Skip to content

Politics. The feel in your country.

1391392394396397635

Comments

  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited December 2017

    joluv said:

    Just... what is wrong with these people?

    They are politicians, which means they have a need for other people to think of them as "important" or they enjoy being in a position where they can tell other people what to do and/or how they should be living. In general, they are all narcissists because they crave the attention and the power which comes with holding a political office.

    *************

    In the aftermath of several politicians stepping down last week, leading to this week's calls for Trump to resign over similar circumstances, there are several important questions which need to be asked and answered:

    How many allegations are sufficient to warrant a politician stepping down from office? Only one? Three? Five or more?

    What level of allegation is sufficient to warrant a politician to step down? Asking someone for a date multiple times without any physical contact? Unwanted kisses, hugs, or swats on the butt? Actual groping?

    Should the allegations be proven first before the politician is forced to step down or are the allegations sufficient on their own?

    If the allegations alone are sufficient for removal or being asked to step down, how many more politicians need to remove themselves from their campaigns or currently-held offices?

    If allegations alone are sufficient for removing a politician from office then won't it be only a matter of time before politically-motivated allegations are made, designed specifically to remove a particular politician from office? (that is similar to what that O'Keefe nut-job was trying to do but the next person to try it will be a little more subtle about it)

    Are allegations leading to removal from office or being asked to step down from a corporate position equivalent to "guilty until proven innocent"?

    Perhaps if we (the collective we) would stop putting politicians, corporate executives, and celebrities on pedestals and treating them as if they were demigods then some of this crap would stop happening. Not only would those people no longer feel as if they were demigods, able to do what they want when they want with whom they want, but some people who are unhealthily attracted to power (again, for a variety of reasons) won't give in to that allure, thus putting themselves into a very risky position.
    The court of public opinion is not a court of law. Beyond that, no one actually expects Trump to step down. This was (of course) a part of the calculus. Once Franken and Conyers stepped aside, the entire burden of this shifted to the Republicans. They could remove this stigma in an instant if they wanted to, but everyone knew they wouldn't. They are now stuck with having given full-throated support to an accused child molester, and Donald Trump will remain in the Oval Office. And everytime another one of these stories comes out from any segment of society, people will be reminded of the cretin in the White House. His approval is at 32% with a (so far) fairly stable economy. The GOP tax plan is polling at pretty much the exact same number. He can't really go much lower. Politicians don't recover from these kind of numbers.

    We actually saw what happened when someone tries to make up an obviously false story about assault allegations with the Project Veritas attempted hit job on the Washington Post. The Post reporters knew something was up almost immediately. Most people aren't nearly as good at lying as they think they are. You're going to have to find someone who is not only morally bankrupt enough to destroy a life based on a lie, but that is also a good actor as well.
  • ZaghoulZaghoul Member, Moderator Posts: 3,938
    'Morally bankrupt' ppl can't be that hard to find given the amt of money we are dealing with in politics.
    And as far as lying goes and acting goes, it seems these days one only needs to 'suggest' something to get people's minds moving in a negative direction. Especially given with the various forms of instant communication everyone has at hand now and reactions of believing the first thing that pops up in a search engine. At least it seems that way with many things not even related to politics.
    As to the court of public opinion, yeah, it aint law but it seems to be quite effective lately.

  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964
    edited December 2017
    Republican controlled Alabama Supreme Court denied a request to keep digital images of voting ballots for today's special election thereby encouraging voter suppression and voter fraud by hyper partisan poll workers.

    Republicans can't win in a fair contest, they have to rig the system. Then they go around crying about the rigged system.

    Same crap happened to Ossof. Same thing happened to Al Gore in Florida where Republicans prevented a fair recount of the ballots and handed us GW Bush.

    They are like 'No no people just trust us, there's no need to keep paper ballots or records of any kind. Electronic voting machines with windows 95 are totes legit. What no of course no one can inspect the software. No one! ' Why are Republicans afraid of a clean election???

    http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/364430-alabama-supreme-court-stays-order-to-preserve-voting-records-in-senate
  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    Digital storage is dirt-cheap. What possible justification could there be for deleting ballot data that would be needed in the event of a recount?
  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,811

    deltago said:
    I didn't say it's about climate change. I said it's a sad sight.
    The video does say it's about climate change however.

    It is still sad, but just because the bear is starving, does not mean global warming is to blame.
    Video's of Polar Bears drowning as they attempt to get on weak and melting ice, is however due to Global Warming.
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited December 2017

    Digital storage is dirt-cheap. What possible justification could there be for deleting ballot data that would be needed in the event of a recount?

    The same reason that after the voter ID requirement was passed in Alabama, every single county whose voter rolls comprised of 75% or more African-Americans had their driver's license offices close:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/05/how-alabama-will-save-11-million-but-undermine-the-voter-id-cause/?utm_term=.2e03b80e3d75
  • MathsorcererMathsorcerer Member Posts: 3,044

    They are like 'No no people just trust us, there's no need to keep paper ballots or records of any kind. Electronic voting machines with windows 95 are totes legit. What no of course no one can inspect the software. No one! ' Why are Republicans afraid of a clean election???

    If the actual records of the election, the ballots, are destroyed/not kept then how does anyone know who actually won? We are supposed to blindly trust the election official who will certify the results? Asking us to trust a person whom we do not know at all it asking *a lot*--I wouldn't trust some people whom I actually know that much!

    We all know what is going to happen, though. Moore will win...but then he has to face a Senate which doesn't really want him there--they may vote to refuse to seat him, which means that he won't get to be a Senator and another election would have to be held. Even if they allow him to assume his seat they probably won't assign him to any committees at all, which means his only job would be to vote on things other people are proposing.
  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,811

    They are like 'No no people just trust us, there's no need to keep paper ballots or records of any kind. Electronic voting machines with windows 95 are totes legit. What no of course no one can inspect the software. No one! ' Why are Republicans afraid of a clean election???

    If the actual records of the election, the ballots, are destroyed/not kept then how does anyone know who actually won? We are supposed to blindly trust the election official who will certify the results? Asking us to trust a person whom we do not know at all it asking *a lot*--I wouldn't trust some people whom I actually know that much!

    We all know what is going to happen, though. Moore will win...but then he has to face a Senate which doesn't really want him there--they may vote to refuse to seat him, which means that he won't get to be a Senator and another election would have to be held. Even if they allow him to assume his seat they probably won't assign him to any committees at all, which means his only job would be to vote on things other people are proposing.
    No. Republican senators will use him first in any votes
    Then prior to the next round of elections, if there is still talk of him (assuming everyone didn't forget in 2 weeks like they usually do), they will lead a vote to unseat him, making them look just as good, if not better, to the voting American public.
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited December 2017
    deltago said:

    They are like 'No no people just trust us, there's no need to keep paper ballots or records of any kind. Electronic voting machines with windows 95 are totes legit. What no of course no one can inspect the software. No one! ' Why are Republicans afraid of a clean election???

    If the actual records of the election, the ballots, are destroyed/not kept then how does anyone know who actually won? We are supposed to blindly trust the election official who will certify the results? Asking us to trust a person whom we do not know at all it asking *a lot*--I wouldn't trust some people whom I actually know that much!

    We all know what is going to happen, though. Moore will win...but then he has to face a Senate which doesn't really want him there--they may vote to refuse to seat him, which means that he won't get to be a Senator and another election would have to be held. Even if they allow him to assume his seat they probably won't assign him to any committees at all, which means his only job would be to vote on things other people are proposing.
    No. Republican senators will use him first in any votes
    Then prior to the next round of elections, if there is still talk of him (assuming everyone didn't forget in 2 weeks like they usually do), they will lead a vote to unseat him, making them look just as good, if not better, to the voting American public.
    They won't do a thing to unseat him. Now or ever. And most people will forget in 2 weeks.
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964
    edited December 2017
    If they unseat him somehow then the Republican governor will appoint another Republican, probably the corporate stooge who is sitting in the seat now Luther Strange. Then they will have another special election again.
  • ZaghoulZaghoul Member, Moderator Posts: 3,938

    They are like 'No no people just trust us, there's no need to keep paper ballots or records of any kind. Electronic voting machines with windows 95 are totes legit. What no of course no one can inspect the software. No one! ' Why are Republicans afraid of a clean election???

    If the actual records of the election, the ballots, are destroyed/not kept then how does anyone know who actually won? We are supposed to blindly trust the election official who will certify the results? Asking us to trust a person whom we do not know at all it asking *a lot*--I wouldn't trust some people whom I actually know that much!

    We all know what is going to happen, though. Moore will win...but then he has to face a Senate which doesn't really want him there--they may vote to refuse to seat him, which means that he won't get to be a Senator and another election would have to be held. Even if they allow him to assume his seat they probably won't assign him to any committees at all, which means his only job would be to vote on things other people are proposing.
    Huh. Can the senate refuse to seat a person? Has that ever happened?
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    Zaghoul said:

    They are like 'No no people just trust us, there's no need to keep paper ballots or records of any kind. Electronic voting machines with windows 95 are totes legit. What no of course no one can inspect the software. No one! ' Why are Republicans afraid of a clean election???

    If the actual records of the election, the ballots, are destroyed/not kept then how does anyone know who actually won? We are supposed to blindly trust the election official who will certify the results? Asking us to trust a person whom we do not know at all it asking *a lot*--I wouldn't trust some people whom I actually know that much!

    We all know what is going to happen, though. Moore will win...but then he has to face a Senate which doesn't really want him there--they may vote to refuse to seat him, which means that he won't get to be a Senator and another election would have to be held. Even if they allow him to assume his seat they probably won't assign him to any committees at all, which means his only job would be to vote on things other people are proposing.
    Huh. Can the senate refuse to seat a person? Has that ever happened?
    Conceivably, yes. In reality, no. This isn't going to happen. People like Mitch McConnell would like you to believe it's in the cards. It isn't. It's what they have said to run out the clock until the story goes away.
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964
    edited December 2017
    Zaghoul said:

    They are like 'No no people just trust us, there's no need to keep paper ballots or records of any kind. Electronic voting machines with windows 95 are totes legit. What no of course no one can inspect the software. No one! ' Why are Republicans afraid of a clean election???

    If the actual records of the election, the ballots, are destroyed/not kept then how does anyone know who actually won? We are supposed to blindly trust the election official who will certify the results? Asking us to trust a person whom we do not know at all it asking *a lot*--I wouldn't trust some people whom I actually know that much!

    We all know what is going to happen, though. Moore will win...but then he has to face a Senate which doesn't really want him there--they may vote to refuse to seat him, which means that he won't get to be a Senator and another election would have to be held. Even if they allow him to assume his seat they probably won't assign him to any committees at all, which means his only job would be to vote on things other people are proposing.
    Huh. Can the senate refuse to seat a person? Has that ever happened?
    I think it happened like in 1862 or something during Civil War 1.

    No Mitch McConnell would never stand up to a member of his party no matter how heinous he is.


    "Vote for my puppet!"

    Once Moore wins, Alabama should be blacklisted like North Carolina was over the bathroom bill. This is an equivalent thing.
    Post edited by smeagolheart on
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    Race is looking razor-tight in Alabama, where black voters are turning out in massive numbers to try save the rest of the state from the disgrace of sending this man to office. We'll see what happens.
  • CamDawgCamDawg Member, Developer Posts: 3,439
    The Failing NY Times has a pretty nifty live projection of the race: https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/alabama-senate-special-election-roy-moore-doug-jones
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited December 2017
    CamDawg said:

    The Failing NY Times has a pretty nifty live projection of the race: https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/alabama-senate-special-election-roy-moore-doug-jones

    Apparently, the votes outstanding are from primarily heavily African-American areas where Jones is likely to get over 80% of the vote. Then again, I've heard this story on election night enough times to take it with a HUGE grain of salt, since I can't count the number of times Dems have waited on election night for a massive number of votes from blue bastions that never seem to materialize.
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964
    edited December 2017
    No idea but it looks like there's a large number of crazy people in Alabama or possibly hacked votes. It's hard to believe people look at Roy Moore and are like "yeah that's what I want!" in a politician, human being, or senator.

    But I guess that's what Alabama and Alabama GOP want to inflict on the rest of us.


  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850

    No idea but it looks like there's a large number of crazy people in Alabama or possibly hacked votes. It's hard to believe people look at Roy Moore and are like "yeah that's what I want!" in a politician or human being or senator. I guess that's what Alabama and Alabama GOP want to inflict on the rest of us.

    It's Alabama. Trump won the State by 28% just one year ago. Jones winning would be a monumental upset even WITH all the allegations against Roy Moore, and would indicate there isn't just a wave coming next year, but a tsunami.
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964
    edited December 2017

    No idea but it looks like there's a large number of crazy people in Alabama or possibly hacked votes. It's hard to believe people look at Roy Moore and are like "yeah that's what I want!" in a politician or human being or senator. I guess that's what Alabama and Alabama GOP want to inflict on the rest of us.

    It's Alabama. Trump won the State by 28% just one year ago. Jones winning would be a monumental upset even WITH all the allegations against Roy Moore, and would indicate there isn't just a wave coming next year, but a tsunami.
    I know it is Alabama and they voted for Trump. So what, now they see what Trump's done. He was promising the moon and two chickens in every pot in the campaign. Now they see him and what loser he is right? Guess not.

    But Moore, jesus lol. That guy is a crazy creep. Oh well, just really embarrassing to be an American today - again.


    Kid Rock is looking like a viable candidate in Michigan. Why not. Just get him out there and spout some racist bible stuff and Republican voters will eat it up.
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited December 2017
    Here is the numbers from Alabama Senate races since 1998:

    1998 GOP + 27
    2002 GOP +19
    2004 GOP +35
    2008 GOP +26
    2010 GOP +31
    2014 GOP +95


    At the moment, Selma, AL seems to be one of the outstanding vote areas. I will smile from ear to ear if the city ends up putting Jones over the top.

    Selma DID come in, and Jones is now over the top of Moore, and there isn't much indication at this point Moore has anywhere near the outstanding votes Jones does, but again, it ain't over.
  • joluvjoluv Member Posts: 2,137
    edited December 2017
    CamDawg said:

    The Failing NY Times has a pretty nifty live projection of the race: https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/alabama-senate-special-election-roy-moore-doug-jones

    It's so nifty that it's even what's on the main screen at Moore headquarters, which is kind of amazing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcJGM7htXr0
    Never thought I'd be embedding a Breitbart livestream.
  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,811
    Wow, Monroe county looks suspect on that map. Just saying. But then again, so does Talladega.

    But with Mobile, Montgomery and Tuscaloosa each going heavy blue with less than half of their precincts in, Jones may pull it off.
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited December 2017
    And now it essentially IS over barring a miracle. Somehow, Donald Trump and Steve Bannon managed to throw away a Senate seat in ALABAMA, which is nearly inconceivable. Republicans are going to get absolutely destroyed at the polls next November. Again, here is what the Party of Donald Trump and Roy Moore have managed to do in the reddest State in the country:

    1998 GOP + 27
    2002 GOP +19
    2004 GOP +35
    2008 GOP +26
    2010 GOP +31
    2014 GOP +95
    2017 GOP LOSS
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964
    edited December 2017
    The failing new york times thing is saying the AP has called it for Moo- er Jones.

    WTH?

    And even Faux News is saying Jones over Moore.
  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,811

    And now it essentially IS over barring a miracle. Somehow, Donald Trump and Steve Bannon managed to throw away a Senate seat in ALABAMA, which is nearly inconceivable. Republicans are going to get absolutely destroyed at the polls next November. Again, here is what the Party of Donald Trump and Roy Moore have managed to do in the reddest State in the country:

    1998 GOP + 27
    2002 GOP +19
    2004 GOP +35
    2008 GOP +26
    2010 GOP +31
    2014 GOP +95
    2017 GOP LOSS

    Granted, Trump didn't back Moore first. This shouldn't be laid at his feet. Bannon on the other hand...
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited December 2017
    deltago said:



    And now it essentially IS over barring a miracle. Somehow, Donald Trump and Steve Bannon managed to throw away a Senate seat in ALABAMA, which is nearly inconceivable. Republicans are going to get absolutely destroyed at the polls next November. Again, here is what the Party of Donald Trump and Roy Moore have managed to do in the reddest State in the country:

    1998 GOP + 27
    2002 GOP +19
    2004 GOP +35
    2008 GOP +26
    2010 GOP +31
    2014 GOP +95
    2017 GOP LOSS

    Granted, Trump didn't back Moore first. This shouldn't be laid at his feet. Bannon on the other hand...
    He campaigned for him over the weekend. He has been tweeting his support for the last week. He made robo-calls for him. And Trump is as big a reason for this as Moore is. This was won because of at least a 5% increase in African-American turnout:
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964
    Well Jones should show up in DC tomorrow and tell Luther Strange to GTFO.
  • bleusteelbleusteel Member Posts: 523
    CNN has called it for Jones! Woot!
  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    Doug Jones seems to be a reasonably decent human being. No scandals, no extreme views. No allegations of child molestation, incidentally.
  • BillyYankBillyYank Member Posts: 2,768
    So at the current count, 48.8% of Alabamans voted for the paedophile. That's 8.8% more than voted to keep the ban on interracial marriages back in 2000. Way to go Alabama.
This discussion has been closed.