Numerical breakdown of the outstanding 2020 votes. (Don't be mad...but I think Biden wins)

[jmdrake]

According to Fox News Biden is now ahead in Nevada, Michigan and Wisconsin. Yes the margins are razor thin, but if the mail in vote breaks Biden's way predictions hold, that means Trump has now way to catch up. With Nevada, Michigan and Wisconsin, Biden gets to 270 without Pennsylvania, Georgia and North Carolina. Trump is leading in those three states and I expect him to take at least Georgia and North Carolina. Biden would have to win 68% of the remaining GA vote, 62% of the remaining NC vote, and 58% of the remaining PA vote to win those states. He's not winning Georgia. I should be called for Trump. But even winning all of those states, the best Trump can get to is 268 if he doesn't win Nevada, Michigan or Wisconsin.

Here is the spreadsheet:

https://mega.nz/file/YAw1SKpA#Ytg0kVJZvy3YlqCavDedM_yVUi7PxltR9j7dOTT3RAM

Here is the PDF:

https://mega.nz/file/8ZojlC5K#vxy1jgiiON1cItb87_8AL8vMNq3PeaRJAGkxf3dX9Gc

On the flipside, it's super unlikely the democrats take the senate. So that means Mitch and company have to play hardcore defense for two years and hope to flip the house, then play hardcore defense another two years and run Rand in 2024 against Kamala Harris. Forget the "House Of Trump." After this election cycle, win lose or draw, it's done. There will be no "Don Jr. 2024."

 

[Anti Federalist]

Yeah, came to the same conclusion last night whey they flipped WI.

Trouble is, the Marxists will run roughshod over whatever weaksauce defenses Turtlean and Loafers can throw out.

Or they just bypass the whole thing and riot in the streets some more to get what they want.

That works much better than this politics shit...that's the lesson I take away from all this.

 

[jmdrake]

Yeah, came to the same conclusion last night whey they flipped WI.

Trouble is, the Marxists will run roughshod over whatever weaksauce defenses Turtlean and Loafers can throw out.

Or they just bypass the whole thing and riot in the streets some more to get what they want.

That works much better than this politics $#@!...that's the lesson I take away from all this.

Meh. One thing Mitch is good at is doing nothing. Yeah he got a last minute SCOTUS confirmation. He didn't get the last stimulus passed. (That might have helped Trump). Obama with a slim majority in the senate couldn't get anything through after the ACA and lost the midterms. I don't think this will be any different. And "taking it to the streets" isn't going to tip the tides in the senate. Bur we'll see in two years.

 

[wizardwatson]

If Trump concedes, does he have enough time to do the massive pedophile ring arrests before the January transition?

Asking for a friend.

 

[BSWPaulsen]

Yeah, came to the same conclusion last night whey they flipped WI.

Trouble is, the Marxists will run roughshod over whatever weaksauce defenses Turtlean and Loafers can throw out.

Or they just bypass the whole thing and riot in the streets some more to get what they want.

That works much better than this politics $#@!...that's the lesson I take away from all this.

Trump has certainly lost. There is little doubt there was tremendous voter fraud in favor of the Democrats given they were able to walk a dementia patient across the finish line. This outcome will only further entrench the left to such an extent they never surrender a grip on power. The media will portray it as it being the simple reflection of what the United States believes and desires. The leftward creep will be unrelenting.

If the Democrat establishment is content with self-enrichment and general corruption, then it is possible life goes on mostly unchanged for most people. They will crush Marxist violence that threatens their gravy train, and traditional Americans will continue to suffer the gradual erosion of their liberties. This is the best case scenario.

The real concern is the Marxists in the streets that will not be content to let things be and have learned from their recent successes. Violence, for whatever ethical considerations it may bring, is very effective at getting politicians to do its bidding in order to "keep the peace". Given the Marxists already have Democrat sympathizers in elected positions, resisting Marxist violence on the ground will become perilous in its own way. Traditional Americans will inevitably be caught between their desire to be lawful and their belief in self-defense. The one thing that is clear is that Democrats and Marxists have no use for old school Americans.

The only real question: Will the Democrats crush the Marxists to maintain absolute power, or will they be coopted by them in due time? Traditional Americans are already an afterthought and what we want hardly matters at this point. Well, not unless we discover a taste for street violence and that is unlikely given our penchant for the moral high ground.

 

[TheCount]

Whatever happens, my preference is that the President and Senate are of opposite parties. Either Trump and a D Senate, or Biden and an R Senate.


Seems like that's coming to pass, so that's a plus in my book. My greatest electoral fear was that the legislature and executive would be entirely controlled by a single party.

 

[jkob]

Rand will get BTFO worse than 2016 if he ran in 2024, if that's why you're happy then you are very very foolish. What makes you think it will be any different? He won't have the remnants of his father's campaigns to rely on, Rand should stay in the senate and try to move up the ranks of leadership which Mitch owes to him for his loyalty. What we're more likely to see is the return of the neocon "true conservatives" like Liz Chaney/Mitt Romney/Ben Sasse/Larry Hogan/Nikki Haley/Tom Cotton try to wrest back control of the party with full media support. Sounds like a lot of fun.

 

[swissaustrian]

Rand will get BTFO worse than 2016 if he ran in 2024, if that's why you're happy then you are very very foolish. What makes you think it will be any different? He won't have the remnants of his father's campaigns to rely on, Rand should stay in the senate and try to move up the ranks of leadership which Mitch owes to him for his loyalty. What we're more likely to see is the return of the neocon "true conservatives" like Liz Chaney/Mitt Romney/Ben Sasse/Larry Hogan/Nikki Haley/Tom Cotton try to wrest back control of the party with full media support. Sounds like a lot of fun.

the rinos will interpret this outcome as an invitation to return to the Bush ideology for sure. and Biden/Harris will be such a trainwreck that the GOP sweeps the midterms.

 

[Sonny Tufts]

If Trump concedes

The Narcissist-in-Chief won't concede. He'll file a slew of lawsuits in the hope that the conservative majority on the Supreme Court will hand him the presidency. By law the electors have to meet on December 14 and vote, but don't be surprised if Trump tries to get the courts to ignore this deadline.

If the GOP maintains control of the Senate Biden won't have to placate the extreme members of the Democrat party by trying to get their pie-in-the-sky wish list passed.

 

[BSWPaulsen]

Rand will get BTFO worse than 2016 if he ran in 2024, if that's why you're happy then you are very very foolish. What makes you think it will be any different? He won't have the remnants of his father's campaigns to rely on, Rand should stay in the senate and try to move up the ranks of leadership which Mitch owes to him for his loyalty. What we're more likely to see is the return of the neocon "true conservatives" like Liz Chaney/Mitt Romney/Ben Sasse/Larry Hogan/Nikki Haley/Tom Cotton try to wrest back control of the party with full media support. Sounds like a lot of fun.

If Rand runs on his beliefs, then he gets crushed in a general election. Freedom is not popular. Traditional American values are not popular. Those that adhere to traditional American values and beliefs are already a minority in their own country.

Given the demographic changes, this country is headed toward true one-party rule and not the kind Libertarians usually talk about with their whole "two sides of the same coin" shtick. Well, unless the Democrats eventually split in two and the other party is openly tagged some version of a socialist party.

 

[Philhelm]

Or they just bypass the whole thing and riot in the streets some more to get what they want.

That works much better than this politics shit...that's the lesson I take away from all this.

Seems to be the case.

 

[AngryCanadian]

I think there wont be a Don Jr. 2024 for a while. But looking at the 2020 election America is very much divided. That wont be changing.
Do i think liberals will be coming for your guns? i don't think so. Not without massive riots or protests they wont.

 

[jmdrake]

Rand will get BTFO worse than 2016 if he ran in 2024, if that's why you're happy then you are very very foolish. What makes you think it will be any different? He won't have the remnants of his father's campaigns to rely on, Rand should stay in the senate and try to move up the ranks of leadership which Mitch owes to him for his loyalty. What we're more likely to see is the return of the neocon "true conservatives" like Liz Chaney/Mitt Romney/Ben Sasse/Larry Hogan/Nikki Haley/Tom Cotton try to wrest back control of the party with full media support. Sounds like a lot of fun.

Oh I forgot. I took a wrong turn and ended up at Trump forums. My bad.

If Rand runs on his beliefs, then he gets crushed in a general election. Freedom is not popular. Traditional American values are not popular. Those that adhere to traditional American values and beliefs are already a minority in their own country.

Given the demographic changes, this country is headed toward true one-party rule and not the kind Libertarians usually talk about with their whole "two sides of the same coin" shtick. Well, unless the Democrats eventually split in two and the other party is openly tagged some version of a socialist party.

So...we should run the most authoritarian Republican we can huh? That explains Trump's support. Bottom line is....Trump just lost. People can talk about "he was cheated out of winning" (no hard evidence yet of that) or "it's the media's fault" (that's an expected problem) or whatever. But he still lost. Good rally at the end. He beat expectations. But he still lost. Will the "white genocide" crowd go for Rand in 2024 if he doesn't explicitly court their vote? Maybe. Maybe not. We'll see.

 

[BSWPaulsen]

Oh I forgot. I took a wrong turn and ended up at Trump forums. My bad.



So...we should run the most authoritarian Republican we can huh? That explains Trump's support. Bottom line is....Trump just lost. People can talk about "he was cheated out of winning" (no hard evidence yet of that) or "it's the media's fault" (that's an expected problem) or whatever. But he still lost. Good rally at the end. He beat expectations. But he still lost. Will the "white genocide" crowd go for Rand in 2024 if he doesn't explicitly court their vote? Maybe. Maybe not. We'll see.

No. The point is Republicans do not matter regardless of the flavor. With each year that passes they will become more statistically irrelevant. As I said to Anti Federalist above, Trump has certainly lost. That is no longer questionable.

What is the deal with the random-as-all-hell "white genocide" comment you threw in?

 

[jmdrake]

I think there wont be a Don Jr. 2024 for a while. But looking at the 2020 election America is very much divided. That wont be changing.
Do i think liberals will be coming for your guns? i don't think so. Not without massive riots or protests they wont.

Obama didn't come gunning for people's guns even when he had the house and the senate. Biden doesn't have the senate. Trump was a bigger threat to guns with his bumpfire stock ban by executive order. If Biden is taken down and Kamala Harris becomes president she might try a gun ban by executive order move. I'm not sure what she could do exactly though. But basically declared a bumpfire stock a "de facto machine gun." She could make a similar argument about high capacity magazines since "belt loop" bump firing doesn't really make sense if you only have 5 bullets in your gun. She might also argue that pistol grips aid in bump firing so they should also be banned. I consider both of those arguments to be a stretch. A bumpfire stock has no legit purpose other than to let you fire at a virtually automatic rate.

 

[jmdrake]

No. The point is Republicans do not matter regardless of the flavor. With each year that passes they will become more statistically irrelevant. As I said to Anti Federalist above, Trump has certainly lost. That is no longer questionable.

What is the deal with the random-as-all-hell "white genocide" comment you threw in?

I am looking at the coalition Trump put together. It wasn't the "We must go to war in Iraq" coalition of George W. Bush nor was it the "End the fed and limit the size of government" coalition of Ron Paul. Trump's 2016 win was based largely on immigration and bolstered by people who are concerned that white people are being replaced by illegal immigrants. Saying "freedom isn't popular" is random-as-hell actually.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

He'll file a slew of lawsuits in the hope that the conservative majority on the Supreme Court will hand him the presidency.

The court won't do that. Just like they didn't give it to Gore in 2000. You're a tax lawyer and should know that.

So, did your Biden vote help in your state? I know you voted for Biden. Right?

 

[AngryCanadian]

Obama didn't come gunning for people's guns even when he had the house and the senate. Biden doesn't have the senate. Trump was a bigger threat to guns with his bumpfire stock ban by executive order. If Biden is taken down and Kamala Harris becomes president she might try a gun ban by executive order move. I'm not sure what she could do exactly though. But basically declared a bumpfire stock a "de facto machine gun." She could make a similar argument about high capacity magazines since "belt loop" bump firing doesn't really make sense if you only have 5 bullets in your gun. She might also argue that pistol grips aid in bump firing so they should also be banned. I consider both of those arguments to be a stretch. A bumpfire stock has no legit purpose other than to let you fire at a virtually automatic rate.

Harris is more of a worry then Biden at this point. At least freedom concerning. I do think Trump might have lost because of the bumpfire ban or stock ban as you said. aren't you worried of tech censorship on right wingers or them getting more power? or moderates though? or you think they were just censoring people who supported for Trump? i havent seen this crazy censoring during the Obama admin days.

 

[AngryCanadian]

I am looking at the coalition Trump put together. It wasn't the "We must go to war in Iraq" coalition of George W. Bush nor was it the "End the fed and limit the size of government" coalition of Ron Paul. Trump's 2016 win was based largely on immigration and bolstered by people who are concerned that white people are being replaced by illegal immigrants. Saying "freedom isn't popular" is random-as-hell actually.

Well whats happening in Europe conservatives are winning in places where liberals didn't thought possible. Open Borders in Europe isnt looking good now.

 

[BSWPaulsen]

I am looking at the coalition Trump put together. It wasn't the "We must go to war in Iraq" coalition of George W. Bush nor was it the "End the fed and limit the size of government" coalition of Ron Paul. Trump's 2016 win was based largely on immigration and bolstered by people who are concerned that white people are being replaced by illegal immigrants. Saying "freedom isn't popular" is random-as-hell actually.

The notion that freedom is not popular is not random-as-hell. It is evident in how few Republicans actually care about it and the fact Democrats do not care for it at all. Those that endorse freedom are a minority within a minority party. That means, by default, freedom is not popular. Conversely, would you venture the claim freedom is popular? If so, by all means, show me the evidence.

There is a reason Ron Paul ran as a Republican despite the fact there are significant numbers of Republicans that do not care for freedom. It is because he would have fallen completely flat in the Democrat party.