Who will Win

[posthuman]

you didn't even read the page you linked, eh?

it contains no proof, nor even a definition of 'most irrational'

what it states about convergent subseries is true for any integer multiple of phi -- therefore ((as previously intimated)) there are infinitely many irrational numbers with equally poor convergent approximations.

you don't know what you're talking about, and to people who do, you look dumber every time you bring it up.

let me dumb it down for you @cv5

φ is irrational
2φ is irrational
3φ is irrational
4φ is irrational
.
.
.
nφ is irrational for any integer n



one of φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates φ
one of 2φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates 2φ
one of 3φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates 3φ
one of 4φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates 4φ
.
.
.
one of nφ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates nφ, for any integer n


which member of this infinite set each with equally poor truncated infinite series representation approximations is "most irrational" ??
define 'most irrational' please.

 

[SophieT]

So who’s gonna be president after the SCOTUS has based on what you just presented here?

That's a quote from the Supreme Court of the United States website

Over your head I guess

 

[Truth7t7]

It is truly amazing how fast despite the evidence. Things are going to get interesting.

It appears the court is looking for a case withing the States Jurisdiction, Voting Resident, Business,Etc

Texas has no interest in another States election process?

There are many cases pending, we will see how things go, this was a big shock.

Will the US Supreme Court deny future cases pending, such as LinWood's on the docket to be heard?

Will the Republican controlled Legislature's in these States, allow the fraudulent electors to move forward?

Will the US Senate and House have at least one objection to the electors to start debate?

Will The Senate Approve The Electors After Debate?

Texas Tribune:
Quote Article: In a few brief sentences, the high court said it would not consider the case for procedural reasons, because Texas lacked standing to bring it.
"Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections," the court wrote in an unsigned ruling Friday evening.

 

[Johnjo]

Ignorance is going to destroy more things that most people will give it credit for. But then, isn't that what ignorance is about and why it is dangerous?

The constitution was thrown out the window by the states named in the case brought by Texas

Half the Supremes have ignored the constitution for years anyway

That’s not the case as of today based on a conservative body count of the members of the SCOTUS. Thing is that the SCOTUS has no soft spot for conspiracy theories.

 

[posthuman]

It is a case of not willing to admit he is wrong, how many times has he presented incorrect info and skirts around it.

Same ole same ole.

remind you of any recent president?

 

[SophieT]

The term “objective” left this country a long time ago. We have resorted to being a nation of natural born polarized people out of touch with reality.

Just woke up from a 4 year nap did you?

 

[SophieT]

That’s not the case as of today based on a conservative body count of the members of the SCOTUS. Thing is that the SCOTUS has no soft spot for conspiracy theories.

Well they are running with one now. Watch and learn.

 

[Johnjo]

Just woke up from a 4 year nap did you?

Out of arguments already?

 

[Truth7t7]

That’s not the case as of today based on a conservative body count of the members of the SCOTUS. Thing is that the SCOTUS has no soft spot for conspiracy theories.

The ruling had nothing to do with conspiracy, it was ruled that Texas had no jurisdiction in another States election process, State Vs State

 

[Johnjo]

remind you of any recent president?

You saying he’s the @realDonadTrump?😁

 

[SophieT]

Out of arguments already?

I know what you are doing

 

[Johnjo]

The ruling had nothing to do with conspiracy, it was ruled that Texas had no jurisdiction in another States election process, State Vs State

And just how will the state of Texas proceed from that?

 

[EleventhHour]

let me dumb it down for you @cv5

φ is irrational
2φ is irrational
3φ is irrational
4φ is irrational
.
.
.
nφ is irrational for any integer n



one of φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates φ
one of 2φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates 2φ
one of 3φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates 3φ
one of 4φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates 4φ
.
.
.
one of nφ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates nφ, for any integer n


which member of this infinite set each with equally poor truncated infinite series representation approximations is "most irrational" ??
define 'most irrational' please.

I so get this ...

 

[SophieT]

The ruling had nothing to do with conspiracy, it was ruled that Texas had no jurisdiction in another States election process, State Vs State

Right. and yet we have one of the major disseminators of misinformation saying they said the case had no merit

 

[posthuman]

You saying he’s the @realDonadTrump?😁

only a disciple of him, i'm afraid. real Don is too busy with important government matters to be tweeting nonsense, KGB propaganda & disinformation in the middle of the night or spending half his days out golfing, and he gets his information from better sources than conspiracy theorists & hack news outlets..

.. wait ..

 

[Truth7t7]

Perhaps more like ... "lack of evidence."

However, this was more about federal undermining the states, something a conservative should not favor actually, and really that was not going to happen.

Wrong, the ruling was State Vs State not Federal, as seen below in bold red.

Texas Tribune:
Quote Article: In a few brief sentences, the high court said it would not consider the case for procedural reasons, because Texas lacked standing to bring it.
"Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections," the court wrote in an unsigned ruling Friday evening.

 

[SophieT]

Wrong, the ruling was State Vs State not Federal

Texas was deemed

The facts are not convenient for her 'facts'

 

[Truth7t7]

And just how will the state of Texas proceed from that?

The Texas suit is done, no further recourse

There are several other cases heading to the Supreme Court,one is on the docket LinWood has a case, Sydney Powell Has Cases, many others not named have cases

 

[Johnjo]

Wrong, the ruling was State Vs State not Federal

Texas was deemed

Wait, wait, wait...the great state of Texas is deliberately, or in fact
premeditated, filling a lawsuit to undermine the constitutional rights of another American state? What happened to states rights, don’t thread on me and don’t mess with Texas?

 

[Truth7t7]

Wait, wait, wait...the great state of Texas is deliberately, or in fact
premeditated, filling a lawsuit to undermine the constitutional rights of another American state? What happened to states rights, don’t thread on me and don’t mess with Texas?

The Texas suit is done, no further recourse

There are several other cases heading to the Supreme Court,one is on the docket LinWood has a case, Sydney Powell Has Cases, many others not named have cases