Millions to Lose votes

[Rustic]

Chuck Todd actually spun this as "a moral victory" for the Democrats.

Joe Scarborough and Chuck Todd sucked each other off after the election… Apparently that's the way they comfort each other

 

[WaitingFor2020]

One number puts the Democrat loss in Georgia in stunning perspective – TheBlaze

In 2016 Democrats spent zero dollars for the GA06 campaign. They won 124,917 votes.

This year they spent over $23 million and won 124,893 votes.

That's a lot of money to lose 24 votes

That is little bang for your buck

It's also weasel math. 2016 (a regular election year) had 326,005 votes, the special election yesterday only 259,488. That means the virtually-same number was worth ten points more in the smaller sample.

Did they not have math when you went to school?

The R candidate meanwhile went from 201,088 votes in '16 to 134595 yesterday, or 66,493 fewer.

Sooooo ..how much did that party spend to lose 66,493 votes? Versus a loss of .... 24?

Yes. Every school I have been to says 124,917 is greater than 124,893.

Your attempt to spin doesn't change the math

The math doesn't need to change. It needs its context put back after you forgot it.
I covered it, you're welcome.

By the way here's a bit more math: The Republican loss of 66,493 votes is exactly 33,246.5 times the Democrats' loss. If you wanna let me know how much each one spent I can get back to you with exactly how much each spent on "losing votes".

I have my own calculator.

So, give us your analysis of how this bodes well for leftards....was the race close because of the dissatisfaction of the candidate or Trump???? Or because people crave fabian socialism ?????

For a district that is historically so red it's almost maroon, it's quite stunning. And a warning for the midterms in 2018. Trump will continue to do nothing but fail, sign useless executive orders, play golf and tweet. Even morons like you will give up.

 

[Pogo]

It's also weasel math. 2016 (a regular election year) had 326,005 votes, the special election yesterday only 259,488. That means the virtually-same number was worth ten points more in the smaller sample.

Did they not have math when you went to school?

The R candidate meanwhile went from 201,088 votes in '16 to 134595 yesterday, or 66,493 fewer.

Sooooo ..how much did that party spend to lose 66,493 votes? Versus a loss of .... 24?

And the GOP spent $33 million doing it!

Great, there we have a number. Let's crunch.

66,493 divided into 33 million ----- I make it $496 and 29 cents the RP spent convincing each of those votes to not show up.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

One number puts the Democrat loss in Georgia in stunning perspective – TheBlaze

In 2016 Democrats spent zero dollars for the GA06 campaign. They won 124,917 votes.

This year they spent over $23 million and won 124,893 votes.

That's a lot of money to lose 24 votes

That is little bang for your buck

It's also weasel math. 2016 (a regular election year) had 326,005 votes, the special election yesterday only 259,488. That means the virtually-same number was worth ten points more in the smaller sample.

Did they not have math when you went to school?

The R candidate meanwhile went from 201,088 votes in '16 to 134595 yesterday, or 66,493 fewer.

Sooooo ..how much did that party spend to lose 66,493 votes? Versus a loss of .... 24?

Dems spent $31 million for a "referendum on Trump" and failed.

I uh, don't think Rump was running.
But I see they picked up ten points in a district they hadn't held since the 1970s.

Whatever, I'm just here to fix the weasel math. That got done.

Whose Rump? Save your bull shit for the badlands. And indeed the man and the media catered to their Trump Derangement syndrome.

 

[Pogo]

One number puts the Democrat loss in Georgia in stunning perspective – TheBlaze

In 2016 Democrats spent zero dollars for the GA06 campaign. They won 124,917 votes.

This year they spent over $23 million and won 124,893 votes.

That's a lot of money to lose 24 votes

That is little bang for your buck

It's also weasel math. 2016 (a regular election year) had 326,005 votes, the special election yesterday only 259,488. That means the virtually-same number was worth ten points more in the smaller sample.

Did they not have math when you went to school?

The R candidate meanwhile went from 201,088 votes in '16 to 134595 yesterday, or 66,493 fewer.

Sooooo ..how much did that party spend to lose 66,493 votes? Versus a loss of .... 24?

Yes. Every school I have been to says 124,917 is greater than 124,893.

Your attempt to spin doesn't change the math

The math doesn't need to change. It needs its context put back after you forgot it.
I covered it, you're welcome.

By the way here's a bit more math: The Republican loss of 66,493 votes is exactly 33,246.5 times the Democrats' loss. If you wanna let me know how much each one spent I can get back to you with exactly how much each spent on "losing votes".

I have my own calculator.

So, give us your analysis of how this bodes well for leftards....was the race close because of the dissatisfaction of the candidate or Trump???? Or because people crave fabian socialism ?????

I don't give a fuck what it means for political parties. I just came to correct dishonest math.
Just like the last thread where I corrected the definition of a couple of words and you melted into a babbling puddle going "but ... but.... Fabian! But... Jesuits! But... but.... butt-stains on underwear of life!"

You seem to be severely afflicted with ADHD.

 

[Dale Smith]

One number puts the Democrat loss in Georgia in stunning perspective – TheBlaze

In 2016 Democrats spent zero dollars for the GA06 campaign. They won 124,917 votes.

This year they spent over $23 million and won 124,893 votes.

That's a lot of money to lose 24 votes

That is little bang for your buck

It's also weasel math. 2016 (a regular election year) had 326,005 votes, the special election yesterday only 259,488. That means the virtually-same number was worth ten points more in the smaller sample.

Did they not have math when you went to school?

The R candidate meanwhile went from 201,088 votes in '16 to 134595 yesterday, or 66,493 fewer.

Sooooo ..how much did that party spend to lose 66,493 votes? Versus a loss of .... 24?

Yes. Every school I have been to says 124,917 is greater than 124,893.

Your attempt to spin doesn't change the math

The math doesn't need to change. It needs its context put back after you forgot it.
I covered it, you're welcome.

By the way here's a bit more math: The Republican loss of 66,493 votes is exactly 33,246.5 times the Democrats' loss. If you wanna let me know how much each one spent I can get back to you with exactly how much each spent on "losing votes".

I have my own calculator.

So, give us your analysis of how this bodes well for leftards....was the race close because of the dissatisfaction of the candidate or Trump???? Or because people crave fabian socialism ?????

I don't give a fuck what it means for political parties. I just came to correct dishonest math.
Just like the last thread where I corrected the definition of a couple of words and you melted into a babbling puddle going "but ... but.... Fabian! But... Jesuits! But... but.... butt-stains on underwear of life!"

You seem to be severely afflicted with ADHD.

Oh, it matters a great deal to you. Leftards spent MILLIONS more than their opponent and still lost.........I simply asked a question. Oh, and believe me on this, you take an ass-whipping all the time which explains as to why you are so butt-hurt.

Hope this helps!!!!

 

[Pogo]

It's also weasel math. 2016 (a regular election year) had 326,005 votes, the special election yesterday only 259,488. That means the virtually-same number was worth ten points more in the smaller sample.

Did they not have math when you went to school?

The R candidate meanwhile went from 201,088 votes in '16 to 134595 yesterday, or 66,493 fewer.

Sooooo ..how much did that party spend to lose 66,493 votes? Versus a loss of .... 24?

Yes. Every school I have been to says 124,917 is greater than 124,893.

Your attempt to spin doesn't change the math

The math doesn't need to change. It needs its context put back after you forgot it.
I covered it, you're welcome.

By the way here's a bit more math: The Republican loss of 66,493 votes is exactly 33,246.5 times the Democrats' loss. If you wanna let me know how much each one spent I can get back to you with exactly how much each spent on "losing votes".

I have my own calculator.

So, give us your analysis of how this bodes well for leftards....was the race close because of the dissatisfaction of the candidate or Trump???? Or because people crave fabian socialism ?????

I don't give a fuck what it means for political parties. I just came to correct dishonest math.
Just like the last thread where I corrected the definition of a couple of words and you melted into a babbling puddle going "but ... but.... Fabian! But... Jesuits! But... but.... butt-stains on underwear of life!"

You seem to be severely afflicted with ADHD.

Oh, it matters a great deal to you. Leftards spent MILLIONS more than their opponent and still lost.........I simply asked a question. Oh, and believe me on this, you take an ass-whipping all the time which explains as to why you are so butt-hurt.

Hope this helps!!!!

I don't even LIVE IN Georgia, butthead. But I do know me some history and therefore what "carpetbagger" means and doesn't mean.

Same thing here. I saw numbers, smelled bullshit, and fixed it. Done.

 

[Lumpy 1]

I always love it when the left wing fake news sites get the gullible fascist Democrats all hopeful and frothy on winning an election and lose ..

Then.. mere hours later the imbeciles are sucking up their lies again like maggots on a dead donkey..

 

[francoHFW]

Chuck Todd actually spun this as "a moral victory" for the Democrats.

I hope they have many

How big is their participation trophy case?

So much dumb brainwashed bs... It's GEORGIA lol. All our crap media just want you to watch...

 

[Dale Smith]

One number puts the Democrat loss in Georgia in stunning perspective – TheBlaze

In 2016 Democrats spent zero dollars for the GA06 campaign. They won 124,917 votes.

This year they spent over $23 million and won 124,893 votes.

That's a lot of money to lose 24 votes

That is little bang for your buck

It's also weasel math. 2016 (a regular election year) had 326,005 votes, the special election yesterday only 259,488. That means the virtually-same number was worth ten points more in the smaller sample.

Did they not have math when you went to school?

The R candidate meanwhile went from 201,088 votes in '16 to 134595 yesterday, or 66,493 fewer.

Sooooo ..how much did that party spend to lose 66,493 votes? Versus a loss of .... 24?

Yes. Every school I have been to says 124,917 is greater than 124,893.

Your attempt to spin doesn't change the math

The math doesn't need to change. It needs its context put back after you forgot it.
I covered it, you're welcome.

By the way here's a bit more math: The Republican loss of 66,493 votes is exactly 33,246.5 times the Democrats' loss. If you wanna let me know how much each one spent I can get back to you with exactly how much each spent on "losing votes".

I have my own calculator.

So, give us your analysis of how this bodes well for leftards....was the race close because of the dissatisfaction of the candidate or Trump???? Or because people crave fabian socialism ?????

For a district that is historically so red it's almost maroon, it's quite stunning. And a warning for the midterms in 2018. Trump will continue to do nothing but fail, sign useless executive orders, play golf and tweet. Even morons like you will give up.

If that is the spin you want to put on it? Knock yourself out. I don't believe that the majority of Americans want open borders and un-vetted muslims coming over here. I am curious as to what platform the leftard clown posse will run on....will it be "More gubermint, more taxes, more fees, more entitlements and subsidies???? Good luck with all that.......

 

[Dale Smith]

Yes. Every school I have been to says 124,917 is greater than 124,893.

Your attempt to spin doesn't change the math

The math doesn't need to change. It needs its context put back after you forgot it.
I covered it, you're welcome.

By the way here's a bit more math: The Republican loss of 66,493 votes is exactly 33,246.5 times the Democrats' loss. If you wanna let me know how much each one spent I can get back to you with exactly how much each spent on "losing votes".

I have my own calculator.

So, give us your analysis of how this bodes well for leftards....was the race close because of the dissatisfaction of the candidate or Trump???? Or because people crave fabian socialism ?????

I don't give a fuck what it means for political parties. I just came to correct dishonest math.
Just like the last thread where I corrected the definition of a couple of words and you melted into a babbling puddle going "but ... but.... Fabian! But... Jesuits! But... but.... butt-stains on underwear of life!"

You seem to be severely afflicted with ADHD.

Oh, it matters a great deal to you. Leftards spent MILLIONS more than their opponent and still lost.........I simply asked a question. Oh, and believe me on this, you take an ass-whipping all the time which explains as to why you are so butt-hurt.

Hope this helps!!!!

I don't even LIVE IN Georgia, butthead. But I do know me some history and therefore what "carpetbagger" means and doesn't mean.

Same thing here. I saw numbers, smelled bullshit, and fixed it. Done.

But the outcome of elections matters to leftards a great deal regardless of which state they live in because it is perceived as a gauge or pulse on how the electorate is thinking, no? BTW, The term "carpetbagger" can have different definitions to many people. Introducing ideas from a diametrically opposed region into another fits that bill. The fact remains is that leftards sent money from all over the U.S to fund jesuit trained fabian socialist Ossoff's campaign...no?

 

[francoHFW]

It's also weasel math. 2016 (a regular election year) had 326,005 votes, the special election yesterday only 259,488. That means the virtually-same number was worth ten points more in the smaller sample.

Did they not have math when you went to school?

The R candidate meanwhile went from 201,088 votes in '16 to 134595 yesterday, or 66,493 fewer.

Sooooo ..how much did that party spend to lose 66,493 votes? Versus a loss of .... 24?

Yes. Every school I have been to says 124,917 is greater than 124,893.

Your attempt to spin doesn't change the math

The math doesn't need to change. It needs its context put back after you forgot it.
I covered it, you're welcome.

By the way here's a bit more math: The Republican loss of 66,493 votes is exactly 33,246.5 times the Democrats' loss. If you wanna let me know how much each one spent I can get back to you with exactly how much each spent on "losing votes".

I have my own calculator.

So, give us your analysis of how this bodes well for leftards....was the race close because of the dissatisfaction of the candidate or Trump???? Or because people crave fabian socialism ?????

For a district that is historically so red it's almost maroon, it's quite stunning. And a warning for the midterms in 2018. Trump will continue to do nothing but fail, sign useless executive orders, play golf and tweet. Even morons like you will give up.

If that is the spin you want to put on it? Knock yourself out. I don't believe that the majority of Americans want open borders and un-vetted muslims coming over here. I am curious as to what platform the leftard clown posse will run on....will it be "More gubermint, more taxes, more fees, more entitlements and subsidies???? Good luck with all that.......

Nobody wants open borders and vetting is already extreme, dupe. Hillary was talking about a dream someday, and vetting already takes 3 years. Stupid campaign promise based on GOP bs...

 

[yiostheoy]

One number puts the Democrat loss in Georgia in stunning perspective – TheBlaze

In 2016 Democrats spent zero dollars for the GA06 campaign. They won 124,917 votes.

This year they spent over $23 million and won 124,893 votes.

That's a lot of money to lose 24 votes

That is little bang for your buck

That's why we have elections -- since nobody has accurate crystal balls.

 

[yiostheoy]

One number puts the Democrat loss in Georgia in stunning perspective – TheBlaze

In 2016 Democrats spent zero dollars for the GA06 campaign. They won 124,917 votes.

This year they spent over $23 million and won 124,893 votes.

That's a lot of money to lose 24 votes

That is little bang for your buck

It's also weasel math. 2016 (a regular election year) had 326,005 votes, the special election yesterday only 259,488. That means the virtually-same number was worth ten points more in the smaller sample.

Did they not have math when you went to school?

The R candidate meanwhile went from 201,088 votes in '16 to 134595 yesterday, or 66,493 fewer.

Sooooo ..how much did that party spend to lose 66,493 votes? Versus a loss of .... 24?

Yes. Every school I have been to says 124,917 is greater than 124,893.

Your attempt to spin doesn't change the math

The math doesn't need to change. It needs its context put back after you forgot it.
I covered it, you're welcome.

By the way here's a bit more math: The Republican loss of 66,493 votes is exactly 33,246.5 times the Democrats' loss. If you wanna let me know how much each one spent I can get back to you with exactly how much each spent on "losing votes".

I have my own calculator.

So, give us your analysis of how this bodes well for leftards....was the race close because of the dissatisfaction of the candidate or Trump???? Or because people crave fabian socialism ?????

For a district that is historically so red it's almost maroon, it's quite stunning. And a warning for the midterms in 2018. Trump will continue to do nothing but fail, sign useless executive orders, play golf and tweet. Even morons like you will give up.

I think GA is becoming a new swing state.

That's can't be good news for the GOP.

 

[Pogo]

The math doesn't need to change. It needs its context put back after you forgot it.
I covered it, you're welcome.

By the way here's a bit more math: The Republican loss of 66,493 votes is exactly 33,246.5 times the Democrats' loss. If you wanna let me know how much each one spent I can get back to you with exactly how much each spent on "losing votes".

I have my own calculator.

So, give us your analysis of how this bodes well for leftards....was the race close because of the dissatisfaction of the candidate or Trump???? Or because people crave fabian socialism ?????

I don't give a fuck what it means for political parties. I just came to correct dishonest math.
Just like the last thread where I corrected the definition of a couple of words and you melted into a babbling puddle going "but ... but.... Fabian! But... Jesuits! But... but.... butt-stains on underwear of life!"

You seem to be severely afflicted with ADHD.

Oh, it matters a great deal to you. Leftards spent MILLIONS more than their opponent and still lost.........I simply asked a question. Oh, and believe me on this, you take an ass-whipping all the time which explains as to why you are so butt-hurt.

Hope this helps!!!!

I don't even LIVE IN Georgia, butthead. But I do know me some history and therefore what "carpetbagger" means and doesn't mean.

Same thing here. I saw numbers, smelled bullshit, and fixed it. Done.

But the outcome of elections matters to leftards a great deal regardless of which state they live in because it is perceived as a gauge or pulse on how the electorate is thinking, no? BTW, The term "carpetbagger" can have different definitions to many people. Introducing ideas from a diametrically opposed region into another fits that bill. The fact remains is that leftards sent money from all over the U.S to fund jesuit trained fabian socialist Ossoff's campaign...no?

Wrong, Buttons. Again, I don't live in Georgia at all, let alone that district. I have my own district with my own congresscritter, and that's all I have a say about. Matter of fact, the same applies to you in Dullass Texas or Florida or wherever you claim to live this week.

And on the other point, no you don't get to invent your own language and pass it off as if it's English. Once again, just like a disctrict you don't live in, you're trying to dictate new meanings for a word you don't own. A term that you didn't even bring up in the first place

Yer quite a hands-on little fascist, huh Bugger Boi?

 

[Dale Smith]

Yes. Every school I have been to says 124,917 is greater than 124,893.

Your attempt to spin doesn't change the math

The math doesn't need to change. It needs its context put back after you forgot it.
I covered it, you're welcome.

By the way here's a bit more math: The Republican loss of 66,493 votes is exactly 33,246.5 times the Democrats' loss. If you wanna let me know how much each one spent I can get back to you with exactly how much each spent on "losing votes".

I have my own calculator.

So, give us your analysis of how this bodes well for leftards....was the race close because of the dissatisfaction of the candidate or Trump???? Or because people crave fabian socialism ?????

For a district that is historically so red it's almost maroon, it's quite stunning. And a warning for the midterms in 2018. Trump will continue to do nothing but fail, sign useless executive orders, play golf and tweet. Even morons like you will give up.

If that is the spin you want to put on it? Knock yourself out. I don't believe that the majority of Americans want open borders and un-vetted muslims coming over here. I am curious as to what platform the leftard clown posse will run on....will it be "More gubermint, more taxes, more fees, more entitlements and subsidies???? Good luck with all that.......

Nobody wants open borders and vetting is already extreme, dupe. Hillary was talking about a dream someday, and vetting already takes 3 years. Stupid campaign promise based on GOP bs...

FBI Director Admits US Can’t Vet All Syrian Refugees For Terror Ties [VIDEO]



The High Cost of Resettling Middle Eastern Refugees

 

[Dale Smith]

So, give us your analysis of how this bodes well for leftards....was the race close because of the dissatisfaction of the candidate or Trump???? Or because people crave fabian socialism ?????

I don't give a fuck what it means for political parties. I just came to correct dishonest math.
Just like the last thread where I corrected the definition of a couple of words and you melted into a babbling puddle going "but ... but.... Fabian! But... Jesuits! But... but.... butt-stains on underwear of life!"

You seem to be severely afflicted with ADHD.

Oh, it matters a great deal to you. Leftards spent MILLIONS more than their opponent and still lost.........I simply asked a question. Oh, and believe me on this, you take an ass-whipping all the time which explains as to why you are so butt-hurt.

Hope this helps!!!!

I don't even LIVE IN Georgia, butthead. But I do know me some history and therefore what "carpetbagger" means and doesn't mean.

Same thing here. I saw numbers, smelled bullshit, and fixed it. Done.

But the outcome of elections matters to leftards a great deal regardless of which state they live in because it is perceived as a gauge or pulse on how the electorate is thinking, no? BTW, The term "carpetbagger" can have different definitions to many people. Introducing ideas from a diametrically opposed region into another fits that bill. The fact remains is that leftards sent money from all over the U.S to fund jesuit trained fabian socialist Ossoff's campaign...no?

Wrong, Buttons. Again, I don't live in Georgia at all, let alone that district. I have my own district with my own congresscritter, and that's all I have a say about. Matter of fact, the same applies to you in Dullass Texas or Florida or wherever you claim to live this week.

And on the other point, no you don't get to invent your own language and pass it off as if it's English. Once again, just like a disctrict you don't live in, you're trying to dictate new meanings for a word you don't own. A term that you didn't even bring up in the first place

Yer quite a hands-on little fascist, huh Bugger Boi?

AGAIN....any election matters to leftards and I made that very clear. Me? A fascist? No, that would be the leftard clown posse and their butthurt snowflakes we know as "antifa" that are trying to prevent anyone from saying something that they don't agree with. Get it now????

 

[12icer]

One number puts the Democrat loss in Georgia in stunning perspective – TheBlaze

In 2016 Democrats spent zero dollars for the GA06 campaign. They won 124,917 votes.

This year they spent over $23 million and won 124,893 votes.

That's a lot of money to lose 24 votes

That is little bang for your buck

It's also weasel math. 2016 (a regular election year) had 326,005 votes, the special election yesterday only 259,488. That means the virtually-same number was worth ten points more in the smaller sample.

Did they not have math when you went to school?

The R candidate meanwhile went from 201,088 votes in '16 to 134595 yesterday, or 66,493 fewer.

Sooooo ..how much did that party spend to lose 66,493 votes? Versus a loss of .... 24?

You miss the point, even though not nearly as many Republicans turned out because they knew they would win, they won with a 7 percent margin.

Your math is just another pipe dream of the shithead party.

 

[tinydancer]

Donald Jr. had the best tweet

Donald Trump Jr.‏Verified account @DonaldJTrumpJr


Congratulations dems that's the most expensive participation medal ev... um since November. #maga

Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) | Twitter

 

[JBond]

One number puts the Democrat loss in Georgia in stunning perspective – TheBlaze

In 2016 Democrats spent zero dollars for the GA06 campaign. They won 124,917 votes.

This year they spent over $23 million and won 124,893 votes.

That's a lot of money to lose 24 votes

That is little bang for your buck

It's also weasel math. 2016 (a regular election year) had 326,005 votes, the special election yesterday only 259,488. That means the virtually-same number was worth ten points more in the smaller sample.

Did they not have math when you went to school?

The R candidate meanwhile went from 201,088 votes in '16 to 134595 yesterday, or 66,493 fewer.

Sooooo ..how much did that party spend to lose 66,493 votes? Versus a loss of .... 24?

Dems spent $31 million for a "referendum on Trump" and failed.

I uh, don't think Rump was running.
But I see they picked up ten points in a district they hadn't held since the 1970s.

Whatever, I'm just here to fix the weasel math. That got done.

80% of the polling had the conservative democrat ahead. Liberals everywhere claimed this election was a referendum on Trump. They shouted it from the rooftops when they thought they were going to win. Take it like a man and stop whining.