@_ohthehumanity_@justicenow_alan@billlycakes@jimiuorio Hard to rely on a data that doesn't have a date and doesn't have her percentage. Was this with 100% counted or not? If she was at 30% and mail-ins were not counted chances are she won that race or at least placed second.
@robertgraham I like how their entire reasoning is "gpt said so" or proof by "are you retarded". none of them can actually spell out the reasoning and assumptions behind it (or know it's flawed and want to bully their way into it)
@billlycakes@justicenow_alan@jimiuorio This is saying in 18 percent of the cases shit like this happens and that's nationwide. That's far from improbability. Also, California has rules around counting that make this more likely without cheating or favoring a particular candidate.
@justicenow_alan@billlycakes@jimiuorio Raman also polled very well. I'm not really sure what his argument is but one version I've seen is "both bass and Raman are Democrats so why is Raman outperforming Bass" . A dumb/meaningless but defensible version is "the probability of this exact result is very low"
@Kal92858Kalti@smallheath631@jimiuorio most likely, mail-in voting skews liberal and not just democrat. In typical elections where it's D v R, liberal = D so you hear "mail-in voting skews D" instead of "mail-in voting skews liberal". here, there are 2 D and 1 R so it skews most heavily towards the most liberal D.
@smallheath631@forcade_mi39238@jimiuorio Hey bud, I do the exact same thing and try to argue back with assholes but ya, if the guy just resorts to name-calling and doesn't ever make a point, chances are he doesn't have a braincell and is not worth arguing with.
@Thunder_Chuck24@jimiuorio maybe don't offload all your brain activity to chatgpt. 1. These are not samples from the same. 2. "chatgpt said so" without an actual link is meaningless.