2022 Midterm Elections

[craftsman 1,045]

2 hours ago, Shooter McGavin said:

So one article quotes trump, of course he's gonna say that, hes lying as usual.

The next article refers to primaries, it's from Sept.

The truth is this was a defeat for trump, and he needs to go away.

I would be embarrassed and deny it all too if I were you. 

[Shooter McGavin 618]

19 minutes ago, craftsman said:

I would be embarrassed and deny it all too if I were you. 

In almost every place a Trumpster lost, there had been a regular Republican who could and should have been the party’s nominee — a nominee who could have taken advantage of the uniquely horrible facts and fundamentals confronting Democratic candidates in 2022.

https://nypost.com/2022/11/09/heres-how-donald-trump-sabotaged-the-republican-midterms/

[craftsman 1,045]

1 minute ago, Shooter McGavin said:

In almost every place a Trumpster lost, there had been a regular Republican who could and should have been the party’s nominee — a nominee who could have taken advantage of the uniquely horrible facts and fundamentals confronting Democratic candidates in 2022.

https://nypost.com/2022/11/09/heres-how-donald-trump-sabotaged-the-republican-midterms/

Of course the liberals will focus on the few losses on his recommendations rather than the overwhelming amount of winners he had. 

TDS is what is destroying this country. And you a part of the problem. Go vote another "squad" member in. 

Then have Biden spend another $4 trillion on boogeyman "issues" during this recession.  

[jerryskids 6,790]

11 hours ago, craftsman said:

There are a lot of sites that have different takes on it. 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-touts-tremendous-success-for-endorsed-candidates-says-why-would-anything-change-on-plans-for-2024

If you don't like Fox how about NPR:

https://www.npr.org/sections/2022-live-primary-election-race-results/2022/09/06/1120652541/donald-trump-republican-primary-endorsement-performance

They have a table that shows what he won and lost. Cant copy/paste it here.

As @Shooter McGavinalready said, your second link is from the primaries.  The numbers in the first link seem to include a large majority of state offices in presumably red areas, mostly incumbents.  This talks about performance in actual competitive races:

Quote

Trump-Backed Candidates Have Mixed Showing In Midterms—And Trump Is Reportedly Furious

Alison Durkee

Forbes Staff

Sara Dorn

Forbes Staff

Politics

TOPLINE

 

Some Republicans are already pointing the finger at former President Donald Trump for the party’s worse-than-expected showing in Tuesday’s midterm elections, as the former president’s preferred candidates have had a mixed showing so far just a few days before Trump is likely set to announce his 2024 candidacy.

KEY FACTS

Trump is particularly angry about Republican Mehmet Oz’s loss to Democrat John Fetterman in the Pennsylvania Senate race, multiple outlets reported, citing sources close to the former president who said Trump is pointing the finger at his wife and Hannity for encouraging him to back Oz.

Out of 39 competitive races in which Trump has endorsed candidates, his preferred politicians have so far won 12 races and lost 11, with 16 still undecided as of 2:15 p.m. Eastern time Wednesday.

Trump-backed candidates notched wins in such contests as the Ohio Senate race, in which Republican J.D. Vance beat Rep. Tim Ryan (D), and the Utah Senate race, in which Sen. Mike Lee (R) kept his seat against independent challenger Evan McMullin.

Trump allies in closely watched gubernatorial races in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania—battleground states that Trump narrowly lost in 2020—all lost their elections to Democratic candidates.

Major races that are still outstanding include Senate and gubernatorial races in Arizona and Nevada and the Georgia Senate race between Herschel Walker and Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), which will head to a runoff election.

Trump acknowledged Tuesday’s results were “somewhat disappointing” in “certain ways” in a post on his Truth Social platform Wednesday afternoon, while at the same time claiming the election was “a very big victory” for him.

The former president was reportedly muted in person at a Mar-A-Lago event Tuesday night, with the New York Times reporting he was “not particularly interested” in making a speech and the Guardian reporting Trump only said it was an “interesting evening.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2022/11/09/trump-backed-candidates-have-mixed-showing-in-midterms-and-trump-is-reportedly-furious/?sh=3ba68b207595

[Hardcore troubadour 15,406]

Arizona and Nevada are a disgrace. It’s Thursday. And libtards wonder why people question these elections. 

[IGotWorms 4,058]

4 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Arizona and Nevada are a disgrace. It’s Thursday. And libtards wonder why people question these elections. 

It’s always been this way. In landslide elections it doesn’t matter, but in close ones (and many of them have been pretty close lately), they’ve got to wait for mail-in ballots, absentee ballots, provisional ballots, etc. It’s a bit of a process making sure every legitimate vote is counted in states with millions of people in them. Anyway, you used to know and understand all this, you’re just too focking stupid and angry now to remember 

[craftsman 1,045]

7 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

As @Shooter McGavinalready said, your second link is from the primaries.  The numbers in the first link seem to include a large majority of state offices in presumably red areas, mostly incumbents.  This talks about performance in actual competitive races

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2022/11/09/trump-backed-candidates-have-mixed-showing-in-midterms-and-trump-is-reportedly-furious/?sh=3ba68b207595

There are tons of articles out there that slant things to their own desired message. Trump overall has been a stellar backer of candidates. Either way, I don't think God himself coming down to Earth could convince a liberal to not vote liberal. So it doesn't really matter in the end. 

At this point: 

When it comes to general-election candidates endorsed by Trump, the former president’s win rate is relatively high: at least 68% on the Senate side, with four races yet to be decided, and at least 87% on the House side, with 12 outstanding races. 

Trump’s Senate win rate could go as high as 88% if all his remaining candidates win; if only the candidates who are currently leading win, his rate would be 76%. His House rate would tick up to 90% if the five candidates he endorsed who are currently leading win.

 

[OldMaid 2,130]

2 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

It’s always been this way. In landslide elections it doesn’t matter, but in close ones (and many of them have been pretty close lately), they’ve got to wait for mail-in ballots, absentee ballots, provisional ballots, etc. It’s a bit of a process making sure every legitimate vote is counted in states with millions of people in them. Anyway, you used to know and understand all this, you’re just too focking stupid and angry now to remember 

He’s not stupid. He just likes to argue. It’s his thing. The more controversial the reply the better. Personally, IDGI, but he seems to get off on disagreeing with everyone. 

[Sean Mooney 1,983]

6 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

It’s always been this way. In landslide elections it doesn’t matter, but in close ones (and many of them have been pretty close lately), they’ve got to wait for mail-in ballots, absentee ballots, provisional ballots, etc. It’s a bit of a process making sure every legitimate vote is counted in states with millions of people in them. Anyway, you used to know and understand all this, you’re just too focking stupid and angry now to remember 

Exactly- lots of these states have had these processes in place for a long time and it is only gaining notice because the elections are close. 

And again- the argument is always from the right "State's rights, state's rights." Well the elections are carried out how a state wants to do it. And honestly- I bet Arizona and Georgia have loved being the last state in play the past two elections in the same way that Iowa likes being the first state out of the gate.

Also, in PA they did clean up the counting process and reported most of those mail in and early ballots immediately. And that was even with the GOP trying to screw with Philadelphia county

[dogcows 1,030]

The media sure screwed the pooch on predicting the election this time, just as bad as their certainty Hillary would win in 2016. And this includes liberal, moderate, and conservative media. 

They should stop pretending they know the outcome before it happens. It’s not a football game people are betting $10 on. They all need to fix how they report on elections, and not treat them like a horse race anymore.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,406]

26 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Exactly- lots of these states have had these processes in place for a long time and it is only gaining notice because the elections are close. 

And again- the argument is always from the right "State's rights, state's rights." Well the elections are carried out how a state wants to do it. And honestly- I bet Arizona and Georgia have loved being the last state in play the past two elections in the same way that Iowa likes being the first state out of the gate.

Also, in PA they did clean up the counting process and reported most of those mail in and early ballots immediately. And that was even with the GOP trying to screw with Philadelphia county

They changed the process during Covid. It sucked. They didn’t change back. Hmmmm. And OMG, you people think these are the only tight races in the country? We aren’t waiting on Georgia anymore, are we? And I’m the one that just likes to argue? 

[Masshole 642]

36 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

It’s always been this way. In landslide elections it doesn’t matter, but in close ones (and many of them have been pretty close lately), they’ve got to wait for mail-in ballots, absentee ballots, provisional ballots, etc. It’s a bit of a process making sure every legitimate vote is counted in states with millions of people in them. Anyway, you used to know and understand all this, you’re just too focking stupid and angry now to remember 

 

31 minutes ago, OldMaid said:

He’s not stupid. He just likes to argue. It’s his thing. The more controversial the reply the better. Personally, IDGI, but he seems to get off on disagreeing with everyone. 

Cool, now do Florida.     You know the state that realized it had a vote counting problem in 2000 so it went out and overhauled its system and now produces accurate, timely results from all of its election.    I mean that is if you want accurate and timely election results.    I do.   

[craftsman 1,045]

2 minutes ago, Masshole said:

 

Cool, now do Florida.     You know the state that realized it had a vote counting problem in 2000 so it went out and overhauled its system and now produces accurate, timely results from all of its election.    I mean that is if you want accurate and timely election results.    I do.   

Stop bringing up good points about capable people. That throws a huge wrench into the liberal logic flow. Who the heck knows what some of these backward states are doing to the actual votes. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,406]

Arizona and Nevada are a disgrace. Anyone that disagrees just likes to argue and is ignorant about what’s happening. So stfu. 

[nobody 2,667]

I don't see what the big deal is.  How are the Dems going to know how many votes to take the f they don't know how many they need to win?

Maybe next year they can pre-print a bunch of fake votes so they can slip them in in a more timely fashion.

[craftsman 1,045]

23 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Arizona and Nevada are a disgrace. Anyone that disagrees just likes to argue and is ignorant about what’s happening. So stfu. 

To think, in this day and age there are people in these states struggling with simple, basic technology.

It all points to attempted cheating. No one can be that stupid.

[iam90sbaby 2,610]

26 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Arizona and Nevada are a disgrace. Anyone that disagrees just likes to argue and is ignorant about what’s happening. So stfu. 

Blockchain is the solution to election integrity. No way to fudge the numbers.

[dogcows 1,030]

23 minutes ago, iam90sbaby said:

Blockchain is the solution to election integrity. No way to fudge the numbers.

Actually, with sufficient computing power, you could completely overwrite the entire bitcoin blockchain. And other crypto currency outfits made mistakes setting theirs up that led to massive problems. I am not a blockchain true believer, sorry.

However, I do think we have enough security tech to allow people to safely vote with their cell phones now. Those who don’t want to or don’t have phones can still go in person or mail it in. People trade millions worth of stocks on their phones, I’m pretty sure we can verify their identity for a vote.

[dogcows 1,030]

31 minutes ago, craftsman said:

To think, in this day and age there are people in these states struggling with simple, basic technology.

It all points to attempted cheating. No one can be that stupid.

“Stop the Steal” turned out to be a big loser. You are one of the last ones clinging to that bandwagon. This is not a fraud problem.

Republicans didn’t get their red wave. The reason is not fraud: it’s the albatross around their neck: Trump. The SCOTUS abortion decision didn’t help either, made worse by many states immediately putting in complete abortion bans, instead of 15-week bans that would have been massively less controversial.

As for Arizona, they have a GOP legislature and governor... they said they were gonna fix their elections, but instead just wasted their money on the “Cyber Ninjas” fiasco. Broken printers, slow counting, refusal to allow mail-in ballots to even START to be counted until Wednesday? They probably only made their elections worse after 2020. Great job, Arizona Republicans! But don’t worry, they just started hand-counting 400,000 ballots as part of an audit... before the count’s even finished? Seems to me you’d want those workers to help you finish counting the outstanding ballots so you can get a final count before you start auditing... 

Nevada just seems like they aren’t in any hurry to count, and that’s been the case for many years. It usually doesn’t matter much, but a close race in that state paired with a close national race puts a microscope on them.

[craftsman 1,045]

8 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Actually, with sufficient computing power, you could completely overwrite the entire bitcoin blockchain. And other crypto currency outfits made mistakes setting theirs up that led to massive problems. I am not a blockchain true believer, sorry.

However, I do think we have enough security tech to allow people to safely vote with their cell phones now. Those who don’t want to or don’t have phones can still go in person or mail it in. People trade millions worth of stocks on their phones, I’m pretty sure we can verify their identity for a vote.

The more you computerize things the more insecure they become. 

[craftsman 1,045]

3 minutes ago, dogcows said:

“Stop the Steal” turned out to be a big loser. You are one of the last ones clinging to that bandwagon. This is not a fraud problem.

Republicans didn’t get their red wave. The reason is not fraud: it’s the albatross around their neck: Trump. The SCOTUS abortion decision didn’t help either, made worse by many states immediately putting in complete abortion bans, instead of 15-week bans that would have been massively less controversial.

As for Arizona, they have a GOP legislature and governor... they said they were gonna fix their elections, but instead just wasted their money on the “Cyber Ninjas” fiasco. Broken printers, slow counting, refusal to allow mail-in ballots to even START to be counted until Wednesday? They probably only made their elections worse after 2020. Great job, Arizona Republicans! But don’t worry, they just started hand-counting 400,000 ballots as part of an audit... before the count’s even finished? Seems to me you’d want those workers to help you finish counting the outstanding ballots so you can get a final count before you start auditing... 

Nevada just seems like they aren’t in any hurry to count, and that’s been the case for many years. It usually doesn’t matter much, but a close race in that state paired with a close national race puts a microscope on them.

I called it out prior to the election, and I was one of the few who stated I don't believe in the big red wave coming until I see it after it happened. 

No chance pigeon-holing me with the ghosts you have in your mind.

[Shooter McGavin 618]

41 minutes ago, iam90sbaby said:

Blockchain is the solution to election integrity. No way to fudge the numbers.

You want to create public ledger of everyone's votes?

[Shooter McGavin 618]

5 minutes ago, craftsman said:

computerize

[craftsman 1,045]

1 minute ago, Shooter McGavin said:

Sorry that went over your head.

com·put·er·ize

/kəmˈpyo͞odəˌrīz/

 

verb

 

1. adapt (a system, device, etc.) to be operated by computer.

   "he directed the finance department to computerize the entire pension system"

[Reality 3,121]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Arizona and Nevada are a disgrace. Anyone that disagrees just likes to argue and is ignorant about what’s happening. So stfu. 

100%, it's focking Thursday. I love the morons making excuses for this sillyness. It's 2022, fix it...

See Florida.

[Engorgeous George 2,331]

For right now the Markets seem pleased with the known, and anticipated election outcome.  When impending gridlock has the markets excited that says something about the path we were on.

[BuckSwope 654]

1 hour ago, Masshole said:

 

Cool, now do Florida.     You know the state that realized it had a vote counting problem in 2000 so it went out and overhauled its system and now produces accurate, timely results from all of its election.    I mean that is if you want accurate and timely election results.    I do.   

You bring up a good point, but I also want as many people as humanly possible to be able to vote and that needs to include mail in votes.    Both can be true, but that doesn't seem to be the thinking when you listen to a lot of politicians.   As it is right now, it seems we have a 2 of those 3 boxes checked in some of the states, but the timeliness needs to be worked on.   Personally, I am fine with it as long as it allows people easy access to voting and it's accurate.   If it takes several days, so be it, although I also think it's silly it takes that long.  

It's also funny in states like mine to see the conspiracies fly around as the mail-ins are counted and races start going another way.  Perfectly reasonable to expect it, but it doesn't stop people from going off the deep end about it.  

[craftsman 1,045]

2 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

You bring up a good point, but I also want as many people as humanly possible to be able to vote and that needs to include mail in votes.    Both can be true, but that doesn't seem to be the thinking when you listen to a lot of politicians.   As it is right now, it seems we have a 2 of those 3 boxes checked in some of the states, but the timeliness needs to be worked on.   Personally, I am fine with it as long as it allows people easy access to voting and it's accurate.   If it takes several days, so be it, although I also think it's silly it takes that long.  

It's also funny in states like mine to see the conspiracies fly around as the mail-ins are counted and races start going another way.  Perfectly reasonable to expect it, but it doesn't stop people from going off the deep end about it.  

I don't want people who are too lazy to get up off their couches and go vote to be able to vote. Those people are out of touch with what is going on out in the world.

And of course people who can't physically get to a polling place can use absentee ballots. 

And I don't want 27 year olds who still live with mom and pop and never supported themselves in any way in life voting either. They are clueless to real world dealings.

[Shooter McGavin 618]

26 minutes ago, craftsman said:

Sorry that went over your head.

com·put·er·ize

/kəmˈpyo͞odəˌrīz/

 

verb

 

1. adapt (a system, device, etc.) to be operated by computer.

   "he directed the finance department to computerize the entire pension system"

That's great, except nobody has used that term since the 70s.

[jonmx 2,429]

2 hours ago, OldMaid said:

He’s not stupid. He just likes to argue. It’s his thing. The more controversial the reply the better. Personally, IDGI, but he seems to get off on disagreeing with everyone. 

Oh please.  Arizona is a cluster.  Three days after the election and still only 70 percent counted.   And they are slow-rolling the release because they know Lake won as she has a significant advantage in the outstanding votes.    The senate race is the only one up for grabs and it will end up very close.  

[BuckSwope 654]

2 minutes ago, craftsman said:

I don't want people who are too lazy to get up off their couches and go vote to be able to vote. Those people are out of touch with what is going on out in the world.

And of course people who can't physically get to a polling place can use absentee ballots. 

And I don't want 27 year olds who still live with mom and pop and never supported themselves in any way in life voting either. They are clueless to real world dealings.

I would rather have a motivated, educated voting public too.    I would rather have voting in person too, but if that's the case we need to take it seriously.  Federal holiday - all work/school/church shut down, enough infrastructure so there are minimal lines and hassle, things like that.   It's not enough just to tell people to get off their ass to vote to have them stand in line for hours.   

We probably won't ever do those things, so mail-in voting or other ideas should be on the menu.  

Basically it also sounds like you just want people in your age group who think like you voting.  It doesn't and shouldn't work that way. 

[listen2me 23 1,873]

4 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

I would rather have a motivated, educated voting public too.    I would rather have voting in person too, but if that's the case we need to take it seriously.  Federal holiday - all work/school/church shut down, enough infrastructure so there are minimal lines and hassle, things like that.   It's not enough just to tell people to get off their ass to vote to have them stand in line for hours.   

We probably won't ever do those things, so mail-in voting or other ideas should be on the menu.  

Basically it also sounds like you just want people in your age group who think like you voting.  It doesn't and shouldn't work that way. 

Meh everyone has the right to vote but I am not too concerned about bums who are too lazy to go vote.  

So we use phones.  Thats ageism.    My grandfather has never had a cell phone and wouldn't know how to turn it on.  

We just keep coddling the lazy in this country yet we stand around and wonder what happened to work ethic and personal responsibility.   

[MDC 7,405]

6 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

Meh everyone has the right to vote but I am not too concerned about bums who are too lazy to go vote.  

So we use phones.  Thats ageism.    My grandfather has never had a cell phone and wouldn't know how to turn it on.  

We just keep coddling the lazy in this country yet we stand around and wonder what happened to work ethic and personal responsibility.   

Your real issue and Utoilet’s is that you’d rather fewer people vote because you think that helps your side. 

You know it, I know it, Utoilet knows it.

[craftsman 1,045]

1 minute ago, BuckSwope said:

I would rather have a motivated, educated voting public too.    I would rather have voting in person too, but if that's the case we need to take it seriously.  Federal holiday - all work/school/church shut down, enough infrastructure so there are minimal lines and hassle, things like that.   It's not enough just to tell people to get off their ass to vote to have them stand in line for hours.   

We probably won't ever do those things, so mail-in voting or other ideas should be on the menu.  

Basically it also sounds like you just want people in your age group who think like you voting.  It doesn't and shouldn't work that way. 

I would love if they made it a federal holiday. It would outline the importance of elections if nothing else. And heck, have an election week with the last day being the holiday and final day of voting. Hell they do it for Mardi Gras. Let it be a week of celebration of our constitution and our great history.  I am open to new ideas around this. Where I live, myself and my girlfriend have received, 2 elections in a row now, multiple ballots in the mail. And we don't even vote by mail. Both ours and previous tenants. I shredded all of them but the fact that garbage like that happens is extremely disconcerting. 

Have no debates after the start of voting week. No political ads allowed on TV or radio or in the media at all during that week. Have no voting prior to the start of voting week. 

I'm just spit-balling this all but the elections should be sacred and treated as such and with a celebratory attitude towards it all. Kind of like Fourth of July only a week long. 

[listen2me 23 1,873]

Just now, MDC said:

Your real issue and Utoilet’s is that you’d rather fewer people vote because you think that helps your side. 

You know it, I know it, Utoilet knows it.

Maybe.  But lets be real.....18 year olds have the right to vote, no doubt.  But they are idiots.  Especially today.  So we vote on phones we have 18 and 19 year olds voting in droves.  Fine it is their right.  But they are idiots.  

 

You and yours want welfare bums and immature kids to vote in droves because you think it helps your side.  Sort of like Dems wanting to LOWER thr voting age.  

You know it.  I know it.  

[listen2me 23 1,873]

Dems want as many dumb and misinformed voters clicking buttons on their government phones because they know that is their base.  And gives them a better chance to collect sheep votes.

MDC knows it.  I know it.  

[craftsman 1,045]

4 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

Maybe.  But lets be real.....18 year olds have the right to vote, no doubt.  But they are idiots.  Especially today.  So we vote on phones we have 18 and 19 year olds voting in droves.  Fine it is their right.  But they are idiots.  

 

You and yours want welfare bums and immature kids to vote in droves because you think it helps your side.  Sort of like Dems wanting to LOWER thr voting age.  

You know it.  I know it.  

You're just feeding the troll.

Only one of two things will register in that brain dead head of his:

1. The lazy people are the ignorant democrats and he wants them all to vote so make things as easy (even if compromised) as possible.

2. See 1.  

[listen2me 23 1,873]

No one is holding back your green haired 18 year old nephew thing from going down and voting.  They don't all make it down there to vote because they are LAZY.  Bottom line.  

[MDC 7,405]

Just now, listen2me 23 said:

Maybe.  But lets be real.....18 year olds have the right to vote, no doubt.  But they are idiots.  Especially today.  So we vote on phones we have 18 and 19 year olds voting in droves.  Fine it is theit right.  But they are idiots.  

 

You and yours want welfare bums and immature kids to vote in droves because you think it helps your side.  Sort of like Dems wanting to LOWER thr voting age.  

You know it.  I know it.  

I don’t want to lower the voting age. I think voting should be as convenient as possible including mail in voting. That would help people in the less populous rural parts of states that tend to go red too. 

Most people who think they’re informed are really just knee jerk partisans who get their information from cable news and hack websites. See all the “informed” Geeks.

[craftsman 1,045]

Just now, listen2me 23 said:

No one is holding back your green haired 18 year old nephew thing from going down and voting.  They don't all make it down there to vote because they are LAZY.  Bottom line.  

Every 18 year old college girl in 2016 wanted Hillary to win simply because "It would be great to have a woman as president". No other reason.