"Will you shut up, man?" US Politics October 2020

a real "stiff"

I mean did anybody really think it was going to be a big name? that'd be a lot harder to hide for a major player in the admin

Ohhh https://t.co/Yx2KJA4Dhv

— can (@can) October 28, 2020

Personally, I was hoping for multiple no name stiffs all putting out competing "I am anonymous" statements, that would be more fun.

if only for the growing list of people Trump had to remember that he "didn't know"

Militia leader Stewart Rhodes tells Alex Jones that his group will be at polling locations and is ready to kill Democrats

Spotify to sign Stewart Rhodes for $100 million, so that he can have Alex Jones on his own podcast


Biden voters who wish to eat a half-off Pizza Hut pizza should just go in and say "I'm voting for Trump" while smiling and holding up a written sign that clearly states "No way in hell is that true!"

if they only wish to eat it, they could just grab the fresh half from the top of the bin

I don't know Miles
Steven
Calvin
John
Michael
Oliver
Elvin
or Tom

But I do recall
the most famous DEEP STATE of all

Liddl Donlad Trump Jr. (never heard of him, sounds like a loser)

Focused on the issues

Trump is, at a rally six days from Election Day 2020, making fun of the hair of 2016 independent candidate Evan McMullin.

— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) October 28, 2020

Genesis
Exodus
Leviticus
Numbers
And Anonymous.

Early vote over 75 million -- given projections of a vote total at/around 150 million, might as well call this a tentative 50% line that's been crossed.

I really feel that the hubris gods should set Trump on fire for talking shit about anyone else's hair

Curse thee and thy blond rags

I really feel that the hubris gods should set Trump on fire for talking shit about anyone else's hair

That he isn't already a sulphurous skeletal burned matchstick is for me concrete proof of the non-existence of an interventionist god

For example, distrust of pollsters also leads to lower response rates for Trump supporters. Rasmussen finds that 17 percent of likely U.S. voters who “strongly approve” of the job Trump is doing say they are less likely to let others know how they intend to vote in the upcoming election. By comparison, only 8 percent of those who “strongly disapprove” of the president’s performance say the same.

Love to cite poll results as evidence that polls can't be trusted

I knew the nuts at Ask Trump Supporters had truly gone off the deep end when they started proclaiming their distrust in polls because every time they'd ever been personally called by a pollster they just lied so the results can't be legit.

Big:

BREAKING: Supreme Court *rejects* Pennsylvania Republicans’ second attempt to block extended ballot deadline.

— Steven Mazie (@stevenmazie) October 28, 2020

they care so little about polls that they need to expend lots of energy online explaining to people why the polls are wrong

Justice Kavanaugh seems to have switched sides from the earlier PA order, abandoning Gorsuch, Alito and Thomas's position.

— Steven Mazie (@stevenmazie) October 28, 2020

Roffle.

he’s drunk

what's different between Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that there'd be different rulings?

Chicanery.

The worst legacy of the Bush II years: Sam Alito, every year grinding out gross and evil opinion after opinion that never abandons the hackiest and most sinister of Republican notions of -- I use the term loosely -- governance.

just for a break from the polls/courts... she is very good at this

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/10/becoming-aoc-cover-story-2020

Under a President Biden, “if his life doesn’t feel different,” she points to a cab driver whizzing by our table, “if their life doesn’t feel different,” she gestures to people walking by the beauty shop and Bengali Halal Grocery, “if these people’s lives don’t actually feel different”—now she is giving a stump speech over her omelet—“we’re done. You know how many Trumps there are in waiting?”

She is tired of incremental change, of “bullshit little 10 percent tax cuts,” she says. “I think, honestly, a lot of my dissent within the Democratic party comes from my lived experience. It’s not just that we can be better, it’s that we have to be better. We’re not good enough right now.”

Hahaha man they are just SAD.

Trump super PAC @AmericaFirstPAC is putting @TuckerCarlson's Tony Bobulinski's interview on the air in Pennsylvania + Wisconsin, beginning Friday >https://t.co/w8XTCSJIOJ

— Dave Catanese (@davecatanese) October 28, 2020

Tony Bobulinski
Mr. Tony Bobulinski (ZILCH)

Barrett and Kavanugh have plenty of time to make their marks but Alito has always seemed the most transparently evil

what's different between Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that there'd be different rulings?

― Lover of Nixon (or LON for short) (Neanderthal)

Answers to be found in this podcast, "Strict Scrutiny":
https://strictscrutinypodcast.com/podcast/hot-mess/

I don't 100% remember the details in part bc it was a little murky, also bc the justices didn't give any notes or commentary on the PA ruling because that case came through the shadow docket? (Oooooh.)

Is that where they decide who gets shadowbanned?

the whole "Trump voters are intentionally skewing the polls" talking point is so idiotic, not only did this by and large not happen in 2016 but there's nothing in the world these idiots want more then for Trump to be leading in the polls, like are you telling me guys like Charlie Kirk & Bill Mitchell wouldn't go fucking crazy if there was a poll showing the race tied

furthermore the polls do seem to be pretty much in line with a President who has not garnered a net positive approval rating at a single point during his presidency, which I believe is a first

"the Republican football team likes to trail by 14 by pretending they're bad at football and then play for real in the 4th quarter"

for days I couldn't figure out what Bobulinski's name reminded me of. I've learned the truth:

https://www.kroger.com/product/images/xlarge/front/0007313001237

hearing Boboli to the tune of Springsteen's "Cover Me"

Pizzagate!

If they do decide the air that Bobulinski interview, I can almost guarantee that Hunter Biden won't be elected president.

Was Bobulinski one of the Sweathogs

what's different between Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that there'd be different rulings?

Because PA and WI have different voting laws. Iirc, PA law allows the deadline to be extended and WI pretty explicitly does not.

"the Republican football team likes to trail by 14 by pretending they're bad at football and then play for real in the 4th quarter"

what's different between Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that there'd be different rulings?

― Lover of Nixon (or LON for short) (Neanderthal), Wednesday, October 28, 2020 5:33 PM (twenty-five minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Remember these are decisions whether to take the underlying appeals (or not), not decisions on the merits, so there are limited written opinions (unlike cases where the SC decides to take the appeal). One significant difference appears to be that the PA ruling appealed from was by the PA Supreme Court (i.e. the highest court in PA) while the WI ruling appealed from was by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals (i.e. the Federal Court just below the US Supreme Court with jurisdiction over WI).

Roberts:

“While the Pennsylvania applications implicated the authority of state courts to apply their own constitutions to election regulations, this case involves federal intrusion on state lawmaking processes,” the chief justice wrote. “Different bodies of law and different precedents govern these two situations and require, in these particular circumstances, that we allow the modification of election rules in Pennsylvania but not Wisconsin.”

Golden Boy:

In a separate concurrence, Justice Kavanaugh wrote that “the Constitution principally entrusts politically accountable state legislatures, not unelected federal judges, with the responsibility to address the health and safety of the people during the Covid-19 pandemic.”

In short, procedure matters, kids.

NB: I am an atty but not an expert, but I assume the reason the WI case went Federal was because the WI Supreme Court was packed with conservative assholes, meaning the Dems felt they had not chance there.

Sorry, omitted the following: Basically, the SC didn't want to fuck with a PA Supreme Court ruling interpreting the PA Constitution, but was fine telling the WI Federal Court to back off.

Funny thing i just read

"Liberals are always shocked when originalist justices are sworn in and produce favorable results. We have to stop thinking of justices as politicians. It’s about an interpretive approach to the law and I think people will be surprised"

Thanks PBKR!

Oh god thank you I was trying to quote from the podcast and I just couldn't get my head around it.

The insanity of that decision is in the details, wherein Alito more or less states that the ballots should be allowed but they reserve the the right to throw them out later, after they're counted.

I assume the reason the WI case went Federal was because the WI Supreme Court was packed with conservative assholes, meaning the Dems felt they had not chance there.

Yes.

In a separate concurrence, Justice Kavanaugh wrote that “the Constitution principally entrusts politically accountable state legislatures, not unelected federal judges, with the responsibility to address the health and safety of the people during the Covid-19 pandemic.”

Sure except WI is SO horrifically gerrymandered that Republicans won like 64 (out of 99) Senate seats with only 40-something % of the vote. So sure, Kavanaugh can claim that they should show deference to the state when they know Repubs have the state locked up.

How trusting he is!

Trump, dismissing Anonymous as a low-level staffer he didn't know: " I thought it might have been Hope Hicks, I thought it might have been Jared."

— Annie Karni (@anniekarni) October 28, 2020

I thought it might have been Hope
Thought it might be the Kush
A real live lover, could have been a book

Like the paranoid last days of the Khmer Rouge.. spies, counterrevolutionaries everywhere!

Sure except WI is SO horrifically gerrymandered that Republicans won like 64 (out of 99) Senate seats with only 40-something % of the vote. So sure, Kavanaugh can claim that they should show deference to the state when they know Repubs have the state locked up.

― Ima Gardener (in orbit), Wednesday, October 28, 2020 6:28 PM (twelve minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

For sure. I don't agree with any of this even from a legal standpoint, just articulating their bullshit Federalist Society "judicial restraint" rationale.