Yikes. Looks like someone had a meltdown here over the weekend.

[atlkvb]

Anyone who is over 18, a citizen, not a felon or mentally incapacitated. It's clearly defined in the link. That's is your Voting Eligible Population(VEP). Some percentage of that population is registered to vote. A smaller percentage of that population actually votes. That last one is the voter turnout rate. Registration has nothing to do with that computation. It's basic arithmetic once you know the definition of the statistic.

I am denying that more folks voted than were legally registered to vote. That's based on the discussion we are having. The VEP is roughly 239.2 million. The number of votes cast was roughly 159.8 million. That's where you get the rate you quoted above of 66.8%.

So then if I'm logically following your argument you're saying that part of that VEP number (239 million you're quoting) is legally allowed to vote regardless of if they're not registered?

In other words, you can vote as long as you are "eligible" but not necessarily "registered" correct?

 

[atlkvb]

I am denying that more folks voted than were legally registered to vote. That's based on the discussion we are having. The VEP is roughly 239.2 million. The number of votes cast was roughly 159.8 million. That's where you get the rate you quoted above of 66.8%.

So if we had 13 million more votes cast than there were actual legally provable registered voters, you're OK with that?

Well I'm not. That argument makes no sense to me and eliminates the need to even register to vote. If we're that far apart, and that far gone into an alternate reality...then I'm afraid I'm whipped and I'm simply going to respectfully end this little debate and hope we survive the nation we have created.

My Lord!

Good day sir.

 

[mule_eer]

Here's a question for you @mule_eer to settle our little dispute. Yes or No

Should we count folks who are not legally registered to vote as voters? In other words, regardless if they're registered or not, do they count in the actual numbers of folks who voted?

Example 9 million registered voters

13 million votes cast

20 million eligible voters

Do we determine the actual % of voters who cast ballots against the "registered" number or the "eligible" number?

Hope that simplifies it?

Earlier you multiplied the number of registered voters by the turn out rate. That undercounts the number of total votes because only some of those eligible are registered. That was your error and the point I'm addressing.

 

[atlkvb]

Earlier you multiplied the number of registered voters by the turn out rate. That undercounts the number of total votes because only some of those eligible are registered. That was your error and the point I'm addressing.

OK fair enough Mule my Man...honestly I couldn't continue our discussion last night because I have too much respect for you and your usually very rational and well reasoned arguments. So rather than engage in any of the disgusting name calling that's so typical of what I read on this forum, I just decided to call it a night. You're one of my favorite posters and I simply wanted to maintain that mutual respect we have established for one another that's why I ended our discussion. Hope you understood?

I got confused because I couldn't believe what I was reading and I just want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding you before I drop this altogether OK my friend?

So are you saying we only need to be concerned about the number of "eligible" voters in this election, and NOT those who were "legally" registered? Let's say I am in error as you suggest and no more votes than those of legally registered voters were submitted during this past election? So how in your opinion do we determine who among those "eligible" voters actually were legally "registered" to vote?

I hope you are not arguing that however going back over the thread I'm not sure? Re-reading it again this morning, I can't figure out what you were arguing? Are you saying it's not true more ballots were cast in this election than we had "registered" voters? Clear this up for me and I'll drop it.

How do we determine among all the "eligible" voters you mentioned in your argument, who was actually legally "registered" to vote? Are we certain we are counting only registered voters? If so, how? How do we know all those absentee ballots sent out to all "eligible" voters were returned by legally "registered" voters only or are you arguing it doesn't matter?

 

[mule_eer]

OK fair enough Mule my Man...honestly I couldn't continue our discussion last night because I have too much respect for you and your usually very rational and well reasoned arguments. So rather than engage in any of the disgusting name calling that's so typical of what I read on this forum, I just decided to call it a night. You're one of my favorite posters and I simply wanted to maintain that mutual respect we have established for one another that's why I ended our discussion. Hope you understood?

I got confused because I couldn't believe what I was reading and I just want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding you before I drop this altogether OK my friend?

So are you saying we only need to be concerned about the number of "eligible" voters in this election, and NOT those who were "legally" registered? Let's say I am in error as you suggest and no more votes than those of legally registered voters were submitted during this past election? So how in your opinion do we determine who among those "eligible" voters actually were legally "registered" to vote?

I hope you are not arguing that however going back over the thread I'm not sure? Re-reading it again this morning, I can't figure out what you were arguing? Are you saying it's not true more ballots were cast in this election than we had "registered" voters? Clear this up for me and I'll drop it.

How do we determine among all the "eligible" voters you mentioned in your argument, who was actually legally "registered" to vote? Are we certain we are counting only registered voters? If so, how? How do we know all those absentee ballots sent out to all "eligible" voters were returned by legally "registered" voters only or are you arguing it doesn't matter?

My issue is the math in your reply in post #31, specifically the "yournews" quoted part. They improperly multiply the turnout rate by the number of registered voters to come up with an argument for why Trump won and there are illegal votes. The turnout rate uses eligible voters as the denominator, so multiplying that times registered voters shorts the count of total votes.

By saying that, I'm not telling you that unregistered, otherwise eligible folks should be able to cast ballots. All I'm telling you is that those folks are counted as part of the VEP used as the denominator in the computation of the turnout rate, obviously votes cast is the numerator.

 

[atlkvb]

My issue is the math in your reply in post #31, specifically the "yournews" quoted part. They improperly multiply the turnout rate by the number of registered voters to come up with an argument for why Trump won and there are illegal votes. The turnout rate uses eligible voters as the denominator, so multiplying that times registered voters shorts the count of total votes.

By saying that, I'm not telling you that unregistered, otherwise eligible folks should be able to cast ballots. All I'm telling you is that those folks are counted as part of the VEP used as the denominator in the computation of the turnout rate, obviously votes cast is the numerator.

OK. However I'm not arguing how the number of "eligible voters" was calculated. I'm simply asserting more votes (ballots) were cast than there were actual verified registrations.

No one can explain that. Can you?

 

[WVUALLEN]

I can't possibly understand how anyone can waste that much time on here on WEEKENDS. I cross country skied my ass off.

Did you wear a mask Pelosi?

 

[atlkvb]

My issue is the math in your reply in post #31, They improperly multiply the turnout rate by the number of registered voters to come up with an argument for why Trump won and there are illegal votes. The turnout rate uses eligible voters as the denominator, so multiplying that times registered voters shorts the count of total votes.

Election Fraud Exposed by More Votes than Registered Voters! | We the People Convention

BREAKING HUGE – ‘Simple Math’ Shows Biden Claims 13 MILLION More Votes Than There Were Eligible Voters Who Voted in 2020 ...

wethepeopleconvention.org

according to the Washington Post, 2020 had the highest voter turnout in over a century:

We made a copy as of today and added these voters up. When we add up the number of registered voters we obtain 213.8 million registered voters in the US

Using the numbers as of today, we find a huge issue. If we have 213.8 million registered voters in the US and 66.2% of all voters voted in the 2020 election, that equals 141.5 voters who voted in the 2020 election. If President Trump won 74 million votes, then that leaves only 67.5 million votes remaining for Biden. This means 13 million duplicate or made up ballots were created and counted for Biden!

OK @mule_eer ...using only the number of "registered" voters as is currently measured in the US, and subtracting from that number the known ballots cast in the election, how is it that Joe Biden got 80 million of those votes if Trump got 74 million of them? (Remember, you cannot count voters who weren't legally registered)

Explain.

 

[atlkvb]

My man @mule_eer ....wrecking his brain trying to find Biden's record votes among all registered voters.....

Tough one huh Bro?

Look, I do know how to count atl!

 

[atlkvb]

I am denying that more folks voted than were legally registered to vote. That's based on the discussion we are having. The VEP is roughly 239.2 million. The number of votes cast was roughly 159.8 million. That's where you get the rate you quoted above of 66.8%

But @mule_eer , didn't you just add something like 18 million voters from the above example atl just provided above in the Washington Post's survey of actual registered voters? 🤨

@mule_eer taking exception to atl's "new math"

 

[mule_eer]

Election Fraud Exposed by More Votes than Registered Voters! | We the People Convention

BREAKING HUGE – ‘Simple Math’ Shows Biden Claims 13 MILLION More Votes Than There Were Eligible Voters Who Voted in 2020 ...

wethepeopleconvention.org

according to the Washington Post, 2020 had the highest voter turnout in over a century:

We made a copy as of today and added these voters up. When we add up the number of registered voters we obtain 213.8 million registered voters in the US

Using the numbers as of today, we find a huge issue. If we have 213.8 million registered voters in the US and 66.2% of all voters voted in the 2020 election, that equals 141.5 voters who voted in the 2020 election. If President Trump won 74 million votes, then that leaves only 67.5 million votes remaining for Biden. This means 13 million duplicate or made up ballots were created and counted for Biden!

OK @mule_eer ...using only the number of "registered" voters as is currently measured in the US, and subtracting from that number the known ballots cast in the election, how is it that Joe Biden got 80 million of those votes if Trump got 74 million of them? (Remember, you cannot count voters who weren't legally registered)

Explain.

The underlined part of your post is EXACTLY why the definition of voter turnout matters. That percentage is of all people who are ELIGIBLE to vote, not of REGISTERED voters. I'm not the one struggling with math here, no matter how many memes you post to the contrary.

 

[atlkvb]

The underlined part of your post is EXACTLY why the definition of voter turnout matters. That percentage is of all people who are ELIGIBLE to vote, not of REGISTERED voters. I'm not the one struggling with math here, no matter how many memes you post to the contrary.

You still refuse to answer the chief question of our dispute my friend. Who is allowed to vote that's not legally registered? I'm assumming you are willing to admit folks who are not legally registered should NOT be voting correct?

OK, if we count only the votes we know came in against the legal registrations I posted for you and then subtract that number by the 75 or so million votes Trump received, please explain to me how there were 80 million legal votes left to go to Biden?

If you prefer you can even provide the actual subtraction formula so I can see how you arrive at your numbers?

I'll wait for your response.

 

[atlkvb]

The underlined part of your post is EXACTLY why the definition of voter turnout matters. That percentage is of all people who are ELIGIBLE to vote, not of REGISTERED voters. I'm not the one struggling with math here, no matter how many memes you post to the contrary.

Let me see if I can make it even easier for you Mule my Man. Explain why we should even count "non registered" voters in the total of folks who actually cast ballots? Seems to me that's where our little dispute is at loggerheads?

You want to use the "MIT" formula that counts all possible eligible voters (registered and non registered) and I want to count only the folks who voted (hopefully they all were legally registered, but I don't think they were)

So in an effort to debate this on the same level let's just count only the folks who we know actually voted against the known legally registered list I provided earlier in the thread. If you don't want to do that, then please explain to me why we should also include "eligible" voters in that total as a percentage of who actually voted?

How do we know if they voted if they weren't legally registered? Make sense?

atl makin' any sense to you my Brother?

Yeah, but did I make sense to @mule_eer ?

Look atl, I f I need your help answering any questions, I'll ask for myself OK?

 

[wvjeff]

Biden is 46.

 

[atlkvb]

OK @mule_eer , this is my last attempt to try and settle this little dispute with you over these voting numbers and then I promise I'm going to drop it. So far you have refused to tell me how we know all of the "eligible" voters used in your formula for voting turnout percentages were actually registered to vote?

I've asked if they should even be counted, and you refuse to even acknowledge they shouldn't be. Fine.

Tell me if you can how many among the "eligible" voters you are using in the 66.7% turnout actually voted or were even registered to? How do you know this? You are counting them in that overall turnout statistic are you not?

You indeed are.

Alright, so please tell me why they are being included in the turnout percentage and how you know they actually voted or should be counted in the overall voting percentages? If you don't answer I understand. It defeats your argument if you're honest. That's fine, no answer actually is an answer and I promise I'm dropping it after this post if you do not respond with a logical, fact based, well reasoned explanation as I already am aware of how you typically do.

OK, so let's hear it my Man?

 

[WVU82]

 

[WVU82]

 

[mule_eer]

OK @mule_eer , this is my last attempt to try and settle this little dispute with you over these voting numbers and then I promise I'm going to drop it. So far you have refused to tell me how we know all of the "eligible" voters used in your formula for voting turnout percentages were actually registered to vote?

I've asked if they should even be counted, and you refuse to even acknowledge they shouldn't be. Fine.

Tell me if you can how many among the "eligible" voters you are using in the 66.7% turnout actually voted or were even registered to? How do you know this? You are counting them in that overall turnout statistic are you not?

You indeed are.

Alright, so please tell me why they are being included in the turnout percentage and how you know they actually voted or should be counted in the overall voting percentages? If you don't answer I understand. It defeats your argument if you're honest. That's fine, no answer actually is an answer and I promise I'm dropping it after this post if you do not respond with a logical, fact based, well reasoned explanation as I already am aware of how you typically do.

OK, so let's hear it my Man?

You are still conflating the number used in the denominator as some argument that unregistered voters should be allowed to cast ballots. That's not the argument. The point is that those eligible to register to vote are all used in the denominator of the computation of the turnout rate. If you later multiply that rate by the number of registered voters, a smaller number than the one used to compute the rate, you'll get an incorrect count of the number of votes cast.

Also, if someone is multiplying a percentage by something to solve for a number used in the computation of the percentage, you should be suspicious. The number of votes cast is used to compute the turnout rate. Why not just use that number?

 

[atlkvb]

You are still conflating the number used in the denominator as some argument that unregistered voters should be allowed to cast ballots. That's not the argument. The point is that those eligible to register to vote are all used in the denominator of the computation of the turnout rate. If you later multiply that rate by the number of registered voters, a smaller number than the one used to compute the rate, you'll get an incorrect count of the number of votes cast.

Also, if someone is multiplying a percentage by something to solve for a number used in the computation of the percentage, you should be suspicious. The number of votes cast is used to compute the turnout rate. Why not just use that number?

Mule my Man you are much too smart and much too sophisticated to be duped by the games folks can play with statistics. My question to you was simple. How do you know which of the "eligible" voters used in the formula to determine the percentage of those who actually voted were registered?

Why can't you answer that? You're saying it doesn't matter? Well then how do you know the precise number of voters who were actually registered really voted? Why do you place more confidence in the number of "eligible" voters in that percentage, than the folks who actually voted and how can you tell the difference?

 

[mule_eer]

Mule my Man you are much too smart and much too sophisticated to be duped by the games folks can play with statistics. My question to you was simple. How do you know which of the "eligible" voters used in the formula to determine the percentage of those who actually voted were registered?

Why can't you answer that? You're saying it doesn't matter? Well then how do you know the precise number of voters who were actually registered really voted? Why do you place more confidence in the number of "eligible" voters in that percentage, than the folks who actually voted and how can you tell the difference?

You're still missing the point. If number of votes is used to compute turnout rate, why are we multiplying some other number by turnout rate to compute the total number of votes? If someone is doing that, odds are they are trying to mislead you. An article you posted twice in this thread does exactly that.

Only registered voters are allowed to legally cast votes. That has absolutely nothing to do with how the turnout rate is computed.

 

[atlkvb]

You're still missing the point. If number of votes is used to compute turnout rate, why are we multiplying some other number by turnout rate to compute the total number of votes? If someone is doing that, odds are they are trying to mislead you. An article you posted twice in this thread does exactly that.

Only registered voters are allowed to legally cast votes. That has absolutely nothing to do with how the turnout rate is computed.

So I'd turn right back around on you and ask why you are including "eligible" voters as part of the actual turnout percentage not knowing if they were actually registered? Anyone who does that I'd argue is also trying to manipulate the numbers. Why are we counting folks as a percentage of the voting population who we can't even determine if they're legally registered? Who votes that's not registered?

Look Mule let's just forget about it and agree to disagree here. This is a perfect reason why there is so much strife and division in this country. We can't even agree on how many folks legally voted for Christ's sake!

Take care my Man....as always appreciate your respectful dialogue even though you're making me lose what little hair on my balding noggin I have Left!

Hope you had a Merry Christmas, and have a happier New Year!

Take care Mule my Man.

 

[mule_eer]

So I'd turn right back around on you and ask why you are including "eligible" voters as part of the actual turnout percentage not knowing if they were actually registered? Anyone who does that I'd argue is also trying to manipulate the numbers. Why are we counting folks as a percentage of the voting population who we can't even determine if they're legally registered? Who votes that's not registered?

Look Mule let's just forget about it and agree to disagree here. This is a perfect reason why there is so much strife and division in this country. We can't even agree on how many folks legally voted for Christ's sake!

Take care my Man....as always appreciate your respectful dialogue even though you're making me lose what little hair on my balding noggin I have Left!

Hope you had a Merry Christmas, and have a happier New Year!

Take care Mule my Man.

I'm not including them. The definition of the turnout rate is. Just because some who are otherwise eligible but not registered are used in the denominator does not mean that they can vote.

 

[atlkvb]

I'm not including them. The definition of the turnout rate is. Just because some who are otherwise eligible but not registered are used in the denominator does not mean that they can vote.

That's like counting players on an active roster who are just walk-ons or redshirts. Yeah they're part of the program, and are "eligible" to play but they're NOT getting any PT, and aren't posting any numbers on the stat sheets! They're not on the two deep roster so why even include them among guys who are logging serious PT and contributing to the W-L column?

That's what you're arguing with these "eligible" voters being included in the actual voter turnout percentages.

Loopy.