That's an awfully Reddit-y opening gambit. Besides which, "stupidest thing ever"? Friend, you've got to see this year's top 10 before making such a pronouncement.
So, when you call for one president to be replaced by the opposite party it's treason and a danger to our democracy and possibly the end times of the Republic. But, when you call for the other president to be replaced by the opposite party, that's patriotism.
Oh man. I've had a bad night and I hate the fucking Eagles, man!
Is there a way to prove the "Dominion Effect"? All I've seen is it being theorized. Is it steadily across all counties, or just in blue counties? Or just deep blue counties? Did it only occur in certain counties to the tune of 10% votes there such that it averages out to 3% of the total votes in the state?
I agree. It all stinks to high heaven. The more you hear about it, the worse and more egregious it all seems.
Here's the problem: showing up with a laundry list of grievances isn't doing it. Every item brought up, on its own, is hand-waved away. Then, the game becomes gathering all those excuses and evasions and trying to stick someone with it all. That's a very high bar to clear, and it plays into the fraud hand.
The easy argument is: we shouldn't count this particular batch of votes because it's fraudulent and undermines the will of the electorate. The only way to counter is asking for evidence that it's fraudulent, but that's already buying into the premise.
You know what would be useful here, and it would be easy to make into a tweet and try to get it spread high/wide? A definitive conclusion with hard numbers.
"Subtracting out the fraud we can see, the actual vote tallies for Arizona is Trump X, Biden Y, making Trump the winner. Here's how we got there."
That would get retweeted everywhere.
The thing that makes it easy to dismiss Trump (aside from pretending he's not saying anything) is that the fraud talk is about how it could have happened. What is needed is a concrete number of votes, entries in the timeseries (or portions of entries), that can be shown to be fraudulent and should be thrown out, which alters the result of the election. The effort then has to be to shift conversation from a blanket "I assume all of that has been debunked" to much-harder-to-evade concrete facts.
Don't get me wrong. My hopes that it would work with the MSM crowd is very low, but such an approach would also makes court cases significantly easier. You don't need to go and prove conspiracy or maliciousness, you just need to prove that entry Z is unclean and it undermines the will of the electorate. The Supreme Court would be amenable to that argument.
Getting tick tocked to death over here. By the time something actually will have consequences I will learn about it from the holodeck in my basement.
"The normal path to becoming a naturalized U.S. Citizen takes five years." Wow, things have changed since the 60s. It took me 16+ years to do it legally.
It's kind of crazy that there would be proprietary technology in a vote counting machine at all. "We want you to purchase this machine to count your votes, but don't you dare try finding out how it works."
Fair enough. The whole thing seems odd to someone looking at it with fresh eyes. One side is arguing that the rules are broken, the judge is talking about "the will of the electorate". If the will of the electorate is the gold standard, and rules can and SHOULD be broken in pursuing that will, what is even the point of having rules?
I'm not familiar with these things, but is that how it works? People make arguments pro, con, and the judge just waits for all of them to say their peace and then gives his ruling? He doesn't engage what was said, he just reads from the paper he'd prepared before the whole thing started? Seems inefficient.
I don't follow Romanian politics, but I did notice that the Romania subreddit was in mourning. Is this why? Who is AUR?
I can hear Scotland the Brave echoing in the distance.
Can't do video, but I can help in another way. Given an Excel spreadsheet and the data that generated it, I can write Python scripts that output the same thing. That way, if anyone is suspicious of the data presented, you can point them to a pastebin or github with the same output, which they can generate themselves.
Not that I don't think this is a bad thing because it definitely is, but it's not as bad as it seems. The appetite for USD is insane. We can probably print another 100% and still be okay.
The US dollar is the only reasonable world currency, and there's no good substitute. EU has siezed deposits, so no one is going there. The Yen and Renminbi are specifically not allowed to be held outside of their borders because of the currency manipulation going on. The Pound is next in terms of size but that means betting on a country that's going to be in the shadow of either the US or EU. Then there's a bunch of currencies that don't have enough liquidity: the Swiss franc, the New Zealand dollar, etc.
He went home and told everyone how lost and sad his graveyard lead is. It's hard to fight through decades of Marxist programming. My approach isn't to hit them with facts (because it's never worked in all the times I've tried it), it's to get them to realize that all of their information has come from the same ideology. I couch it in the things we agree on-- I lean heavily libertarian, so I'm not a fan of, say, our tax dollars being used to push abstinence-only education in Africa.
Anyway.
Mixed results.
Nicely done on that weight loss!
I can see the reason why Edison serves data this way is because that's the kind of data you want in order to display an interactive election map, like CNN and NYT do. It's not clear that the we see there is all of the data, and that there isn't a better source out there where each candidate's vote total is an ordinal number.
Does anyone have video captures from that night of CNN saying that they were done counting in various states that I could use?
DC US Attorney: I don't think political violence when enacted against my political enemies is a problem.
Also, it's a shitty way to combat cancel culture to turn around and cancel everyone at the slightest perceived transgression. We can be adults and recognize when people do things that are good and when they do things that are bad-- if we start from a place of reaching out (instead of lashing out), we're much more likely to end up where we want to be.
Moreover, it's ridiculous to assume that everyone will arrive at the same exact conclusions you have. And, if they don't it's because of traitorous/evil/stupid motives-- that's exactly what makes the left so infuriating.
If you get any static, tell them you identify as a person who doesn't bare responsibility for that text.
Bring me the old man from scene 24: GET ON WITH IT.
https://twitter.com/CodeMonkeyZ/status/1329078132704301063 Come back this evening for more ticking and more tocking.
Bad news, infogalactic is also alt-right: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vox_Day#Infogalactic Them's the breaks, I suppose. Either you agree 100%, or you're alt-right.