The Arizona "Audit"

Reader---this is due to the fact that most Senate races were held in states that had incumbent Democrats. This affects the vote total across all races and would lend itself to more Dem votes. Dems getting more votes overall and by a wide margin in 2018 is singularly meaningless . Furthermore, Trump was not on the ballot in 2018.
 
Last edited:
For example, PhonySnark continuously mentions that Dems got 10 million more votes in the 2018 election. But, here is a fact for you----4 million of that surplus was in California alone. This was a state that had a Democrat incumbent, Dianne Feinstein running for reelection.
 
In addition, another 2 million Democrat surplus came from New York's House Elections. This was a state that had Tina Rutnick, the Democrat incumbent running for reelection.
 
==New Jersey, a state where Bob Menendez, the incumbent Democrat was running for reelection, yielded a 660k surplus of Democrat House votes.
==Illinois, where there was not a Democrat running for reelection, but there is a corrupt Chicago and Obama Dem machine yielded a 1 million Dem House vote surplus.
==Massachusetts, where Elizabeth Warren was the Democrat incumbent running for reelection, yielded a 1.4 million Dem House vote surplus.
 
Buy1Sell2 said:
Reader---this is due to the fact that most Senate races were held in states that had incumbent Democrats. This affects the vote total across all races and would lend itself to more Dem votes. Dems getting more votes overall and by a wide margin in 2018 is singularly meaningless . Furthermore, Trump was not on the ballot in any race since Nov 2016.
More...


Dems won by 10 million in The House,not The Senate (where they won by more than 10 million).Dems getting more votes overall in The House and by a wide margin in 2018 couldn't be more meaningful.
 
Buy1Sell2 said:
==New Jersey, a state where Bob Menendez, the incumbent Democrat was running for reelection, yielded a 660k surplus of Democrat House votes.
==Illinois, where there was not a Democrat running for reelection, but there is a corrupt Chicago and Obama Dem machine yielded a 1 million Dem House vote surplus.
==Massachusetts, where Elizabeth Warren was the Democrat incumbent running for reelection, yielded a 1.4 million Dem House vote surplus.
More...


House moron,House


upload_2021-6-10_12-10-40.png
 
==The state of Washington, where Maria Cantwell, the Democrat incumbent, was running for reelection yielded an 840k surplus of Dem House votes.
==The State of Virginia, where Tim Kaine was running for reelection as the Democrat incumbent, yielded a 450k surplus of Dem House votes.
==The state of Michigan, where Debbie Stabenow was running for reelection as the Democrat incumbent, yielded a 325k surplus of Dem House votes.
==The state of Pennsylvania, where Bob Casey was running for reelection as the Democrat incumbent, yielded a 510k surplus of Dem House Votes.
 
The state of Wisconsin, where incumbent Democrat Senator Tammy Baldwin was running for reelection, yielded a 200k surplus of Dem House votes.
 
So , as can be seen, The Dem House surplus was largely in states where incumbent House Democrat Senators were running for reelection. In fact, if you add up the states of CA, NY, IL, MA, VA, WA and NJ, you'll see that Dem House surplus in those states was 10.3 million. Trump won none of these states in the 2016 election. Trump wasn't even on the ballot in these elections. There were Democrat surpluses in the three states than I mentioned PA, WI and MI, but all 3 had Democrat incumbent Senators on the ballot.
 
Buy1Sell2 said:
The state of Wisconsin, where incumbent Democrat Senator Tammy Baldwin was running for reelection, yielded a 200k surplus of Dem House votes.
More...


That has nothing to do with republicans voting nationwide in House races moron.And Hillary got 3 million more votes in 2016 when the country wasn't as pissed at Trump.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top