- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: LOL snopes LOL 2016 election map by county OH BOY WE LOVE FACT CHECKERS
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:42 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:42 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
All these graphs show exactly why you have to have an electoral college when you are a republic of republic's. Otherwise politicians could simply ignore huge swaths of the country instead of having to build broad coalition's of regional support
0
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:42 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
The map is not inaccurate
dammit son, ITS A FACT CHECKING SITE
What fact, needs to be checked, in an EC vote, that would require the representation of that distorted map
Did they note that Trumps election was 'Mostly False', and heres a distorted map to prove it??? Does that map, and the numbers it represent, have anything to do with the certification of Trumps election? Anything at all???
No, its just a feel good, about, what might have been if the rules were changed. Which is not a fact. Its a fantasy. Which doesn't belong on a Fact Check Website!! Because that was the point of the thread
quote:
I FOR ONE REST BETTER AT NIGHT KNOWING OUR GOOD FRIENDS ARE GOING TO USE FACTS TO SAVE US FROM THIS ILLEGITIMATE DICTATOR
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:47 pm to Wally Sparks
quote:Thats right. The electoral college does.
Land doesn't vote.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:48 pm to RobbBobb
quote:Why don't you read the page to find out? The fact check was about how many counties were won, so it showed at least 4 different ways to represent County populations.
What fact, needs to be checked, in an EC vote, that would require the representation of that distorted map
You're talking about things that are irrelevant to the discussion, and worse yet, you're making arguments about accuracy about those same irrelevant things. Worst of all, you didn't even seem to read the page your interjecting your irrelevant arguments, so you can't even make an argument about accuracy if you don't know what the discussion is about.
It's weird.
This post was edited on 1/23/17 at 2:51 pm
Posted on 1/23/17 at 3:02 pm to CAD703X
Alternate facts right there.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 3:03 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
It's weird.
Yeah, I give up. We're talking past each other.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 3:05 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
The fact check was about how many counties were won
No, it wasn't. They changed the discussion of counties won, to the LARGE number of votes in population centers
quote:
Misleading maps and distorted data led to an inaccurate rumor that Donald Trump won 3,084 of America's 3,141 counties.
Otherwise, they would have said "Mostly True". While Trump may not have won 3,084 counties, he got awfully close. But they didn't do that, did they? They changed the entire scope of the fact they claimed to be checking
quote:
which contrasted several different maps contrasting the election results as they're generally shown with cartograms (which adjust for population density).
The map was a distortion of the NATIONAL popular vote. Because any county map, would be glaringly red! And your attempt to spin it that way, is why I have always questioned your intelligence
Posted on 1/23/17 at 3:06 pm to RobbBobb
quote:And it doesn't make a map inaccurate, expecially since it was from an external source. You can question the relevancy to he discussion, but it down a remake a graph inaccurate, which implies the external source inaccurately created it. I found the juxtaposition of all four graphs interesting.
The map was a distortion of the NATIONAL popular vote. Because any county map, would be glaringly red!
quote:Well feelings are mutual at least.
is why I have always questioned your intelligence
This post was edited on 1/23/17 at 3:10 pm
Posted on 1/23/17 at 3:34 pm to CAD703X
quote:
i love how they are trying to stress the importance of the blue areas by turning the US map into a melty lava lamp.
Or maybe they realize that Culberson County, Texas has about 55 times the land mass as Washington DC while DC has about 250 times the population of Culberson County and therefore a map showing Culberson County in red and DC in blue to demonstrate something is just fricking idiotic.
ETA: This was just an example. Culberson County, Texas actually went blue in the 2016 race
This post was edited on 1/23/17 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 1/23/17 at 4:07 pm to Alt26
quote:
However, for the most part, the areas in blue are huge population centers.
Though it isn't the "official score", popular vote-wise, the election was very close.
I don't care how large her "groups" were.
What if the Christians and Muslims got together and voted, said they had the "majority" of religious opinions and therefore are going to force every other religion to conform to their views? (Sorry Jews, you get fricked again.)
The EC exists for a reason. A very good reason.
EDIT - Removed mathematical inaccuracies.
This post was edited on 1/23/17 at 4:50 pm
Posted on 1/23/17 at 4:09 pm to Wally Sparks
quote:
Land doesn't vote.
But it should.
I'm so very tired of people who don't own property continually voting to increase my property taxes.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 4:11 pm to SlapahoeTribe
quote:
57 counties.
Fifty
Seven
That's all that Hillary won.
She won way more than 57 counties. She won over 10 in Alabama alone.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 4:13 pm to SlapahoeTribe
quote:
57 counties.
Fifty
Seven
That's all that Hillary won.
This isn't true.
Page 6 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News