Report: In 353 US Counties, 1.8 Million More Voters Than Eligible Citizens

[puer.dei]

It says that the vote was in 2016,

As you would know if you had actually read my posts, I was clearly using 2020 registration and vote numbers.

 

[gam197]

They forgot to list “creative math.”

Do the math yourself from 2016 and tell me how this adds up to 503,000 .

As you would know if you had actually read my posts, I was clearly using 2020 registration and vote numbers.

I have read all your post and you insistence that 2020 is the only year that counts. The new registered voter list is 503,000. What will happen when the next election cycle comes up and there are no more mail-in ballots?

 

[billsherman]

If the rate of voters in 2016 was 274,000
as indicated and the rate of registered voter is 67.8 as indicated by the state then by 2020 by the tally of 338,000 would be 83.9 percent with 5 percent more still coming in.

I’ve read this three times, and I don’t understand it.

 

[gam197]

If the rate of voters in 2016 was 274,000
as indicated and the rate of registered voter is 67.8 as indicated by the state then by 2020 by the tally of 338,000 would be 83.9 percent with 5 percent more still coming in.

Sloancaprice could figure it out the math.

Let’s do a little math…

If 278000 voters represented 68% of registered voters, then there were 409000 registered voters.

95% of 409000 registered voters means 389000 votes. There were 338000 votes.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Only the NYTimes, Washington Post, and CNN are on your list of sites that adhere to journalistic standards., is that the true, ThinkingSapien or could you list others that you find respectable and please fell free to do so.?

The premises of your questions fail.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I’ve read this three times, and I don’t understand it.

You pass. That means you are good at math.

 

[gam197]

gam197:

Only the NYTimes, Washington Post, and CNN are on your list of sites that adhere to journalistic standards., is that the true, ThinkingSapien or could you list others that you find respectable and please fell free to do so.?

The premises of your questions fail.

Fails to you. There are many, many news sites. Please state news sites that you believe have integrity and “basic journalistic standards”. You would list the NYTimes and Washington Post I am sure.

 

[gam197]

post withdrawn

 

[gam197]

I’m getting warnings about this news site.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

NewsGuard considers Fox News a healthy part of your news diet | Nieman Journalism Lab

Whose is NewsGuard? NewsGuard is a site that tells people what is “real news”. This is green and real news.

Or as our own Ken Doctor put it in March, writing about the green-for-good, red-for-bad color system the company uses:>

Among the green sites I saw: national newspapers
(The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, The Guardian); network news operations (ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, PBS Newshour, BBC News, CNN, MSNBC, NPR); mainstream magazines (The New Yorker, The Atlantic, GQ, Forbes, National Geographic); all the major metro newspapers I checked; and major digital natives (BuzzFeed News, Deadspin, Business Insider, TechCrunch, Vox, The Daily Beast, Quartz, The Verge).
Also green were the majority of politics sites I saw, even those with a pronounced slant: leaning left, sites like Salon, Talking Points Memo, HuffPost, Mic, The Daily Beast, and Media Matters; leaning right, Daily Caller, Daily Wire, IJR, The Daily Signal, The Federalist, Townhall, and the Washington Examiner. (I’m sure plenty of people would have arguments against several of those sites’ greenness.)

So what’s red? A few liberal sites: Shareblue, Bipartisan Reports, Palmer Report, and (surprisingly to me, at least) Daily Kos. (NewsGuard’s complaints there are mostly about the work of non-staff contributors to the site.) What seems, from my searching, to be a somewhat larger number of conservative sites: Breitbart, RushLimbaugh.com, Hannity, The Blaze, Infowars, Conservative Tribune, Right Wing News.

NewsGuard should be looking at its own bias before telling the rest of us what is “real journalism”.

 

[puer.dei]

I have read all your post and you insistence that 2020 is the only year that counts.

I never said that “2020 is the only year that counts.” Whh are you misrepresenting what I say?
This whole thing started because you claimed Vermont has a 95% voter turnout in 2020."

Do the math yourself from 2016 and tell me how this adds up to 503,000 .

As I have clearly said, more than once, the 502,627 number of registered voters is from 2020. Why should I try to make it fit 2016? Please explain how that makes any sense at all.

And, stillwaiting for the answer to this – In what universe is 338,000 83.9% of 502,000?

 

[gam197]

gam197:

I have read all your post and you insistence that 2020 is the only year that counts.

I never said that “2020 is the only year that counts.” Whh are you misrepresenting what I say?
This whole thing started because you claimed Vermont has a 95% voter turnout in 2020."

Yes and the math was disputed and corrected.

You seem to insist that 2020 that Vermont which only has a population of 623,000 now has over 503,000 registered voters when in prior years that was not the case at all , the registered voters were around 400,000 to 410,000. Percentage of registered voters do not change dramatically .

It is a graduate process and this year the rates are off the chart . Here is MA for the last 20 years, very slow increase in voter registrations.(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

In 2000 the voter registration was 4,100,000 and it took 20 years to get that voter registration number up to 4,800,000.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Fails to you.

When one points out a question with the premise of the question, it means that the question assumes as true something which is not, and that makes the rest of the question invalid.

Ex: if so done ask “Do you still put mustard on your hamburgers” the question assumes as true that the person in question eats hamburgers and has put mustard on them in the past. If the person has never eaten a burger or has never put mustard on one, then the question makes a false assumption.

You assumed that I have a list of sites. I don’t.
You assumed that I determined some criteria for acceptable journalistic standards. I did not.

What I did do is state that I was getting warnings about the site.

Whose is NewsGuard? NewsGuard is a site that tells people what is “real news”. This is green and real news.

It doesn’t do this. The warnings are based on past concerning stories. But the existence of a story with journalistic concerns in the past does not tell one that a specific story being viewed is true or false.

 

[gam197]

When one points out a question with the premise of the question, it means that the question assumes as true something which is not, and that makes the rest of the question invalid.

Ex: if so done ask “Do you still put mustard on your hamburgers” the question assumes as true that the person in question eats hamburgers and has put mustard on them in the past. If the person has never eaten a burger or has never put mustard on one, then the question makes a false assumption.

You assumed that I have a list of sites. I don’t.

I don’t assume anything. I do know that you posted a bogus site that seems to be left-leaning -

gam197:

Whose is NewsGuard? NewsGuard is a site that tells people what is “real news”. This is green and real news.

It doesn’t do this. The warnings are based on past concerning stories. But the existence of a story with journalistic concerns in the past does not tell one that a specific story being viewed is true or false.

No I am not saying that NewsGuard rates the stores as true or false but it does rate the news sources as you have shown on Daily Wire. However when you look at its list of “basic journalistic standards” the green sites are clearly left-leaning.

I saw: national newspapers(The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, The Guardian); network news operations (ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, PBS Newshour, BBC News, CNN, MSNBC, NPR); mainstream magazines (The New Yorker, The Atlantic, GQ, Forbes, National Geographic); all the major metro newspapers I checked; and major digital natives (BuzzFeed News, Deadspin, Business Insider, TechCrunch, Vox, The Daily Beast, Quartz, The Verge).

And the red sites, those that have stories with journalistic concerns are clearly right-leaning.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

However when you look at its list of “basic journalistic standards”

This list?

• Does not repeatedly publish false stories
• Gathers and presents information responsibly
• Regularly corrects or clarifies errors
• Handles the difference between news and opinion responsibly
• Avoids deceptive headlines

standards” the green sites are clearly left-leaning.

And the red sites, those that have stories with j ournalistic concerns are clearly right-leaning.

Not sure I get your point here. It looks like you are saying that popular sites that don’t meet one of the above standards trend red.

 

[puer.dei]

Yes and the math was disputed and corrected.

No, it wasn’t. Your last percentage claim was “then by 2020 by the tally of 338,000 would be 83.9 percent with 5 percent more still coming in.”
338,361 votes out of 502,607 registered voters is nowhere near “83.9%.” 83.9% would have been over 421,000 votes.
Seriously, wherever you bought your calculator, you need to go and demand your money back.

You seem to insist that 2020 that Vermont which only has a population of 623,000 now has over 503,000 registered voters

I’m not insisting anything; take it up with the State of Vermont. They’re the ones who keep count of the registrations. And by the way, they say the population is 628,000, not 623,000.

You seem to insist that 2020 that Vermont which only has a population of 623,000 now has over 503,000 registered voters when in prior years that was not the case at all , the registered voters were around 400,000 to 410,000.

Registered voters in Vermont, 2016: 471,619

Percentage of registered voters do not change dramatically .

It does when people are heavily invested in the outcome of an election. And when you have an organization as well put together as Bernie Sanders’ running voter registration drives.

Here is MA for the last 20 years, very slow increase in voter registrations.

Which has nothing to do with any other state.

 

[gam197]

gam197:

However when you look at its list of “basic journalistic standards”

This list?

• Does not repeatedly publish false stories
• Gathers and presents information responsibly
• Regularly corrects or clarifies errors
• Handles the difference between news and opinion responsibly

Again that is relative - from one’s perspective. I think many would agree that both sides do this

gam197:

tandards” the green sites are clearly left-leaning.

And the red sites, those that have stories with j ournalistic concerns are clearly right-leaning.

Not sure I get your point here. It looks like you are saying that popular sites that don’t meet one of the above standards trend red.

Again this is what the article states - sites you can trust.

I saw: national newspapers
(The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, The Guardian); network news operations (ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, PBS Newshour, BBC News, CNN, MSNBC, NPR); mainstream magazines (The New Yorker, The Atlantic, GQ, Forbes, National Geographic); all the major metro newspapers I checked; and major digital natives (BuzzFeed News, Deadspin, Business Insider, TechCrunch, Vox, The Daily Beast, Quartz, The Verge).

NewsGuard considers Fox News a healthy part of your news diet | Nieman Journalism Lab

Actually the Daily Wire was one you could trust but that seems to have changed.

“These are some other sites “you can trust,” according to NewsGuard: the conservative Daily Caller and Daily Wire, and the liberal Second Nexus and PoliticusUSA.”

These are ones you should “read with caution”: [Palmer Report] (“highly speculative…misleading”), [The Political Insider] (“regularly publishes false and misleading stories”), [Hannity] (“advance a variety of conspiracy theories”), [Gateway Pundit] (“regularly distorts information”), [Breitbart] (“sometimes distorts or omits facts to fit its agenda”), the [Daily Mail] (“repeatedly publishes false information”), [100PercentFedUp (“inaccurate stories and headlines”), [Bipartisan Report] (“anonymous articles…sensational headlines”), [Shareblue] (“charged, misleading language”), and [Daily Kos]
(“often add commentary and exaggeration”).

 

[RidgeSprinter]

The population of Vermont is only 623 thousand - 623,000.

We don’t know actual population of Vermont until the 2020 census information is published and that could take a while.

The 2018 estimate that I found is higher than your number:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
And that was 2 years ago.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Again this is what the article states

Ah, you are sharing an article and not your own perspective. Okay. Thank you for sharing.

 

[gam197]

The population does not change a whole lot. There are no big jumps, a few thousand…(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[RidgeSprinter]

Good grief! In what universe is 338,000 83.9% of 502,000?

Yea I agree it is strange:
It should be 421,000
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)