Tuesday, March 15, 2016

j reacts to what the supertuesday II results tell us about the fairness of the results (# 1)

they called ohio too early.

i mentioned this in massachusetts: it looks like she stuffed ballots in boston. and he almost overwhelmed it.

i mentioned it in michigan: it looks like she stuffed ballots in detroit. and he did overwhelm it.

that's where she could stuff ballots. and, the urban/rural split is backwards. i mean, did we enter the twilight zone? then, there's something funny going on.

so, she looks at the "expert analysis" for today. and, they say that she could lose ohio. so, she stuffs ohio extra good - to make sure he couldn't possibly overwhelm her.

so, she starts off with a huge lead. 70%. "initial results". then, they call it within a few minutes, right. all according to plan...

now, i didn't think ohio was the state she had to worry about. i thought it was illinois. and, there's a lot of illinois that hasn't come in, yet.

but, whether i was right or wrong, something is curious: he is consistently gaining in ohio. she's fallen, steadily, from 70% to 57%. and, this movement is continuing.

wait for it.

can he overwhelm it, after all?