Maybe if you were ... well, okay, nevermind. I think, after all your bawling, it's a bit late for that one, Arthur. Your disrespect is hardly news, sir. It's been pretty apparent since you showed up. If that's the only way you're capable of comprehending it, then I guess it will have to do. Actually, it turns out we're both wrong. My 2.8% figure was based on your 51.4% assertion (which, we might note, is incorrect according to your assertion of raw numbers). But your 14% figure is the sort of cheap misrepresentation we might expect from television commercials telling us how much we'll save if we buy fifteen of this particular product. That is, yes, the raw difference is approximately fourteen percent of 38.9 million. But the actual difference between the two is less than half that. The Republicans won 53.4%, according to your House numbers; the Democrats received 46.5%. That makes the difference 6.9%. In the Senate, the margin was closer, about about 52.3% to 47.7%, a 4.6% difference. Either way, it's less than the popular vote in 2008 when Barack Obama apparently failed to win a mandate with a 7.2% popular margin. As such, the 2010 victory for the GOP doesn't empower them to do anything; indeed, it's hard to tell the difference 'twixt before and after, since the whole purpose of the Republican Party right now is the same as it was then—to sink the nation in hopes that voters will punish Barack Obama.
And as long as we are talking votes, those little Republicans have been busy finding new ways to keep non Republicans from voting again - bless their little hearts. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-vote-florida-20111031,0,1962738.story In 2000 they illegally purged voter rolls in key states like Florida. And then they used the Supremes to block a recount in Florida.
"I Am the Koch Brothers' Brother From Another Mother! And proud of it! - Herman Cain http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2...ch_brothers_brother_from_another_mother_.html
No bawling Tiassa. Straight up telling you that you are wrong is not bawling. Yeah, funny about the need to do something respectful to actually EARN respect. No, that's clearly your position, or what else do you mean when you said the people fell for a con job? No, you were wrong with your pathetic understatement of 2.8% but my math is correct because indeed, the extra 5.7 million votes in favor of the Republicans is indeed 14% more votes than the 38.9 million cast for the Dems. Yeah Tiassa, keep telliing yourself that, because that is just that more of your rabidly partisan BS. Arthur
You're almost funny Keep telling yourself, that, Arthur, as you tell us all about how (boo-hoo) you aren't like that. The fundamental difference 'twixt you and me. I figure people can opt out of respect, but you're the sort of self-centered supremacist who needs to judge others. Something obviously too subtle for you: They made the mistake of taking a Republican at his word. You still don't get how that works, do you? Or is that you do, but don't really care about representing yourself honestly? Anyway, to reiterate: But your 14% figure is the sort of cheap misrepresentation we might expect from television commercials telling us how much we'll save if we buy fifteen of this particular product. That is, yes, the raw difference is approximately fourteen percent of 38.9 million. But the actual difference between the two is less than half that. You missed that part in your self-righteous bawling. You know what else is rabidly partisan, then? Reality. Oh, and, strangely, the Republican Party, since the reality is that their behavior is accurately described as "to sink the nation in hopes that voters will punish Barack Obama". How dare they be such partisan leftists as to support my argument by their deeds! And yet you wonder why people question the integrity of conservative advocates? Oh, poor you.
Again, refer to the loss of 63 seats and 14% more votes for the Republicans in the last election and see why you are WRONG. So, no Tiassa, with those kind of numbers you're the one who is left to say that though you are so smart, the Sheeple were conned. Typical self-serving BS you see posted all the time from clueless basement dwellers. Which is why all we read from you is your rabid partisanship and endless bawling. Poor YOU. Arthur
(chortle!) And that's well and fine, but refer to your original statement: "The difference, 5.7 million votes in favor of the Republicans is 14% more votes than the 38.9 million cast for the Dems." And as I noted: But your 14% figure is the sort of cheap misrepresentation we might expect from television commercials telling us how much we'll save if we buy fifteen of this particular product. That is, yes, the raw difference is approximately fourteen percent of 38.9 million. But the actual difference between the two is less than half that. So the number of seats speaks to the number of people? That's some weird math you've got going on, Arthur. Yet you complain that some people see conservatives as mean-spirited and dishonest? Pretty much anything that disagrees with a conservative, the conservative sees as rabid partisanship. I mean, hell, take a look at President Obama. His health care plan is based on the Republican offering from 1993, and a plan enacted by a Republican governor in Massachusetts. Now we hear from the right wing about how it's so evil and communist and fascist and, in a predictably strange twist, "Jewish". The difference in conservative eyes between responsible reform and making taxpayers "Jews for Obama's ovens" is the difference between whether the elected official is a Republican or Democrat. Welcome to your right wing, Arthur. As stated before, I can accept that you don't like the outcome of your fellow conservatives' behavior. But you're not going to change how people view conservative behavior unless you convince Republicans to behave better. I suppose you could try to convince everyone that Republicans really aren't behaving so badly; it's worked before. But I don't think you're the spokesman to pull off that sleight of reality.
What you call the RAW difference and the ACTUAL difference mean the same thing Tiassa. 14% More people voted for the Republicans than voted for the Democrats in the last House elections. A simple mathematical fact. Which is why the Dems lost 63 seats. Poor you. Arthur
Let us know when you next try to make sense Which is why the actual difference between the parties is less than fourteen percent. You see, Arthur, people around here are already awake to your game: You drag threads off topic. First you came in with a false complaint, then you lied to us some, then you started arguing over numbers, insisting that the difference between 53 and 47 is actually the difference between 45 and 39 as a proportion of 39. That way, you can claim that six is fourteen, and in order to make some point that only you know, because even if you convince us of what your point is, as soon as it's shown wrong, it will turn out that it wasn't your point and whatever you insist on talking about next has been your point all along. What is unclear to anyone at this point is why the point that isn't your point except it is is and has nothing to do with Herman Cain is so pointedly important to you that you'll blather on about it all this time. And it's probably because you don't have a genuine, useful point to make.
ROTFLMAO Tiassa, all you are doing is proving to the fourm that your mathematical skills are piss poor 44.59 million votes for the Republicans minus 38.85 million votes for the Democrats means 5.74 million more people voted Republican. Try it 44.59 - 38.85 = 5.74 Using any calculator on the planet will show that the margin of 5.74 million votes is equal to 14.8% more votes. 5.74 / 38.85 = .1477 Arthur
Only if you're expressing it as a percentage of democrat votes. I'm not sure I can see the merit of doing so. It seems to me it would make more sense to express the difference as a percentage of the total votes - in which case it comes out at 6.9%. Republicans got 53.4% of the vote. Democrats got 46.6% of the vote. The difference is 6.8% of the total vote, which is still 14.6% of the democrat vote (the difference between 6.8% and 6.9% is due to rounding errors).
Because it most clearly show that 14.8% more of the voters voted for the Republican candidate. Only if you are talking about the total votes for ALL the candidates. I wasn't (we are only dealing with about 96% of the total votes). The simple fact is the Republicans got 14.8% MORE votes than did the Democrats.
No, it shows that the margin of the republicans over the democrats is 14.8% of the Democrat vote, that's not the same thing. What you're doing is roughly the equivalent of going grocery shopping, buying one item at a 25% discount, 9 at their normal prices and then claiming you've saved 25% on your weekly grocery bill. You haven't, you've save more like 2.5% (assuming you buy the same tn items every week). That makes a negligible difference, it reduces the difference between the margins to something like 6.6% of the total.
And that's what I've been claiming: It's a simple mathematical fact. BULL SHIT That is absolutely NOTHING like that example Trippy and you know it. If you want a grocery analogy, it's pretty simple. If they raise the price of a $38.85 item by 14.7%, I'll pay $44.59 for it. ONE MORE TIME: 44.59 million votes for the Republicans minus 38.85 million votes for the Democrats means 5.74 million more people voted Republican. 44.59 - 38.85 = 5.74 million vote difference between them, or the MARGIN. The Republican margin of 5.74 million votes is equal to 14.8% more votes than were cast for the Democrats. 5.74 / 38.85 = .1477 Arthur
What every horsepucky dealer needs There are two merits for doing so when one is in his position: (1) Continued digression from thread topic, as per his m.o. (2) He needs a more impressive looking number because he believes his argument draws some certain authority or effect from the larger margin.
You were the one who were apparently outraged by the percent: Tiassa, You need to get a grip. The ACTUAL DIFFERENCE is a fixed number and never changes. You can express the actual difference as a percent, and then the percent can change depending on what that percent represents. The 14.7% denotes how many more people voted Republican than did Democrat. The 6.9% is what the difference was of the total votes cast, which, because though a smaller percent is of a much larger number. The ACTUAL DIFFERENCE though never changes. Your big objection to stating it one way vs the other is simply being either childish or dumb, your pick. Arthur
Yes you did, you accused me of making this obvious MISTAKE: When I've done NOTHING of the sort. I repeat: 14.7% More people voted for the Republicans than voted for the Democrats in the last House elections. It is a simple mathematical fact. Arthur
Double Dog Dare, Even! Actually I was trying to follow your rapidly-transforming digression. Which, as anyone might have predicted, went nowhere: I would say thank you for making your reasons for this silly sideshow absolutely clear, but there never really was any mystery about it. No, really: What is the point of this irrelevant statistic? What are you trying to prove, or even suggest, by introducing this specific context of the numbers? Go on. Come up with something useful. I dare you.
