1. #36381
    Quote Originally Posted by Fugus View Post
    Understood, just seemed weird that it would flip that much.
    I'm watching CNN 1800 might seem like a lot, but because of the margins, it matches up basically right on the middle margin avg of what could have flipped. So it's nothing eye brow raising I guess.

  2. #36382
    Quote Originally Posted by Redwyrm View Post
    Golly how did Trump win in 2016 with all of this corruption going on.

    And, I guess republicans are concerned about foreign interference in our elections now? Guess you should have passed that election security bill.
    He won despite it libtard/s.
    Violence Jack Respects Women!

  3. #36383
    Merely a Setback Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    29,834
    Quote Originally Posted by passingthrew View Post
    I got to say its got a ring to it. I picture someone hitting a red button and "intentional Soros Venezuela fraud" starts flashing on the screen. You could really use it for anything.


    On topic:

    Clock running out on Trump as states move to finalize vote counts

    Georgia is no longer important but...

    Certification deadlines are fast approaching in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada and Arizona, even as the Trump campaign makes sweeping claims about criminal activity that they’ve failed to substantiate in court.

    A recount will get underway in two Democratic counties in Wisconsin on Friday, although Biden’s lead of about 20,000 votes appears safe.

    The Trump legal team has been collecting sworn affidavits from some Republican poll workers claiming they weren’t allowed to properly oversee vote counts or describing what they viewed as irregularities at the polls.

    They do not have evidence that votes were changed, but appear to be arguing that millions of ballots from Democratic areas should be thrown out because they were not properly supervised or because the Trump team believes local laws were insufficient in monitoring fraud.

    In the case of Michigan, this would involve disenfranchising the votes of predominantly Black Americans.

    The most shocking unsubstantiated allegations came from bla bla bla that's the Sen. Ernst thing I just cited
    Trump seems to have this strange thing with deadlines. On one tiny hand, he wants to run out the clock so that he can just be declared the winner without facts or votes. On the other tiny hand, his own actions also have deadlines. If he, for example, files suit against Michigan the day before the votes are due, he'll be accused of waiting too long and the case will be summarily dismissed.

  4. #36384
    Georgia confirmed a Biden win.

    Feels weird to not be disappointed in my state. I'm sure January will fix that, but whew. Fuck you Donald Trump.

  5. #36385
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    65,269
    Quote Originally Posted by beanman12345 View Post
    I'm confused then. Aren't they a publisher? if so what exactly is the point of section 230?
    The easiest way to understand what Section 230 is about is to change the hypothetical issue from a civil violation that's hard to prove (slander/libel) to a criminal charge that's dead simple to prove (child pornography, say).

    What Section 230 means is that if some fucko posts child porn on their public wall on Facebook, and Facebook's mods go "oh fuck no" and remove the content, ban the user, and inform the authorities, Facebook can't be charged with publishing child pornography. The user did that. Facebook gave no approval to that content. That's all Section 230 really covers.

    That's why it's a basic requirement for user-based systems like social media and reddit and these forums here; you can't guarantee a user won't post something HUGELY illegal, and no site is going to take on that liability unless they're using a "only approved posts get published" approach, which obviously isn't workable. Imagine these forums if moderators had to manually approve every single post. They'd grind to a halt. It's only worse with bigger media groups.

    230 doesn't really apply to media companies like OANN because they're not publishing user content in the first place; they're protected by entirely different legislation which gives really broad leeways to media companies regarding their freedom of speech (also why the National Enquirer can post all the horseshit speculation and gossip they publish, for instance). As long as you frame is as "I heard X", you don't actually need to establish X to be true; your story is that you heard it, and that's all you can be called on to justify before the courts; at best, they'll require you to issue a retraction if X is demonstrably false, and even that is a challenge to get the courts to decree. You've gotta prove they A> created the idea being reported themselves, and B> did so with malice, knowing it to be false. Not an easy claim to prove, generally.

  6. #36386
    Affidavits are the new silent majority.

  7. #36387
    Merely a Setback Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    29,834
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapemask View Post
    Feels weird to not be disappointed in my state.
    ...you're talking about the World Series, aren't you?

    On topic: McConnell tells GOP to stay healthy so they can do their best to ruin America in the lame-duck session.

    All three remaining non-positive GOP members agreed.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Yep.

    One of those two Michigan GOP vote officials we've been talking about calls WaPo to tell them, basically, that they believed everything Giuliani says and is planning to ask for an audit.

    "What's an audit?"

    It's what you get when you want a recount, but Trump can't afford it.

    If Dominion was fudging votes, that’s a serious problem, If it’s true. I don’t know. I have to be convinced of it. That’s why the audit makes sense.
    Just so we're clear, "We don't know if it's true so we have to investigate" sure sounds hypocritical coming from a Republican. Remember when Trump got caught blackmailing Ukraine and the Republican Party refused to investigate it? Remember when Trump refused to testify or for his staff to testify and the Republican Party thought that was okay? Where are Trump's taxes?

    This is a lie. This isn't about "doing the right thing" this is about "Trump lost so I'm burning the system down until you declare him the winner".

    Also I'm pretty sure they already voted for the certification so I don't know what the audit is for anyhow.

  8. #36388
    Quote Originally Posted by downnola View Post
    That's an indictment of the voters rather than either candidate.
    I want you to stop and think about the absurdity of choosing a candidate whose sole claim to the role is electability, and when he fails to perform blaming voters for it.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Levelfive View Post
    So a) yes, I am telling you that, but b) the reason I'm telling you that is because you are misattributing Hillary's loss to her being an establishment candidate--that's why retaking those states is relevant. Biden won decisively without Ohio or Florida, so what do you mean when you say "claims of electablity are completely bunk"?
    I don't really know how to respond to this, basically your premise is that the heavens decreed that Hillary lose the states that she lost, it isn't her fault, and Biden should get a medal for retaking states that shouldn't have been lost in the first place, while failing to gain any of the ground establishment candidates claim they can take.

    The establishment got their pick twice, and both times they failed to perform as they claimed. The end.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Redwyrm View Post
    Golly how did Trump win in 2016 with all of this corruption going on.
    To be fair he said that election was rigged too, when he thought he was going to lose. Suddenly wasn't when he won.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

  9. #36389
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post

    Also I'm pretty sure they already voted for the certification so I don't know what the audit is for anyhow.
    Yup you are right, it's 100% out of her hands now. literally nothing she can do now. "the audit" or whatever is just hot air because she doesn't want to take responsibility for eventually voting correctly, and doesn't want her diet of eating trump's shit to end.

  10. #36390
    I'd like to take a moment to thank Rudy Giuliani. His clown faces, hair dye trickling down his sweaty cheek, constant look as if he's just been exhumed, My Cousin Vinny impersonations, and Four Seasons Total Landscaping fuckup have brought many a good laugh to my soul in this otherwise god-awful year.
    “Leadership: Whatever happens, you’re responsible. If it doesn’t happen, you’re responsible.” -- Donald J. Trump, 2013

    "I don't take responsibility at all."
    -- Donald J. Trump, 2020

  11. #36391
    Quote Originally Posted by Mormolyce View Post
    To be fair he said that election was rigged too, when he thought he was going to lose. Suddenly wasn't when he won.
    No, he never stopped claiming fraud. He claimed he won the popular vote but "fraud". Had he won the popular vote he might have? I think he would have then just started claiming fraud in states he lost by a small margin in that case though. It's like how he isn't talking about fraud in Ohio or Florida states Biden was "supposed" to win.

  12. #36392
    Immortal Thepersona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Puerto Montt, Chile
    Posts
    7,841
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Or, if you're a Trump supporter, "intentional Soros Venezuela fraud"
    I will say this as a latin american, please leave Venezuela alone. Or better yet, try to reverse the embargos that make the life of Venezuelans a living hell
    Last edited by Thepersona; 2020-11-20 at 03:42 AM.
    Forgive my english, as i'm not a native speaker



  13. #36393
    Merely a Setback Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    29,834
    Quote Originally Posted by Thepersona View Post
    I will say this as a latin american, please leave Venezuela alone.
    Hey, I'm not the one using Venezuela as a cheap attack line. You can thank Team Trump for that.

  14. #36394
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Hey, I'm not the one using Venezuela as a cheap attack line. You can thank Team Trump for that.
    Remind me of the chain here again. It was something like Venezuela > Chavez > Soros... right?

  15. #36395
    Merely a Setback Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    29,834
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    Remind me of the chain here again. It was something like Venezuela > Chavez > Soros... right?
    You missed the Democrats, China, Communism, the fourth season of Lost, the fake news media, and Biden. By the way, I lied about two of those, and I'll bet you can't guess which two.

  16. #36396
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    You missed the Democrats, China, Communism, the fourth season of Lost, the fake news media, and Biden. By the way, I lied about two of those, and I'll bet you can't guess which two.
    Once Rudy started leaking oil I found it hard to concentrate. Oh, and it’s Lost and, shockingly, Biden. Seemed like Rudy didn’t want to catch a lawsuit.

  17. #36397
    Merely a Setback Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    29,834
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    Oh, and it’s Lost and, shockingly, Biden. Seemed like Rudy didn’t want to catch a lawsuit.
    Indeed. He actually said he didn't know what Biden knows and even went far enough to say "I'm not being glib, this is me talking as a lawyer, by the way what's opacity"?

  18. #36398
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Indeed. He actually said he didn't know what Biden knows and even went far enough to say "I'm not being glib, this is me talking as a lawyer, by the way what's opacity"?
    He did his best to make Alex Jones proud.

  19. #36399
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    Once Rudy started leaking oil I found it hard to concentrate. Oh, and it’s Lost and, shockingly, Biden. Seemed like Rudy didn’t want to catch a lawsuit.
    I'd say Dominion has a pretty clear cut case for defamation after all the accusation Rudy has been making against them.

  20. #36400
    Merely a Setback Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    29,834

    -- Senator Mitt Romeny, Republican, too little too late.

    - - - Updated - - -

    When Trump sends lawyers to court, it seems he’s not sending his best

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *deep breath* MUAHAHAHAHAHA

    Fighting to challenge an election he lost to President-elect Joe Biden, Trump has launched a barrage of lawsuits across the country. Top Republicans have stood behind him and said they will wait for those cases to be resolved before officially recognizing the winner, a standard that has no modern precedent.

    But his attorneys have repeatedly made elementary errors in those high-profile cases: misspelling “poll watcher” as “pole watcher,” forgetting the name of the presiding judge during a hearing, inadvertently filing a Michigan lawsuit before an obscure court in Washington and having to refile complaints after erasing entire arguments they’re using to challenge results.

    Trump’s legal team has lost repeatedly in court and failed to uncover the kind of widespread fraud that might challenge Biden’s leads in several key battleground states. His lawyers and allies have still pressed forward with asking judges and certification authorities to block the results.

    Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and other Trump lawyers held a press conference Thursday in which they berated reporters for questioning their claims and cited a Michigan affidavit already dismissed by a judge. They also argued a debunked conspiracy theory that Venezuela could have hacked election results through machines used by local authorities.

    Experts have noted that Trump is not employing the Republican Party’s top election lawyers, including those who represented the GOP in the Florida recount two decades ago. Law firms have faced public pressure from Trump opponents not to fight the election on his behalf. Legal giant Porter Wright Morris & Arthur withdrew from a case in Pennsylvania last week.

    Attorneys at the larger, more established firms that had been representing Trump have expressed concern privately about pushing a legal strategy without a body of evidence, and worry that it’s wrongly furthering a false narrative that the election was fraudulent, according to two people familiar with the litigation. The people were not authorized to speak about litigation and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

    The day before a major argument in Pennsylvania, three lawyers for Trump withdrew and bla bla bla we know that part.

    Much of the derision has focused on Giuliani, who appeared in court on Tuesday in the Pennsylvania case. It was the first time he had represented a client in federal court in almost three decades.

    During the hearing, Giuliani forgot the name of an opposing lawyer, misstated the name of the presiding judge and mistook the meaning of the word “opacity.”

    Hasen pointed to Giuliani’s apparent lack of knowledge of the meaning of “strict scrutiny,” the highest of three standards used by judges to evaluate how a law or action taken by the government affects someone’s constitutional rights. The Trump campaign has claimed without providing evidence that Pennsylvania violated voters’ rights by allegedly allowing election fraud.

    Strict scrutiny is a basic concept taught to aspiring lawyers and constitutional law classes.

    “I’ve never seen an election lawyer handle a case as poorly as Giuliani has,” Hasen said. “The idea that the lawyer arguing the most important case in Pennsylvania would not understand what it means to apply the standard of strict scrutiny in a constitutional case is mind-boggling.”
    It goes on, but you get the idea.

    Those boldeds tho.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •