All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[Steel Inquisitor]

That, and hopefully this put the Senate Republicans on trial, and they convicted themselves.

Don't get too optimistic. They'll vote for him, since their agenda needs Trump to succeed - they'll have less leverage with President Pence. They won't let Nixon happen again.

[Gray Lensman]

Don't get too optimistic. They'll vote for him, since their agenda needs Trump to succeed - they'll have less leverage with President Pence. They won't let Nixon happen again.

I think you misread what I wrote.

The Senate, by voting to aquit, inadvertently said that the Senate is guilty. The question is will voters still care, or be able to do anything about it if they do, come November?

[Steel Inquisitor]

I think you misread what I wrote.

The Senate, by voting to aquit, inadvertently said that the Senate is guilty. The question is will voters still care, or be able to do anything about it if they do, come November?

I didn't misread.

This isn't simply about politicians, they'll be voted out by doing that. You have too much trust in Republicans holding their own accountable.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

Exactly. She did give the man 120 billion to murder more people... #resistance lol.

[Gray Lensman]

I didn't misread.

This isn't simply about politicians, they'll be voted out by doing that. You have too much trust in Republicans holding their own accountable.

You certainly seem to be reading wrong. At no point did I suggest putting any faith in Senate Republicans - the point about convicting themselves is in the eyes of the votors, which i spelled out and you still misread.

Perhaps if you stopped refuting points I didn't even try to make?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

You know that if what happened in Iowa had happened in any other country, you'd have some jackass from the State Department out in front of the cameras expressing grave concerns about the electoral process, while a CIA backed puppet is airlifted into the country demanding transparency and a redo of the election.

If Iowa Was Bolivia, the US Would Have Already Intervened

We're still waiting for the full results of the Iowa caucus. In Bolivia, the United States backed a violent coup against Evo Morales for even less.

Last October, Bolivia held a presidential election that pitted incumbent Evo Morales against former president Carlos Mesa. Morales, a socialist that had been in power since 2006, was popular and successful, although his reelection bid was marred by a contentious decision to scrap presidential term limits. Many in the opposition had promised they wouldn’t recognize the results if Morales won.

On election day, as tallies trickled in and the election commission reported results from the unofficial “quick count,” Mesa preemptively declared victory, claiming that he had forced a second round of voting. (Presidential candidates in Bolivia must capture 50 percent of the vote, or must receive at least 40 percent of the vote and lead the second-place candidate by at least ten percentage points, in order to win outright.) Controversially, the election commission then stopped reporting voting tallies for the night. The outcome was up in the air.

Sound familiar?

Along with the suspension of results, both the Democratic presidential caucuses in Iowa and the presidential election in Bolivia faced geographic challenges (there were more than 1,600 precincts in Iowa and 5,300 in Bolivia, many of them rural) as well as technological hurdles (using smartphone apps to record results requires technical familiarity and internet access). Security concerns in each election caused administrative delays, although in Bolivia the delay was briefer, and the official count — entirely separate from the quick count and tabulated in person — was not affected by the suspension.

One thing, however, is entirely different: Morales was overthrown in a violent coup, with the full backing of the United States. The worst that could happen in Iowa is the state losing its first-in-the-nation status — and even that’s unlikely.

In Bolivia, the electoral authorities restarted their quick count the day after the election, showing Morales’s lead increasing to over ten percentage points. The jump was in line with the previous trends in results, but the Organization of American States (OAS), which was observing the contest, criticized the “drastic” change-in-trend, implying that fraud had taken place. Even though Morales, the outright victor based on the official count, agreed to a second-round election, he was eventually forced out of office at the behest of the military.

The United States played a significant role in legitimizing the putsch. While the OAS has still failed to provide evidence of fraud, US politicians have congratulated the OAS on its work and quickly normalized relations with the de facto government. Led by Jeanine Áñez, the new government has repressed those associated with Morales and his party in the run-up to new elections.

It’s clear that US elites have double standards for elections based on where they take place and who is winning. If the country is Venezuela or Haiti or Bolivia, and undesirable candidates are leading, the United States can throw out the results or declare whoever they want as president with little justification. If a US ally steals an election, as happened in 2017 in Honduras, the “winner” can stay the winner.

And how about the United States itself, a country that bills itself as a champion of democracy abroad? Voter suppression, gerrymandering, and undemocratic rules are now common elements of the electoral landscape. Overturning an election result, which happened in Florida in 2000, is not unheard of. In 2016, the candidate who came in second in the popular vote was inaugurated president. And while these problems are often to the detriment of Democrats, Democratic elites don’t seem to be too invested in solving them, even for their own nominating process (recent energy has been focused on stopping supposed Russian interference in elections, for example).

The ongoing Iowa caucus debacle illustrates quite a few things: the corruption and waste in the Democratic Party, the hubris around voting systems and security, and the backwardness of the US presidential nominating process. But perhaps above all it shows how voting is selectively weaponized by US elites: against left-wing candidates, against poor and working-class voters.

In Iowa, party leaders refuse to jettison a system that performed abominably and gave center stage to an undeserving, self-declared winner. Yet in Bolivia and other targets of imperialism, US elites are happy to seize on electoral hiccups — and use them to install more favorable, pro-US governments whole cloth.

[master of read]

Just because you know that doing the right thing might not work doesn't mean you shouldn't attempt to do it.

The alternative is condoning a president extorting other nations to dig up dirt on his political opponents with taxpayer money.

If Republicans lack the integrity to take a stand against that, that's their business, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't at least be addressed in Congress.

It's also a matter of self-defense -- there''s no reason they should look the other way while Trump attacks Biden through illegal means.

It's the Republicans who don't have a problem with criminal behavior in office -- that shouldn't become the status quo of our government, nor our society.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/16/polit...aid/index.html

evil triumphs when good men do nothing.

[master of read]

Exactly. Impeachment is the scarlet letter Trump will wear to his grave, there’s NOTHING he can do to remove it, and that will eat at him like a cancer. Meanwhile, Democrats did the right thing by going through with the hearings, even if the deck was stacked against them from jump street, by bringing Trump’s crimes into the light for the country to see, Dems illustrated to the public, especially undecided voters just how crooked the president had been while the GOP was more than willing to be complicit to his activities. There’s no hiding for Republicans who voted to acquit and they could well pay a heavy price come November.

just because the fight seems pointless, doesn't mean it's pointless to fight.

[Steel Inquisitor]

You certainly seem to be reading wrong. At no point did I suggest putting any faith in Senate Republicans - the point about convicting themselves is in the eyes of the votors, which i spelled out and you still misread.

Perhaps if you stopped refuting points I didn't even try to make?

When I was speaking about Republicans, this included Republican voters. A reason Republican politicians won't budge is because they fear their base kicking them out over betraying the party by convicting Trump. They're not going to be "convicting" any Republicans politicians who vote no on this.

I disagree that you should have any trust in any Republicans holding their own accountable, this isn't not solely about Trump. Look at the numerous horrible Republican politicians holding office, despite being horrific people when Worst Blogger makes profiles about. Roy Moore got 49% of the Alabama vote, for example.

[Jack Dracula]

As far as I know there are two people on this thread that caucused (You and I). Interestingly, from what I've seen, several of people on this thread, who didn't, seem to know much more about the process and what happened then either of us.

Baseless speculation and dip-shittery.
The goal is for accuracy. Not speed.

[Jack Dracula]

[B][I]Interesting
Uhhhhhhhh the IDP is now reporting vote totals from

So, we're posting twitter links from someone named "lib_crusher" now?

[Astral Disaster]

This ruling could be one that haunts the Republican party , maybe not today or tomorrow. But at some point this ruling and the lack of conviction to uphold their duty is gonna be something years from now with a future President decides he has no rules. And if it is a Democrat they will have no choice but to stand by and watch. Because they opened pandora's box.

That assumes Republicans will quietly and willingly cede power if a Democrat wins the Presidential election, when. over the past decade, they've shown time and time again they have no interest in "playing by the rules" and will subvert the consensus of a majority of the American people to consolidate and maintain their control.

[Tami]

Report: Trump Is Melting Down Over Bloomberg Ads About His Weight

As you may have heard, former New York City mayor Mike Bloomberg recently got into the Democratic primary with one goal: to troll the shit out of Donald Trump. Oh sure, he’d like to be the nominee, but more than that, Bloomberg has been spending hundreds of millions of his own money to drive the president insane. And thus far, it appears to be working! Last month, the New York Times reported that despite Bloomberg’s relatively low polling, he’s managed to get under Trump’s skin much more than, say, Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders, and Trump is apparently “pricked” by Bloomberg’s massive ad buys and anti-DJT messaging, including spots targeting his treatment of military leaders. And if the events of the last 24 hours are any indication, it’s been $200 million (and counting!) well spent.

Fueled by an alleged, though totally believable, anger over Bloomberg ads targeting his “girth,” Trump spent Sunday attacking “Mini Mike” on Twitter, declaring the three-time mayor “fake news,” a loser, out to get Sanders, and, most damningly, short:

[AnakinFlair]

The claims of rigging aren't nonsense. But then again they're withholding the news that Bernie has won.
What nonsense was this.
It’s pretty weird that Pete’s Iowa Comms Director still has not deleted this tweet which contains: 1) a login PIN for the Shadow voting app 2) 3.2 delegates for Pete rounded up to 4, contrary to the instructions on the form

Ok, so I work for a company in Customer Service where I have to answer emails sent by customers who are trying to get back into their accounts and need assistance. Even though our app gives detailed instructions on exactly what to send (last 4 digits of their card, phone number, and ID tag name) , almost half of the customers who write in also choose to include their full debit or credit card numbers with expiration date and CVV number, their PIN, and even their full Social Security Number. And even when we write them back and straight up tell them NOT to send those type of things, about half of them send it again anyways, sometimes multiple times.

In other words, people in general are morons, and the fact that the post is still up (or was made at all) doesn't surprise me in the least.

[master of read]

Report: Trump Is Melting Down Over Bloomberg Ads About His Weight

but tami! trump is a stable genius.

why would he care about what someone says about his weights since he's the fittest president evar?