On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 14:38:30 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 10:51:16 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 15:37:00 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

It was the lowest turnout sine 1996. It was Stupid Day, 2016.

Excuse me scooter but weren't there more votes cast in 2016 than in
the rest of the history of presidential campaigns?
Maybe CNN lied to me?

Well Bubba, 2016 was the lowest percentage of eligible voters since 1996.
Define election turnout however you like. Percentage of eligible voter
suits me just fine.

Is that eligible voter or registered voter?
It is funny how they are slicing and dicing the statistics without
acknowledging that these were the two most unpopular candidates in
recent history, if not the entire history of the republic.

The statistics are the acknowledgement. No other way to take it.

You are right. BOTH Clintons did not have the popularity to drive
turnout. So what?

wrote:
On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 14:38:30 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 10:51:16 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 15:37:00 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

It was the lowest turnout sine 1996. It was Stupid Day, 2016.

Excuse me scooter but weren't there more votes cast in 2016 than in
the rest of the history of presidential campaigns?
Maybe CNN lied to me?

Well Bubba, 2016 was the lowest percentage of eligible voters since 1996.
Define election turnout however you like. Percentage of eligible voter
suits me just fine.

Is that eligible voter or registered voter?
It is funny how they are slicing and dicing the statistics without
acknowledging that these were the two most unpopular candidates in
recent history, if not the entire history of the republic.

The statistics are the acknowledgement. No other way to take it.

You are right. BOTH Clintons did not have the popularity to drive
turnout. So what?


Yup. Lies, damn lies, and statistics.