BigRedBuster
Active member
Yep, if it's this close at the end...go ahead and recount.
But, if Biden wins PA, it doesn't matter.
***** Official Election Game Day Thread *****
- Thread starter Mierin
- Start date
But, if Biden wins PA, it doesn't matter.
Guy Chamberlin
Active member
It's murky. There is definitely voter suppression going on, and it tends to target people inclined to vote Democrat, but it doesn't explain away Stacy Abrams' loss. On the other hand, Abrams coming that close in a state like Georgia is a meaningful trend by itself.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/30/did-racially-motivated-voter-suppression-thwart-stacey-abrams/
I also don't know anyone who seriously argued that Putin had hacked America's electoral system itself. I know many yearned to prove collusion, but there really was no evidence (I mean, beyond Donald Trump publicly urging Russia to release any and all hacked dirt on Hillary Clinton.) What's undeniable is that Putin targeted and financed a social media campaign out of Russia to infiltrate America with divisive messaging and uncredited conspiracies that skewed towards helping Donald Trump win the election. I personally think America's own bats#!t conspiracy theorists could have handled the job themselves, and I doubt the election hung in the balance of Vladamir Putin, but the volume of Russian output in the American election was pretty stunning. And it hardly cost Putin a thing.
But Trump's efforts to subvert the voting process and cast doubt on any election result he didn't like were done loudly and in broad daylight.
ColoradoHusk
Donor
Guy Chamberlin
Active member
Dude, you're in the P&R forum. Assumed you were following at least some of the basic issues. The only tax increase is for people making more than $400,000 a year, and the tax rate would still be lower on the wealthy than it's been in for most of the last 70 years.
Who knows? Maybe we could get some of the huge corporations paying ZERO taxes to pony up a bit.
But you gotta promise not to call it socialism.
Last edited by a moderator:
RedDenver
New member
schriznoeder
New member
I still vividly remember watching Clint Watts testify about Russian election interference before the Senate Intelligence Committee back in March of 2017. I was so enamored by what he had to say, that I actually saved off the PDF of his opening statement. Here's an excerpt that plays right into the bold above...
"Why did Soviet Active Measures fail during the Cold War but succeed for Russia today?
Russia’s Active Measures today work far better than that of their Soviet forefathers. During the Cold War, the KGB had to infiltrate the West, recruit agents and promote communist parties and their propaganda while under watch by Western counterintelligence efforts. Should they be too aggressive, Soviet spies conducting Active Measures amongst U.S. domestic groups could potentially trigger armed conflict or would be detained and deported.
Social media provides Russia’s new Active Measures access to U.S. audiences without setting foot in the country, and the Kremlin smartly uses these platforms in seven ways to win Western elections. First, Russia chooses close democratic contests where a slight nudge can usher in their preferred candidate or desired outcome. Second, Russia targets specific audiences inside electorates amenable to their messages and resulting influence – in particular alt-right audiences incensed over immigration, refugees and economic hardship. Third, Russia plans and implements their strategy long before an election allowing sufficient time for cultivating an amenable audience ripe for manipulation. Fourth, their early entry into electoral debates allows them to test many messages and then reinforce those messages that resonate and bring about a measurable, preferred shift in public opinion. Fifth, Russia brilliantly uses hacking to compromise adversaries and power their influence messaging – a tactic most countries would not take. Sixth, their employment of social media automation saturates their intended audience with narratives that drown out opposing viewpoints. Finally, Russia plays either side should the contest
change – backing an individual candidate or party so long as they support a Kremlin policy position and then turning against the same party should their position shift against Russia.
The implications of Russia’s new Active Measures model will be two fold. The first is what the world is witnessing today – a Russian challenge to democracies throughout the West. Russian influence surfaced in Eastern Europe elections and the United Kingdom’s Brexit vote before the U.S. Presidential election, helped bolster a losing far-right candidate recently in the Netherlands and right now works diligently to shape the upcoming 2017 elections in France and Germany. Over the horizon, Russia has provided any authoritarian dictator or predatory elite equipped with hackers and disrespectful of civil liberties a playbook to dismantle their enemies through information warfare. Fledgling democracies and countries rife with ethnic and social divisions will be particularly vulnerable to larger authoritarian regimes with the time, resources and
patience to foment chaos in smaller republics."
teachercd
Active member
Crossing my fingers!!!!
I am also heading to Georgia right now to add in some votes! I need my cash
teachercd
Active member
teachercd
Active member
I work with students that would be the ones voting for her in the near future. She doesn't move the needle for most of them yet. I thought they would be bigger fans but there is either a disconnect or they just don't buy what she is selling.BlitzFirst said:
I still think she leaves for a podcast/satellite gig for about 10-15 million a year.
Mierin
Donor
Last edited by a moderator:
RedDenver
New member
It's possible, but you and teach live in a very conservative state. AOC is very popular among younger Dems and of course progressives in the circles I talk politics with.