Biden won, it's over --- The Election Thread

[Wander]

When you can't afford to buy Florida, you say "Bye, Florida".

President Donald Trump’s campaign has all but pulled its advertising out of Florida, as it stakes its relatively small bank account on the industrial northern states that carried him to victory in 2016.

Since the beginning of the fall campaign on Labor Day, Trump has cut $24 million from his national ad budget, while former Vice President Joe Biden has added $197 million. Biden has outspent Trump three-to-one over that time.

Trump is now placing his final bet on just four battleground states: Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Polls show he’s down in all those states but Ohio, where it’s effectively even.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... li=BBnbfcL

Sadly, there is a darker perspective suggesting that one candidate doesn’t need to spend more money and is somehow assured the outcome will be in their favour.
I want to be as wrong about this as I have ever been wrong about anything in my life.

God, that is the most terrifying thought I've heard about the election in a while. I wish I could say I dismissed it as being unrealistic.

[gumbomoop]

Sadly, there is a darker perspective suggesting that one candidate doesn’t need to spend more money and is somehow assured the outcome will be in their favour.
I want to be as wrong about this as I have ever been wrong about anything in my life.

I agree with every word fuse writes here.

I do not know for certain either that Trump can or will steal the election. But I will repeat: our fascist moment is here; it’s real, actual, not hypothetical, imaginary, prospective. I repeat, further, that there is nothing fascists and their highly-positioned enablers will not do to steal this election, to “save the country from socialism.” The fascists — skillful practitioners of the Big Lie — intend to save our country and democracy by destroying our constitutional democratic republic.

Without knowing exactly what will happen in the coming weeks, we have some evidence that there is likely to be an attempt to steal the election, unless Biden wins in a landslide. I commend this article to your attention; you will not find it reassuring.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/p ... g-1081977/

[gumbomoop]

Sadly, there is a darker perspective suggesting that one candidate doesn’t need to spend more money and is somehow assured the outcome will be in their favour.
I want to be as wrong about this as I have ever been wrong about anything in my life.

I agree with every word fuse writes here.

I do not know for certain either that Trump can or will steal the election. But I will repeat: our fascist moment is here; it’s real, actual, not hypothetical, imaginary, prospective. I repeat, further, that there is nothing fascists and their highly-positioned enablers will not do to steal this election, to “save the country from socialism.” The fascists — skillful practitioners of the Big Lie — intend to save our country and democracy by destroying our constitutional democratic republic.

Without knowing exactly what will happen in the coming weeks, we have some evidence that there is likely to be an attempt to steal the election, unless Biden wins in a landslide. I commend this article to your attention; you will not find it reassuring.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/p ... g-1081977/

Apologies for tag-quoting my own post. Here’s an update, with better news! Just heard that the Supreme Court today ruled against Repub effort to suppress votes in Pa. Don’t have all details, but Barrett recused herself. Decision was 5-3, against Pa Repubs’ suppression plan. Roberts and Kavanaugh joined the 3 liberals. I’m looking for an article that details the decision, will hope to post later.

Many weeks back I posted that I thought Roberts and Kavanaugh would be key votes in most cases re the election. That seems to have happened today. Of course there’s also potential bad news, as those 2 plus Barrett could join the 3 right-wing jusrices to make 6-3 disastrous decisions.

But today, good news!

[gumbomoop]

I have been corrected OY on today’s Court decision, so the news isn’t necessarily good, as I naïvely stated above.Today the Court simply put a substantive decision off until at least Nov.3. So by tonight Dems all over the place are strongly advising (mostly tweets, I guess) that voters in PA— and everywhere else — no longer count on their ballot being received on time, if mailed. The strong advice for folks using absentee/mail ballots is that they be hand delivered.

[Wander]

I'm just terrified that somehow, someway this is going to end up in the Supreme Court. And if it does, there is no chance they don't side with Trump. Only option to me is still have it be a Biden landslide to sap any challenge of credibility.

[CameronBornAndBred]

I'm just terrified that somehow, someway this is going to end up in the Supreme Court. And if it does, there is no chance they don't side with Trump. Only option to me is still have it be a Biden landslide to sap any challenge of credibility.

IF it got that far, I think there is a very strong chance that they would NOT side with Trump. At the end of the day, I believe they do hold themselves to their oath, and so far, they have shown it when Trump's lawyers have been in front of them. Even without RGB's presence. (And I really think that Roberts does not like Trump at all, so there's that.)

[Troublemaker]

Hello all.

Thanks for the invite CB&B and Richard! Looking around, it seems like DBR with profanity allowed.

For now, I just need a place to post my election map before Election Day so I can gloat about it next week when I'm right, haha.

Will post soon.

[OPK]

I'm just terrified that somehow, someway this is going to end up in the Supreme Court. And if it does, there is no chance they don't side with Trump. Only option to me is still have it be a Biden landslide to sap any challenge of credibility.

IF it got that far, I think there is a very strong chance that they would NOT side with Trump. At the end of the day, I believe they do hold themselves to their oath, and so far, they have shown it when Trump's lawyers have been in front of them. Even without RGB's presence. (And I really think that Roberts does not like Trump at all, so there's that.)

I agree with CBn’B on the Court.

I know plenty of conservative lawyers. I know very few that support Trump. His constant attacks on the rule of law is an assault on something we all take pretty seriously. I have been sworn into, and appeared, in courts as high as the U.S. Supremes and as low as local small claims court. The oath I take for admission is essentially the same as the President takes — to support and defend the laws of the United States and of my jurisdiction. There are lots of lawyer jokes — and a few assholes who make those jokes deserved — but by and large lawyers believe in the rule of law. Deeply.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Hello all.

Thanks for the invite CB&B and Richard! Looking around, it seems like DBR with profanity allowed.

For now, I just need a place to post my election map before Election Day so I can gloat about it next week when I'm right, haha.

Will post soon.

More than just profanity, we actually not only allow free thought here, we also encourage it.

[Wander]

I'm just terrified that somehow, someway this is going to end up in the Supreme Court. And if it does, there is no chance they don't side with Trump. Only option to me is still have it be a Biden landslide to sap any challenge of credibility.

IF it got that far, I think there is a very strong chance that they would NOT side with Trump. At the end of the day, I believe they do hold themselves to their oath, and so far, they have shown it when Trump's lawyers have been in front of them. Even without RGB's presence. (And I really think that Roberts does not like Trump at all, so there's that.)

I agree with CBn’B on the Court.

I know plenty of conservative lawyers. I know very few that support Trump. His constant attacks on the rule of law is an assault on something we all take pretty seriously. I have been sworn into, and appeared, in courts as high as the U.S. Supremes and as low as local small claims court. The oath I take for admission is essentially the same as the President takes — to support and defend the laws of the United States and of my jurisdiction. There are lots of lawyer jokes — and a few assholes who make those jokes deserved — but by and large lawyers believe in the rule of law. Deeply.

I totally believe you in that the vast majority of lawyers, including conservative lawyers, are like this. But there are always exceptions, and it seems to me like Trump would not pick the 3 people he picked unless they were part of those minority exceptions who would be shills for him.

Either that, or something with loopholes about faithless electors. Or something else entirely. I don't know exactly what will happen. But it seems likely to me he will try SOMETHING unless it's a landslide.

[OPK]

IF it got that far, I think there is a very strong chance that they would NOT side with Trump. At the end of the day, I believe they do hold themselves to their oath, and so far, they have shown it when Trump's lawyers have been in front of them. Even without RGB's presence. (And I really think that Roberts does not like Trump at all, so there's that.)

I agree with CBn’B on the Court.

I know plenty of conservative lawyers. I know very few that support Trump. His constant attacks on the rule of law is an assault on something we all take pretty seriously. I have been sworn into, and appeared, in courts as high as the U.S. Supremes and as low as local small claims court. The oath I take for admission is essentially the same as the President takes — to support and defend the laws of the United States and of my jurisdiction. There are lots of lawyer jokes — and a few assholes who make those jokes deserved — but by and large lawyers believe in the rule of law. Deeply.

I totally believe you in that the vast majority of lawyers, including conservative lawyers, are like this. But there are always exceptions, and it seems to me like Trump would not pick the 3 people he picked unless they were part of those minority exceptions who would be shills for him.

Either that, or something with loopholes about faithless electors. Or something else entirely. I don't know exactly what will happen. But it seems likely to me he will try SOMETHING unless it's a landslide.

That is a possibility, and a sad one if it comes to pass for more reasons than just an undesired result.

[dudog]

This article is a few days old, but some interesting numbers on early voting.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... y-n1244764

"Polling released Sunday by CBS News/YouGov showed that in Florida, 61 percent of those who already voted backed Biden, while 37 percent backed Trump. In North Carolina, the division was 61 percent to 36 percent, while in Georgia it was 55 percent to 43 percent."

That's a lot to make up on election day.

You'd think the reddest part of the country (Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida panhandle) would be getting God's election year message with all the hurricane hits.

[gumbomoop]

I totally believe you in that the vast majority of lawyers, including conservative lawyers, are like this. But there are always exceptions, and it seems to me like Trump would not pick the 3 people he picked unless they were part of those minority exceptions who would be shills for him.

That is a possibility, and a sad one if it comes to pass for more reasons than just an undesired result.

My inclination is to be more worried about a corrupted, politicized Supreme Court majority than to be confident about the fealty to the rule of law among this Court’s majority. There’s probably substantial “evidence” to support either inclination — wander’s and mine, or OPK’s — right now.

Because IANAL and have virtually no personal contact with lawyers, conservative or otherwise, my views are more conditioned by historical and current circumstances. And, cards on the table, by my own deep anger at the hostile takeover of American conservatism by a not-at-all-conservative reactionary populism. Reactionary populists want to stop history in its tracks. Unlike real conservatives, they cannot abide even very gradual, very modest change. They have no faith in institutional stability; they revel in destroying institutions. They want to return to a Golden Age, to MAGA, to a manly time before the dark-skinned “Other” was allowed by identity-politics liberals to ruin Our Country. Reactionary populism is fascism. Our fascist moment is here now.

Although not a Supreme, Atty Gen Bill Barr rarely exhibits respect for the rule of law. The chief law enforcement officer of the U.S. advocates culture war to the death, not the rule of law. He is frequently a poster child for the Politicized Society of Trumpist Scofflaws. Maybe it’s unfair to apply guilt-by-association to taint Trump-appointed Supremes with Barr’s fascist sins. Yet certainly Alito and Thomas, and likely Gorsuch and Barrett, seem to be in Barr’s ideologue-camp of culture warriors.

CJ Roberts seems an actual conservative, but no reactionary. The wild card, for me, is Kavanaugh. Going forward in the near-term, whatever cases arise from this election chaos, I would expect to be decided 5-4 and 6-3. I cannot imagine either Thomas or Alito opining in ways that I’d think faithful to the rule of law. As avowed “originalist-textualists,” Gorsuch and Barrett adopt what amounts to a reactionary understanding of our constitutional history. I will be enormously relieved if these “originalists” join the 3 liberals, the sole clear conservative, and the wild-card unknown to give us several 7-2 decisions repudiating the fascist attempt to destroy our constitutional democratic republic.

I am, truly, holding my breath.

[CameronBornAndBred]

I totally believe you in that the vast majority of lawyers, including conservative lawyers, are like this. But there are always exceptions, and it seems to me like Trump would not pick the 3 people he picked unless they were part of those minority exceptions who would be shills for him.

That is a possibility, and a sad one if it comes to pass for more reasons than just an undesired result.

My inclination is to be more worried about a corrupted, politicized Supreme Court majority than to be confident about the fealty to the rule of law among this Court’s majority. There’s probably substantial “evidence” to support either inclination — wander’s and mine, or OPK’s — right now.

Because IANAL and have virtually no personal contact with lawyers, conservative or otherwise, my views are more conditioned by historical and current circumstances. And, cards on the table, by my own deep anger at the hostile takeover of American conservatism by a not-at-all-conservative reactionary populism. Reactionary populists want to stop history in its tracks. Unlike real conservatives, they cannot abide even very gradual, very modest change. They have no faith in institutional stability; they revel in destroying institutions. They want to return to a Golden Age, to MAGA, to a manly time before the dark-skinned “Other” was allowed by identity-politics liberals to ruin Our Country. Reactionary populism is fascism. Our fascist moment is here now.

Although not a Supreme, Atty Gen Bill Barr rarely exhibits respect for the rule of law. The chief law enforcement officer of the U.S. advocates culture war to the death, not the rule of law. He is frequently a poster child for the Politicized Society of Trumpist Scofflaws. Maybe it’s unfair to apply guilt-by-association to taint Trump-appointed Supremes with Barr’s fascist sins. Yet certainly Alito and Thomas, and likely Gorsuch and Barrett, seem to be in Barr’s ideologue-camp of culture warriors.

CJ Roberts seems an actual conservative, but no reactionary. The wild card, for me, is Kavanaugh. Going forward in the near-term, whatever cases arise from this election chaos, I would expect to be decided 5-4 and 6-3. I cannot imagine either Thomas or Alito opining in ways that I’d think faithful to the rule of law. As avowed “originalist-textualists,” Gorsuch and Barrett adopt what amounts to a reactionary understanding of our constitutional history. I will be enormously relieved if these “originalists” join the 3 liberals, the sole clear conservative, and the wild-card unknown to give us several 7-2 decisions repudiating the fascist attempt to destroy our constitutional democratic republic.

I am, truly, holding my breath.

[dudog]

I am, truly, holding my breath.

I don't know you, but I hope this isn't true.

(good post, btw)

[richardjackson199]

Hello all.

Thanks for the invite CB&B and Richard! Looking around, it seems like DBR with profanity allowed.

For now, I just need a place to post my election map before Election Day so I can gloat about it next week when I'm right, haha.

Will post soon.

And much better emojis.

[richardjackson199]

Hello all.

Thanks for the invite CB&B and Richard! Looking around, it seems like DBR with profanity allowed.

For now, I just need a place to post my election map before Election Day so I can gloat about it next week when I'm right, haha.

Will post soon.

Definitely check out the PW'ing thread at least from when fuse goes on a spree to get his trophy count up. It's well done. PW'ing is post-whoring evidently.

[dudog]

And much better emojis.

OMG! I had never checked out the extra ones! What I've been missing!



Oh, and we'll be pushing 100,000 new COVID cases tomorrow if trends hold.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

And much better emojis.

OMG! I had never checked out the extra ones! What I've been missing!



Oh, and we'll be pushing 100,000 new COVID cases tomorrow if trends hold.

But Donald Trump said this week COVID is going away! And we all know that he never lies. Maybe UPS lost the memo telling him that cases are up. Hopefully they can find it like the found the one copy of Tucker Carlson's very important document...

[gumbomoop]

Apropos the earlier discussion about whether the Supreme Court has been so politicized that Trump’s 3 appointees will join Thomas and Alito to find constitutional rationale to steal the election for Trump.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ ... sis-433573

“It is likely that no pillar of institutional life in America will emerge from the Trump era — whether in January or in 2025 — more dangerously corroded than the judiciary. The Supreme Court is virtually begging for a legitimacy crisis.”

The author thinks, as do many other Court-watchers, that CJ Roberts is committed ... to preserving the institutional mystique of the Court as non-partisan arbiter .... When Roberts sermonizes about independent judges and a nonpartisan judiciary, he is demonstrating the old adage that hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue. He isn’t describing the reality of the judiciary as it is, or perhaps even as it will ever be, but he is describing an ideal that people should at least try to approximate. It is dangerous when a democracy lets go of hypocrisy altogether.

I continue to believe that Kavanaugh is the actual wild-card-swing-justice that Roberts needs to persuade to act as a non-partisan arbiter in defense of democracy and the rule of law. And I will hope that either Gorsuch or Barrett will move toward Roberts and away from Thomas and Alito.