Octopus Overlords

He wants the power to give the final yea or nay.

Kurth wrote: ↑Wed Jun 21, 2023 11:05 am

pr0ner wrote: ↑Wed Jun 21, 2023 9:43 am Another video from the Baier interview. Damn.

"She wouldn't be killed . . ."

"But your policy?"

"Yeah, starting now. But Alice wouldn't be killed."

"I don't stand by anything."
-Donald Trump

Alefroth wrote: ↑Wed Jun 21, 2023 12:13 pm He wants the power to give the final yea or nay.

110% this.

He CONSTANTLY pushes back on laws, norms and policy because he HATES them - those are only for losers and sheep, and the general population, not him.

Enter Hurd.

https://apnews.com/article/will-hurd-20 ... 7cQHjz9o-M

Former Texas Rep. Will Hurd speaks during the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition Spring Kick-Off Saturday, April 22, 2023, in Clive, Iowa. Hurd, a onetime CIA officer and fierce critic of Donald Trump, announced on Thursday that he's running for president, hoping to build momentum as a more moderate alternative to the Republican primary field's early front-runner. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall, File)
WASHINGTON (AP) — Former Texas congressman Will Hurd, a onetime CIA officer and fierce critic of Donald Trump, announced Thursday that he’s running for president, hoping to build momentum as a more moderate alternative to the Republican front-runner.

You're not going to believe it, but Wisconsin Republicans are f'ing with elections again. Specifically they're trying to get rid of the non-partisan election administrator there.

The process is a little confusing, but:

(1) The WI Elections Commissioner, Megan Wolf, is a competent nonpartisan administrator who, among other things, oversaw the 2020 election in WI. However, her term expires on Friday.
(2) However, there was recently a court ruling that someone can overstay their term until a new nominee is voted on by the WI Senate, which Republicans control (due to hyper-gerrymandering) with a 22-11 supermajority.
(3) Republicans want to vote on Wolfe's nomination in the WI Senate so that they can reject it and put a (presumably crazier) new Commissioner in her place. By statute the Senate can only vote on a nominee voted on by a majority of the WI elections Commission, which is evenly split into 3 Republicans and 3 Democrats.
(4) In order to avoid this the Democratic commissioners abstained from voting on Wolfe's renomination, so that the vote was 3-0 in favor in renominating her (with the three Republicans voting yes) But because a majority of the Commission did not vote, by statute the Senate can't vote on her nomination.
(5) At 9 pm last night a Republican senator sprang a surprise resolution vote which basically said that we consider her to have been renominated and so we plan to hold a hearing in the Senate and then a vote (which will almost certainly be to reject her).
(6) There's then going to be an inevitable court battle (though Democrats will soon control the WI Supreme Court by a 4-3 majority).

What a shit show. Going to be a potentially huge problem if Republicans can succeed in getting some nutjob in the Commissioner role. Though not great that Democrats are in the position of fighting to have her overstay her term for a non-trivial amount of time (presumably at least 1.5 years). The whole thing reflects what a shitshow our system has become, especially at the state level.

Trump is campaigning/having a rally in my general area today. The weird part is he picked a small town a fair ways from anywhere to do it Pickens, SC. The amount of the town that has to be totally shut down (per the Secret Service )during the speech is impressive.

Pickens?! Man that is truly Smalltown, boonies USA.

I’d love to know the thinking behind going there.

I'd share the Twitter videos here, but apparently that would be pointless. Suffice to say the crowd started building at like 6am this morning and it looked more like a County fair than a hate campaign rally to my eyes.

Since announcing his campaign on Nov. 15 last year, Trump has held fewer than 30 in-person campaign events, according to an Axios review.

Top Trump campaign officials have said part of the reason he is not holding many rallies is because they are expensive.

https://www.axios.com/2023/07/01/trump- ... ign-events

Low energy.

Probably because no one will agree to anything but payment at or before time of services rendered.

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 12:33 pm Probably because no one will agree to anything but payment at or before time of services rendered.

Was waiting for something like this to come out about Kennedy. As always, follow the money:

On Friday NYT got ahold of RFK Jr's SEC filings and did a piece on his income.

Looks like RFK has earned nearly $2.25 million in 2021 for fighting against vaccines:

$1.6 million in consulting fees for his suit against the Gardasil HPV vaccine.

$516k from his 'charity'.

$125k for his ghost-written conspiracy-laden "books" that are ultimately about promoting RFK Jr among the anti-science crowd.

His 'charity', Children's Health Defense, pulled in a whopping $15.6 MILLION. in revenue in 2021. 2020? $6.9million.

Between 2020 and 2021, the revenues by Children's Health Defense went from $6.9 million to $15.6 million.

Looks like the pandemic was very lucrative for anti-vaccine propogators. The obscenely rich pushers of misinformation are even richer.

When you see the arguments about following the money, while you mindlessly support someone like RFKJr and Children's Health Defense...

Follow THEIR money.

The whole Presidential run is about launching his anti-vaccination nonsense into the stratosphere with respect to fleecing donors.

Man, I should probably start a "charity" also!

Great passive income source I bet, and probably a pre-requisite for the modern oligarch.

Not to mention the tax benes, the rep boost, etc etc. Is there even a downside? You have to gladhand the poors once a year maybe? Give a speech for a fundraiser?

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Jul 02, 2023 3:53 pm Man, I should probably start a "charity" also!

Great passive income source I bet, and probably a pre-requisite for the modern oligarch.

Not to mention the tax benes, the rep boost, etc etc. Is there even a downside? You have to gladhand the poors once a year maybe? Give a speech for a fundraiser?

Unfortunately you're probably not rich enough to get away with it.

El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 11:34 am

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Jul 02, 2023 3:53 pm Man, I should probably start a "charity" also!

Great passive income source I bet, and probably a pre-requisite for the modern oligarch.

Not to mention the tax benes, the rep boost, etc etc. Is there even a downside? You have to gladhand the poors once a year maybe? Give a speech for a fundraiser?

Unfortunately you're probably not rich enough to get away with it.

Or come from the right bloodline. Though the two are more and more becoming the same thing due to the reactionary nature of economic and political policy in the United States!

If you run a charity, you have to have money or raise money. If you can raise money, you’re a natural at sales and valuable in any field.

This is kind of notable, right?

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has endorsed President Joe Biden‘s reelection campaign, sending a strong sign of Democratic unity from one of the party’s most liberal members.

“I think he’s done quite well, given the limitations that we have,” Ocasio-Cortez said on the “Pod Save America” podcast Thursday. “I do think that there are ebbs and flows.”

...

She endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary and demurred in an interview last year when asked if she would support the incumbent president in 2024.

Biden is facing nominal primary challenges for next year’s election in self-help author Marianne Williamson and anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Ocasio, when asked about whether she’d support Biden, said: “I believe, given that field, yes.”

And on the puppet candidacy front...

Page Six regrets to report that a press dinner to boost Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s presidential campaign descended into a foul bout of screaming and polemic farting Tuesday night

It is as funny as you'd think, and also says a LOT about what the US would look like if he were President...

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Thu Jul 13, 2023 11:24 am And on the puppet candidacy front...

Page Six regrets to report that a press dinner to boost Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s presidential campaign descended into a foul bout of screaming and polemic farting Tuesday night

It is as funny as you'd think, and also says a LOT about what the US would look like if he were President...

That was absolutely worth reading.

When asked to comment about his, er, outburst the next day, Dechert told us: “I apologize for using my flatulence as a medium of public commentary in your presence.”

(He also asked us to refer to him either as a “gallivanting boulevardier” or a “beer-fueled sex rocket.”)

How is this man even remotely viable as a potential candidate in 2024? Absolutely disgusting that anyone would consider voting for him in any capacity as a public official.

"There is an argument that it is ethnically targeted," Kennedy said of the virus, according to the Post. "COVID-19 attacks certain races disproportionately... COVID-19 is targeted to attack Caucasians and black people. The people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese."

Kennedy added that "we don’t know whether it was deliberately targeted or not but there are papers out there that show the racial or ethnic differential and impact."

The New York Post has the video of his statements; Roll 1D20 SAN loss if you watch it.

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 1:49 pm How is this man even remotely viable as a potential candidate in 2024? Absolutely disgusting that anyone would consider voting for him in any capacity as a public official.

That shouldn't be a serious question after 2016, but in case it is.

He's not really viable - his numbers are mostly from those who recognize the name who know nothing about his views and anti-establishment people who will vote for any alternative to Biden (some voters may actually support his views, but not a lot, at least, not among Democrats) . And if, say, Biden were to have to drop out, you would see at least one (and likely a bunch) of more serious candidates step in.

Defiant wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 3:11 pm

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 1:49 pm How is this man even remotely viable as a potential candidate in 2024? Absolutely disgusting that anyone would consider voting for him in any capacity as a public official.

That shouldn't be a serious question after 2016, but in case it is.

He's not really viable - his numbers are mostly from those who recognize the name who know nothing about his views and anti-establishment people who will vote for any alternative to Biden (some voters may actually support his views, but not a lot, at least, not among Democrats) . And if, say, Biden were to have to drop out, you would see at least one (and likely a bunch) of more serious candidates step in.

Also as far as I'm aware, the thing that he's most known for (aside from his last name) is his anti-vax views, and sadly there is a constituency (albeit not massive) for that among left-wing voters.

I wonder if ratfucker Bannon and his friends backing RFK Jr. carries some risk because QAnon weirdly reveres the Kennedy family.

Despite their right-wing commitments, many QAnon folks believe that JFK Jr (while dead) is set to return any day now as the new American savior, and some of them even believe that JFK himself (also dead) is still alive and waiting to re-enter the White House. Many of them dream of a Trump/JFKJr ticket in 2024. JFK/Jr's liberal Democratic leanings somehow don't matter to any of this.

RFK Jr (JFK's nephew, JFK Jr's first cousin) is today's most prominent political Kennedy. He hits most of the QAnon notes, and he's a Democrat in name only.

If Trump doesn't run (perhaps because he's in jail) and RFK Jr still puts himself out there as a third-party candidate, wouldn't he likely siphon more votes from a DeSantis/Scott/Haley GOP ticket than from Biden?

Weird.

Holman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 9:28 pm he's a Democrat in name only.

I wouldn't go quite that far - on some issues, he does support typical Democratic stances - for example, he does support the environment, and he did criticize the Supreme Court's decision on Affirmative Action. It's just that he has a lot of crazy stances, too.

If Trump doesn't run (perhaps because he's in jail) and RFK Jr still puts himself out there as a third-party candidate, wouldn't he likely siphon more votes from a DeSantis/Scott/Haley GOP ticket than from Biden?

Maybe? I think we'd need to see the kind of general election campaign he runs to tell (also, we'd have to see the kind of campaign the Republican runs). Although he probably only gets 1-2%, so it'll probably only matter if the race is close (which it probably will be again).

Defiant wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 11:36 pm

Holman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 9:28 pm he's a Democrat in name only.

I wouldn't go quite that far - on some issues, he does support typical Democratic stances - for example, he does support the environment, and he did criticize the Supreme Court's decision on Affirmative Action. It's just that he has a lot of crazy stances, too.

Couldn't this be said of someone like Jill Stein as well, though? (In fact, isn't Stein part of RFK Jr's campaign?)

A Democrat can disagree with other Democrats but can't work to undermine core Democratic policies and commitments. And they definitely don't pal around and coordinate with the likes of Steve Bannon and Roger Stone.

Holman wrote: ↑Sun Jul 16, 2023 3:58 pm

Defiant wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 11:36 pm

Holman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 9:28 pm he's a Democrat in name only.

I wouldn't go quite that far - on some issues, he does support typical Democratic stances - for example, he does support the environment, and he did criticize the Supreme Court's decision on Affirmative Action. It's just that he has a lot of crazy stances, too.

Couldn't this be said of someone like Jill Stein as well, though? (In fact, isn't Stein part of RFK Jr's campaign?)

Sure, except that I'm not sure you could call Jill Stein a Democrat in name, considering that she doesn't call herself a Democrat. But sure, ideologically, the positions she pushes are closer to Democrats (maybe even more than RFK's) , even though her actions, like his, are much more likely to help Republicans.

Holman wrote: ↑Sun Jul 16, 2023 3:58 pm And they definitely don't pal around and coordinate with the likes of Steve Bannon and Roger Stone.

And find funding from conservative think tanks and anonymous donors.

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Thu Jul 13, 2023 11:24 am And on the puppet candidacy front...

Page Six regrets to report that a press dinner to boost Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s presidential campaign descended into a foul bout of screaming and polemic farting Tuesday night

It is as funny as you'd think, and also says a LOT about what the US would look like if he were President...

Imagine a Trump v RFK election it would be Dr Evil v Fart Bastard. Idiocracy awaits us at this point - is this any different to where Congress is clearly going?



We have come a long way from men like FDR who said things we have all forgotten. Namely :

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. "Necessitous men are not free men." People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

We need to ensure that we elect administrations who will keep to that second bill of rights.

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

Is it too early for polls?

With the 2024 presidential race potentially pitting a current and former president against each other and more than a dozen other candidates officially seeking their party's presidential nomination, voters are evenly split about voting for a third-party candidate, with 47 percent saying they would consider voting for a third-party candidate in the 2024 presidential election and 47 percent say they would not consider it, according to a Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University national poll released today.

Independents say more than 2 to 1 (64 - 30 percent) that they would consider voting for a third-party candidate in the 2024 presidential election while Democrats (61 - 35 percent) and Republicans (57 - 38 percent) say they would not consider it.

To the party support:

The race for the Republican presidential nomination is largely unchanged from a June 14 Quinnipiac University poll. Former President Donald Trump receives 54 percent support among Republican and Republican leaning voters followed by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis with 25 percent support.

The race for the Democratic presidential nomination is also largely unchanged from a month ago. President Joe Biden receives 71 percent support among Democratic and Democratic leaning voters, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an environmental lawyer and anti-vaccine activist receives 14 percent support and Marianne Williamson, an author, receives 7 percent support.

Between the two:

President Biden leads former President Trump 49 - 44 percent in a hypothetical general election matchup among registered voters. This is essentially unchanged from June, when Biden had a slight lead over Trump, 48 - 44 percent.

The last two elections kind of soured me on the whole poll thing. I mean I certainly would feel a lot worse if Trump were ahead so we have that going for us.

Octavious wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2023 12:44 pm The last two elections kind of soured me on the whole poll thing. I mean I certainly would feel a lot worse if Trump were ahead so we have that going for us.

Polling has been historically accurate in the last two election cycles. The trouble has been that many elections keep running inside the margin of error reflecting the deeply polarized electorate. It's turned in to series of coin flips and people tend to think the polls are bad when the coin flip goes against *them*.

I don't really have thoughts on the polling other than the historical data point where you have everything that's (legally) going on with TFG and he's still the clear winner among people being polled. If nothing else, it documents the rot that has consumed the entire party.

malchior wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2023 1:14 pm

Octavious wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2023 12:44 pm The last two elections kind of soured me on the whole poll thing. I mean I certainly would feel a lot worse if Trump were ahead so we have that going for us.

Polling has been historically accurate in the last two election cycles. The trouble has been that many elections keep running inside the margin of error reflecting the deeply polarized electorate. It's turned in to series of coin flips and people tend to think the polls are bad when the coin flip goes against *them*.

This is correct. Plus we have the electoral college that our wise founding fathers handed us, which further makes this less predictable because it doesn't just matter how many votes a candidate gets, but also matters how the votes are distributed. So in 2016 ending polls had Clinton with a material lead, and there was a polling error in Trump's favor, but not enough for him to win, *except* for ~ 100,000 votes spread across MI, WI, and PA.

But it is too early for polling to be especially predictive. I would say that current polling alongside other data generally suggests that Biden would be a narrow favorite against Trump, but likely too close for comfort (especially given likely MAGA shenanigans).

Well I honestly think RFK Jr or Manchin will run third party and send us to our doom.

Octavious wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2023 3:38 pm Well I honestly think RFK Jr or Manchin will run third party and send us to our doom.

Yeah, between No Labels and Cornel West and others, the third party risk in 2024 is unfortunately high. My only comforts are that it's not clear whether they'll get significant traction, and a third party doesn't automatically take disproportionate votes from Biden - it also provides an outlet for partisan Republicans who have issues with Trump but can't bring themselves to vote for a democrat.

Though 2024 is overwhelmingly terrifying for this and other reasons, though.

I was reading an article that traditionally third parties don't take a signifant amount of the vote in battleground states. Doesn't mean it's an impossibility, just that it's likely not as big a threat as you may think in the states that matter. Still, with today's polarization I don't take anything for granted.

What's still insane is that after the 2016-2020 timeline, there's still so many people that can't be bothered to vote. I think that actually amazes me more than anything else. I just have such a hard time imagining being that disengaged - and I'm terminally cynical with politics.

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2023 5:12 pm What's still insane is that after the 2016-2020 timeline, there's still so many people that can't be bothered to vote. I think that actually amazes me more than anything else. I just have such a hard time imagining being that disengaged - and I'm terminally cynical with politics.

In the past there was the excuse that: "There is no difference between the two candidates." That is a pretty tough argument to make when one candidate is being tried as a seditious felon and has openly stated that when he wins he will take steps to install himself as dictator.

The other candidate's son is a drug addict.

YellowKing wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2023 4:12 pm I was reading an article that traditionally third parties don't take a signifant amount of the vote in battleground states. Doesn't mean it's an impossibility, just that it's likely not as big a threat as you may think in the states that matter. Still, with today's polarization I don't take anything for granted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Unit ... l_election

Republican Donald Trump Mike Pence 2,279,543 47.25% 16
Democratic Hillary Clinton Tim Kaine 2,268,839 47.03% 0
Libertarian Gary Johnson William Weld 172,136 3.57% 0
Green Jill Stein Ajamu Baraka 51,463 1.07% 0
U.S. Taxpayers' Darrell Castle Scott Bradley 16,139 0.33% 0
Independent Evan McMullin (write-in) - 8,183 0.17% 0
Natural Law Mimi Soltysik Angela Nicole Walker 2,209 0.05% 0
- Others - 26,030 0.54% 0
Totals 4,824,542 100.00% 16

Not sure what that will be like moving forward though. The state has become pretty polarized. And the SC of last 6+ years has rang clear about how important and lasting important votes are.