Progressives (Liberals)

@Setanta,

Quote:

Anyone who has labored under the influence of twenty years or more of obsessive hatred for the Clintons shouldn't vote.

Democrats don't want anyone to vote. They have shown they feel it is unnecessary and they and the bureaucrats can name the president.

0 Replies

@Sturgis,

Sturgis wrote:

Biden is definitely having trouble. With the addition to the race of Bloomberg it'll likely get worse.

By my reckoning Mr. Biden has already got the nomination sewn up.

0 Replies

@Sturgis,

In addition to Biden's political career being much like Trump's business career, that is to say some success with intermittent disasters, he has snapped at several people on the campaign trail....some even would be voters. His skin is as thin as Trump's, there's no way he could hold it together in a debate....and can't really take the high ground.

1 Reply

@Brand X,

I agree, that's a good capsule assessment. We've not seen you much lately, have we? (I've been mostly gone for a while myself.)

1 Reply

Is this a thing that is true?!

Code:



                 First Vote	 Final Vote	Total S.D.E.s

Candidate	Votes	Pct.	Votes	Pct.	Votes	Pct.

Sanders	        1,925	25.7%	1,811	27.8%	—	—

Warren	        1,664	22.2	1,636	25.2	—	—

Buttigieg	1,333	17.8	1,553	23.9	—	—

Klobuchar	1,013	13.5	773	11.9	—	—

Biden	        1,002	13.4	722	11.1	—	—

Uncommitted	41	0.5	9	0.1	—	—

*fixed

source

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

These are current numbers without all the precincts reporting in yet. So changes are possible. The list has shifted several times already over the last hour or so.

They are having some serious problems tallying the results tonight. Everything that can go wrong is going wrong. The way they are going, it may still be a number of hours before they have all of the precincts reporting in.

EDIT: Check out the feed of "real-time updates" from reporters on the right of the screen. Those numbers are based on only 35% of the precincts reporting in.

0 Replies

Brad Parscale and other right wing sources are promoting the notion that the Iowa vote is rigged.

Just guess why they would be doing this.

2 Replies

@blatham,

Quote:

Brad Parscale and other right wing sources are promoting the notion that the Iowa vote is rigged.

Nonsense, everyone knows it is the Russians. Laughing

0 Replies

@blatham,

Because nobody really ran against Trump in the Republican caucus there?

1 Reply

@Setanta,

I haven't been gone enough. lol

0 Replies

@Sturgis,

Wrong answer but still worthy of an A grade. Congratulations!

0 Replies

Quote:

Jim Sciutto
@jimsciutto
Beyond the delay, the most alarming story are coordinated (& false) claims by Trump surrogates the vote is rigged. Beware of more in 2020 w/damaging consequences.

Don Jr: “The fix is in..AGAIN”
Eric Trump: “..they are rigging this thing."
Parscale: "Quality control=rigged?"

Again, if you are pushing this ****, you're playing their game.

0 Replies

The Only Safe Election Is a Low-Tech Election

1 Reply

@hightor,

Quote:

The Only Safe Election Is a Low-Tech Election

It seems to me there are few elements of the modern electoral process more obvious that this

Quote:

The hours spent waiting for overdue results created an information vacuum, which was quickly filled by conspiracy theorists.

Paper ballots (however designed) would obviously result in much longer delays before a final result was clear. And god knows what paranoid theories and disinformation campaigns would insert into that waiting period. But so what? That's obviously happening now.

But our modern dependence on electronics leaves us open to data manipulation which is difficult to impossible to determine and trace. And which can be implemented over far larger geographical spheres than could be the case with paper ballots.

I suspect a main impediment here would be the TV networks themselves who surely yearn for the concentration of eyeballs on election nights along with the advertising dollars that attend. The voting machine producers and lobbyists too would not be happy. Likewise, and more to the point, any political party which might see value in such manipulation and which sees such manipulation as justified - because they represent, they believe, the only legitimate political ideology. The sort of party William Barr would belong to.

2 Replies

@blatham,

Quote:

I suspect a main impediment here would be the TV networks themselves who surely yearn for the concentration of eyeballs on election nights along with the advertising dollars that attend.

Gawd, I hate the commercial/entertainment aspects of our late stage democracy. Can online betting on the results of primary elections be far behind?

1 Reply

@hightor,

Were you a fan of the Max Headroom series? I think of this show very often these days. Not to mention Network, of course.

0 Replies

For the live of me, I can't figure out why this man might be pushing a GOP/Russian troll narrative. It's so unlike him.

Quote:

Lindsey Graham
@LindseyGrahamSC
· 1h
What are the odds that:

➡️ most anticipated poll of the year (@DMRegister) is cancelled.

➡️ voting system completely crashes.

....and it has nothing to do with a Bernie blowout and a Biden crash?

1 Reply

@blatham,

It shows how this snafu is going to really take a toll on the Democrats. Unless Sanders wins big, his followers will claim the vote was rigged. That's a quarter of the Democratic party on twitter spreading the hate. The Republicans are already doing that. It completely illegitimizes the entire Democratic primary process to this point. It's a complete own goal. No one tested the software?

1 Reply

Here's another

Quote:

Hugh Hewitt on Iowa caucus problems:
Quote:
“And they want to run Medicare for All”

MM
Hewitt is such a slimy bugger. Note his use of "they" here which of course suggests "the Democrats in toto" or maybe "the progressives" when the issue resides with the unique aspects of Iowa's caucus system and the state Dems' failure to adequately test the new system and to train volunteers.

He's not a stupid guy but he know's he's lying. He is not one to care about that. Like Barr, he's a dyed in the wool Reaganite and more than willing to play the propaganda game

Quote:

In June 2016, after Trump's controversial remarks concerning Judge Gonzalo Curiel, Hewitt publicly called on the RNC to disendorse Trump as nominee. A week later, Hewitt reversed his position in a Washington Post op-ed.[26] Internal emails showed that a Salem Media executive pressured Hewitt to support Trump, and that the Salem Media executive attributed Hewitt's support for Trump in the aforementioned Washington Post op-ed shortly after to the pressure

wikipedia

1 Reply

@engineer,

Quote:

It shows how this snafu is going to really take a toll on the Democrats.

I think this snafu will be forgotten in a week.

Quote:

It completely illegitimizes the entire Democratic primary process to this point.

I don't think so — the Iowa caucus wasn't that highly regarded anyway. Once the actual primaries start everyone will see how unimportant the software glitch really was. The Sanders twitiverse might try to make an issue of it but paper and photographic backups should calm and reassure the rational voters.

0 Replies

Progressives (Liberals)

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know