STILL THINK Q IS WRONG HUH?
JUNIOR STUGOTZ:
Gee, it’s weird for all these 60+, 70+, and (looks up age of latest retiree) … 85!!! Year old to be retiring ahead of a challenging mid term…
First of all, I couldn’t give a shit what Q said 4 years ago. This Nostradamus act is old, and these predictions can’t keep applying forever.
About the retirements, Kevin McCarthy has talked about this:
According to that article, 9 House Republicans are not seeking re-election in 2022. OMG it’s a conspiracy!!!
This page has different numbers, not sure why. It says in the Senate, 1 Dem is retiring. And the Pubs? 5!!! OMG it’s a conspiracy!!!
As you can see, I’m not impressed by a string of retirements every 2 years as House/Senate terms come to their end. Show me how it isn’t normal if you want to have a debate.
1 Like
WHERE DID Q SAY THE RETIREMENTS WERE ALL DEMOCRATS?
ARE YOU REALLY THIS FCKEN ESTUPID STUPIDER OR ARE YOU JUST DELAYING ADMITTING HOW DEEP OF A HOLE YOU ARE DIGGING?
I don’t know if Q said that or not, but retirements are normal. The last midterms in 2018 saw 32 Congress members retire from public office (23 Pubs). 2022 is only at 21 so far.
You’re failing to prove this is anything but normal.
1 Like
Here we go. (You might find this interesting @GardenStateCane) According to ballotpedia:
2016 = 31 Congress retired from public office (21 Pubs, 10 Dems)
2018 = 35 Congress retired from public office (26 Pubs, 9 Dems)
2020 = 30 Congress retired from public office (23 Pubs, 6 Dems, 1 Lib)
2022 = 21 Congress retiring from public office so far (9 Pubs, 12 Dems)
So what do we see here?
-
So far, 2022 retirements are in line with previous years, currently on the low end but I expect more resignations to come in to catch up because it’s early. These future resignations do NOT deserve OMG conspiracy threads.
-
The last 3 election cycles, many MANY more Pubs have retired than Dems, so even if 2022 finally sees a majority of Dems, it wouldn’t be anything strange.
-
As with most Q believers, you’re getting duped into thinking anything special is happening.
1 Like
WHAT WERE THEY PRETRUMP 2016?
2014 AND BEFORE?
I’ll also add, this is the logical fallacy that GSC falls for a lot.
Someone says, “hey, notice all the retirements coming out of Congress?”
GSC, who had never especially paid attention to Congressional retirements, starts noticing them for the first time. One, two, three. Hmm, maybe Storm’s onto something? There certainly DO seem to be a lot of retirements…
But it turns out, not only are retirements perfectly normal, but so far this election year has FEWER RETIREMENTS THAN USUAL.
We can apply this same confirmation bias fallacy to “Notice all the black outs?” “Notice all the foreign government retirements?”
Sorry folks, you’re seeing what you want to see, and it’s not the slightest bit convincing.
Look it up.
WELL IT IS A LITTLE STRANGE THAT MOST OF ALL THE REPUBLICANS RETIRING VOTED FOR TRUMP’S IMPEACHMENT AND HE HAS MADE A LIST…
OUTSIDE OF THAT AND Q STATING IT WOULD HAPPEN SURE NOTHING TO SEE UNLESS PRIOR TO 2016 THINGS WERE DIFFERENT…
MAYBE YOU JUST OROVED OUR POINT JUNIOR…
Nope. Do you even math?
9 Pubs are retiring. 2 of those voted to impeach Trump.
Trump named 3 House members who already retired. None of the others on his list are retiring. The reason they are on his list is because he wants to back an opponent so they lose the seat. Now, will some of them end up retiring because of Trump? Maybe. Everyone knows he is actively campaigning against them.
And I’m stating the sky will be blue tomorrow. I’m also stating that we’ll see Congressional retirements in 2024. BANK ON IT!!!
That GRANDMA MEEMAW is an idiot? I prove that every day.
No interest in these numbers, @GardenStateCane?
After your comment:
Lots of people getting out of politics suddenly.
Dare I say - Durham?
I thought you might be curious about the comparison to previous years.
Why are raw numbers the point as opposed to key leadership?
Pelosi is speaker
Leahy you can argue is the #2 Democrat in the Senate.
Johnson and Spies are pretty high on the list too.
It’ll be interesting if we continue to see the trend.
HE DOESN’T APPARENTLY WANT TO LOOK AT WHAT THE TRENDS ARE PRETRUMP…
WHY WOULD THAT BE?
Were you talking about something besides numbers when you said “Lots of people” ?
Because that is your direct quote:
Lots of people getting out of politics suddenly.
Aren’t numbers relevant when the basis of your suspicion was because they were “lots”?
You also mentioned Durham as a possible cause, but Pelosi announced her retirement a long time ago. I think you tried posting a link about that but it was broken so I couldn’t see your source.
Weird because you apparently don’t want to either…
WHY WOULD THAT BE?
1 Like
STORM ISN’T THE ONE BRINGING UP THE STATISTICS…
THAT IS YOUR BABY SO THE QUESTION IS WHY ARE YOU HIDING PRETRUMP?
WHY DON’T YOU PROVIDE A LINK SINCE YOU ARE ASKING GSC TO?
SEEMS LIKE YOU ARE HIDING THE INFORMATION…
DID YOU GET CAUGHT AGAIN?
Yea- “lots of important people”
I believe, and Storm check em if I’m wrong, that Durham was investigating in 2018. He wasn’t Special Counsel yet, but was actively looking into this matter as US Attorney.
NOPE HE WAS PUT IN PLACE BY SESSIONS IN 2017…
THAT IS WHY THE TRUMP SESSION’S FEUD WAS ALL AN ACT JUST LIKE THE DEMOTION OF FLYNN…
ALL PART OF THE PLAN…
You absolutely were the one who brought up the pre-Trump statistics.
Weird how you’re not presenting them.
WHAT ARE YOU SCARED OF?
Scroll up. The source is ballotpedia, which I linked twice.
DID YOU GET CAUGHT OUT AGAIN???
Ah, another one of your inferences. We should have INFERRED by that BLANK SPACE that you meant IMPORTANT PEOPLE.
Classic GSC.
This says May 2019? Got a better source?
