|
Pay people $50/hr to count votes overnight. The idea that vote counting stops when it’s bed time is absolute madness
|
TLADT24920 Posts
NC has Trump leading by ~40k with 89% reporting.
|
Interesting scenario would be Michigan Winsconsin and Arizona going blue and PA going red. That would lead to a possible tie scenario with the district of Omaha turning into the swing vote. Omaha going red would be a tie which would lead to a trump win. The house of representatives would vote for president but I believe (please correct me if im wrong) its a winner takes all per state format which guarantees a trump win. If Biden would win Omaha in that situation he would win outright.
|
On November 04 2020 12:34 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 12:32 FlaShFTW wrote:
From the NYT: "Trip Gabriel, in Butler County, Pa. 1m ago
The early exit polls of Arizona show voters over 65 prefer Biden by 5 percentage points. In other words, this is not your grandparents’ Arizona, full of conservative retirees."
Exit polls being in favor of Biden is great news since exit polls show the people who vote in person. Biden might be able to flip Arizona. If Biden wins AZ and Trump wins MN I'll be happy with that, 94% of votes in minneapolis already counted.
Very little of the vote has been counted in the Twin Cities suburbs. St. Paul has yet to report any vote.
The Duluth and Rochester areas, two other relatively urban areas that are Democratic strongholds in the state, have also reported almost nothing.
MN is the GOP's version of a pipe dream.
|
On November 04 2020 12:39 kidcrash wrote:
Interesting scenario would be Michigan Winsconsin and Arizona going blue and PA going red. That would lead to a possible tie scenario with the district of Omaha turning into the swing vote. Omaha going red in would be a tie which would lead to a trump win. The house of representatives would vote for president but I believe (please correct me if im wrong) its a winner takes all per state format which guarantees a trump win. If Biden would win Omaha in that situation he would win outright.
This only matters without faithless electors. Its going to be INSANE when we have a tie and some faithless pick the president
|
On November 04 2020 12:26 BlueBird. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 12:25 Husyelt wrote:
If Trump wins tomorrow, I will not be going to work. Portland where I live, will be Riotstormfest 200020. Gonna walk to work just like normal. Nobody going to shoot you lol.
Nah, I have to cross either St Johns bridge or 405 multiple times tomorrow and those can be shut down. Not dealing with that shit.
|
On November 04 2020 12:37 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 12:35 Monochromatic wrote:On November 04 2020 12:32 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2020 12:28 Monochromatic wrote:On November 04 2020 12:20 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2020 12:17 Monochromatic wrote:On November 04 2020 12:04 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2020 12:01 Monochromatic wrote:On November 04 2020 11:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 11:52 Monochromatic wrote:
[quote]
On the flipside, in Florida, 40% of people said they were better off than 4 years ago. Only 20% said they were worse off. This is despite a massive pandemic.
At the end of the day, people care if their life is better. Trump has delivered on that front. Except 40% of Floridians are literally wrong. I'm glad you know their life situation better then they do. At the end of the day, the economy is what wins elections. It's been amazing under Trump. You often hear about how China grows GDP 6% a year, yet the US stock market has matched them in total return the past decade, a significant part of which was the past four years. Europe, during this same period? Less than 1/4th the return. I don't think you know what you're talking about. Trump promised growth of 4%, 5%, or maybe even 6% https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/12/16/trump_were_going_to_see_economy_growth_of_4_5_and_maybe_6_percent.htmlbut per his own government's figures delivered growth of about 2.5%/year. https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=19&step=2#reqid=19&step=2&isuri=1&1921=surveyWhat you've done here is confused the economy and the stock market. I'm saying that despite the economy growing slower, his corporate tax cuts and pro-business policies allowed US corporations to match the valuation as in China. That's great, especially compared to the rest of the world. I think you're confused. Let's say you work on a farm. In year 1 the farm produces 100 units of grain. In year 2 the farm produces 102 grain. That's 2% growth in the output of the farm. What you're trying to argue is that how much grain the farm produces isn't what matters, what actually matters is how much a speculator would pay to buy the farm. But there's two issues with that. Firstly, you don't own the farm, you just work there, it doesn't make any difference to you how much the speculator thinks it's worth on a given day. And secondly, the only thing that matters at the farm is how much food it produces. An idea of how much it's worth will go up and down daily but will never feed a single person. If the farm is publicly traded, I can own it. With the rise of indexing the average person will probably own it in their 401k. Second, valuation is not purely speculation. Oftentimes there's competitive advantages that push a company above their peers. It's also a proxy to sentiment - the average investor agrees the USA is doing very, very well right now. You can own it, but the vast majority of Americans own a tiny fraction of US equities. But owning it doesn't change how much grain it produces. The rest is just bullshit. If you lower the cost of borrowing by pumping liquidity into the market, as the Fed has done, it triggers stock buybacks and the artificial inflation of equities. You've not actually created anything, you've just pumped up the market by printing cash. That's why real GDP growth is what Trump promised to deliver and why bullshit market valuations based on cheap credit isn't an acceptable substitute for it. I've been struggling with valuations since '08. You don't need to tell me the damage QE has done to the rational stock market. However, at the end of the day, it's something we have to live with, and take advantage of. The stock market going up has put money in my, as well as millions of other Americans, pocket. But it's not what you originally claimed. You claimed Trump delivered more GDP. Now you're saying that due to QE Trump has delivered higher valuations on the same GDP. Do you see why that's not proof of your original claim?
No. I'm saying that despite lower GDP, we've managed to match China's market growth, and that the economy has been amazing - two separate thoughts. A large part of this (both the valuations and the economy) was the corporate tax cut, which was 100% Trump. US unemployment hit the lowest level for 50 years. Removing regulations has also supercharged the economy. To your point about fake buybacks and low rates, that's the QE. To the massive growth in SMEs, I award that to Trump's policies.
|
Looks like I guessed Arizona correctly... Probably going to be blue. Ohio likely going to Trump, also as predicted. MI, WI, and PA are going to be extremely important though... I predicted Biden would win them, but if Trump wins them, then Trump wins (essentially a repeat of 2016).
|
United States10402 Posts
Arizona lead down to 7 points now for Trump with 75% reporting. Really gonna come down to that next Maricopa update and see if Biden can retain that county or if Trump flips it back.
|
Biden running 18% behind in Lacwanna, PA with 48% in, a county Clinton won by 3%.
|
On November 04 2020 12:43 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Biden running 18% behind in Lacwanna, PA with 48% in, a county Clinton won by 3%.
A lot of PA has already stoped reporting tonight. We wont know PA for awhile
|
Iowa approaching 50% reporting and Biden has a 14% lead.
|
On November 04 2020 12:42 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Looks like I guessed Arizona correctly... Probably going to be blue. Ohio likely going to Trump, also as predicted. MI, WI, and PA are going to be extremely important though... I predicted Biden would win them, but if Trump wins them, then Trump wins (essentially a repeat of 2016).
If Trump wins any one of WI, MI, or PA with the current map then he's going to win the election.
If Biden holds on to all three as expected, Biden will pull through.
|
United States43989 Posts
On November 04 2020 12:42 Monochromatic wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 12:37 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2020 12:35 Monochromatic wrote:On November 04 2020 12:32 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2020 12:28 Monochromatic wrote:On November 04 2020 12:20 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2020 12:17 Monochromatic wrote:I'm saying that despite the economy growing slower, his corporate tax cuts and pro-business policies allowed US corporations to match the valuation as in China. That's great, especially compared to the rest of the world. I think you're confused. Let's say you work on a farm. In year 1 the farm produces 100 units of grain. In year 2 the farm produces 102 grain. That's 2% growth in the output of the farm. What you're trying to argue is that how much grain the farm produces isn't what matters, what actually matters is how much a speculator would pay to buy the farm. But there's two issues with that. Firstly, you don't own the farm, you just work there, it doesn't make any difference to you how much the speculator thinks it's worth on a given day. And secondly, the only thing that matters at the farm is how much food it produces. An idea of how much it's worth will go up and down daily but will never feed a single person. If the farm is publicly traded, I can own it. With the rise of indexing the average person will probably own it in their 401k. Second, valuation is not purely speculation. Oftentimes there's competitive advantages that push a company above their peers. It's also a proxy to sentiment - the average investor agrees the USA is doing very, very well right now. You can own it, but the vast majority of Americans own a tiny fraction of US equities. But owning it doesn't change how much grain it produces. The rest is just bullshit. If you lower the cost of borrowing by pumping liquidity into the market, as the Fed has done, it triggers stock buybacks and the artificial inflation of equities. You've not actually created anything, you've just pumped up the market by printing cash. That's why real GDP growth is what Trump promised to deliver and why bullshit market valuations based on cheap credit isn't an acceptable substitute for it. I've been struggling with valuations since '08. You don't need to tell me the damage QE has done to the rational stock market. However, at the end of the day, it's something we have to live with, and take advantage of. The stock market going up has put money in my, as well as millions of other Americans, pocket. But it's not what you originally claimed. You claimed Trump delivered more GDP. Now you're saying that due to QE Trump has delivered higher valuations on the same GDP. Do you see why that's not proof of your original claim? No. I'm saying that despite lower GDP, we've managed to match China's market growth, and that the economy has been amazing - two separate thoughts. A large part of this (both the valuations and the economy) was the corporate tax cut, which was 100% Trump. US unemployment hit the lowest level for 50 years. Removing regulations has also supercharged the economy. To your point about fake buybacks and low rates, that's the QE. To the massive growth in SMEs, I award that to Trump's policies.
If the growth was due to the tax cut then why did it start 8 years before the tax cut?
|
United States10402 Posts
Yeah Trump has North Carolina at this point. 93% reporting and Trump has a 1 point lead. This was the exact same thing that happened in 2016.
|
On November 04 2020 12:44 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 12:42 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Looks like I guessed Arizona correctly... Probably going to be blue. Ohio likely going to Trump, also as predicted. MI, WI, and PA are going to be extremely important though... I predicted Biden would win them, but if Trump wins them, then Trump wins (essentially a repeat of 2016). If Trump wins any one of WI, MI, or PA with the current map then he's going to win the election. If Biden holds on to all three as expected, Biden will pull through.
Biden could lose Wisconsin, win Arizona, and still win.
It's basically a trade.
|
This is anxiety inducing, it’s giving me a real adrenaline high
|
So it looks like it is going to be Michigan Winsconsin and PA. Not going to have an early night. No landslide like a lot of predicted. Dont think there is enough to call anything though with huge swings in the demographics. Some vote lie we expect and others dont. We also have to remember that a lot of states still let votes come in, may have to fight over those.
|
On November 04 2020 12:45 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 12:42 Monochromatic wrote:On November 04 2020 12:37 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2020 12:35 Monochromatic wrote:On November 04 2020 12:32 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2020 12:28 Monochromatic wrote:On November 04 2020 12:20 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2020 12:17 Monochromatic wrote:I'm saying that despite the economy growing slower, his corporate tax cuts and pro-business policies allowed US corporations to match the valuation as in China. That's great, especially compared to the rest of the world. I think you're confused. Let's say you work on a farm. In year 1 the farm produces 100 units of grain. In year 2 the farm produces 102 grain. That's 2% growth in the output of the farm. What you're trying to argue is that how much grain the farm produces isn't what matters, what actually matters is how much a speculator would pay to buy the farm. But there's two issues with that. Firstly, you don't own the farm, you just work there, it doesn't make any difference to you how much the speculator thinks it's worth on a given day. And secondly, the only thing that matters at the farm is how much food it produces. An idea of how much it's worth will go up and down daily but will never feed a single person. If the farm is publicly traded, I can own it. With the rise of indexing the average person will probably own it in their 401k. Second, valuation is not purely speculation. Oftentimes there's competitive advantages that push a company above their peers. It's also a proxy to sentiment - the average investor agrees the USA is doing very, very well right now. You can own it, but the vast majority of Americans own a tiny fraction of US equities. But owning it doesn't change how much grain it produces. The rest is just bullshit. If you lower the cost of borrowing by pumping liquidity into the market, as the Fed has done, it triggers stock buybacks and the artificial inflation of equities. You've not actually created anything, you've just pumped up the market by printing cash. That's why real GDP growth is what Trump promised to deliver and why bullshit market valuations based on cheap credit isn't an acceptable substitute for it. I've been struggling with valuations since '08. You don't need to tell me the damage QE has done to the rational stock market. However, at the end of the day, it's something we have to live with, and take advantage of. The stock market going up has put money in my, as well as millions of other Americans, pocket. But it's not what you originally claimed. You claimed Trump delivered more GDP. Now you're saying that due to QE Trump has delivered higher valuations on the same GDP. Do you see why that's not proof of your original claim? No. I'm saying that despite lower GDP, we've managed to match China's market growth, and that the economy has been amazing - two separate thoughts. A large part of this (both the valuations and the economy) was the corporate tax cut, which was 100% Trump. US unemployment hit the lowest level for 50 years. Removing regulations has also supercharged the economy. To your point about fake buybacks and low rates, that's the QE. To the massive growth in SMEs, I award that to Trump's policies. If the growth was due to the tax cut then why did it start 8 years before the tax cut?
That's a little silly. Sure, he inherited a growing economy. His policies turned it into a record-breaking one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
