Generally when there's a landslide (as in the UK tonight) everyone's hot takes are mostly right and when there's a close result everyone's hot takes are mostly wrong.
-
-
Yeah, and he says this all the time.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Its different. In nates example tge margin itself is evidence where as in your example you simply cant rule them out, but theres no reason to believe any one of them were causal.
-
No, I think that’s wrong. In a close election, any single domino could have fallen differently and there’d have been a different result. In a landslide, you have to look for something bigger that explains why all the dominos fell at once. None of them are determinative alone.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
-
-
-
Except Hillary could’ve lost if everyone for Stein voted for her and Trumps hemorrhage to Johnson was tremendously bigger
-
The funny thing is: If third party voters were forced to vote for Hillary or Trump, Trump would've won the electoral college by a larger margin.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
And shutting down recounts in MI/WI/PA
-
When has a recount ever worked
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I'm not sure if you listened to much of the podcasting or read much of the writing he did post 2016, but he's actually made that point before. The Comey letter was the last in a series of events that pushed Hillary over the line, but without all of them she may have won.
-
About 62,000,000 voted for trump. About 73,000,000 voted for someone other than trump. About 120,000,000 eligible voters did not vote. Trump didn't win. Hillary didn't win. The United States lost.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.