Palin wins house seat held for 50 years by Republicans

[Jacuzzme]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

You clearly do since I showed you the numbers.

Voters vote for people, not parties. Louisiana is a perfect example. In two statewide elections republicans voted for the democrat governor rather than the Republican candidate.

Clearly people didn’t want Palin regardless of the R by her name.

LOL! You still don’t get it. Read the original comment, reeeeeeeeally slowly.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Republicans get 60% of the vote and dems get the seat. Reminds me of Trump vs Biden.

How so?

Was that race ranked voting?

Maybe you're thinking about Clinton having more votes than Trump? No that can't be it because so did Biden.

What you want is a Electoral College type system that is rigged in the smaller states favor.

[winn dixie]

Originally Posted by WTF

How so?

Was that race ranked voting?

Maybe you're thinking about Clinton having more votes than Trump? No that can't be it because so did Biden.

What you want is a Electoral College type system that is rigged in the smaller states favor.

The constitution was set up with the E C to prevent the BIG CITIES determining elections. Its not rigged. It gives a better and balanced way to represent people and business[trade]. Do away with the E C la ny city philly houston and chicago would determine all elections. We all know how inner cities vote!

[winn dixie]

I dont like the new Alaska voting system. It weakens certain candidates unjustly.

BUT! Palin went against a very popular Indigenous candidate.
However the tenure for this seat is only for about 4 months.
Alaska votes again for the same seat with prolly the same candidates come november. As the last vote was just to fill a vacated spot for the remainder of term.

Heres a lil sumthang to thinks about. The Sarah Palin blow up sexdoll was one of the most popular and profitable sex toys ever in the market.

[1blackman1]

How does it weaken a candidate. The people that voted R could have made Sarah their second choice rather than the person that won.

[winn dixie]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

How does it weaken a candidate. The people that voted R could have made Sarah their second choice rather than the person that won.

Math sir math is the answer. The more the candidates in a weighted vote system, the more it can be manipulated. Plus the folks in the middle voting for the least popular opponents weaken the pool. To explain this better id have to get into point slope curve graphs and i dont want to get into that detailed of a long post. Besides im not gonna change your mind Mainly cause your side won the weighted vote. I dont care for that system at all.
Nor do I like States splitting proportioned electoral college votes. Undermines the whole e c process and why its in the Constitution.

[reddog1951]

"Nor do I like States splitting proportioned electoral college votes. Undermines the whole e c process and why its in the Constitution."

Please explain how so within the realm of state's rights and the constitution. Curious as to how you arrived at your opinion.

[1blackman1]

Originally Posted by winn dixie

Math sir math is the answer. The more the candidates in a weighted vote system, the more it can be manipulated. Plus the folks in the middle voting for the least popular opponents weaken the pool. To explain this better id have to get into point slope curve graphs and i dont want to get into that detailed of a long post. Besides im not gonna change your mind Mainly cause your side won the weighted vote. I dont care for that system at all.
Nor do I like States splitting proportioned electoral college votes. Undermines the whole e c process and why its in the Constitution.

You make no sense. There is no “weighted” Vote. Little Johnny can vote for candidate A B or C in their preferred order. The first round applies the votes as given for 1st choices only. If no one gets 50%+1 vote then the bottom person is eliminated and the votes applied to that person as first votes get moved to second votes and applied to the existing total. This is repeated until there are 2 candidates or until someone reaches 50%+1 vote.

You get the same result as if there was regular voting but without making people keep coming back out to vote. All the republicans in the race could have made Palin their 2nd or 3rd choice and not voted at all for the democrat and Palin would have won.

It’s clear you’re just whining and don’t really know shit.

[winn dixie]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

You make no sense. There is no “weighted” Vote. Little Johnny can vote for candidate A B or C in their preferred order. The first round applies the votes as given for 1st choices only. If no one gets 50%+1 vote then the bottom person is eliminated and the votes applied to that person as first votes get moved to second votes and applied to the existing total. This is repeated until there are 2 candidates or until someone reaches 50%+1 vote.

You get the same result as if there was regular voting but without making people keep coming back out to vote. All the republicans in the race could have made Palin their 2nd or 3rd choice and not voted at all for the democrat and Palin would have won.

It’s clear you’re just whining and don’t really know shit.

Its a weighted or point system vote. Easily manipulated. Bad policy. Its clear why you dont get it. You dont wanna hear it.

[1blackman1]

Originally Posted by winn dixie

Its a weighted or point system vote. Easily manipulated. Bad policy. Its clear why you dont get it. You dont wanna hear it.

In other words. You don’t know shit.

[winn dixie]

Very sorry you dont see the math. I stand by that the system can be rigged and or manipulated.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by winn dixie

Very sorry you dont see the math. I stand by that the system can be rigged and or manipulated.

How is it easily manipulated?

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...aska-election/

[winn dixie]

number of candidates for one. Installing a candidate that has no chance of winning so they can take votes from your competitor. Combine that with the bullshit weighted points is how.

In a small way kinda like when the clintons talked perot into running for prez. Bush Sr. woulda won easily if it wasnt for that little hobbit perot.

This example is one of many how the alaska system can be rigged.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by winn dixie

number of candidates for one. Installing a candidate that has no chance of winning so they can take votes from your competitor. Combine that with the bullshit weighted points is how.

In a small way kinda like when the clintons talked perot into running for prez. Bush Sr. woulda won easily if it wasnt for that little hobbit perot.

This example is one of many how the alaska system can be rigged.

You’re right. Simple minds are simple minds. At the end of the day, this seat only lasts a short time before the next rigged election.

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

That is fine. Although the 73 million who voted for Trump in 2020 may have changed their opinions based on Trump's actions since the election. On election day Trump's approval rating was 44.7%. On January 6 it was 42.8%. The day he left office, the last day approval ratings are done, it was 38.6%. That is a drop of 6.1% from election day to inauguration day.

I would also doubt that the 73 million who voted for Trump would vote for Palin.

OK, that was impressive. Now tell me what percentage/ how many votes did Biden ( conceivably ) lose when he went from a 52.2% win in the popular vote, to an approval rating any where from high 30s ( 26% on the border issue ) to low 40's? 52.2 to low 40's. Kinda sounds like more than Trumps, but math is not my strong suit.


But you and I both know that when it comes to "nut cutting time" , my apologies to the "non nut having people", that many to most of those "disappointed" by Trump's actions, I was, ( I just argue about the legality of the matter ) and Biden's actions, will vote party on this.



And I don't see that changing.