Republicans get owned in their Weaponization Hearings

[Satchel 6,908]

If the first hearing is any indication, Republicans may wanna reconsider:

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/tech-and-telecom-law/house-gop-opens-hunter-biden-probe-focusing-on-what-twitter-did

House Republicans failed in the opening salvo of their investigation into the finances of Joe Biden’s family to produce evidence substantiating their claims that US intelligence officials worked with Twitter Inc. to suppress an unflattering 2020 news story on the president’s son. 

Former Twitter Inc. officials testified Wednesday that their decision to limit the spread of the New York Post story about Hunter Biden’s now-infamous laptop and his overseas business dealings was, in hindsight, a mistake. But they said they weren’t directed by the FBI or other US intelligence officials, and the action wasn’t politically motivated. 

Many of the documents Republicans displayed at the House Oversight hearing were from the so-called “Twitter Files,” a series of reports shared by journalists who were invited by Elon Musk to examine Twitter’s handling of controversial decisions made under the company’s previous leaders. The first installment of the Twitter Files focused on the company’s treatment of the New York Post story.

Musk gave the journalists access to company emails and Slack messages, and many of those messages were then published on Twitter. Most of the reports suggest without evidence that Twitter made decisions based on demands or pressure from the FBI and the Biden campaign.

“I think you guys wanted to take it down,” House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, who also sits on the Oversight committee, said of the story, which was published just weeks before the 2020 election that then-President Donald Trump lost to Biden. “I think you got played by the FBI.”

[yoladu 4,067]

Did GOP house members yell and berated witnesses? 

Winning.

[C-Man 27,058]

Lauren Boebert spent her 5+ minutes yesterday berating Twitter for supposedly "shadow banning" her account temporarily for a "freakin' joke." Now Bobo wants to subpoena Fauci. I can't wait for that -- he'll eviscerate these clowns. 

The GQP is not a serious political party.

[Pescado_Rojo 19,331]

2 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Lauren Boebert spent her 5+ minutes yesterday berating Twitter for supposedly "shadow banning" her account temporarily for a "freakin' joke." Now Bobo wants to subpoena Fauci. I can't wait for that -- he'll eviscerate these clowns. 

The GQP is not a serious political party.

The problem is their audience will see and hear their loud, angry questions but never see them get owned by the answers. Fox, Twitter, OANN etc will lead with headlines like "Lauren Bobert demanding answers to the tough questions!!", but will never show the answers because she'll look like a moron. 

[Chuckie Finster 22,600]

Genuine question:  How are these hearings longer than:

Q: What is the timeframe for when the government was allegedly ordering the suppression of this story?

A: Before the 2020 election

Q: Remind me, who was president at that point?

A: ........

It is unspeakably depressing that the Republicans are insisting that Joe Biden was influencing the government 6 months before he was inaugurated and yet this is still being covered like legitimate news.

Edited February 9, 2023 by Chuckie Finster

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13,547]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/08/media/republicans-hearing-twitter-bias-reliable-sources/index.html

Quote

And Matt Taibbi, one of the journalists Musk handpicked last year to comb through Twitter's internal messages for evidence of free speech violations, said himself that "there is no evidence — that I've seen — of any government involvement in the laptop story."

Quote

Ironically, the hearing appeared to reveal that Twitter had acquiesced to Trump and changed its policies after it concluded that he had violated its rules.

Anika Collier Navaroli, a former senior employee on Twitter's content moderation team, testified that the social media company ended its ban on abusive language against immigrants to "go back to where they came from" so that Trump would not face repercussions for his racist 2019 attack on four minority Democratic congresswomen. "So much for bias against right-wing on Twitter," Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez replied.

Quote

And the hearing hinted that the Trump White House attempted to censor the speech of at least one American: Chrissy Teigen. When Teigen called Trump a series of expletives in 2019, Navaroli testified that she was told the Trump White House contacted Twitter and demanded that it be removed.

Strangely enough, Republicans showed no interest in drilling down on this allegation of censorship. It's no wonder why.

 

[tx 3 putt 76,404]

 

[Satchel 6,908]

My, my, my—what happens when you hold a hearing, and you can't prove your point?” [Democratic Congressman] Connolly asked.

[DDD Dad 14,252]

The stupid runs deep. 

[tx 3 putt 76,404]

A potato is smarter than Turley …..

 

[Neonmoon 38,127]

Gaetz is not smart enough to question anyone 

Gaetz: Did the FBI influence google? 
Lobbyist: I don’t work for the FBI or google.

Gaerz: But google is listed as one of your clients. Does it surprise you google and Pfizer is one of your clients 

Lobbyist: No, it does not surprise me, sir. 

ground breaking stuff going on. 

 

 

[Nivek 16,861]

1 hour ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

The problem is their audience will see and hear their loud, angry questions but never see them get owned by the answers. Fox, Twitter, OANN etc will lead with headlines like "Lauren Bobert demanding answers to the tough questions!!", but will never show the answers because she'll look like a moron. 

incorrect.  Some of them will watch it just like they did the Kavanaugh hearings.  They will realize that the accuser is credible, believable, and legitimate and their guy is a drunk, who cries over calendars, and fakes outrage for being questioned about his shitty behavior and questionable finances.    Then they will shrug their shoulders and carry on.  

[Homesickhorn 2,202]

1 hour ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

The problem is their audience will see and hear their loud, angry questions but never see them get owned by the answers. Fox, Twitter, OANN etc will lead with headlines like "Lauren Bobert demanding answers to the tough questions!!", but will never show the answers because she'll look like a moron. 

Not to them, unfortunately.

[Satchel 6,908]

Sorta like Gym Jordan looked in this clip?
 

https://www.newsweek.com/jim-jordans-own-words-used-undermine-him-jamie-raskin-1780263

[Chooky 13,302]

Me: it can't get dumber than this. 

US Congress: LOL

[DigglerontheHoof 21,065]

There's no fucking way Gym isn't a child molestor. 

[Satchel 6,908]

When the Trump justice department tapped a US attorney to examine the origins of the FBI inquiry into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, conservatives and many Republicans hoped it would end the idea Donald Trump’s campaign was boosted by Moscow and back his charges that some FBI officials and others had conspired against him. But instead, as the multi-year investigation winds down, it is ending with accusations that unethical actions by that special counsel – John Durham – and ex-attorney general William Barr “weaponized” the US Department of Justice (DoJ) to help Trump.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-russia-investigation-investigators-leaves-100003692.html

Critics of the Durham inquiry also noted early on that Barr on several occasions, and contrary to longtime DoJ policies, suggested publicly that Durham’s inquiry would yield significant results, which in effect would help validate Trump’s charges that some officials at the FBI and CIA had led a political witch-hunt.

Further, Barr and Durham, in highly unusual public statements early in their investigation, tried to undermine a chief conclusion of a report by the DoJ inspector general, Michael Horowitz, that the Russia investigation was based on sufficient facts to warrant opening the investigation in 2016.

Ex-DoJ officials say the Durham inquiry seemed aimed from the start at boosting Trump’s political fortunes.

“It was clear to people following the Durham investigation as it unfolded that it was highly irregular from the start,” said former deputy AG Donald Ayer who served in the George HW Bush administration “Indeed there’s good reason to believe that its purpose and primary function was to create fodder to advance Trump’s election prospects.”

Critics note that Barr tapped Durham to lead the investigation just a month after special counsel Robert Mueller issued a large report documenting substantial ties between Trump’s campaign and Russia, and concluded that Moscow tried to sway the election to help Trump in “sweeping” and “systematic” ways, a conclusion Barr and Trump worked to downplay.

Despite Trump’s pressures and Durham’s sprawling investigation, including unusual overseas trips with Barr to interview officials in Italy and England about potential flaws in the Russia investigation, the inquiry notched just one minor conviction of a mid-level ex-FBI official for falsifying a document. There were also two embarrassing acquittals.

The Times report revealed too that Durham had uncovered evidence during his Italy trip of possible criminal misconduct by Trump, but it’s unknown what that entailed and how much he pursued that element of the inquiry.

Durham also reportedly spent time investigating a conspiratorial and dubious lead that seemed aimed at connecting an aide to billionaire George Soros, a leading Democratic donor, to the early Russian meddling investigation and the campaign of Trump’s opponent Hillary Clinton.

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,843]

I think we're back to Rule #1 with the GOP:

Every accusation a confession. God I hate these fucking people

[Satchel 6,908]

This weaponization ruse will contribute greatly to the undoing of House Republican rule. Reps Goldman and Raskin are kicking their asses for old and new.

[horn4life 3,755]

Yet if you were watching Fox News you were never burdened with the knowledge that the Trump Administration was upset with Trump being a "Pussy Ass Bitch" and got Twitter to take it down.  Nor will the Fox News crowd be burdened with twitter changing the rules of account suspension to accommodate Trump's rantings.

On Fox News... It was the Libs that were owned!  Take that you Pussy Assed Bitches!!!

And the cycle continues....

Edited February 10, 2023 by horn4life

[hpslugga 4,044]

22 hours ago, C-Man said:

 

The GQP is not a serious political party.

They’re an ad hoc group of social media commentators who are constantly finding themselves having to do and say abominable things to get all the likes and subscribes. They believe this is a winning electoral strategy, largely because being a Republican has a prerequisite requirement known as “believing in belief.” Let them keep believing it…after all, it’s worked so well for them since they started doing it in 2018

[Pescado_Rojo 19,331]

1 hour ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

I think we're back to Rule #1 with the GOP:

Every accusation a confession. God I hate these fucking people

Really makes you wonder about the kidnapping kids and harvesting their adrenochrome conspiracy with ghouls like Bannon and Stone walking around. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,843]

1 hour ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

Really makes you wonder about the kidnapping kids and harvesting their adrenochrome conspiracy with ghouls like Bannon and Stone walking around. 

I'm just curious how long THEY have been stealing elections.

[Pescado_Rojo 19,331]

31 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

I'm just curious how long THEY have been stealing elections.

My theory is the reason they went apeshit about it in 2020 is in 2016 they had hacked the specific voting machines they were bitching about. They ran the same play in 2020, with the same number of votes in the same precincts but didn't account for higher turnout. Trump acted like a guy that lost a lot of money on a fight he thought was fixed.  

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,843]

2 minutes ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

My theory is the reason they went apeshit about it in 2020 is in 2016 they had hacked the specific voting machines they were bitching about. They ran the same play in 2020, with the same number of votes in the same precincts but didn't account for higher turnout. Trump acted like a guy that lost a lot of money on a fight he thought was fixed.  

do you mean to imply that they won legitimately in 2016? because if any election has been fraudulent/stolen in my lifetime, i would put everything I own on that one.

[Pescado_Rojo 19,331]

2 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

do you mean to imply that they won legitimately in 2016? because if any election has been fraudulent/stolen in my lifetime, i would put everything I own on that one.

no, I think they stole 2016 and were pissed it didn't work in 2020 because they didn't account for higher turnout. 

[Captainant 27,467]

14 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

do you mean to imply that they won legitimately in 2016? because if any election has been fraudulent/stolen in my lifetime, i would put everything I own on that one.

I do think they narrowly won it in the ballot box in 2016 - thanks to the massive active measures campaign on the part of the russians and steve bannon's own weaponization of populist grievance politics

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,843]

4 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I do think they narrowly won it in the ballot box in 2016 - thanks to the massive active measures campaign on the part of the russians and steve bannon's own weaponization of populist grievance politics

and for me this is equally possible. I don't *believe* it was stolen/cheated, but you sure as shit won't see any shock on my face either way if it's determined to be legit or not. my mom voted for the first time in my life (afaik) in that election and she voted for the orange turd - she's now a never-trumper and regrets that vote every day (thankfully)

[Neonmoon 38,127]

The GOP is a cult. It’s the same cult that fought for the right to own slaves. It’s the same cult that believes Jesus is American. It’s never changed. It’s been the same for hundreds of years. And like clockwork, each new generation of idiots fall for the “fiscal conservative” bait 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,151]

1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

It’s the same cult that fought for the right to own slaves.

Dems were the pro-slavery and KKK party, stupid libtard pinko commie muslim.

[Gatorubet 30,117]

10 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Dems were the pro-slavery and KKK party, stupid libtard pinko commie muslim.

He said cult, not political party. And he was right.

Edit, and I know you knew that

Edited February 11, 2023 by Gatorubet

[hayden_horn 11,360]

2 hours ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

My theory is the reason they went apeshit about it in 2020 is in 2016 they had hacked the specific voting machines they were bitching about. They ran the same play in 2020, with the same number of votes in the same precincts but didn't account for higher turnout. Trump acted like a guy that lost a lot of money on a fight he thought was fixed.  

holy shit my night is ruined I'm gonna go get high off my fave and watch conspiracy shows now

i have never heard it characterized thusly, like a guy losing money on a fight he thought was fixed. 

that's fucking brilliant and i actually think you are onto something about not accounting for higher turnout in their cheating calculations

[elfenix 34,172]

4 hours ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

Really makes you wonder about the kidnapping kids and harvesting their adrenochrome conspiracy with ghouls like Bannon and Stone walking around. 

https://www.vice.com/en/article/jm5ng4/the-legal-industry-for-kidnapping-teens

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/troubled-teen-industry-abuse-agape-school-1234645835/

https://last-podcast-on-the-left.simplecast.com/episodes/episode-517-the-troubled-teen-industry-part-i-elan-school-tough-love-uPAoNlsR

etc etc

Edited February 11, 2023 by elfenix

[956 Worldwide 34,444]

Lol, the only way Republican voters hear about what what happens in these hearings is from Fox or from MTG’s Twitter. They’re going fine for the GOP. 

[Willfully Horn 7,916]

22 hours ago, elfenix said:

https://www.vice.com/en/article/jm5ng4/the-legal-industry-for-kidnapping-teens

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/troubled-teen-industry-abuse-agape-school-1234645835/

https://last-podcast-on-the-left.simplecast.com/episodes/episode-517-the-troubled-teen-industry-part-i-elan-school-tough-love-uPAoNlsR

etc etc

The Republican Party is the grooming party enabling pedophiles. As evidence I point to their opposition to age limits on marriage.

https://www.newsweek.com/wyoming-ending-child-marriage-sparks-republican-outrage-1780501

[GW Hayduke 1,952]

On 2/10/2023 at 5:13 PM, Pescado_Rojo said:

My theory is the reason they went apeshit about it in 2020 is in 2016 they had hacked the specific voting machines they were bitching about. They ran the same play in 2020, with the same number of votes in the same precincts but didn't account for higher turnout. Trump acted like a guy that lost a lot of money on a fight he thought was fixed.  

Is there evidence supporting this theory? Seems dangerous. I understand Hillary was considered the favorite and she lost the electoral vote.  Other than that, is there anything else?  I understand the 2016 nationwide results were mostly within the margin of error.  538 gave Trump an overall 3/10 shot at winning.  I don't discount the Russian meddling at all and believe their involvement contributed to Trump's narrow win - but that would likely have been generally captured in polling. I also wouldn't discount Comey's unprecedented meddling when he publicly announced his investigation 11 days before election day, which was during early voting.  The polling leading up to that time wouldn't have factored Comey's meddling. Here is a good video on how "wrong" the polls were in 2016 - i.e., not very wrong.    

https://fivethirtyeight.com/videos/polling-101-what-happened-to-the-polls-in-2016-and-what-you-should-know-about-them-in-2020/

[WhatTheBuck 28,713]

No, there’s no evidence of anyone hacking voting machines in 2016 or 2020. He’s just speculating. What I’m pretty sure happened in 2020 was that Trump’s people told him if he gets 70,000,000 votes then he’d win the election. He got 74,000,000. So he thought that meant he won. The problem was that Biden got 81,000,000 votes. Trump just can’t accept that he lost and figures like he does with everything else that he can just speak a new reality into existence. They must have cheated. Someone find me more votes. I’m the real winner. 

[Horn Dog 9,674]

13 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

No, there’s no evidence of anyone hacking voting machines in 2016 or 2020. He’s just speculating. What I’m pretty sure happened in 2020 was that Trump’s people told him if he gets 70,000,000 votes then he’d win the election. He got 74,000,000. So he thought that meant he won. The problem was that Biden got 81,000,000 votes. Trump just can’t accept that he lost and figures like he does with everything else that he can just speak a new reality into existence. They must have cheated. Someone find me more votes. I’m the real winner. 

Yup.  Trump also can't understand the concept of population growth and how, with time, even a losing candidate will get more votes than what a winning candidate would have received years prior.  

"I got more votes than Lincoln!  How is is possible that I lost???" 

[henrygandorf 29,179]

On 2/10/2023 at 5:31 PM, hayden_horn said:

holy shit my night is ruined I'm gonna go get high off my fave and watch conspiracy shows now

i have never heard it characterized thusly, like a guy losing money on a fight he thought was fixed. 

that's fucking brilliant and i actually think you are onto something about not accounting for higher turnout in their cheating calculations

i think that's part of it, and bannon understood the electoral math well enough to know he needed to squeak by in a few states (like he did in 2016).  using every trick in the book, squeaking by requires a little suppression, a little propaganda, and a well-timed controversy like, oh, say, an announcement of an investigation of his political enemy.

it worked with hillary, so they had it all lined up with biden.  well, they tried to line it up with ukraine, but that didn't go as planned.  so the backup was the laptop story.  the problem is that because twitter (and others) had gotten caught up in the nonsense previously, they were more hesitant (as were most outlets), so they didn't run with the story, out of fear of getting burned and ridiculed.

so here we are, with the pubs screeching about the hunter biden laptop story.  are they doing it because they think hunter is corrupt?  no.  are they doing it because they think it's connected to president biden and they think the president is corrupt?  no.  they are doing it because they had a plan to win the election that relied on the well-timed bombshell, and that plan got derailed, mostly because of their history of crying wolf.

they're mad that it didn't work, and they're screeching about it afterwards, because that's what cheaters and crooks do, while the other side is trying, and succeeding, in running the country.  meanwhile, the current congress will fling poo at each other for 20 months or so and remind everyone why they don't belong there, setting up an obliteration at the 2024 ballot box.

I'm pretty pleased with how things are going currently, and I'm treating these hearings with all the seriousness and sobriety they so richly deserve.

[jimmyjazz 45,560]

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

No, there’s no evidence of anyone hacking voting machines in 2016 or 2020. He’s just speculating. What I’m pretty sure happened in 2020 was that Trump’s people told him if he gets 70,000,000 votes then he’d win the election. He got 74,000,000. So he thought that meant he won. The problem was that Biden got 81,000,000 votes. Trump just can’t accept that he lost and figures like he does with everything else that he can just speak a new reality into existence. They must have cheated. Someone find me more votes. I’m the real winner. 

It's a remarkable angle -- "I got more votes than I did when I won, how could I have lost without the other side cheating?"

The base just laps it up, no critical thought whatsoever.

[Pescado_Rojo 19,331]

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

Is there evidence supporting this theory? Seems dangerous. I understand Hillary was considered the favorite and she lost the electoral vote.  Other than that, is there anything else?  I understand the 2016 nationwide results were mostly within the margin of error.  538 gave Trump an overall 3/10 shot at winning.  I don't discount the Russian meddling at all and believe their involvement contributed to Trump's narrow win - but that would likely have been generally captured in polling. I also wouldn't discount Comey's unprecedented meddling when he publicly announced his investigation 11 days before election day, which was during early voting.  The polling leading up to that time wouldn't have factored Comey's meddling. Here is a good video on how "wrong" the polls were in 2016 - i.e., not very wrong.    

https://fivethirtyeight.com/videos/polling-101-what-happened-to-the-polls-in-2016-and-what-you-should-know-about-them-in-2020/

Evidence? Of course I don't have evidence. I'm just some schmuck opining on an internet message board. But when you consider that these assholes love to blame the other side for the shit they are actually doing (every accusation is a confession), and how quick they were to blame a very specific Dominion voting machine, it makes me wonder. They didn't just pick Dominion voting machines out of a hat, and with the involvement of Steve Bannon...a guy who's made a lot of money "influencing" elections all over the 3rd world...something doesn't pass the smell test. 

HG and WTB are probably closer to the truth, but every time one of the conspiracy theorists in my life starts spouting some bullshit, I hit them with the "Republicans actually hacked the voting machines" and watch the gears grind. It's kind of fun, actually. 

[GW Hayduke 1,952]

33 minutes ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

Evidence? Of course I don't have evidence. I'm just some schmuck opining on an internet message board. But when you consider that these assholes love to blame the other side for the shit they are actually doing (every accusation is a confession), and how quick they were to blame a very specific Dominion voting machine, it makes me wonder. They didn't just pick Dominion voting machines out of a hat, and with the involvement of Steve Bannon...a guy who's made a lot of money "influencing" elections all over the 3rd world...something doesn't pass the smell test. 

HG and WTB are probably closer to the truth, but every time one of the conspiracy theorists in my life starts spouting some bullshit, I hit them with the "Republicans actually hacked the voting machines" and watch the gears grind. It's kind of fun, actually. 

Ok.  The Stop the Steal folks also don't have evidence.  I perceive that theory to be anti-democratic, dangerous to the US, and exactly what our foreign adversaries want. Is there a reason I shouldn't perceive your theory as the same?

[Pescado_Rojo 19,331]

1 minute ago, GW Hayduke said:

Ok.  The Stop the Steal folks also don't have evidence.  I perceive that theory to be anti-democratic, dangerous to the US, and exactly what our foreign adversaries want. Is there a reason I shouldn't perceive your theory as the same?

Ok, Cool. Hook'em. 

[henrygandorf 29,179]

26 minutes ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

Evidence? Of course I don't have evidence. I'm just some schmuck opining on an internet message board. But when you consider that these assholes love to blame the other side for the shit they are actually doing (every accusation is a confession), and how quick they were to blame a very specific Dominion voting machine, it makes me wonder. They didn't just pick Dominion voting machines out of a hat, and with the involvement of Steve Bannon...a guy who's made a lot of money "influencing" elections all over the 3rd world...something doesn't pass the smell test. 

HG and WTB are probably closer to the truth, but every time one of the conspiracy theorists in my life starts spouting some bullshit, I hit them with the "Republicans actually hacked the voting machines" and watch the gears grind. It's kind of fun, actually. 

i don't think your theory and mine are mutually exclusive.

when the election was coming up, i had a "four quadrant" approach to "could trump win?"  essentially, there were four quadrants of voters in 2016 (oversimplifying i realize).  they were (1) for trump, (2) against hillary, (3) for hillary, and (4) against trump.  i assumed that anyone who voted for trump or for hillary was very likely to keep those votes for 2020 (obviously for biden instead of hrc). 

i also assumed that anyone who voted "against trump" would do so again.  this left us with folks that voted "against hillary".  i posited that this group, while large, would not get larger in 2020.  sure, some would also vote against biden, but hillary was one of the most unpopular candidates ever, along with trump.  this number might still be significant, but no way does it increase.

using all that logic, i just didn't see how trump could win in 2020.  i also made assumptions that some who voted for a relatively unknown (in a political/governing sense) trump would be turned off by his shenanigans, of which there were constant, along with impeachments, and just basically being on tv and talking a lot, particularly in summer of 2020 with the covid circus.

i thought the 4 quadrants would be effective and trump had no path to victory.  while i was ~correct, i did not anticipate the jump in overall turnout.  hillary beat trump 66mm to 63mm in 2016.  so when i saw that trump got 11mm+ more votes in 2020, after all the bullshit, and after the relative "un-hate-ability" of someone as boring as biden, my spidey sense definitely went to a place where i told myself, "if there was fraud in this election, it came from team trump".  it would make sense that folks would rally to vote against trump, but those 11mm votes just did not make sense.

as for trump acting like he lost a rigged fight, i think that's a terrific analogy.  that said, once it was close, the plan was always to act like it was rigged and to declare victory as early and often as possible.  shit, if he had just said he won in a close race and to count all the votes, he might've made believers out of more dopes.  repeatedly calling it a blowout did not help his case.

there are a lot of reasons to say you "should've" won an election.  but using one-side vote totals or twitter cover-ups of stories that were bullshit to begin with takes us into crackpot territory, and i think 2022 proves that the country is mostly done with that nonsense.  he still has a plurality of the pubs, no doubt, but i think he's toast in a general.  thank god some of the state elections went how they went, or we'd be in some relatively deep deuce.

[Beau Vine 54,004]

5 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

there are a lot of reasons to say you "should've" won an election.  but using one-side vote totals or twitter cover-ups of stories that were bullshit to begin with takes us into crackpot territory, and i think 2022 proves that the country is mostly done with that nonsense. 

[Satchel 6,908]

It’s fun watching Gym Jordan stutter when his ass is being dragged all over the House floor:

https://grabien.com/file.php?id=1807977

[High Plains Drifter 10,978]

On 2/10/2023 at 2:08 PM, Satchel said:

When the Trump justice department tapped a US attorney to examine the origins of the FBI inquiry into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, conservatives and many Republicans hoped it would end the idea Donald Trump’s campaign was boosted by Moscow and back his charges that some FBI officials and others had conspired against him. But instead, as the multi-year investigation winds down, it is ending with accusations that unethical actions by that special counsel – John Durham – and ex-attorney general William Barr “weaponized” the US Department of Justice (DoJ) to help Trump.

 

 

 

The house should hold hearings about this. They could call them an "inquiry into the weaponization of the justice dept".

Something like that, anyway. We'll workshop it.

 

[Gap03 3,287]

50 minutes ago, Satchel said:

It’s fun watching Gym Jordan stutter when his ass is being dragged all over the House floor:

https://grabien.com/file.php?id=1807977

Looks like Dan Goldman is going to make Gym's life hell, and I'm here for it.

Edited February 13, 2023 by Gap03

[Hermanator 6,945]

2 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

i don't think your theory and mine are mutually exclusive.

when the election was coming up, i had a "four quadrant" approach to "could trump win?"  essentially, there were four quadrants of voters in 2016 (oversimplifying i realize).  they were (1) for trump, (2) against hillary, (3) for hillary, and (4) against trump.  i assumed that anyone who voted for trump or for hillary was very likely to keep those votes for 2020 (obviously for biden instead of hrc). 

i also assumed that anyone who voted "against trump" would do so again.  this left us with folks that voted "against hillary".  i posited that this group, while large, would not get larger in 2020.  sure, some would also vote against biden, but hillary was one of the most unpopular candidates ever, along with trump.  this number might still be significant, but no way does it increase.

using all that logic, i just didn't see how trump could win in 2020.  i also made assumptions that some who voted for a relatively unknown (in a political/governing sense) trump would be turned off by his shenanigans, of which there were constant, along with impeachments, and just basically being on tv and talking a lot, particularly in summer of 2020 with the covid circus.

i thought the 4 quadrants would be effective and trump had no path to victory.  while i was ~correct, i did not anticipate the jump in overall turnout.  hillary beat trump 66mm to 63mm in 2016.  so when i saw that trump got 11mm+ more votes in 2020, after all the bullshit, and after the relative "un-hate-ability" of someone as boring as biden, my spidey sense definitely went to a place where i told myself, "if there was fraud in this election, it came from team trump".  it would make sense that folks would rally to vote against trump, but those 11mm votes just did not make sense.

as for trump acting like he lost a rigged fight, i think that's a terrific analogy.  that said, once it was close, the plan was always to act like it was rigged and to declare victory as early and often as possible.  shit, if he had just said he won in a close race and to count all the votes, he might've made believers out of more dopes.  repeatedly calling it a blowout did not help his case.

there are a lot of reasons to say you "should've" won an election.  but using one-side vote totals or twitter cover-ups of stories that were bullshit to begin with takes us into crackpot territory, and i think 2022 proves that the country is mostly done with that nonsense.  he still has a plurality of the pubs, no doubt, but i think he's toast in a general.  thank god some of the state elections went how they went, or we'd be in some relatively deep deuce.

 

On 2/10/2023 at 5:40 PM, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

and for me this is equally possible. I don't *believe* it was stolen/cheated, but you sure as shit won't see any shock on my face either way if it's determined to be legit or not. my mom voted for the first time in my life (afaik) in that election and she voted for the orange turd - she's now a never-trumper and regrets that vote every day (thankfully)

 

On 2/10/2023 at 3:25 PM, hpslugga said:

They’re an ad hoc group of social media commentators who are constantly finding themselves having to do and say abominable things to get all the likes and subscribes. They believe this is a winning electoral strategy, largely because being a Republican has a prerequisite requirement known as “believing in belief.” Let them keep believing it…after all, it’s worked so well for them since they started doing it in 2018

They went to this over the top strategy in 2014/2015 to align with Trump and the reality tv craziness of it combined with Trump's facade on the popular Apprentice show won over a ton of people who wouldn't normally care about politics. 

Then the country got 2 full years of a psychotic President Trump, the majority said fuck this, and they've been hammered using that same strategy in 2018, 2020, and 2022. A lot of Americans are pieces of shit but evidence is starting to mount that enough Americans aren't trump level pieces of shit. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,843]

1 minute ago, Hermanator said:

 

 

They went to this over the top strategy in 2014/2015 to align with Trump and the reality tv craziness of it combined with Trump's facade on the popular Apprentice show won over a ton of people who wouldn't normally care about politics. 

Then the country got 2 full years of a psychotic President Trump, the majority said fuck this, and they've been hammered using that same strategy in 2018, 2020, and 2022. A lot of Americans are pieces of shit but evidence is starting to mount that enough Americans aren't trump level pieces of shit. 

just the loudest and most obnoxious ones are - which is all you ever hear from anymore