Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Point of the thread is the “walkaway movement”. We were assured by Trumpists, based upon the unimpeachable source of YouTube videos, that blacks and other minorities were walking away from the Democrats in record numbers. Where are they?
Many of those people said they weren’t going to vote, so they could still not be represented in this poll.
And what's that got to do with the fact the #walkawayDems still voted for local Dems or perhaps didn't vote at all and there wasn't a full impact in the results? I'll give you a hint, nothing.
Because it’s BS. When there’s no evidence whatsoever that there has been any “walk away” in any statistically significant way, this is the fall back position for those cultists refusing to accept that the entire concept was a YouTube and alt-right induced canard.
Maybe they walked away from the party but they just might be voting in their local races for the party they left.
So then what does it matter who they pledge allegiance too -- lol.
People who are dramatic and make a big show of 'walking away' -- are politically motivated. I don't believe for one moment after all that drama they won't choose to exercise their right to vote.
But say they did put on a big show to say they belong to the Republican party -- the fact they can't be bothered to vote means their big walkaway means absolutely nothing.
I've seen this data before. Democrats win every demographic except for uneducated, rural, white males over 64. So why didn't Dems sweep the elections?
They pretty much did - especially in some Red States where actual votes are counted (Gov, as opposed to Gerrymandered house districts...which dems won anyway)....
I think you already know that 1/10th as many people end up voting for the same 2 senators that millions more do....so there is what (rural uneducated low pop. states have two Senators)!!
In places like Florida many of the voters (year-rounders) are older and many are uneducated and somewhat rural. Sure, there are a lot of people in the Blue and Purple counties but vast numbers of them still keep their domicile in their other house in the North.
Lots of reasons. But the data is the data.
It would be hard for us to to say Scott "won" Floridians handily given these criteria:
1. He spent a total of 150 MILLION of his own money to barely squeak by.
2. He had complete control of the voter rolls, laws and election process.
3. Voting rights were not restored to 1.5 Million Floridians (now they are)......
With a margin of less than 1/5 of 1%, any of these three would have sunk him - all of them would have been a landslide. You don't think he spent all that money for nothing??
There's your problem. You must realize by now, they simply make stuff up. They will never acknowledge it.
Get back to us with a legitimate source.
Define "legitimate".
This will be interesting, I'm sure...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
