FFS now the Dems are gonna slowly trickle in one at a time to vote no?
Like literal grade schoolers.
It's a boy who cried wolf thing.
This is actually pretty interesting, but clockfags have dove off the cliff of confirmation bias and post all kinds of weak tea bullshit every day.
A lot of anons just glaze over when they see the graphic.
If they would hold themselves to some sort of standard then anons would pay more attention.
>Asks if we are ready, implying it is coming soon
>Starts a timer as if Q was announcing an arrest would be happening that literal instant
53-47 is a vote total, implying a vote.
>This gives us the subject of the prediction.
53-47 = 6
>This gives us the date
October 6th Brett Kavanaugh will be voted on and confirmed.
Whether the vote total matches exactly isn't the point, the proof here was Q calling out the date and outcome.
Well the OP is wrong bc in that case 50 votes would win…
But the VP can only vote to break a 50-50 tie.
You misunderstand.
I am not saying your complication is necessary yet difficult for the general anon population to understand.
I'm saying a majority of clockfag work is a mixture between legitimate and verifiable analysis of comms techniques used by Q/POTUS, and a bunch of bias driven complete bullshit.
I have seen large piles of absolute horse shit insisted in by clockfags.
What most of them seem to forget is that if you create a complicated enough system of rules and methods, they become leaves in a tea cup that any anon who is smart and determined enough can distort into a "proof"
Exactly, it's only ever applied inconsistently and backward, which makes it virtually useless.
Maybe, but the vote total doesn't matter.
It makes more sense to me that, during a time of complete uncertainty as to when/if the vote would occur, Q used a little wink and misdirection posting a vote total.
Everyone would freak and think it was a prediction of the total, but in reality it was communicating the outcome and date.
Classic Q: Make Prediction Prediction Failed > Oh wait it didnt fail we assumed it meant the wrong thing
It could also still turn out to be accurate, who knows.
Absolutely not.