I say YES. YOU say NO....Numero Tre! Enjoy!
Comments
-
All too funny. It is nice to laugh knowing that in so many ways we are having the last laugh. Four yrs. of misery and I know I really shouldn't 'gloat' and I try not to but the relief is just so huge now. We had false hopes along the way that our miseries would go away and they should have -- but there is a definite period this time for sure. No if, ands or butts. We will be rid of the heathen spawn and very rightly so. He is going to continue to flail and yes we will have to keep our guard, but the "STAGE" is going to be fantastic and even though Trump may try to 'up' stage the event -- it will go on and we will at last cheer to our heart's content for the RIGHT thing finally happening.
Trump is fading into the woodwork as we speak. One of his own is on Twitter with the hashtag @StopTheStupid. More and more he is being relegated to the losers position and he is going to have to get use to it. So many people were horrified in 2016 -- and now they are not. ByeDon
0 -
Love the quote and the memes have provided some much needed laughs.
The thought of him having to watch the inaugural stands being built in his backyard brings me glee. I am sure he is drawn to it as if it were a magnet and then has a temper tantrum about how "unfair" it all is. It has been unfair that we have had to endure his antics and machinations for the past 4 years with no relief. I hope he pulls a "Tom Brady" (poor sportmanship) and doesn't show at the inauguration.
0 -
The tiny desk memes are hilarious, but I do wonder: what is the history behind the tiny desk? So much of the WH furniture has stories or associations. If it's a Colonial-era antique, that would explain the smaller dimensions. Was it from a Jackson suite? Does it have some other significance? Or was it just a convenient set they could put in front of the fireplace? DH suspects the last option.
0 -
I don't always like what Bill Maher has to say, but I still appreciate it. He wrapped up his season with a great piece on how we might gently reclaim disillusioned trumpeters. It's not going to be as fun, since we can't dish back all the derision they heaped on us; but it's the best way of avoiding defensive solidification of harmful ideas.
0 -
Mirianda...thanks for the Bill Maher reminder. Just watched it and will try to 'not argue' out my trumpian family.
0 -
I think Trump might have been at Camp David and that is where the desk was and yet I'm amazed that anyone would choose to let the thing appear behind it. His incessant need to be front and center and not give you a chance to ENJOY NOT hearing from him is typical for someone with his mental issues. I guess the desk ( small as it was ) was to make sure we all knew it was official for sure.
I can't imagine being him or being Melania for that matter either. Frankly -- while they likely won't, I'd be feeling like something of an interloper now and VERY un-wanted. Not much appreciated either. Well, I think for most of the time Trump was in ofc. many of us had the same feelings about both of them. They are interlopers as they have been since day one. I never looked on trump as a president and certainly not MY president. I've seen this four yrs. as scary, degrading and a mockery of our customs, rule of law, and decency. Well, there isn't enough words for all the negativity.
Waiting now for Happy Inauguration Day.
0 -
hehe0 -
Illinois lady,
Trump actually was at the White House when he used that desk. Not only has he used it before but so have other presidents. It is used when a signing is not in the Oval Office and in general, when many people are present at the signing, though this was not the case last week. Here is a photo of trump using it on 2017 and a photo of Obama using it as well.
0 -
0
-
This was posted by Dan Rather on FB, by Martin Rather, his grandson, of whom he is very proud! Heads up, not that trump doesn't hate NY enough, if he hasn't already flipped out over the IVANKA NOT WANTED posters allegedly being pasted up all over the city, the sheer numbers to be certified tomorrow might put him over the edge...hehe.
"There's likely going to be a large shift towards Biden in the national popular vote tomorrow afternoon due to a quirk in the NYC election laws. The New York City Board of Elections is going to vote to certify the election results at their 1pm meeting, but due to some outdated administrative processes, the only results currently posted online are from in-person voting. We're still missing the results of every vote-by-mail, which represent about 30% of the city's vote total. These mail-in ballots have been collected and counted at warehouses throughout the city since Election Day. The Commissioners of the NYC BOE (a longstanding NY political patronage job) then have to meet and agree to certify the results before mail-in totals are updated on their website. They missed an original Nov. 28 deadline but they promise to certify tomorrow. It's a slow and inefficient system but there is nothing nefarious about it.I have no doubt that this will lead to the same calls of voter fraud from bad actors who have been at it for weeks. There will be all-caps tweets about the hundreds of thousands of additional votes added to the totals nearly a month after the election. These updated numbers should add to Biden's lead, with a combination of his strength in deep-blue NY along with the propensity of his voters to vote-by-mail. Tomorrow is just our notification of the official count. In nearly all cases, these ballots were correctly counted by BOE officials weeks ago.Of course, New York missed an opportunity here to shut this down by providing real-time, or at least daily, updates. Still, if we all remember that these new totals are just the public notification of valid votes, our collective faith in our democracy will be better off for it."
0 -
Once all states certify their votes, then comes the electors role. This is the part I’m not clear on. Can Trump create chaos with this next phase? How are electors selected? Is there a real possibility that any of these electors do not vote who their state has certified won? I guess I worry that someone or some of them, will be paid off to cast the electoral votes for Trump and not Biden in those states where Biden won. I guess I never really was clear on this part because once the votes were counted, the loser always conceded and everyone moved on, not really discussing much of this next part. Can some explain how it works? And if Trump can somehow steal the election through the electors?
0 -
Thanks Exbrnxgrl. Hmmm, interesting that Pres. Obama looks much better behind the desk. Maybe because men the size of Trump having a hissy just tend to have a ridiculous look going on. Then again, Trump having a hissy looks ridiculous no matter where he is when it comes.
Jelson, in view of your entry it seems like another giant hissy will be in-coming soon. I read a piece that said the possibility exists that a lot of what is going on now is the continuation of the grifting. There are still it seems plenty of the Trump base who will fork over funds if they think they can help Trump cheat his way back into the WH. He knows that is not going to work and so to a lot of the entities ( rt. wing media ) who are pushing it with Trump. Just $20.00 more and we can make sure a proper count takes place or something to that effect. The votes are in and counted -- but every rt. wing grifter up to and including Trump are going to ride that gravy train while it keeps running. None of them are going to waste one ounce of feeling about the stupid people willing to fork it all over either.
0 -
He still bothered to call into the M. Bartilomo show though. So, he will still use any avenue to be heard and take up airwaves space -- even if from Fox that is keeping a bit of distance from the LOSER.
0 -
I have been searching through this thread but not finding what I am looking for. Someone posted about a bunch of voter-registration organizations in addition to Stacey Abrams' in Georgia. Could someone repost them?
0 -
Got this in my inbox today.
WORD OF THE DAY
Hegemony
[ hej-uh-moh-nee ]
noun
- the predominant influence of one group over another.
Examples of hegemony in a sentence:
- When the dictator was chased out of the country, his hegemony over the people came to an end.
- Because the gang leader's hegemony was so strong, the gang members always did what they were told without question.
0 -
0 -
Jack5ie -- that is interesting and is about right I would say. Some people would obviously rather be led than do the work of figuring out what is going on. I think there are more of us than them though.
0 -
0 -
0 -
0 -
yeslama dragon - I googled georgia voter registration organizations and came up with a few. I am writing letters for Vote Forward - they send preprinted letters to which I add something personal and a list of names and addresses encouraging the GA voters to apply for absentee ballots for the January Senate runoff elections. Illinois Lady - You are probably right that he is just continuing to stir the pot to encourage more donations but I hope more donors, even the $20 donors try this!! https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/28/trump-donor-election-fraud-sues-money-back
0 -
Marc E. Elias @marceelias🚨NEW: All six key states have now certified their election results with Joe Biden as the winner: ✅Arizona ✅Georgia (ongoing recount) ✅Michigan ✅Nevada ✅Pennsylvania ✅Wisconsin Trump and his allies remain 1-39 in court.
November 30th 2020
0 -
From National Review:
This isn't the first time Trump has been criticized by the magazine founded in 1955 by author William F. Buckley to stimulate the conservative movement. In January 2015, it published an article titled "Against Trump," saying, "Some conservatives have made it their business to make excuses for Trump and duly get pats on the head from him. Count us out. Donald Trump is a menace to American conservatism who would take the work of generations and trample it underfoot in behalf of a populism as heedless and crude as the Donald himself."
Prophetic words.
0 -
The survival of the fittest is the ageless law of nature, but the fittest are rarely the strong. The fittest are those endowed with the qualifications for adaptation, the ability to accept the inevitable and conform to the unavoidable, to harmonize with existing or changing conditions. -Dave. E Smalley
0 -
The Electoral College is not going to give Trump a second term
Nov 14, 2020
Robert Alexander
Alexander is a professor of political science and founding director of the Institute for Civics and Public Policy at Ohio Northern University.
(CNN) — Four years ago in this space, I swatted down the idea that so-called "faithless electors" would deny Donald Trump the presidency when electors met to cast their votes for president and vice president in late December of that year. Instead, I predicted that while we would likely see a large number of faithless electors -- electors who vote contrary to expectations -- they would mostly be Democrats and they would have little effect upon Trump's chances for victory. We did indeed witness a record number of faithless votes. Most were indeed cast by Democrats and they did little to change the final outcome.
Spurred by these events, the Supreme Court decided this summer in Chiafalo v. Washington that states could bind electors to the will of the voters in their states. Although 33 states and the District of Columbia have some form of binding law, just 14 states (representing 121 electoral votes) have laws providing for the cancellation of a faithless vote if an elector breaks his or her pledge. This leaves 417 electors who could go rogue without any means to cancel their vote. Many are now wondering whether electors could provide a means for Donald Trump to win a second term.Thanks to tweets and retweets from conservative radio host Mark Levin and President Trump's son, Don Jr. there are a number of scenarios that have Democrats concerned that the Electoral College could undo the results of the November 3 election. One scenario is that state legislatures could choose their own slate of electors, which could give Donald Trump the 270 electoral votes he would need to win a majority in the Electoral College. Another scenario is that "faithless electors" could flip from Biden to Trump, providing him those 270 electoral votes — and a second term.
Having studied the Electoral College for nearly two decades, I'm here to tell you that neither of these scenarios will happen.
First, it is true that state legislatures have the power to determine how electors are appointed and all states made those determinations in advance of the November election. As they have for nearly 150 years, all states chose to have electors selected directly by the voters in their respective states. This is what occurred on Election Day when over 150 million Americans voted for electors pledged to support Donald Trump or Joe Biden. State legislatures, then, have already done their job by choosing how electors would be selected. The voters then chose electors and it is now up to state executive officials to certify those votes. The Electoral Count Act of 1887 clearly indicates that states cannot change the rules after the election has been held. If in the future a state legislature would like to have the authority to directly select electors for their state, they are free to pass that legislation. However, I suspect no state would be willing to take that leap for 2024.
Second, although faithless electors have existed throughout our nation's history — including a record number in 2016 — the chances of Democratic electors bolting from the Biden campaign are virtually nonexistent. Having surveyed electors from each of the past five presidential elections, it is clear to me that they represent some of the most partisan individuals in American politics. They are chosen for their party loyalty, and in the case of Democratic electors the thought of a Trump presidency is a nonstarter. Throughout history only one elector (in 1796) ever voted for the opponent of their party's ticket. And while I have found a surprising number of electors do consider casting rogue votes, few ultimately choose to do so. The fact that this type of chicanery is possible at all creates needless uncertainty, intrigue, and questions of legitimachy. This is especially concerning in an election where a majority of Americans voted for the winning candidate — a candidate who is on pace to win the largest share of the national popular vote in three decades, save the elections of Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012.Although proponents of the Electoral College claim that it helps bestow legitimacy on a winning candidate in close elections, we see the opposite in this case. The uncertainty created by talk of state legislatures seating their own electors as well as the prospect of faithless votes provides fertile ground for conspiracies from both the right and the left about what could happen when members of the Electoral College meet.
These backdoor Electoral College scenarios are not without precedent. In 1960, an effort was undertaken within the Electoral College to deny John F. Kennedy the presidency by throwing the contest not to his Republican opponent, Richard Nixon, but to Southern Democrat Harry Byrd. While there was interest in the plan, only Henry Irwin, a Republican from Oklahoma, cast a faithless vote for Byrd.
In 1976, Jimmy Carter won a very close contest over Gerald Ford. A change in just over 5,000 votes in Ohio and 3,000 votes in Hawaii would have given the election to Ford with exactly 270 electoral votes. After the election, Ford's running mate, Bob Dole, told the Senate Judiciary Committee that the Ford-Dole campaign actively sought to influence Democrat electors to switch to their votes. "We were shopping -- not shopping, excuse me -- looking around for electors." He added that, "It just seems to me that the temptation is there for that elector in a very tight race to really negotiate quite a bunch."
My own research on electors finds that they are regularly lobbied to change their votes and many consider doing so. In 2008, I found that 83% of electors were contacted and urged to not vote for Barack Obama, in spite of the fact that nearly 10 million more people voted for him and he earned a commanding Electoral College victory over John McCain 365-173. These Electoral College lobbyists argued that Obama was ineligible to serve as president because they falsely claimed he was not born in the United States. These baseless "birther" accusations were frequently stoked by the likes of Donald Trump throughout Obama's presidency. Ultimately, no electors defected.
The current talk about the Electoral College salvaging the presidency for Trump is reminiscent of efforts to deny him the presidency just four years ago. While discussion today centers on claims of voter fraud, four years ago the focus was on Trump's character, his failure to win the national popular vote, and concerns over Russian interference in the election. There was a public campaign in the form of a petition signed by millions including Lady Gaga and Pink. Additionally, a skit airing on Saturday Night Live memorably called on electors to flip their votes. These efforts had some effect, as my research found that every single Republican elector responding to my survey was contacted to change their vote and 85% of Democrats were too.
There was yet another campaign that took place within the Electoral College to dump Trump. It was led by Bret Chiafalo and Michael Baca in 2016. The so-called "Hamilton elector" movement encouraged fellow electors to band together to select a Republican unity candidate. They drew upon Hamilton's vision of independent and wise electors who were to be those citizens "most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations." They argued that Trump was unfit for office and hoped that at least 37 Republican electors would join their cause to deny Trump a majority of Electoral College votes.
Although 20% of Republican electors responding to my 2016 survey considered casting rogue votes against Trump, just two decided to cast faithless votes -- both for fellow Republicans (John Kasich and Ron Paul).
I am sure that Democratic members of the 2020 Electoral College will face immense pressure to change their votes, but I suspect virtually all will remain steadfast and loyal to the Biden-Harris ticket. Still, Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge Jr.'s observation in 1949 about the potential harm of electors persists. He warned that electors "are like the appendix in the human body. While it does no good and ordinarily causes no trouble, it continually exposes the body to the danger of political peritonitis."
It is my hope that all states will minimize the danger and adopt appropriate binding laws to remove any doubt that electors could change the outcome when the country casts its ballots four years from now. Until then, we should take some comfort in the view of electors offered by Justice Robert Jackson in Ray v. Blair (1952): "They [electors] always voted at their party's call and never thought of thinking for themselves at all."
While I have found a surprising number of wavering electors in past elections, most all follow the will of the people in their states and I expect that is exactly what will occur this December.
0 -
Some good reassurance here. This happened in 2016 when I thought there was a powerful reason for it not too. There certainly is no such reason here this time.
0 -
Jackie, that's what I'm looking for: reassurances. It sounds like a pretty solid case that all electoral votes will be cast accordingly, with no defectors. I know I'm not the only one who doesn't understand the ins and outs of the electoral process. I think I read that Hillary is an elector for maybe New York? It seems like a system that needs some tweaking. But I will rest more easily when the electors meet and confirm Biden. Not sure why Trump keeps squawking about big fraud and he will concede "if electors vote Biden" as if there is a chance the electors will be bought off. I sure as heck hope not. We do not need more chaos and upheaval in our nation, which would surely occur if that were to happen.
0 -
He keeps falsely claiming fraud so he can raise money. He's been sending over a dozen emails a day begging for money. It's funny that a donor who gave $2.5 million wants his $$$ back because nothing has been found that could change the outcome. The only voter fraud I've seen reported is by Trumpers.
0 -
Meanwhile, Bill Barr, the president's Attorney Lackey goes against dear leader, and states the election was fair and without fraud
0 -
last night I posted that NYC had missed it's deadline to certify it's ballot, including mail in ballots, but was supposed to do so this afternoon at 1pm and with a minute to spare they posted ther certified results on their website. I haven't seen anything about it in the news https://www.vote.nyc/sites/default/files/pdf/election_results/2020/20201103General Election/00000100000Citywide President Vice President Citywide Recap.pdf but in total, in NYC there were 3,066,581 votes cast. Adding the Dem and GreenParty lines: 2,321,759 for Biden/Harris and adding Repub and Conservative lines, 691,682 for Trump. It looks like Staten Island was the only borough to go for Trump, not surprised! and of the write-in candidates Kanye West received the most with 927. They list military/absentee separately and then in the total but I can trust my addition skills only so far.
0
