Scrutable

shpalman wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 9:32 am Apparently #hashtagItalyDidIt

What did Italy do?

It. They did It.

The only thing to wait for now is EXCLUSIVE BREAKING NEWS of how Jimmy Hoffa, Glenn Miller and Teddy Roosevelt are all IMPLICATED IN THE STEAL.

I may have posted in another place that for the last few weeks I've only had two questions for the STOP THE STEAL crowd:

1. Are you on crack?

2. Seriously, are you on crack?

malbui wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 9:44 am I may have posted in another place that for the last few weeks I've only had two questions for the STOP THE STEAL crowd:

1. Are you on crack?

2. Seriously, are you on crack?

And

3. It must be some CIA-strength sh.t, where did you get it?

An Italian response

I slid into the #ItalyDidIt has tag so that you don't have to.

I beg you, for your mental sanity, don't read it

Below the lines on the internet has somewhat predictably claimed this is all explained by electoral fraud the same as in the election that Trump won by 100s of 1000s of legal votes. What gets me is that if they knew about fraud in the November election and Republicans were in charge of running this election, why did they do nothing to stop it happening again? Like all conspiracy theories, this one is going to get more and more convoluted to avoid any of those inconvenient facts.

Chris Preston wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 10:15 am Below the lines on the internet has somewhat predictably claimed this is all explained by electoral fraud the same as in the election that Trump won by 100s of 1000s of legal votes. What gets me is that if they knew about fraud in the November election and Republicans were in charge of running this election, why did they do nothing to stop it happening again? Like all conspiracy theories, this one is going to get more and more convoluted to avoid any of those inconvenient facts.

They've long since decided that people like Raffensperger and Sterling are secretly working with the commies to steal Republican votes. Hell, they've even been going after Brian Kemp, the governor, a Trumpist who can credibly be accused of stealing elections, but with the rather important detail that he stole it for a republican; himself.

Little waster wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 9:50 am

malbui wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 9:44 am I may have posted in another place that for the last few weeks I've only had two questions for the STOP THE STEAL crowd:

1. Are you on crack?

2. Seriously, are you on crack?

And

3. It must be some CIA-strength sh.t, where did you get it?

I do admire that approach.

It would be funny, not useful and certainly not likely but hella funny, if the clamour among Trump's beliebers that the Commie Dems stole the election could be matched by an opposing story that they are all literally on crack.

Okay that's a pipe dream, so to speak, but it does seem like it might be a good start to routinely preface any response to such nonsense on social media with "Are you on crack?".

Given just how strong turnout was among black rural Georgians, it looks pretty clear that as well as being a morally very poor move, attacking a Black preacher and smearing Black churches in general may not have been the best tactical move, either.

EACLucifer wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 11:48 am Given just how strong turnout was among black rural Georgians, it looks pretty clear that as well as being a morally very poor move, attacking a Black preacher and smearing Black churches in general may not have been the best tactical move, either.

Who did that, out of interest?

El Pollo Diablo wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 12:07 pm

EACLucifer wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 11:48 am Given just how strong turnout was among black rural Georgians, it looks pretty clear that as well as being a morally very poor move, attacking a Black preacher and smearing Black churches in general may not have been the best tactical move, either.

Who did that, out of interest?

Loeffler, for one.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 12:07 pm

EACLucifer wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 11:48 am Given just how strong turnout was among black rural Georgians, it looks pretty clear that as well as being a morally very poor move, attacking a Black preacher and smearing Black churches in general may not have been the best tactical move, either.

Who did that, out of interest?

Loeffler's smear attacks on Warnock relied very heavily on some rather nasty tropes about radical black preachers. This included taking footage of Warnock talking about and quoting Jeremiah Wright's speech which included the line "God damn America" and cutting it down to just the quote to make it sound like it was Warnock's own words. Doug Collins, meanwhile, effectively compared Ebenezer Baptist Church - of MLK fame - to the "bed of hell" because he didn't like the idea of a pro-choice pastor.

Loeffler also literally ran digital ads where the colours had been adjusted to make Warnock's skin darker.

EACLucifer wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 12:59 pm Loeffler also literally ran digital ads where the colours had been adjusted to make Warnock's skin darker.

That really is quite unbelievable. Of all the b.llsh.t the GOP pulls, that's the one that made me actually gasp.

shpalman wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 9:32 am That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

About 15 years ago I was peripherally involved in Europe-wide discussions about electronic voting. The Dutch seemed quite keen. Then came all kinds of allegations about Diebold-brand machine, with the company being owned by a major Republican donor or something. There was a grassroots (AFAICT) campaign in the Netherlands to which I gave a very small amount of help to get voting machines out of Dutch elections. They are now back to their old method: A big sheet of paper (there are 20 or more party lists, and although most people vote for the list you can also choose a candidate), and a red pencil with which you mark exactly one box.

I suppose one difficulty with the US situation is that they have so many elections on the same day, more in some states than other. If you had to have ballot papers for each race you would need a ton of boxes, and you would have people putting their papers in the wrong box. So I can see why machines have an appeal. But as a minimum they should generate pieces of paper that can be read and checked by the voter.

Also, Ron Rivest is a frickin' genius.

headshot wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 1:18 pm

EACLucifer wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 12:59 pm Loeffler also literally ran digital ads where the colours had been adjusted to make Warnock's skin darker.

That really is quite unbelievable. Of all the b.llsh.t the GOP pulls, that's the one that made me actually gasp.

Perdue also ran an ad in which Ossoff's nose had been enlarged. You know, in case anyone might forget he is jewish.

Ossoff berating him for such tactics was the second most memorable moment of their debate - it's at 2:30 in this vid.

If you didn't see it earlier, the first part of the vid contains the "It's not just that you're a crook" speech that really seems to have been a key turning point in the campaign, and the reason Perdue ducked the remaining debate and the runoff debate.

Squeak wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 4:04 am
My read of the word salad was that he's confident he would have won if not for 100s of 1000s of miscounted votes and he just needs Raffensperger to find 11,800 of those dodgy votes and count them properly. He doesn't need all the votes "fixed". Just enough to tip him over the line. I'm in the camp of thinking that a prosecutor would struggle to prove mens rea on this one.

I'd also like to see some reporting on how the US legal system copes with Mafia cases where the bosses use indirect language to try to avoid culpability. Does the legal system really get caught out by "will noone rid me if this troublesome priest" type evasion?

Trump has been reported as saying in private that he lost Georgia for well over a month, so there's probably options there if anyone he spoke to can be made to testify.

lpm wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 7:23 am He claims to be 33. Hmm.

Will be youngest senator since someone called Joseph R Biden. Wonder what happened to that guy.

Ossoff 2064!

Ossoff is 17,000 votes clear now and just under 0.4 points distant. A little more and no recount can be demanded.

It's still feeling like a shock victory. The Dems have f.cked up far easier Senate races in 2018 and 2020. I was fully prepared for MagaMorons to be dining off my liberal tears this morning, or at best a 1-1 split.

Quite a turnaround from Republican house, senate and president in 2016 to Democrat in 2020.

Bet you a zillion alternative pounds that in the alternative universe of Clinton winning 2016 there would now be a sweeping Republican triumph.

Squeak wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 4:04 am My read of the word salad was that he's confident he would have won if not for 100s of 1000s of miscounted votes and he just needs Raffensperger to find 11,800 of those dodgy votes and count them properly. He doesn't need all the votes "fixed". Just enough to tip him over the line. I'm in the camp of thinking that a prosecutor would struggle to prove mens rea on this one.

That was my reading of it too. My post was just the tl,dr version

lpm wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 2:56 pm It's still feeling like a shock victory. The Dems have f.cked up far easier Senate races in 2018 and 2020. I was fully prepared for MagaMorons to be dining off my liberal tears this morning, or at best a 1-1 split.

Quite a turnaround from Republican house, senate and president in 2016 to Democrat in 2020.

Bet you a zillion alternative pounds that in the alternative universe of Clinton winning 2016 there would now be a sweeping Republican triumph.

Clearly what they need is the equivalent of Stacey Abrams in every state.

Now that it's a done deal, what do we think about the 2022 mid-terms? Usually a hard call for the incumbent party, so certainly a possibility (probability?) that the dems could lose seats. But not definite.

House - the entire house is up for election, and there's probably a fair chance of the Democrabs losing control. Depends on various things, such as how mad the republicans are, and the Dem ground game - whether they learn from Stacey Abrams or not. Possible, however, that the lack of a Trump higher up the ballot list may depress Republican turnout.

Senate - obviously similar factors here, but a little easier to inspect. 34 of the 100 seats are up for grabs, 20 of which are Republican and 14 Democrab. Of these, we've got some interesting ones:

Safe Republican (15)
Alabama
Alaska
Arkansas
Idaho
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
South Carolina
South Dakota
Utah

Winnable (Republican-Held) (5) (2016 election margin in brackets)
Florida (+7.7)
Missouri (+2.8)
North Carolina (+5.7)
Pennsylvania (+1.5)
Wisconsin (+3.4)

Winnable (Democrab-Held) (5)
Arizona (+2.3)
Colorado (+5.7)
Georgia (+2 or 3 ish)
New Hampshire (+0.14)
Nevada (+2.4)

Safe Democrab (9)
California
Connecticut
Hawaii
Illinois
Maryland
New York
Oregon
Vermont
Washington

Obviously, Florida isn't that winnable, and the new victories for Raphael Warnock and Mark Kelly in Georgia and Arizona respectively will have to be refought in less than two years. But Pennsylvania and Wisconsin are very winnable for the Dems, and Missouri not a million miles away either. But it's a close call.

It also depends on the effect of Trump's shadow on the GOP. I suspect the GOP leadership are hoping Trump will just disappear and leave them alone to get back to "normal" politics, but maybe not...

You've got the 13 crazies who are currently going full-tilt to appear to support Trump's antics - will they continue in that vein afterwards to try and hoover up a "Trumpist" base?

How much will Trump want to continue to meddle in politics? Whilst he's notoriously easily bored, he's also one to seriously hold a grudge - so I can easily see him messing around in GOP politics for a while especially if he thinks he can act as a kingmaker or settle scores with those who he felt that their lack of support cost him the presidency.

Then there's younger Trump names, a couple at least seem to have got the bug for political power. Ivanka, Don Jr and Laura have all been touted as potentially putting themselves forward.

All of that could seriously muddy the waters. I can't see that his weird pronouncements ahead of the Georgia run-off helped Purdue and Loeffler much outside of preaching to his base - and most likely hindered the election chances.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 4:05 pm Now that it's a done deal, what do we think about the 2022 mid-terms? Usually a hard call for the incumbent party, so certainly a possibility (probability?) that the dems could lose seats. But not definite.

House - the entire house is up for election, and there's probably a fair chance of the Democrabs losing control. Depends on various things, such as how mad the republicans are, and the Dem ground game - whether they learn from Stacey Abrams or not. Possible, however, that the lack of a Trump higher up the ballot list may depress Republican turnout.

Senate - obviously similar factors here, but a little easier to inspect. 34 of the 100 seats are up for grabs, 20 of which are Republican and 14 Democrab. Of these, we've got some interesting ones:

We got a preview of how the GOP does without Trump on the ballot in 2018, and last night. Obviously there won't be a replacement for Trump in 2022, as it's a midterm, so the GOPs options depend on if there's a settled character to drive the Trumpist ecosystem forward, or if it's vanished entirely by then; vs it hanging around and splitting the vote. I expect the latter in 2022, but maybe not in 24.

Judge Judy Garland as AG. Not sure he'll be tough enough against the Trump crime family.