The Election Thread To Talk About The Election

[revbob]

for my own campaign (that I had been managing), we're down a couple hundred with some provisional ballots and such still to come in. state party is mounting a ballot curing campaign. shit's unlikely, but may pull this one out yet. Pretty out of my hands at this point tho.

Conceded this morning, the numbers just weren't there to keep chasing ballots. Ah, well. We actually hit our voting targets but the district leans so republican we needed depressed turnout in the trumpy/Qanon-ist parts of the district and they were super fired up to vote too, so we actually lost some ground in those areas despite our raw vote numbers being where we wanted them. So it goes.

Bummer Flex, but good to hear your positive takeway. The Trumpy-QAnon turnout really fucked a lot of shit up.

I'm not saying that there are no Q-Whos up here in Massachusetts. I will say that I have never seen any in the wild. As a campaign worker for a candidate I'm sure was to the left of Trotsky, did you run into these folks who are under the spell of the Q spell? I guess the question goes to everyone, have any of you run into enthusiastic Q's in the wild?

I strongly suspect one of my sisters could be. She my wife, son and myself were chatting a few months back about what I dont recall. Bill Gates came up somehow and Ive never seen a person have so much venom for him. On the surface she isn't the type to have anything against him. I later did some research and apparently he's a Qanon boogeyman.

[Dr. Medulla]

She my wife, son and myself were chatting a few months back about what I dont recall. Bill Gates came up somehow and Ive never seen a person have so much venom for him. On the surface she isn't the type to have anything against him. I later did some research and apparently he's a Qanon boogeyman.

Maybe she's just an Apple fan who never got over the 1990s. (Hilarious to recall the righteous spittle of Mac people towards Microsoft back then.)

[Dr. Medulla]

[Olaf]

YES!

[revbob]

She my wife, son and myself were chatting a few months back about what I dont recall. Bill Gates came up somehow and Ive never seen a person have so much venom for him. On the surface she isn't the type to have anything against him. I later did some research and apparently he's a Qanon boogeyman.

Maybe she's just an Apple fan who never got over the 1990s. (Hilarious to recall the righteous spittle of Mac people towards Microsoft back then.)

But Apple used to fly the pirate flag...

As for my sister, I wish it was so simple.

[Dr. Medulla]

She my wife, son and myself were chatting a few months back about what I dont recall. Bill Gates came up somehow and Ive never seen a person have so much venom for him. On the surface she isn't the type to have anything against him. I later did some research and apparently he's a Qanon boogeyman.

Maybe she's just an Apple fan who never got over the 1990s. (Hilarious to recall the righteous spittle of Mac people towards Microsoft back then.)

But Apple used to fly the pirate flag...

As for my sister, I wish it was so simple.

The real evil of Mircosoft in the 90s was using the cast of Friends to promote Win95. Apple, on the other hand, had drunk Jeff Goldblum.

[eumaas]

I strongly suspect one of my sisters could be. She my wife, son and myself were chatting a few months back about what I dont recall. Bill Gates came up somehow and Ive never seen a person have so much venom for him. On the surface she isn't the type to have anything against him. I later did some research and apparently he's a Qanon boogeyman.

in the qanon religion bill gates is a pedovore and a pawn of the ancient roman emperor lineage that rules the pedovore cult from the vatican.

[oliver]

I guess the question goes to everyone, have any of you run into enthusiastic Q's in the wild?

Marjorie Greene got elected with 66% of the vote in my county so it's safe to say there are a few of them.

The only time I've knowingly seen them is when they were protesting with signs and banners on a public corner about Wayfair, human trafficking and paedophiles.

No exaggeration, the ratio of Trump to Biden signs around here is about 20 / 1

[revbob]

I strongly suspect one of my sisters could be. She my wife, son and myself were chatting a few months back about what I dont recall. Bill Gates came up somehow and Ive never seen a person have so much venom for him. On the surface she isn't the type to have anything against him. I later did some research and apparently he's a Qanon boogeyman.

in the qanon religion bill gates is a pedovore and a pawn of the ancient roman emperor lineage that rules the pedovore cult from the vatican.

Well when you explain it that way... where do I sign up?

[Dr. Medulla]

I strongly suspect one of my sisters could be. She my wife, son and myself were chatting a few months back about what I dont recall. Bill Gates came up somehow and Ive never seen a person have so much venom for him. On the surface she isn't the type to have anything against him. I later did some research and apparently he's a Qanon boogeyman.

in the qanon religion bill gates is a pedovore and a pawn of the ancient roman emperor lineage that rules the pedovore cult from the vatican.

So is the c drive, like, some kind of holy ark?

[Silent Majority]

Well, alright

[Dr. Medulla]

I'm pretty sure I've written about this before—with my post count? C'mon—but I've been reflecting back again on a book by Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., The Vital Center (1949), which is a core text for understanding the Cold War liberal mind. In it, AMS makes the claim (and one echoed by Hannah Arendt) that liberal democracy and totalitarianism are responses to modernity, meaning the political and economic liberation of the masses. That is, a huge chunk of society was now able to participate in the politics and economy of their communities and nations as free agents. Those people who were able to accept the responsibility and stress of this freedom, he said, were liberals (broadly speaking), while those who couldn't turned to totalitarian movements like Nazism and Communism, where there was security in a group identity and a strong, always correct leader. It's an argument about politics from psychology rather than, say, materialism.

There's plenty of questionable assumptions in the thesis, but I keep coming back to it because of the apparent divergence of perceiving reality in Western societies today amidst the constant barrage of contradictory information. Is the appeal of nonsense conspiracy theories and openly incompetent political leaders a result of people who aren't up to the job of thinking critically, of accepting the responsibility of individualism, and so they flock to these totalitarianesque movements? Instinctually, I hate that idea because, like with AMS' thesis, it's smug and elitist and dismissive of "those people." And yet, when you see so many people signing on to ideas and claims that have no evidence to support them, turning to psychological explanations seems plausible, maybe even sensible. I dunno, I just have a hard time comprehending how so many people are acting like street corner ramblers.

[eumaas]

I'm pretty sure I've written about this before—with my post count? C'mon—but I've been reflecting back again on a book by Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., The Vital Center (1949), which is a core text for understanding the Cold War liberal mind. In it, AMS makes the claim (and one echoed by Hannah Arendt) that liberal democracy and totalitarianism are responses to modernity, meaning the political and economic liberation of the masses. That is, a huge chunk of society was now able to participate in the politics and economy of their communities and nations as free agents. Those people who were able to accept the responsibility and stress of this freedom, he said, were liberals (broadly speaking), while those who couldn't turned to totalitarian movements like Nazism and Communism, where there was security in a group identity and a strong, always correct leader. It's an argument about politics from psychology rather than, say, materialism.

There's plenty of questionable assumptions in the thesis, but I keep coming back to it because of the apparent divergence of perceiving reality in Western societies today amidst the constant barrage of contradictory information. Is the appeal of nonsense conspiracy theories and openly incompetent political leaders a result of people who aren't up to the job of thinking critically, of accepting the responsibility of individualism, and so they flock to these totalitarianesque movements? Instinctually, I hate that idea because, like with AMS' thesis, it's smug and elitist and dismissive of "those people." And yet, when you see so many people signing on to ideas and claims that have no evidence to support them, turning to psychological explanations seems plausible, maybe even sensible. I dunno, I just have a hard time comprehending how so many people are acting like street corner ramblers.

Seems to cut across the partisan line too. Look at how popular Russiagate was as an explanation of Trump.

[Dr. Medulla]

I'm pretty sure I've written about this before—with my post count? C'mon—but I've been reflecting back again on a book by Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., The Vital Center (1949), which is a core text for understanding the Cold War liberal mind. In it, AMS makes the claim (and one echoed by Hannah Arendt) that liberal democracy and totalitarianism are responses to modernity, meaning the political and economic liberation of the masses. That is, a huge chunk of society was now able to participate in the politics and economy of their communities and nations as free agents. Those people who were able to accept the responsibility and stress of this freedom, he said, were liberals (broadly speaking), while those who couldn't turned to totalitarian movements like Nazism and Communism, where there was security in a group identity and a strong, always correct leader. It's an argument about politics from psychology rather than, say, materialism.

There's plenty of questionable assumptions in the thesis, but I keep coming back to it because of the apparent divergence of perceiving reality in Western societies today amidst the constant barrage of contradictory information. Is the appeal of nonsense conspiracy theories and openly incompetent political leaders a result of people who aren't up to the job of thinking critically, of accepting the responsibility of individualism, and so they flock to these totalitarianesque movements? Instinctually, I hate that idea because, like with AMS' thesis, it's smug and elitist and dismissive of "those people." And yet, when you see so many people signing on to ideas and claims that have no evidence to support them, turning to psychological explanations seems plausible, maybe even sensible. I dunno, I just have a hard time comprehending how so many people are acting like street corner ramblers.

Seems to cut across the partisan line too. Look at how popular Russiagate was as an explanation of Trump.

Certainly. I'm not making a spectrum observation by any means, tho the most pronounced expression these days is on the right. But there are, for example, plenty of anti-vaxers at the centre and on the left, plus antisemitism has found more believers on the left.

[WestwayKid]

https://nationalpost.com/news/if-trump- ... visor-says

Can Trump still run in 2024 if he's hiding out in a country without an extradition treaty with the US?

Maybe he'll 1) pass away before 2024 or 2) lose his mind completely before 2024 or 3) be convicted of a Federal crime(s) before 2024 and we truly won't ever have to worry about him again.

1) Hope so.
2) He hasn't lost his mind yet?
3) Federal or state, I hope so. Plus with, reportedly, close to $1B in loans coming due, he's got liquidity issues. I read something from a bank executive who said that there aren't any banks who'll want to touch him now. He's too high profile as a risk. So this guy figured Trump as real estate ghoul could collapse sooner than people think.

I think we live in a country where Trump's followers will send him their money to get him out of debt.

I'd love for someone to do a spoof informercial where Trump is asking for donations.