I am struggling to find where I saw how many counties Biden did better than Hillary in. And it was ridiculously low. Like, less than 10. Certainly not as many as you are saying. Are your numbers pure votes, or percentage of votes? Either way, if that was bad information, my apologies.
The point remains. Your theory of that many republicans voting against him and that many people passionate about voting against him would have merit if it were a nationwide trend. It wasn't. Biden did well only in places he was already going to win overwhelmingly and ridiculously well in metro areas of swing states. There are literally 4 counties that make the difference between 270 for Trump and 270 for Biden. And in those counties, counting mysteriously stopped for a period of time while Trump was leading and then once resumed there were ballots literally dumped by the tens and even hundreds of thousands. All +90% for Biden. Those places also saw ridiculously high turnout and historically low rejection rates. It would be bizarre for those odds to play out. But it is 2020 after all, so who knows?
None of that can be certifiably linked to fraud in all likelihood. But it is stupid to think that things are on the up and up. I am ready for it to be over either way. Let pedo Joe and Harris get us back into terrible foreign agreements and revert back into the military era in search of the next war. I will live my life the exact same way as I always have regardless.
I specifically looked for percentage gains. For example, Biden performed at over 3 percentage points higher than Clinton in Iowa, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas and 2.5 percent better in North Carolina.
To give an idea of truly how many more people voted in literally every state in the country, Biden's 2020 totals in Texas and North Carolina would have given him 2016 wins of more than 600,000 and 300,000 votes, respectively.
Some of the things you have mentioned go back to Trump spreading information that is simply not true. You and I talked about the Detroit thing, which was flat wrong, as being something he may have misinterpreted or not understood. As it turned out it was based on someone who actually submitted an affidavit in court with counties and voting from Minnesota and used that data for districts in Michigan.
Trump tweeted about the rejection rate in Georgia, saying it is normally 5 percent but this year it was sub 1 (I don't remember the exact sub 1 percent number). Checking Georgia's records for the last three elections the percentages are all sub 1 and roughly the same. As opposed to his Detroit tweets, no one seems to know where the hell he got the Georgia data from.
The stuff about stopping counting and waking up with Biden leading has been exaggerated and, in some cases, straight fabricated. All one has to do to understand what happened in states that Biden turned around is look at the trajectory and occurrence in three states, that really no one talks about: Virginia, Ohio and Kentucky. If it is possible (and I'm not sure it is, but I'm going off memory of the surprising numbers at the time), find a site that shows the head to head race as ballots were being counted.
Ohio and Kentucky allowed for early counting of mail-in and early in-person ballots (they counted in the order things were received, essentially) and Biden had sizable leads in both (massive actually). As day of, in-person ballots got counted, Biden's lead shrunk and Trump won comfortably.
In Virginia, nothing got counted until day of, in-person ballots were calculated and counties/districts reported results all at once. Trump, a massive underdog in the state, led until late Tuesday night. Of course, late Tuesday night was still only representing 60-65 percent of the state vote. Fairfax county, largest in the state and historically blue, reported after all mail-in and early were calculated and the state immediately swung for Biden. A short time later, the state was projected as a comfortable Biden win.
Things like this literally happened all over the country, but no one talks about it because Donald Trump doesn't tweet about them.
My theory about the passion both for and against Trump was a nationwide trend. Look all over the country. Places like Texas had more people vote early than have ever voted there in the history of this country. The turnout around the country was massive and, as I mentioned yesterday, it was projected. Nate Silver at Tivethirtyeight, to cite just one expert, projected 145 million plus turnout.
I know it seems easy because I'm a liberal and the guy I voted for won, but looking at some of this stuff logically goes a long way.
It gets commonly thrown about that Trump's 2016 win was shocking but it shouldn't have been. I said many times in the lead up, she was the only candidate he could beat and practically any other Republican would have beaten her, as well.
Too many liberals simply failed to recognize certain qualities about her and this country, which is what led to their reaction of shock. I have always said, while I fully believe there was Russian interference (not direct collusion with Trump) in the election in terms of the spread of mis and disinformation, the truth is Trump didn't need it.