I think I blinked at least 100 times before fully processing this information.
Show this thread
My friend @caththegreat012 just sent me these results from her home district. I have chills all over my body.
The Democrat won by literally one vote. One. Vote.
Don’t let anyone ever tell you your vote doesn’t matter. #ElectionNightpic.twitter.com/rlEQ0qN95Y
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yeaaaaah...winning by ONE VOTE isn’t sketchy at all.
#Recount -
Yeah losing the popular vote by two million but still getting to be President “isn’t sketchy at all” yet here we are.
-
Coupled with the 3 million plus illegal/dead/fraud democrat voters, it all balances out.
-
Hey,
@EverTheBeverly, there are two underlying sources for that claim of ~3 million (or sometimes up to 5 million) illegal votes in 2016. A USA TODAY look at those here ...https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/01/26/fact-check-trumps-bogus-voter-fraud-claims-revisited/97080242/ … -
There *is* in-person voter fraud, and it's somewhat more common than many Democrats/liberals wish to claim, but it's still quite rare, compared to total number of votes. The most authoritative database of such incidents is here; you can check it yourself.https://twitter.com/aronro/status/1020076066633756674 …
-
The lists of registered voters maintained by many states are a mess. We could do *much* better at managing those. Some other countries do this very well, and we could/should use or adapt their best practices. But important not to conflate that with fraud in actually-cast votes.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
There was much voter fraud. All these need a recount. James O’Keefe released a video on the dems making sure illegals win.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I personally believe there is a moral obligation to vote but it's almost always irrational to vote if one's goal is to change the outcome.
Excerpt from interesting Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on the ethics & rationality of voting https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/voting/ pic.twitter.com/53MXetjLnb
-
a) opportunity cost of voting, seriously...? b) writing this out in modal logic is nice, but one misses the purely anthropocentric, psychological point that people vote for two reasons - to foster change, or to prevent it. Change, or its prevention, is central to voting.
-
a) Umm...what is contentious about this? b) You missed the point. The excerpt doesn't address *why* people vote but whether voting itself is rational if the *only* goal is to change the outcome of the election between two major candidates.
-
a) What is the next best foregone alternative of not voting? b) Nope, my point is that voting is designed to either maintain a candidate or replace them. How is the raison d'être of voting not rational? Plus, people vote for other, subsidiary reasons as well (ideology, belief,..)
-
a) excerpt supposes that the expected benefit is monetary. because voting is worth less than a millionth of a penny, better alternative = anything (in monetary terms) whose yield is more than millionth of a penny.
-
b) I agree that voting can be rational for many reasons, just not the one aforementioned.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
1 vote margin can be contested. Its not over.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You gotta get a life if voting gives you chills all over your body lol
-
And you gotta get a life if you get a chubby by trolling strangers on Twitter.
- 1 more reply
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.