Serious Trump's PROJECTED Electoral Votes could still FALL back down to BELOW 270!!!

[flatearther]

The actual is 306 votes to Hillary Clinton’s 232 votes.

But it is clear mainstream has a lot to lose so they are doing everything unethical not to report this and stir shit. This is the face of America and what they call democracy.

Yes, as I've said before in another thread:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?237544-Hillary-wins-the-popular-vote-by-margin-of-150-000&p=2534906#post2534906

Why the fuck do they take a week to count these three bloody states? One by one count the ballot using monkeys is it?

Here are some seemingly valid reasons and examples:

Michigan ballot count still unofficial
fox2detroit.com/news/local-news/216553114-story
(Posted:Nov 09 2016 06:24PM EST)

Why did it take so long for Wayne County to count votes?
wxyz.com/news/why-did-it-take-so-long-for-wayne-county-to-count-votes
(POSTED: 8:08 PM, Nov 9, 2016)

Thursday: More than 400,000 votes left to count in Arizona; final total to come next week
azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/11/10/counting-early-ballots-resumes-arizona-maricopa-county-pima-county/93589690
(8:06 p.m. MST November 10, 2016)


But I still suspect there's a conspiracy by the mainstream media to delay publishing the complete popular vote numbers, in order to spin the "fact" that Hillary has won more popular votes because they fear that Trump has a good chance of winning significantly more popular votes from the remaining nearly ten million that have not been counted/published yet, which would obviously cause Hillary and her staunch supporters (including the many mainstream media personalities and celebrities) to lose even more face!

Also, I suspect that the pro-Hillary mainstream media secretly want more anti-Trump street protests, or even riots!

[video=youtube;CE1Buhx-rbY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CE1Buhx-rbY[/video]

[video=youtube;UHvYgEBBGOM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHvYgEBBGOM[/video]

[video=youtube;FRd1gMyj7sU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRd1gMyj7sU[/video]

 

[flatearther]

[video=youtube;Zk02GZxbJvs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk02GZxbJvs[/video]

[video=youtube;Zlt_fXJC8K0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zlt_fXJC8K0[/video]

[video=youtube;8d6c8wIi7qU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8d6c8wIi7qU[/video]

 

[PTADER]

It’s Official: The States With The Highest Numbers of Welfare Recipients are GOP-Controlled RED STATES!

Libs and conservatives can be found in all states, red or blue. Just because a state is red does not mean 100% of the state residents are Republicans. Ditto for blue states. It doesn't mean blue states have zero Republicans in their midst.

The reality is that for every conservative on food stamps, there are 2.2 times the number of libs on food stamps. This does not include public housing benefits in which a whopping 81% are libs (12% Republicans), 74% of Medicaid recipients are libs (16% Republicans), 63% of welfare/public assistance are libs (22% Republicans), 66% are on unemployment compensation (21% Republicans) and so on. The percentage of Republicans on various type of welfare varies from 12% (public housing) to a maximum of 25% (disability allowance) while the percentage of libs on welfare range from a minimum of 63% (welfare and public assistance) to 81% for public housing.

The only logical conclusion from these figures is the lib parts of the red states are responsible for the red states having this "honour" of having the highest number of what Queen Clinton referred to as the "professional never-do-wells".

 

[PTADER]

Also, I suspect that the pro-Hillary mainstream media secretly want more anti-Trump street protests, or even riots!

If I were a Republican, I will quietly applaud these welfare-loving and destructive morons. Give them more, and as much rope as they want. The more destruction, the more violence, the better. This will open the eyes of and turn the middle and swing voters away from these debased creatures and their equally debased causes.

 

[flatearther]

can't be ....they already declared Trump the winner so I don't think any of those votes would impact the result.

Before 8 November, they also used to predict that Hillary would win more electoral votes, right?
Anyway, so far, they have only projected, not "declared", Trump to win more electoral votes.

As I've mentioned in my first post, those uncounted/unpublished popular votes in Wisconsin and Arizona are sizeable enough for Hillary to win a significant portion of them that would cause her to win over their 21 EVs from Trump:

Wisconsin has 95% of their ballots in, so there are still:
({1,409,467 (Trump) + 1,382,210 (Hillary)} / (48 + 47) x 100) / 95 x 5 (i.e. the remaining 5% of ballots that are still not "in") = roughly 150,000 popular votes to count/publish, while Trump is currently leading by only 27,257.

Arizona has 80% of their ballots in, so there are still:
({1,021,154 (Trump) + 936,250 (Hillary)} / (50 + 45) x 100) / 80 x 20 (i.e. the remaining 20% of ballots that are still not "in") = roughly 515,000 popular votes to count/publish, while Trump is currently leading by only 84,904.

 

[Devil Within]

Before 8 November, they also used to predict that Hillary would win more electoral votes, right?
Anyway, so far, they have only projected, not "declared", Trump to win more electoral votes.

As I've mentioned in my first post, those uncounted/unpublished popular votes in Wisconsin and Arizona are sizeable enough for Hillary to win a significant portion of them that would cause her to win over their 21 EVs from Trump:

Wisconsin has 95% of their ballots in, so there are still:
({1,409,467 (Trump) + 1,382,210 (Hillary)} / (48 + 47) x 100) / 95 x 5 (i.e. the remaining 5% of ballots that are still not "in") = roughly 150,000 popular votes to count/publish, while Trump is currently leading by only 27,257.

Arizona has 80% of their ballots in, so there are still:
({1,021,154 (Trump) + 936,250 (Hillary)} / (50 + 45) x 100) / 80 x 20 (i.e. the remaining 20% of ballots that are still not "in") = roughly 515,000 popular votes to count/publish, while Trump is currently leading by only 84,904.

Trump won both popular and electoral votes. So grow up and stop being a crybaby.

FINAL ELECTION 2016 NUMBERS: TRUMP WON BOTH POPULAR ( 62.9 M -62.2 M ) AND ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES ( 306-232)

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=61989

 

[flatearther]

Trump won both popular and electoral votes.

I think so too!

FINAL ELECTION 2016 NUMBERS: TRUMP WON BOTH POPULAR ( 62.9 M -62.2 M ) AND ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES ( 306-232)
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=61989

Even though I think that article and its sources are based on speculation (and not actual facts), I'm also speculating that Trump won both the popular and electoral votes.

So grow up and stop being a crybaby.

But I think you have misunderstood me, which is why I posted the following earlier to hopefully prevent any misunderstanding:

By the way, just to remind everyone, I'm not siding with Hillary; nor am I siding with Trump; I just wanted to highlight the possibility and even probability that Trump could lose those 21 projected EVs.

 

[Devil Within]

I think so too!



Even though I think that article and its sources are based on speculation (and not actual facts), I'm also speculating that Trump won both the popular and electoral votes.



But I think you have misunderstood me, which is why I posted the following earlier to hopefully prevent any misunderstanding:

Ok, thanks for clarifying.

 

[winnipegjets]

Then you should not have said the following words three days ago:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?237619-Turns-out-that-it-is-not-a-Trump-insurgency

right?

Nope because I don't use one source of info. If the majority of reports say that Trump won, then we just accept it although the official result is on Dec 19 when the electoral college cast their votes.

By the way, just to remind everyone, I'm not siding with Hillary; nor am I siding with Trump; I just wanted to highlight the possibility and even probability that Trump could lose those 21 projected EVs.

If Clinton wins, all hell will break lose over there.

 

[flatearther]

Nope because I don't use one source of info. If the majority of reports say that Trump won, then we just accept it although the official result is on Dec 19 when the electoral college cast their votes.

The official/definitive/certified results of the popular votes for all the states will be finalized well before 19 December, possibly by the end of this week, but certainly before the end of this month.
It is this, and only this, result (i.e. when the ballots are "100% in" for all the states) that you should use to say:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?237619-Turns-out-that-it-is-not-a-Trump-insurgency

Trump had less popular vote than Mitt Romney!

Furthermore, as of three days ago (when you posted the above thread), did the "majority of reports" (that you used) say/imply that all the popular votes had been counted, or were they still clearly using words like "projected"?
For example, even NBC (one of the most pro-Hillary TV networks) is still clearly saying that Trump is the "PROJECTED WINNER":
nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/president
simply because NBC knows that there is still a sizeable number of popular votes in Arizona and Wisconsin (as I've mentioned in my first post and post #25) that have not been counted/published by the election officials, and they know that Hillary still has a good chance to win those two states, which is why they are only saying that Trump is the "projected/apparent" winner.

The main reason Trump dared to declare "victory" last week is that Hillary actually phoned him to concede defeat, even though NBC and ABC were still stuck at 245 projected EVs for Trump at that time.

And only after NBC confirmed that Hillary had conceded did it project an additional 20 EVs (from Pennsylvania) and 10 EVs (from Wisconsin) for Trump (even though those two states were still "Too Close to Call" at that time), in order to be consistent with Hillary's concession.

If Clinton wins, all hell will break lose over there.

Even now, Wisconsin (at "95% in") still has roughly 150,000 popular votes left to count/publish, while Trump is currently leading by only 27,257, according to the calculation I posted earlier.
But NBC obviously won't revert to "Too Close to Call" for Wisconsin because they would obviously lose face.

However, if after Wisconsin reaches "100% in" (or even "98/99% in") and the election officials discover and publish a significant surge in popular votes for Hillary that causes her to win, NBC and all the other TV networks will obviously have to project, or even declare, Hillary to be the winner of Wisconsin's 10 EVs!

 

[winnipegjets]

And it's not as if Trump won a smashing victory, even though he claims he did. He won the Electoral College with slim margins in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida. He trails Hillary Clinton in the popular vote by nearly 1 million. Trump now calls the Electoral College "genius." In 2012 he called it a "disaster for democracy."

 

[johnny333]

Libs and conservatives can be found in all states, red or blue. Just because a state is red does not mean 100% of the state residents are Republicans. Ditto for blue states. It doesn't mean blue states have zero Republicans in their midst.

The reality is that for every conservative on food stamps, there are 2.2 times the number of libs on food stamps. This does not include public housing benefits in which a whopping 81% are libs (12% Republicans), 74% of Medicaid recipients are libs (16% Republicans), 63% of welfare/public assistance are libs (22% Republicans), 66% are on unemployment compensation (21% Republicans) and so on. The percentage of Republicans on various type of welfare varies from 12% (public housing) to a maximum of 25% (disability allowance) while the percentage of libs on welfare range from a minimum of 63% (welfare and public assistance) to 81% for public housing.

The only logical conclusion from these figures is the lib parts of the red states are responsible for the red states having this "honour" of having the highest number of what Queen Clinton referred to as the "professional never-do-wells".

Another way to look at it, is that Republicans are the party of the rich & they want to maintain the status quo because they want to keep their money. While the poor e.g. blacks, hispanics,...etc are drawn to the democrats because they see the democrats helping the poor & working class.

 

[frenchbriefs]

Another way to look at it, is that Republicans are the party of the rich & they want to maintain the status quo because they want to keep their money. While the poor e.g. blacks, hispanics,...etc are drawn to the democrats because they see the democrats helping the poor & working class.

So why are Republican states made up twenty of the poorest states and lowest household income states in america?let's face it most red states are country bumpkin states,in general their education levels are low and they don't make much money either.while th3 blue states are mostly highly populated urban city states and economies with middle class populations and high levels of college graduates.thats why u see on the electoral vote maps,even though roughly 63 mil people each voted for Republican and Democrats,nearly 90% of America is covered in swathes of red,cause most blue folks are city dwellers highly density city folks or suburbia whose economies center around cities,while rednecks live in the vast countryside.

the truth is Republican party are the super rich elite 1 percenters and top 10 percenter assholes manipulating the rest of the poor dumbfucks country bumpkins assholes with all the Bible thumping,gay Muslim bashing rhetoric blaming atheists and mexicans and asians and everyone for their stupidity and problems when they don't realise the root cause of their economic problems lies with the Republican Party whom are mostly rich assholes and corporatists trying to manipulate them with stupid non relevant issues but its important to these right wing dumbfucks because they are God fearing,gun loving and sweat the small things in life.

thats why in one of those Republican articles it said Republicans "working class" hate professionals but admire the rich,of course they do,these dumbfucks are afraid of intelligence and knowledge but they will worship anyone with a golden house or cars with rims and bling bling and preachers who comfort them with the "truth".

 

[bodycells]

And it's not as if Trump won a smashing victory, even though he claims he did. He won the Electoral College with slim margins in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida. He trails Hillary Clinton in the popular vote by nearly 1 million. Trump now calls the Electoral College "genius." In 2012 he called it a "disaster for democracy."

 

[winnipegjets]

Goodness ...you are still hawking fake news? I have not found this in the mainstream media.