with Trump is he just makes stuff up. Every president has shaded the truth or spun stuff (and even lied for legitimate reasons like national security). But the one or two times they got caught with an outright lie to the nation on something important to the public, they got creamed unlike Trump. Clinton saying he didn't have sex for example. But no other president of either party has behaved as Trump. He is trying to create an atmosphere, when combined with the internet, in which reality is irrelevant. Aside from volume, Trump's lies differ significantly from those of previous presidents. Some of his most frequent lies are demonstrably untrue and contrary to well-known and accepted fact, that no President would make. These lies undermine public confidence in the American government, and increase public cynicism. What they don't seem to do is come back at the guy making the false statements, or impact elections. And they emblazon people to just say anything they like such as a neutral or blue tending district for over decade or a gerrymandered trending blue district flipping is the same as SF voting GOP. That is just demonstrably false. Trump creates a psychology that "misinformation" so encoded in a person's mind, that they just say anything to support their views, and they brag about it, like Trump. And that is why my comment to Dajo.
I just ask that if you claim I am making something up you be specific about it. I know you don't like my opinions, but I try very hard to be fact based.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
My MAGA cousin in TX posted this:

Midterm Election, Most House Seats Lost by President's Party in Power
2010 Obama: -63
1994 Clinton: -52
1958: Eisenhower: -48
1974 Ford (Nixon): -48
1966 Johnson: -47
1946 Truman: -45
2006 Bush: -30
1950 Truman: -29
1982 Reagan: -26
2018 Trump: -26
*NY Times data since 1946

I let him know that the -26 may very well be -35, depending on the final counts.

The current congress has 235 Republicans with 5 Republican vacancies. If I add those 5, the number of 2016-election held seats is 240.

Meanwhile, CNN reports Republicans have won 200 seats from Tuesday with 10 seats still too close to call. As it happens, scrolling down shows those 10 have 5 Republicans leading, and 5 Democrats leading.

Thus, 200 + 5 = 205. And 240 - 205 = 35.
Conclusion, the initial list shown had Trump losing 26 seats. That appears to have been based on either uncounted vacancies and/or as yet undetermined races from Tuesday. Unless we were to contact the NyTimes, we will not know how they tabulated the 26 figure, what their counting methodology was for the other presidents/years. Were "vacancies" counted there as I have done here? Who knows.

My point is, his table appears to be BS. Typical for a MAGA-zombie.

Hey, that's a good moniker: MAGA Zombies.

concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Someone beat me to it:

×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.