Closest election in 21st Century

[jross]

48 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Thought Stopper Alert

What I take from you saying that is, 'if you don't put forth a fully accurate picture of every topic, to my satisfaction, I am within my right to dismiss your information as false and not consider it at all.' 

 

Where do we go from there? You are setting it up so you can move the goal posts as much as you want whenever you want. My toddler does the same thing when not getting their way. 

 

You're all branding yourselves as biased, dishonest, and unable/unwilling to even consider information as true that challenges your opinion. Why should anyone take you seriously? And do you even care? 

 

Every attempt to pivot, muddy, and shift goal posts is a defense mechanism your brain forces you to type so your opinions are not challenged in a meaningful way.

You can't egregiously dismiss how the voting process works when telling the story.  

[ThreePointTakedown]

49 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

I was wondering if you would be so kind to answer some of the questions I asked you. Thanks.

I’m sorry. As soon as you address my post adequately, including my question(s), then I’ll consider your questions. 

[ThreePointTakedown]

1 hour ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

'if you don't put forth a fully accurate picture of every topic,  I am within my right to consider your information as cherry picked"

 

Again, so now what? 
You’ve given yourself a get out of conversation free card. 
You don’t want your opinions challenged. I get it. Then log off. 

[Gene Mills Fan]

Just now, ThreePointTakedown said:

Again, so now what? 
You’ve given yourself a get out of conversation free card. 
You don’t want your opinions challenged. I get it. Then log off. 

no just saying you aren't painting the complete picture

[ThreePointTakedown]

51 minutes ago, jross said:

You can't egregiously dismiss how the voting process works when telling the story.  

Is that what happened? 
Please explain

[mspart]

How are presidents elected?   They are not elected by the popular vote, although that can be an indication.   They are elected by state electors.   So it was not the closest election in the 21st century.   If she wanted to make that statement, she could have said it was the closest popular vote in the 21st century.   But it certainly wasn't in terms of electoral voting.   I don't say she lied.   But she is weaving a narrative that has nothing to do with presidential politics.   So who is being disingenous?

mspart

[ThreePointTakedown]

9 minutes ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

no just saying you aren't painting the complete picture

Noted

[ThreePointTakedown]

5 minutes ago, mspart said:

How are presidents elected?   They are not elected by the popular vote, although that can be an indication.   They are elected by state electors.   So it was not the closest election in the 21st century.   If she wanted to make that statement, she could have said it was the closest popular vote in the 21st century.   But it certainly wasn't in terms of electoral voting.   I don't say she lied.   But she is weaving a narrative that has nothing to do with presidential politics.   So who is being disingenous?

mspart

Nothing to do with presidential politics?

Go ahead and back that up.

Disingenuous? Hardly. If you hold all to the same standard this is hardly even a blip. Because, as I stated before, it is true. I think you just don’t like that it was and want to reframe it to deny it because of your again arbitrary criteria. 

[jross]

2 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Is that what happened? 
Please explain

Kamala says it was "the closest presidential race in the 21st century, in terms of the outcome."

The facts are that Kamala lost by 86 electoral votes.  It was not a close election in terms of the outcome, and she had the 5th worst loss out of the last 7 elections.

Presidential Election Process Timeline...

https://www.usa.gov/presidential-election-process

Early January of the next calendar year

Congress counts the electoral votes.

[Caveira]

2 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Nothing to do with presidential politics?

Go ahead and back that up.

Disingenuous? Hardly. If you hold all to the same standard this is hardly even a blip. Because, as I stated before, it is true. I think you just don’t like that it was and want to reframe it to deny it because of your again arbitrary criteria. 

In a baseball game team A wins 10-0…. Somehow the teams are very even in hits… team A had 15 hits and team B had 16 hits.

is this the closest game in baseball history or am I using different metrics to measure the winner?

 

 

[Offthemat]

She probably won the illegal vote, though.

[ionel]

23 hours ago, Paul158 said:

Trump won by 86 electoral votes. 312 t0 226. Right around a 16 Percent win.

 Can we all just agree that 16% is really really close?

Next topic.

[Offthemat]

30 minutes ago, ionel said:

 Can we all just agree that 16% is really really close?

Next topic.

Checking your math, aren’t you 10% short?

[ionel]

15 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

Checking your math, aren’t you 10% short?

Well that wasn't my math.  I was just quoting the math.  However I do recall that the election was not close.  

[Paul158]

5 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

I’m sorry. As soon as you address my post adequately, including my question(s), then I’ll consider your questions. 

If you address some specific questions directly to me, I would be happy to answer them. Just like I addressed some specific questions directly to you. Thanks.

[mspart]

4 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Nothing to do with presidential politics?

Go ahead and back that up.

Disingenuous? Hardly. If you hold all to the same standard this is hardly even a blip. Because, as I stated before, it is true. I think you just don’t like that it was and want to reframe it to deny it because of your again arbitrary criteria. 

Hillary Clinton and Al Gore learned the hard way (and thank goodness for that) that total vote means nothing in Presidential elections.   Because total vote does not elect the President.   The Electoral college elects the President and that has been true since the Constitution was ratified.  You can complain all you want but that doesn't change this fact.   Hillary famously ignored Wisconsin and lost the race due to that.   In electoral politics, Kamala's race was not the closest by a long shot.  I proved it in my earlier post.   You just don't want to accept that reality.  

mspart

[Caveira]

On 9/24/2025 at 10:23 AM, ThreePointTakedown said:

 

Rather than asking yourself what metric Kamala may have been citing and starting the discussion there. Did you ask yourself why your knee jerk reaction was to brand the claim as a lie. It wasn't. Clearly. Based on everyone tacitly agreeing with Ms. Harris and not refuting the fact that the percentage of the vote was closer than any presidential election in the 21st century. Just simply pivoting to, 'well that's not the metric I feel is the best' and not put forth a reason why it should be prioritized over another. 

Just so you could dunk on someone that you don't like. Have you asked yourself why you all tend to do that? Is it just so you can more comfortably retain your cognitive biases without having to address them? That's my guess. Because an honest person would say, 'Kamala is correct in one area, but also there are other metrics that paint a different picture'. But y'all aren't honest. 

 

Kamala was correct. I know it's difficult for some of you all to see a person like that challenging your version of reality. So much so that you need to scream into the void in the hopes that others rally to your side. But you will always get push back from me and my big text. Because you are almost always wrong about everything you think and feel. And I'm more than happy to point it out with a smile on my face
 

and I know that pisses some people off. ;D

 

[vsnej]

On 9/23/2025 at 6:08 PM, mspart said:

2000 (not technically 21st century)   Bush 271 Gore 266  and this after SCOTUS involvement

2004   Bush 286   Kerry  251    Closer than 2024 election

2008  Obama 365   McCain  173

2012   Obama  332  Romney  206

2016   Trump  304   clinton  227    Closer than 2024 election

2020   Biden  306    Trump  232   Closer than 2024 election

2024   Trump 312   Harris  226     4th closest election in the 21st century

And there you have it.   Kamala still can't tell the truth when the facts are staring her in the face.  In fact she got the least electoral votes of 2 of the other losers.   So not even close to being the closest race in the 21st century.   Even when Trump lost he got more electoral votes than Kamala.   

mspart

Speaking of the truth, facts and lies...what the fat man said in January 2021:

"Today I will lay out just some of the evidence proving that we won this election and we won it by a landslide. This was not a close election. You know I say sometimes jokingly, but there's no joke about it. I have been into elections. I won them both and the second one I won much bigger than the first, okay?"
 

[Bigbrog]

Okay...??

[JimmySpeaks]

1 hour ago, vsnej said:

Speaking of the truth, facts and lies...what the fat man said in January 2021:

"Today I will lay out just some of the evidence proving that we won this election and we won it by a landslide. This was not a close election. You know I say sometimes jokingly, but there's no joke about it. I have been into elections. I won them both and the second one I won much bigger than the first, okay?"
 

There’s Mr what about right on schedule.