Trump J/6 indictment document

zymurgy said:
he has never tried to win a national popular vote. You lie every time you attach win or lose to a non competition - which is a fact
Click to expand...

You are arguing stuff I never said. I never said he "tried to win" a national popular vote. I didn't lie about something I never said or implied. I never said there was a "national competition."

You don't like the simple fact I stated and want to start an argument just to argue. Quit reading assumptions into simple facts. I lied about nothing.

Trump did claim he won the national popular vote in 2016 but "millions" of illegal migrants voted against him. No illegal migrant votes were ever discovered. Another simple fact.
 
Flash said:
You are arguing stuff I never said.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. You keep attaching significance to some nation popular vote, which is idiotic, yet you keep doing it.

You didn't say he tried to win, you said he has never won. The term won and lose implies it was a competition, but it was not. that is a lie you keep repeating
 
zymurgy said:
Bullshit. You keep attaching significance to some nation popular vote, which is idiotic, yet you keep doing it.

You didn't say he tried to win, you said he has never won. The term won and lose implies it was a competition, but it was not. that is a lie you keep repeating
Click to expand...

In all fairness, the person winning the electoral college almost always wins the national popular vote. That means most parties/candidates would like to win the national popular vote because it usually means they will win the electoral college and because it looks better than losing.

Trump also attached some significance to the national popular vote when he claimed he won it in 2016 except for cheating. That is attaching much more significance than my simple factual statement. A lot of people attach importance to it because we point out the few exceptions when a person won the presidency without winning the popular vote.
 
Flash said:
In all fairness, the person winning the electoral college almost always wins the national popular vote.
Click to expand...

it is meaningless though

flash said:
I said he has never won the popular vote in any election. That tells us something about his lack of support.
Click to expand...

This is just poor logic. Ignoring a state that you have no chance of winning does not indicate lack of support. It indicates strategy

You keep placing significance on something that was not coveted. If national vote counts matter, the GOP strategy in states like California would be totally different
 
zymurgy said:
it is meaningless though



This is just poor logic. Ignoring a state that you have no chance of winning does not indicate lack of support. It indicates strategy

You keep placing significance on something that was not coveted. If national vote counts matter, the GOP strategy in states like California would be totally different
Click to expand...

Yes, it is a sensible strategy (although most Trump voters live in states won by Biden).

I never suggested the candidate should try to win the popular votes; only that the electoral college winner almost always wins the national popular vote; so, the odds are with that candidate.

Obviously, the strategy should go after the electoral votes in swing states. It made the difference in 2016 and 2020. In both elections one candidate was ahead until late in the evening when the other surged ahead in those swing states and won by only a few thousand votes.
 
Flash said:
Yes, it is a sensible strategy (although most Trump voters live in states won by Biden).

I never suggested the candidate should try to win the popular votes; only that the electoral college winner almost always wins the national popular vote; so, the odds are with that candidate.

Obviously, the strategy should go after the electoral votes in swing states. It made the difference in 2016 and 2020. In both elections one candidate was ahead until late in the evening when the other surged ahead in those swing states and won by only a few thousand votes.
Click to expand...

that is not what you were doing though

the idiot troll was trying to say Trump has never lost, and rather than just ignore or laugh off that nonsense, you fought stupidity with your own stupidity and claim he has has actually never won

It was the only reason to even bring up a nonsensical point of a fictitious popular vote victory.

two peas in a pod :laugh:
 
zymurgy said:
that is not what you were doing though

the idiot troll was trying to say Trump has never lost, and rather than just ignore or laugh off that nonsense, you fought stupidity with your own stupidity and claim he has has actually never won

It was the only reason to even bring up a nonsensical point of a fictitious popular vote victory.

two peas in a pod :laugh:
Click to expand...

I just made a simple factual statement and you brought in all kinds of unfounded assumptions and trivia. You have made a bigger issue of this than Into the Night did.
 
Flash said:
I just made a simple factual statement and you brought in all kinds of unfounded assumptions and trivia. You have made a bigger issue of this than Into the Night did.
Click to expand...

nothing factual about your statement

it is as factual as saying he has never lost a national popular vote
 
zymurgy said:
nothing factual about your statement

it is as factual as saying he has never lost a national popular vote
Click to expand...

Wrong. He lost two national popular votes. He won none. This is a factual statement.

The fact that candidate strategy is not based on winning the national popular vote does not make that statement any less factual since that is well understood.

I think Trump lost by about 45,000 votes in 4-5 swing states. Now, those popular votes were important.
 
Flash said:
Wrong. He lost two national popular votes. He won none. This is a factual statement.

The fact that candidate strategy is not based on winning the national popular vote does not make that statement any less factual since that is well understood.

I think Trump lost by about 45,000 votes in 4-5 swing states. Now, those popular votes were important.
Click to expand...

false.

you can't win or lose something that that isn't part of a competition

with no competition, there is no winner or loser

and we have no national popular vote competition
 
zymurgy said:
false.

you can't win or lose something that that isn't part of a competition

with no competition, there is no winner or loser

and we have no national popular vote competition
Click to expand...

A distinction without a difference.

Trump himself said he would have won the popular vote in 2016 without "massive fraud." So, he viewed it as win/loss.
 
zymurgy said:
false.

you can't win or lose something that that isn't part of a competition

with no competition, there is no winner or loser

and we have no national popular vote competition
Click to expand...

He received less popular votes in 2016 and 2020. We don't have to use the word "lose" since that bothers you.
 
zymurgy said:
neither word is accurate (win or lose)

why do you have to lie about things?
Click to expand...

He didn't receive LESS popular votes? If you don't think that is a factual statement you are divorced from reality. You take a simple statement and try to deny truth by using semantics and trivial distinctions. You still haven't shown any lies from me. Some people aren't obsessed with partisan rivalries (and competition).
 
Flash said:
He didn't receive LESS popular votes? If you don't think that is a factual statement you are divorced from reality. You take a simple statement and try to deny truth by using semantics and trivial distinctions.
Click to expand...

he didn't win or lose a national popular vote

it's a simple word with a simple definition. to win (or lose), you have to compete. a prize or reward must exist.

none of those things are what occurred. nobody won or lost a national popular vote because nobody made that the goal
 
zymurgy said:
he didn't win or lose a national popular vote

it's a simple word with a simple definition. to win (or lose), you have to compete. a prize or reward must exist.

none of those things are what occurred. nobody won or lost a national popular vote because nobody made that the goal
Click to expand...

Ok
 
zymurgy said:
he didn't win or lose a national popular vote

it's a simple word with a simple definition. to win (or lose), you have to compete. a prize or reward must exist.

none of those things are what occurred. nobody won or lost a national popular vote because nobody made that the goal
Click to expand...

Biden did not lose Texas and Florida (or receive less votes).
 
zymurgy said:
states have competitions for total votes. those had a prize attached
Click to expand...

Just as the political parties do not compete for national popular votes, the Democratic strategy does not compete for states they cannot win like Texas and Florida. At least, that was your reasoning earlier. Have you now reversed your argument?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top