casinterest wrote:

seb146 wrote:

luckyone wrote:

It’s going to interesting to see if this motley crew can actually take the wheel…or are they the dog that caught the truck and will have no clue what to do once their in charge? McCarthy has been waiting for this ever since he tripped over his balls with the whole Hillary Clinton investigation comments — but he isn’t the craftiest guy around, and he has continued to score a few own goals along the way. Luckily for him a lot of the more prominent hard liners (MTH, teen-mom Boebert, Matt Gaetz, and a few others) actually aren’t all that bright either.

I think it will be interesting, also, to see who Democrats elect as House Minority Leader. I am guessing not a progressive, but someone farther to the left than Pelosi. Maxine Waters or Sheila Jackson Lee would really drive MAGAs nuts. I am thinking it might be Joaquin Castro.

AoC would be perfect to troll them with. She is a lot brigther than most of the GOP, and would bring the mysoginy,racism , and ageism straight to the surface of the GOP attacks

I agree about AOC but I think that would cause too much trouble. Republicans would focus so hard on that to distract everyone from the fact they will not get anything done. I don't know much about Hakeem Jeffries, who (as another post stated) will probably be the next Democratic leader. With him, at least we will not be distracted and actually see they are not going to get anything done.

Avatar2go wrote:

In Colorado, after curing votes in all but one county, Boebert's lead is down to 551 votes. That's a mandatory recount but she will probably still win, as there are unlikely to be that many counting errors.

Such a shame, but Frisch ran a great campaign and is clearly the superior candidate. I look for him to try again in 2024. In the meantime, 2 more years of Boebert's outbursts.

https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm ... 57eb87c543

Frisch conceded today, so Boebert will be back for two more years. I think Frisch will try again, but depending on who the GOP nominee is, there may be more GOP turnout in the next election.

seb146 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

seb146 wrote:

I think it will be interesting, also, to see who Democrats elect as House Minority Leader. I am guessing not a progressive, but someone farther to the left than Pelosi. Maxine Waters or Sheila Jackson Lee would really drive MAGAs nuts. I am thinking it might be Joaquin Castro.

AoC would be perfect to troll them with. She is a lot brigther than most of the GOP, and would bring the mysoginy,racism , and ageism straight to the surface of the GOP attacks

I agree about AOC but I think that would cause too much trouble. Republicans would focus so hard on that to distract everyone from the fact they will not get anything done. I don't know much about Hakeem Jeffries, who (as another post stated) will probably be the next Democratic leader. With him, at least we will not be distracted and actually see they are not going to get anything done.

Jeffries is a corporate owned and backed democrat who loves smacking down progressives. He has actually run campaigns against progressives in primaries running ads that attack so hard that in a General they would be run by the GOP candidate against them. He was closely aligned with Joe Crowley, and in fact they were putting together a campaign for Crowley to challenge Pelosi for speaker, which got derailed by AOC successfully primary challenge to Crowley.

Jeffries biggest challenge is going to be to try to keep groups like the squad in line. He doesn't command the respect that Pelosi did, and it could be with all new democrat leadership they flex their muscles a lot more. I would expect Pramila Jayapal to make a bid at something, and I would expect her either get shut out of the leadership, or at least have some ranking member position to try to keep the Progressives in line.

seb146 wrote:

All this talk of gerrymandering and polls, but what we really need is to take money out of politics. Look at how much money was spent on ads and meet-and-greets for candidates. ALL candidates. It is disgusting. We have the best government money can buy. And it ain't that great. For all those millions and millions of dollars spent on this last campaign, the message from Democrats was "we are bad but not like election deniers!" and the GOP message was "vote for us because we are not Democrats!" That's what we got for millions of dollars.

Take money out of politics.

I am with you but without a constitutional amendment it won't happen. Gerrymandering played a role but not the big role that I think everyone anticipated outside of Florida. Interestingly the GOP will win the popular vote in the House this cycle.


One other thing that was successful for Democrats this cycle, but they need to be very careful with because this is playing with fire. One of the reason the Dems held onto the senate is because the Dems poured lots of money into GOP primaries to ensure that people like Kari Lake, and Don Bolduc were nominated because they felt they were so crazy they could not win a general. They were right this time, but the issue is if they do this and miss, you are stuck with a crazy actually holding elected office. This is exactly how Trump got elected in 2016.

Bill Maher's hilarious take on how the election turned out, and you gotta love the last line: 'let's all agree to form a less psycho union'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD_RB-aWgaM

apodino wrote:

One of the reason the Dems held onto the senate is because the Dems poured lots of money into GOP primaries to ensure that people like Kari Lake, and Don Bolduc were nominated because they felt they were so crazy they could not win a general.

Errr... Kari Lake was not running for the Senate. She was the gubernatorial candidate.

apodino wrote:

One other thing that was successful for Democrats this cycle, but they need to be very careful with because this is playing with fire. One of the reason the Dems held onto the senate is because the Dems poured lots of money into GOP primaries to ensure that people like Kari Lake, and Don Bolduc were nominated because they felt they were so crazy they could not win a general. They were right this time, but the issue is if they do this and miss, you are stuck with a crazy actually holding elected office. This is exactly how Trump got elected in 2016.

I keep hearing this "blame Democrats" talking point but still see zero evidence. During the Republican primary, every commercial, at least here in Oregon and in California, stated "(GOP candidate) paid for this ad" or something similar. Zero ads were paid for by DNC or Democratic committee of Oregon or California. Just another classic example of Republicans refusing to take responsibility for the monster they created.

The general election was the same "don't vote for that horrible candidate" ads we all see every election cycle, paid for by the candidate hoping to win.

casinterest wrote:

seb146 wrote:

luckyone wrote:

It’s going to interesting to see if this motley crew can actually take the wheel…or are they the dog that caught the truck and will have no clue what to do once their in charge? McCarthy has been waiting for this ever since he tripped over his balls with the whole Hillary Clinton investigation comments — but he isn’t the craftiest guy around, and he has continued to score a few own goals along the way. Luckily for him a lot of the more prominent hard liners (MTH, teen-mom Boebert, Matt Gaetz, and a few others) actually aren’t all that bright either.

I think it will be interesting, also, to see who Democrats elect as House Minority Leader. I am guessing not a progressive, but someone farther to the left than Pelosi. Maxine Waters or Sheila Jackson Lee would really drive MAGAs nuts. I am thinking it might be Joaquin Castro.

AoC would be perfect to troll them with. She is a lot brigther than most of the GOP, and would bring the mysoginy,racism , and ageism straight to the surface of the GOP attacks

She'd be perfect!


Her Intellect would snuff out anything McCarthy, MTG or Boobert utters publicly....

But Jeffries is better tempered.


BN747

Aaron747 wrote:

Bill Maher's hilarious take on how the election turned out, and you gotta love the last line: 'let's all agree to form a less psycho union'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD_RB-aWgaM

Yes, all that stuff they have said, my favorite being the Jewish Space Lasers (a KKK idea), that are causing the fires in CA.
Funny how all the defense by denial/whataboutism, don’t have an answer/explanation if they even bother to, maybe they believe it?

I was listening to progressive talk on satellite radio yesterday and they brought up an interesting point:

Democrats were able to unite under Pelosi and will unite again under Jeffries. The progressive caucus will still have their voice, but Democrats will be united. Kevin McCarthy, however, as leader of the Republicans, will have to unite the sane centrists with MAGAs who simply want to burn everything to the ground. The Republicans willing to compromise and those who simply want what they want and screw everyone else. It will be like herding cats.

Looking at the most recent results from Alaska, which is using ranked choice (which I support): More than twice times as many Alaskans voted for somebody other than Sarah Palin, than voted for her. Remarkable.

BN747 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

seb146 wrote:

I think it will be interesting, also, to see who Democrats elect as House Minority Leader. I am guessing not a progressive, but someone farther to the left than Pelosi. Maxine Waters or Sheila Jackson Lee would really drive MAGAs nuts. I am thinking it might be Joaquin Castro.

AoC would be perfect to troll them with. She is a lot brigther than most of the GOP, and would bring the mysoginy,racism , and ageism straight to the surface of the GOP attacks

She'd be perfect!


Her Intellect would snuff out anything M

McCarthy, MTG or Boobert utters publicly....

But Jeffries is better tempered.


BN747

I think evenually AoC will be a choice, but she will be older and wiser on how to deal wth many of the current crazies. She just doesn't get to hide behind white privelidge as so many in the GOP currently do when they say and do outlandish things.

Avatar2go wrote:

More craziness in Arizona. Two Republican counties have refused to certify their election results, in protest against alleged fraud in Maricopa County. This mirrors their similar actions on the 2020 election.

The counties claim their votes were diluted by fraud in the more populous Maricopa County. Also that their own voting machines were not properly certified and are suspect.

The Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich has demanded a report from Maricopa county to explain the election difficulties with the printers, further throwing fuel on the false fraud fire. He had earlier fought Maricopa over 2020 election data, but then as now, all his allegations were proven false.

County election boards have no power to either alter the election results, or to refuse certification. This is now bordering on a sickness with these people.

https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm ... 25ddcfb655

They are all mentally ill. If the residents of Arizona were serious, they would sue for deriliction of duty on these frauds. However that would have to come from the Governor. And I am sure that will all be getting done in January.

Avatar2go wrote:

More craziness in Arizona. Two Republican counties have refused to certify their election results, in protest against alleged fraud in Maricopa County. This mirrors their similar actions on the 2020 election.

The counties claim their votes were diluted by fraud in the more populous Maricopa County. Also that their own voting machines were not properly certified and are suspect.

The Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich has demanded a report from Maricopa county to explain the election difficulties with the printers, further throwing fuel on the false fraud fire. He had earlier fought Maricopa over 2020 election data, but then as now, all his allegations were proven false.

County election boards have no power to either alter the election results, or to refuse certification. This is now bordering on a sickness with these people.

https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm ... 25ddcfb655

Republicans put up these awful candidates who have nothing more to offer beyond "if I lose it is fraud!" and when We The People see right through them, these awful candidates sue. Enough is enough.

During this election, did anyone else notice that Arizona was bluer than its neighbor Nevada (for statewide elections)?

Mark Kelly won re-election by nearly 5%.
Katie Hobbs won the governorship that had previously been held by Republican.

Yet in NV, incumbent Democrat governor Sisolak was unseated while senator Cortez-Masto barely won re-election.

Any idea on why this happened? For as long as I can remember, NV has consistently voted to the left of AZ on a statewide level.

acavpics wrote:

During this election, did anyone else notice that Arizona was bluer than its neighbor Nevada (for statewide elections)?

Mark Kelly won re-election by nearly 5%.
Katie Hobbs won the governorship that had previously been held by Republican.

Yet in NV, incumbent Democrat governor Sisolak was unseated while senator Cortez-Masto barely won re-election.

Any idea on why this happened? For as long as I can remember, NV has consistently voted to the left of AZ on a statewide level.

Arizona's Republican candidates were notably loonier than Nevada's

Also: Alaska called their elections. Murkowski re-elected. Sarah Palin lost...again. Not sure if any broader lessons can be drawn from that, because the reasons she lost are very local to Alaska. Peltola is pretty moderate and a lot of Alaskans remember Sarah Palin resigning the governorship for the benefit of her bank account.

acavpics wrote:

During this election, did anyone else notice that Arizona was bluer than its neighbor Nevada (for statewide elections)?

Mark Kelly won re-election by nearly 5%.
Katie Hobbs won the governorship that had previously been held by Republican.

Yet in NV, incumbent Democrat governor Sisolak was unseated while senator Cortez-Masto barely won re-election.

Any idea on why this happened? For as long as I can remember, NV has consistently voted to the left of AZ on a statewide level.

Just listened to a podcast with longtime Nevada political reporter Jon Ralston. NV trended slightly more Republican since 2020. It came down to quality of candidates. Adam Laxalt is just a bad dude who only recently moved to Nevada. Failed to win the governor's seat 4 years ago and scared away independents just enough to give Cortez-Masto the edge. Steve Sisolak on the other hand went hard on COVID measures, and with NV having a more tourism based economy, took a lot of heat for it. I think Sisolak was in a damned if he did, damned if he didn't with regard to COVID, and combined with Joe Lombard running a low key campaign, got just enough independent votes from people who were going to vote against Sisolak regardless of who was running against him.

Avatar2go wrote:

In Arizona, today is the day that counties must certify their votes, but the Republican state chair has urged counties not to certify until after an election challenge hearing is conducted for the AZ Attorney General race.

In that contest, the GOP candidate is behind by 510 votes, which will be a mandatory recount. But other candidates, such as Kari Lake for governor and Mark Finchem for secretary of state, are also linking their losses to that case. All are claiming that tabulation machine problems in Maricopa County resulted in their losses.

https://news.yahoo.com/arizona-counties ... 42144.html

I don't see how that claim could possibly hold up in court. Maricopa officials informed voters they had other options and locations available. If people didn't cast a vote, it's because they listened to advice from bad actors online who were eager to claim malfeasance at play.

Avatar2go wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

I don't see how that claim could possibly hold up in court. Maricopa officials informed voters they had other options and locations available. If people didn't cast a vote, it's because they listened to advice from bad actors online who were eager to claim malfeasance at play.

Yes, it will be interesting if the Court finds that the complainants are the same groups who urged voters not to use the lockboxes. Even more interesting if that was considered to be election interference.

The issue the GOP has , is that the issue would have affected all voters. The fact that "Their" voters were not capable of showing up at other polling sites would be hard to prove in court as Democrats, and Independents would have all faced the same issue.

What a freaking circus, all driven by sore losers spreading disinformation online. The AZ election was conducted according to law and nobody was disenfranchised unless they made bad personal decisions. Ri-diculous.

seb146 wrote:

apodino wrote:

One other thing that was successful for Democrats this cycle, but they need to be very careful with because this is playing with fire. One of the reason the Dems held onto the senate is because the Dems poured lots of money into GOP primaries to ensure that people like Kari Lake, and Don Bolduc were nominated because they felt they were so crazy they could not win a general. They were right this time, but the issue is if they do this and miss, you are stuck with a crazy actually holding elected office. This is exactly how Trump got elected in 2016.

I keep hearing this "blame Democrats" talking point but still see zero evidence. During the Republican primary, every commercial, at least here in Oregon and in California, stated "(GOP candidate) paid for this ad" or something similar. Zero ads were paid for by DNC or Democratic committee of Oregon or California. Just another classic example of Republicans refusing to take responsibility for the monster they created.

The general election was the same "don't vote for that horrible candidate" ads we all see every election cycle, paid for by the candidate hoping to win.

Really Seb. This has been all over progressive talk radio, or do you not listen to left wing media but just establishment sources. Even so, here are some sources on what I said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/12/democrats-interfere-republican-primaries/

https://www.npr.org/2022/11/11/1135878576/the-democrats-strategy-of-boosting-far-right-candidates-seems-to-have-worked

https://www.vox.com/2022/11/12/23454725/democrat-republican-maga-strategy-midterm-red-wave

alfa164 wrote:

apodino wrote:

One of the reason the Dems held onto the senate is because the Dems poured lots of money into GOP primaries to ensure that people like Kari Lake, and Don Bolduc were nominated because they felt they were so crazy they could not win a general.

Errr... Kari Lake was not running for the Senate. She was the gubernatorial candidate.

You are correct. I meant to say Blake Masters. But my comment still stands.

apodino wrote:

seb146 wrote:

apodino wrote:

One other thing that was successful for Democrats this cycle, but they need to be very careful with because this is playing with fire. One of the reason the Dems held onto the senate is because the Dems poured lots of money into GOP primaries to ensure that people like Kari Lake, and Don Bolduc were nominated because they felt they were so crazy they could not win a general. They were right this time, but the issue is if they do this and miss, you are stuck with a crazy actually holding elected office. This is exactly how Trump got elected in 2016.

I keep hearing this "blame Democrats" talking point but still see zero evidence. During the Republican primary, every commercial, at least here in Oregon and in California, stated "(GOP candidate) paid for this ad" or something similar. Zero ads were paid for by DNC or Democratic committee of Oregon or California. Just another classic example of Republicans refusing to take responsibility for the monster they created.

The general election was the same "don't vote for that horrible candidate" ads we all see every election cycle, paid for by the candidate hoping to win.

Really Seb. This has been all over progressive talk radio, or do you not listen to left wing media but just establishment sources. Even so, here are some sources on what I said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/12/democrats-interfere-republican-primaries/

https://www.npr.org/2022/11/11/1135878576/the-democrats-strategy-of-boosting-far-right-candidates-seems-to-have-worked

https://www.vox.com/2022/11/12/23454725/democrat-republican-maga-strategy-midterm-red-wave

Actually, I DO listen to the few progressive outlets I can access and not once did I hear anything about funding MAGA campaigns. The links you provide show only Democratic committees and Democratic candidates telling it like it is. Right wing conspiracy theorists and election deniers and violent extremists. Telling the truth about opponents instead of screaming "vote for me because I am not the other candidate" like Republicans did.

I guess I don't understand what is so wrong with telling voters "here is what my opponent actually did in their own words". Here in Oregon, Democrat Val Hoyle ran ads showing her opponent, MAGA backed Alek Skarlatos, on a podcast not two years ago, laughing about choking a woman to death during sex and telling a crowd he wanted to ban abortion and saying he would abolish the minimum wage. Some of the ads also featured Val Hoyle's accomplishments to compare her to him. Hoyle won, BTW.

Showing voters who the opposing candidate is by backing it up with facts and their own words is what stopped the "red tsunami". I guess, if you twist history a certain way, Democrats paid to show America who Republicans are.

seb146 wrote:

apodino wrote:

seb146 wrote:

I keep hearing this "blame Democrats" talking point but still see zero evidence. During the Republican primary, every commercial, at least here in Oregon and in California, stated "(GOP candidate) paid for this ad" or something similar. Zero ads were paid for by DNC or Democratic committee of Oregon or California. Just another classic example of Republicans refusing to take responsibility for the monster they created.

The general election was the same "don't vote for that horrible candidate" ads we all see every election cycle, paid for by the candidate hoping to win.

Really Seb. This has been all over progressive talk radio, or do you not listen to left wing media but just establishment sources. Even so, here are some sources on what I said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/12/democrats-interfere-republican-primaries/

https://www.npr.org/2022/11/11/1135878576/the-democrats-strategy-of-boosting-far-right-candidates-seems-to-have-worked

https://www.vox.com/2022/11/12/23454725/democrat-republican-maga-strategy-midterm-red-wave

Actually, I DO listen to the few progressive outlets I can access and not once did I hear anything about funding MAGA campaigns. The links you provide show only Democratic committees and Democratic candidates telling it like it is. Right wing conspiracy theorists and election deniers and violent extremists. Telling the truth about opponents instead of screaming "vote for me because I am not the other candidate" like Republicans did.

I guess I don't understand what is so wrong with telling voters "here is what my opponent actually did in their own words". Here in Oregon, Democrat Val Hoyle ran ads showing her opponent, MAGA backed Alek Skarlatos, on a podcast not two years ago, laughing about choking a woman to death during sex and telling a crowd he wanted to ban abortion and saying he would abolish the minimum wage. Some of the ads also featured Val Hoyle's accomplishments to compare her to him. Hoyle won, BTW.

Showing voters who the opposing candidate is by backing it up with facts and their own words is what stopped the "red tsunami". I guess, if you twist history a certain way, Democrats paid to show America who Republicans are.

The issue Apodino is taking is about the Dems meddling in primaries. My point to that is why the hell not? The parties are picking their voters with the constant Gerrymandering. Why not present the voters in those specially drawn districts with their favorite version of themselves, even if the candidate is so extreme? The dems only meddled by advertising what the "extreme" candidate was for in the primaries. They can't help it if that is what the primary voters wanted.
This is the road we are on with Gerrymandering. Extreme candidates in Extreme districts.

In NC they had a balanced independent council draw the districts fairly even and wound up with a 7-7 splt of R/D representation , fairly representing the state/.
in 2024 the GOP will redraw for an 11-3 or 10-4 majority. You can bet shenannigans will prevail. The House or Represenatitives needs to be renamed to the House of "We Choose our Voters"

apodino wrote:

seb146 wrote:

apodino wrote:

One other thing that was successful for Democrats this cycle, but they need to be very careful with because this is playing with fire. One of the reason the Dems held onto the senate is because the Dems poured lots of money into GOP primaries to ensure that people like Kari Lake, and Don Bolduc were nominated because they felt they were so crazy they could not win a general. They were right this time, but the issue is if they do this and miss, you are stuck with a crazy actually holding elected office. This is exactly how Trump got elected in 2016.

I keep hearing this "blame Democrats" talking point but still see zero evidence. During the Republican primary, every commercial, at least here in Oregon and in California, stated "(GOP candidate) paid for this ad" or something similar. Zero ads were paid for by DNC or Democratic committee of Oregon or California. Just another classic example of Republicans refusing to take responsibility for the monster they created.

The general election was the same "don't vote for that horrible candidate" ads we all see every election cycle, paid for by the candidate hoping to win.

Really Seb. This has been all over progressive talk radio, or do you not listen to left wing media but just establishment sources. Even so, here are some sources on what I said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/12/democrats-interfere-republican-primaries/

https://www.npr.org/2022/11/11/1135878576/the-democrats-strategy-of-boosting-far-right-candidates-seems-to-have-worked

https://www.vox.com/2022/11/12/23454725/democrat-republican-maga-strategy-midterm-red-wave

I guess the unspoken part is what that says about the intelligence of the voter if such moves were genuinely effective.

casinterest wrote:

seb146 wrote:

apodino wrote:

Really Seb. This has been all over progressive talk radio, or do you not listen to left wing media but just establishment sources. Even so, here are some sources on what I said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/12/democrats-interfere-republican-primaries/

https://www.npr.org/2022/11/11/1135878576/the-democrats-strategy-of-boosting-far-right-candidates-seems-to-have-worked

https://www.vox.com/2022/11/12/23454725/democrat-republican-maga-strategy-midterm-red-wave

Actually, I DO listen to the few progressive outlets I can access and not once did I hear anything about funding MAGA campaigns. The links you provide show only Democratic committees and Democratic candidates telling it like it is. Right wing conspiracy theorists and election deniers and violent extremists. Telling the truth about opponents instead of screaming "vote for me because I am not the other candidate" like Republicans did.

I guess I don't understand what is so wrong with telling voters "here is what my opponent actually did in their own words". Here in Oregon, Democrat Val Hoyle ran ads showing her opponent, MAGA backed Alek Skarlatos, on a podcast not two years ago, laughing about choking a woman to death during sex and telling a crowd he wanted to ban abortion and saying he would abolish the minimum wage. Some of the ads also featured Val Hoyle's accomplishments to compare her to him. Hoyle won, BTW.

Showing voters who the opposing candidate is by backing it up with facts and their own words is what stopped the "red tsunami". I guess, if you twist history a certain way, Democrats paid to show America who Republicans are.

The issue Apodino is taking is about the Dems meddling in primaries. My point to that is why the hell not? The parties are picking their voters with the constant Gerrymandering. Why not present the voters in those specially drawn districts with their favorite version of themselves, even if the candidate is so extreme? The dems only meddled by advertising what the "extreme" candidate was for in the primaries. They can't help it if that is what the primary voters wanted.
This is the road we are on with Gerrymandering. Extreme candidates in Extreme districts.

In NC they had a balanced independent council draw the districts fairly even and wound up with a 7-7 splt of R/D representation , fairly representing the state/.
in 2024 the GOP will redraw for an 11-3 or 10-4 majority. You can bet shenannigans will prevail. The House or Represenatitives needs to be renamed to the House of "We Choose our Voters"

What recent presidential election were right wing pundits telling their viewers and listeners to register as Democrats so the Democratic primary could drag on and all that money would not be available for the general so the Republican would win? Was it Obama vs. Romney? Obama vs. McCain? But people are complaining their own candidates are being called out for being election deniers and praising January 6 attackers?

seb146 wrote:

What recent presidential election were right wing pundits telling their viewers and listeners to register as Democrats so the Democratic primary could drag on and all that money would not be available for the general so the Republican would win? Was it Obama vs. Romney? Obama vs. McCain? But people are complaining their own candidates are being called out for being election deniers and praising January 6 attackers?

Rush Limbaugh encouraged "Operation Chaos" in 2008 where he told republicans to register as democrats to extend the Obama-Hillary primary.

https://www.politico.com/story/2008/05/ ... ase-010253

StarAC17 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

What recent presidential election were right wing pundits telling their viewers and listeners to register as Democrats so the Democratic primary could drag on and all that money would not be available for the general so the Republican would win? Was it Obama vs. Romney? Obama vs. McCain? But people are complaining their own candidates are being called out for being election deniers and praising January 6 attackers?

Rush Limbaugh encouraged "Operation Chaos" in 2008 where he told republicans to register as democrats to extend the Obama-Hillary primary.

https://www.politico.com/story/2008/05/ ... ase-010253

And this is where the issue really lies. Too much power for either party to decide it's own electors. We shouldn't have closed primaries. Everyone needs a chance to make a ranked choice vote on all the candidates. By the time each party chooses, the middle voters have lost out.

In a further sign courts are tiring of MAGA antics Kari Lake has been sanctioned for filing suit against Maricopa County.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tylerroush/2022/12/01

scbriml wrote:

A political party playing politics? How very dare they!

Unless you're in Hong Kong where the pan-Dems (basically the faction that was against the govt and against CCP in general) got arrested by holding a freaking primary election. A primary! The purpose? Just so the pan-Dem can win elections (this was back in 2020 when there was still legitimate election in Hong Kong)! How dare they!

I point that out b/c that's exactly what the GOP is trying to say here - how dare Dems play politics to try to win election! They should all be arrested and thrown in jail! Not surprising from a party that embraced dictatorship (like Putin and Kim Jong Un and even Xinnie) and have a cult of personality with TFG.

I definitely miss John McCain...RIP.

bennett123 wrote:

IMO, if John McCain was the candidate for the GOP then the Democrats would be a much much precarious situation.

The Democrat Party is probably relieved that they don't face that prospect.

Kinda telling about the current state of the GOP when a dead candidate could do better than all of the live ones.

GOP Autopsy advisory council formed, including the one and only Kellyanne, and off-brand Christian Bale in American Psycho, Blake Masters.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... 2-autopsy/

Some very smart people, Elise Stefanik, Tim Miller, helped put together the 2012 autopsy, but their findings were ignored and the party lurched to the right (Stefanik with them). I won't hold my breath for the lessons they learn from this one...

Keep posts respectful or they will be removed.

✈️ atcsundevil

Good news, Arizona overcame those pesky countiy election leaders that don't beleive in democracy and certified the election results.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireSto ... s-94496753

The certification opens a five-day window for formal election challenges. Republican Kari Lake, who lost the race for governor, is expected to file a lawsuit in the coming days after she's spent weeks of criticizing the administration of the election.

Election results have largely been certified without issue around the country, but Arizona was an exception. Several Republican-controlled counties delayed their certification despite no evidence of problems with the vote count. Cochise County in southeastern Arizona blew past the deadline last week, forcing a judge to intervene on Thursday and order the county supervisors to certify the election by the end of the day.

Agreed. An obviously low quality person was nearly elected at a similar vote ratio to when a n obviously low quality person was elected POTUS. That any of these races are close really speaks to the affluenza deeply affecting US political division.

Gotta admit though, he did provide a lot of comedy gold. But he did concede, so credit is given where credit is due.