2020 General Election

[SeattleGriz]

Your in IT security. Does his article make sense?

Objectively - no. He isn't considering all the physical and virtual security that surrounds these machines and software. The upgrades, the patches, they re-coding that is constantly being done to make something not only more secure, but more operationally efficient. He's forgetting that while these machines say they aren't connected to the internet - there is a connection for remote observation where these companies are monitoring everything and using real time analysis.

He's got a bias and he's only telling you enough to sow doubt or make you confused. I know and talk regularly with an exec for one of the companies he mentioned - he's failed to report on everything these companies do in the months and weeks leading up to an election and what they do after to verify the integrity of their machines.

Thank you.

I did edit my post apparently while you were typing.

The main reason I brought it up was because this is a move that would have been pulled on Trump, but it was pulled on Raffensperger. The timing of the release is very odd.

Get someone on record leaning one way and then release an article undermining them.

[SeattleGriz]

Has anyone else noticed Hillary's go to line? Anything she disagrees with is some sort of an assault on our democracy. Outside of her, is the line that something is an assault on our constitutional republic.

Both those lines are tired and worn out. Can only go to the well so many times.

Busted out laughing when I read this due to her always saying that line.

[Ibanez]

Has anyone else noticed Hillary's go to line? Anything she disagrees with is some sort of an assault on our democracy. Outside of her, is the line that something is an assault on our constitutional republic.

Both those lines are tired and worn out. Can only go to the well so many times.

Busted out laughing when I read this due to her always saying that line.

The Republicans are saying the same thing. This election is an assault. Someone said yesterday that if Congress confirms Biden then our "Democracy will end."

HRC is trying to stay relevant - though I'm not sure why.

[GannonFan]

Has anyone else noticed Hillary's go to line? Anything she disagrees with is some sort of an assault on our democracy. Outside of her, is the line that something is an assault on our constitutional republic.

Both those lines are tired and worn out. Can only go to the well so many times.

Busted out laughing when I read this due to her always saying that line.

That's not just a Hillary thing, it's a go to line for any politician any more. Everyone is going straight to the end-times when it comes to anything political anymore. Obama said the fate of the Republic was at stake with the 2016 election (so with Hillary's loss the Republic apparently ceased to exist), Trump starts saying we're almost in Civil War-mode if he doesn't get the election result he wants, and on and on. The Trumps/Obamas/Clintons of the world aren't helping our political problems, and are likely making them worse. But I don't get the sense they really care all that much other than self interest.

[kalm]

Has anyone else noticed Hillary's go to line? Anything she disagrees with is some sort of an assault on our democracy. Outside of her, is the line that something is an assault on our constitutional republic.

Both those lines are tired and worn out. Can only go to the well so many times.

Busted out laughing when I read this due to her always saying that line.

I hate Hillary but she’s 100% spot on here with all three.

1). As of yesterday we were running almost 4 times the number of new cases as the next nearest competitor, the UK. We are #1 in cumulative cases by twice as many and have roughly the same amount as the next three combined (India, Russia, Brazil).

2). See the open letter signed by 10 former Sec Defs (including Cheney and Rumsfeld) regarding the election and the national security concerns.

3). Agree on the tired phrase especially coming from her, but the one is probably the easiest to consider.

[kalm]

Has anyone else noticed Hillary's go to line? Anything she disagrees with is some sort of an assault on our democracy. Outside of her, is the line that something is an assault on our constitutional republic.

Both those lines are tired and worn out. Can only go to the well so many times.

Busted out laughing when I read this due to her always saying that line.

That's not just a Hillary thing, it's a go to line for any politician any more. Everyone is going straight to the end-times when it comes to anything political anymore. Obama said the fate of the Republic was at stake with the 2016 election (so with Hillary's loss the Republic apparently ceased to exist), Trump starts saying we're almost in Civil War-mode if he doesn't get the election result he wants, and on and on. The Trumps/Obamas/Clintons of the world aren't helping our political problems, and are likely making them worse. But I don't get the sense they really care all that much other than self interest.

President Trump’s relentless effort to overturn the result of the election that he lost has become the most serious stress test of American democracy in generations, one led not by outside revolutionaries intent on bringing down the system but by the very leader charged with defending it.

In the 220 years since a defeated John Adams turned over the White House to his rival, firmly establishing the peaceful transfer of authority as a bedrock principle, no sitting president who [lost an election](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/07/us/p ... ction.html) has tried to hang onto power by rejecting the Electoral College and [subverting the will of the voters](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/03/us/p ... orgia.html) — until now. It is a scenario at once utterly unthinkable and yet feared since the beginning of Mr. Trump’s tenure.

The president has gone well beyond simply venting his grievances or creating a face-saving narrative to explain away a loss, as advisers privately suggested he was doing in the days after the Nov. 3 vote. Instead, he has [stretched or crossed the boundaries of tradition, propriety and perhaps the law](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/03/us/p ... pe=Article) to find any way he can to cling to office beyond his term that expires in two weeks. That he is almost certain to fail and that President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. will be inaugurated on Jan. 20 does not mitigate the damage he is doing to democracy by undermining public faith in the electoral system.

Mr. Trump’s [hourlong telephone call over the weekend](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/03/us/p ... e=Homepage) with Georgia’s chief election official, [Brad Raffensperger](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/03/us/p ... orgia.html), pressuring him to “find” enough votes to overturn [Mr. Biden’s victory](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/07/us/p ... ction.html) in that state only brought into stark relief what the president has been doing for weeks. He has [called the Republican governors of Georgia](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/06/us/p ... state.html) and Arizona to get them to intervene. He has [summoned Michigan’s Republican Legislature leaders](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/19/us/p ... ction.html) to the White House to pressure them to change their state’s results. He [called the Republican speaker of the Pennsylvania House](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html) multiple times seeking help to reverse the outcome there.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/04/us/p ... Au1SpoTQ5Y

[bluehenbillk]

I didn't see a separate Georgia thread here so excuse me for working in today's Senate runoff but here's my question:

The way the Senate works, with the exception of judicial appointments, don't you need 60 votes to pass legislature, etc from the Senate? Maybe Cabinet appointments just need a majority too but if legislation, taxes, etc needs to go through don't you still need 60? Trump's first two years in office a lot got stuck in the Senate b/c they never had 60 votes.

Anyone?

[kalm]

Queen Congresswoman of Qanon has spoken!

[GannonFan]

I didn't see a separate Georgia thread here so excuse me for working in today's Senate runoff but here's my question:

The way the Senate works, with the exception of judicial appointments, don't you need 60 votes to pass legislature, etc from the Senate? Maybe Cabinet appointments just need a majority too but if legislation, taxes, etc needs to go through don't you still need 60? Trump's first two years in office a lot got stuck in the Senate b/c they never had 60 votes.

Anyone?

Yes, currently you don't need 60 votes for judicial appointments (the Dems hit the nuclear button on all appointments other than SCOTUS back in 2013, and then the GOP pressed the button again in 2017 to include SCOTUS picks), and you don't need 60 votes for the budget reconciliation process when dealing with taxes or spending (it is somewhat narrow, but what falls under that could be expanded as needed by the party in power).

With that said, the Dems have been very clear for the past election cycle that nothing is off the table to pass what they want to pass and if that means dumping the filibuster rule to get it then that is certainly an option. Schumer has been saying that for at least the past year. Biden is supposed to be the calming influence in that regard, but he supported the nuclear option as VP when Reid did it in 2013 (and he opposed it when the GOP did it in 2017 - apparently it just matters if it benefits you or not). There will be a lot of pressure to dump the filibuster to pass as much as possible over the next two years as a 50/50 split in the Senate means Harris can break the tie everytime. I imagine much of the climate change legislation will go that route.

[GannonFan]

That's not just a Hillary thing, it's a go to line for any politician any more. Everyone is going straight to the end-times when it comes to anything political anymore. Obama said the fate of the Republic was at stake with the 2016 election (so with Hillary's loss the Republic apparently ceased to exist), Trump starts saying we're almost in Civil War-mode if he doesn't get the election result he wants, and on and on. The Trumps/Obamas/Clintons of the world aren't helping our political problems, and are likely making them worse. But I don't get the sense they really care all that much other than self interest.

President Trump’s relentless effort to overturn the result of the election that he lost has become the most serious stress test of American democracy in generations, one led not by outside revolutionaries intent on bringing down the system but by the very leader charged with defending it.

In the 220 years since a defeated John Adams turned over the White House to his rival, firmly establishing the peaceful transfer of authority as a bedrock principle, no sitting president who [lost an election](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/07/us/p ... ction.html) has tried to hang onto power by rejecting the Electoral College and [subverting the will of the voters](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/03/us/p ... orgia.html) — until now. It is a scenario at once utterly unthinkable and yet feared since the beginning of Mr. Trump’s tenure.

The president has gone well beyond simply venting his grievances or creating a face-saving narrative to explain away a loss, as advisers privately suggested he was doing in the days after the Nov. 3 vote. Instead, he has [stretched or crossed the boundaries of tradition, propriety and perhaps the law](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/03/us/p ... pe=Article) to find any way he can to cling to office beyond his term that expires in two weeks. That he is almost certain to fail and that President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. will be inaugurated on Jan. 20 does not mitigate the damage he is doing to democracy by undermining public faith in the electoral system.

Mr. Trump’s [hourlong telephone call over the weekend](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/03/us/p ... e=Homepage) with Georgia’s chief election official, [Brad Raffensperger](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/03/us/p ... orgia.html), pressuring him to “find” enough votes to overturn [Mr. Biden’s victory](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/07/us/p ... ction.html) in that state only brought into stark relief what the president has been doing for weeks. He has [called the Republican governors of Georgia](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/06/us/p ... state.html) and Arizona to get them to intervene. He has [summoned Michigan’s Republican Legislature leaders](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/19/us/p ... ction.html) to the White House to pressure them to change their state’s results. He [called the Republican speaker of the Pennsylvania House](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html) multiple times seeking help to reverse the outcome there.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/04/us/p ... Au1SpoTQ5Y

The last real, peaceful transfer of power we had was back in '93 when Clinton was inaugurated. Every change in President since then as been disputed and the losing side has been clear that they believe a travesty has happened. Dems blamed the SCOTUS for stealing the election in '00 (and by default also in '04 since Bush was a fraudulent incumbent - plus Bush was a Nazi, so there was that), the GOP had their crazy birther wing (*cough* racists *cough*) claim Obama wasn't a natural born citizen in '08, and then of course the Dems mounted the Resistance and #notmypresident after they said the GOP stole the election through massive disenfranchisement in 2016. The only real difference this time is that Trump is far less civilized and much more coarse than the sore losers in past elections and you have a media that has been used to chasing ratings and sensationalizing any story, even at the sacrifice of accuracy, trying to one up each other for clickbait. The Republic is fine. Democracy is not in any danger. We just have a population that loves drama and loves the "look at me" attraction of social media and the current culture.

[kalm]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/04/us/p ... Au1SpoTQ5Y

The last real, peaceful transfer of power we had was back in '93 when Clinton was inaugurated. Every change in President since then as been disputed and the losing side has been clear that they believe a travesty has happened. Dems blamed the SCOTUS for stealing the election in '00 (and by default also in '04 since Bush was a fraudulent incumbent - plus Bush was a Nazi, so there was that), the GOP had their crazy birther wing (*cough* racists *cough*) claim Obama wasn't a natural born citizen in '08, and then of course the Dems mounted the Resistance and #notmypresident after they said the GOP stole the election through massive disenfranchisement in 2016. The only real difference this time is that Trump is far less civilized and much more coarse than the sore losers in past elections and you have a media that has been used to chasing ratings and sensationalizing any story, even at the sacrifice of accuracy, trying to one up each other for clickbait. The Republic is fine. Democracy is not in any danger. We just have a population that loves drama and loves the "look at me" attraction of social media and the current culture.

The only one of those even remotely close was 2000 and it’s nothing compared to this.

Crisis periods throughout history carry many possibilities depending on leadership and actions.

This is one time I’m glad the media is all over it.

[SeattleGriz]

The last real, peaceful transfer of power we had was back in '93 when Clinton was inaugurated. Every change in President since then as been disputed and the losing side has been clear that they believe a travesty has happened. Dems blamed the SCOTUS for stealing the election in '00 (and by default also in '04 since Bush was a fraudulent incumbent - plus Bush was a Nazi, so there was that), the GOP had their crazy birther wing (*cough* racists *cough*) claim Obama wasn't a natural born citizen in '08, and then of course the Dems mounted the Resistance and #notmypresident after they said the GOP stole the election through massive disenfranchisement in 2016. The only real difference this time is that Trump is far less civilized and much more coarse than the sore losers in past elections and you have a media that has been used to chasing ratings and sensationalizing any story, even at the sacrifice of accuracy, trying to one up each other for clickbait. The Republic is fine. Democracy is not in any danger. We just have a population that loves drama and loves the "look at me" attraction of social media and the current culture.

The only one of those even remotely close was 2000 and it’s nothing compared to this.

Crisis periods throughout history carry many possibilities depending on leadership and actions.

This is one time I’m glad the media is all over it.

I could easily be fooled by a misinformation campaign, but I'm amazed at all the talk that something bigger is brewing behind the scenes.

I'll gladly eat crow, if in the end, that is all it was. But can't help perk up when I start reading articles from Italy saying they believe the defense firm Leonardo was involved. Plus all the military command moves.

Just too many moving parts right now.

[SDHornet]

Good point, but not sure why there is so much push back for election transparency. All of this stuff should be open for reviews, audits, investigations, etc. Count every legal ballot and let the chips fall where they may.

I don't know either (whey there is so much pushback). Envelopes and ballots have been separated so I think it's too late for meaningful recounts and I don't think they would change the final outcome.

But this election did us a favor in highlighting some pretty slipshod practices that need to be fixed. Signature verification needs to be more stringent with follow-throughs when there are questions. People shouldn't be able to bring in flash drives and hook them up to election computers. At a minimum, whoever told the observers that they were done for the night and then kept counting after they left should be blackballed from ever working an election again. Harvesting of ballots by non-family members should be illegal. The judiciary should not be doing a legislature's job (in extending deadlines for mailed ballots).

Agree about any meaningful recounts with the separation of ballots from envelopes, but given that the second part of that statement can be proven either way. Agree about the more stringent measures, but the measures currently on the books wasn't followed so not sure of any point in passed more or new measures that wont be followed the next time as well.

[GannonFan]

The last real, peaceful transfer of power we had was back in '93 when Clinton was inaugurated. Every change in President since then as been disputed and the losing side has been clear that they believe a travesty has happened. Dems blamed the SCOTUS for stealing the election in '00 (and by default also in '04 since Bush was a fraudulent incumbent - plus Bush was a Nazi, so there was that), the GOP had their crazy birther wing (*cough* racists *cough*) claim Obama wasn't a natural born citizen in '08, and then of course the Dems mounted the Resistance and #notmypresident after they said the GOP stole the election through massive disenfranchisement in 2016. The only real difference this time is that Trump is far less civilized and much more coarse than the sore losers in past elections and you have a media that has been used to chasing ratings and sensationalizing any story, even at the sacrifice of accuracy, trying to one up each other for clickbait. The Republic is fine. Democracy is not in any danger. We just have a population that loves drama and loves the "look at me" attraction of social media and the current culture.

The only one of those even remotely close was 2000 and it’s nothing compared to this.

Crisis periods throughout history carry many possibilities depending on leadership and actions.

This is one time I’m glad the media is all over it.

Eh, if you say so. Seems like a lot of overblown things really. Biden's going to take the Oath of Office on Jan 20th. That's not been in any doubt since a couple of days after the election and certainly not in doubt since the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December. The idea that he's not going to (and the ideas that Trump is going to call out the military to hold on to power - my wife told me about that thread in Twitter the other day - and the whole host of other crazy things that are going to happen in the next 15 days to stop the transfer of power) just seem incredibly far-fetched and not based in any reality. Heck, even the GOP procedural opposition to not accepting the Electoral vote don't have any chance of succeeding and are basically procedural protests. Listening to the media, though, you get the idea that it's all touch and go and could go either way. That's the sensationalism, the propping up of things that have no chance of happening (i.e. martial law and Trump using the military to hold on to power) that the media is guilty of. It's their last gasp of holding on to Trump stories until they need to move on to something else after 12 noon on Jan 20th.

[SDHornet]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/04/us/p ... Au1SpoTQ5Y

The last real, peaceful transfer of power we had was back in '93 when Clinton was inaugurated. Every change in President since then as been disputed and the losing side has been clear that they believe a travesty has happened. Dems blamed the SCOTUS for stealing the election in '00 (and by default also in '04 since Bush was a fraudulent incumbent - plus Bush was a Nazi, so there was that), the GOP had their crazy birther wing (*cough* racists *cough*) claim Obama wasn't a natural born citizen in '08, and then of course the Dems mounted the Resistance and #notmypresident after they said the GOP stole the election through massive disenfranchisement in 2016. The only real difference this time is that Trump is far less civilized and much more coarse than the sore losers in past elections and you have a media that has been used to chasing ratings and sensationalizing any story, even at the sacrifice of accuracy, trying to one up each other for clickbait. The Republic is fine. Democracy is not in any danger. We just have a population that loves drama and loves the "look at me" attraction of social media and the current culture.

Normally I'd agree with this statement, but we had a blatant disregard of how the election laws were implemented and followed and enforced this election. Why would any one expect either side to not see this and double down on it?

[GannonFan]

The last real, peaceful transfer of power we had was back in '93 when Clinton was inaugurated. Every change in President since then as been disputed and the losing side has been clear that they believe a travesty has happened. Dems blamed the SCOTUS for stealing the election in '00 (and by default also in '04 since Bush was a fraudulent incumbent - plus Bush was a Nazi, so there was that), the GOP had their crazy birther wing (*cough* racists *cough*) claim Obama wasn't a natural born citizen in '08, and then of course the Dems mounted the Resistance and #notmypresident after they said the GOP stole the election through massive disenfranchisement in 2016. The only real difference this time is that Trump is far less civilized and much more coarse than the sore losers in past elections and you have a media that has been used to chasing ratings and sensationalizing any story, even at the sacrifice of accuracy, trying to one up each other for clickbait. The Republic is fine. Democracy is not in any danger. We just have a population that loves drama and loves the "look at me" attraction of social media and the current culture.

Normally I'd agree with this statement, but we had a blatant disregard of how the election laws were implemented and followed and enforced this election. Why would any one expect either side to not see this and double down on it?

I don't think there's any doubt that our election laws, and our adherence to them, are not anywhere as good as they should be. But with that said, I don't think our byzantine systems of election laws is threatening Democracy or the Republic. I don't think elections are routinely being stolen.

[SDHornet]

Normally I'd agree with this statement, but we had a blatant disregard of how the election laws were implemented and followed and enforced this election. Why would any one expect either side to not see this and double down on it?

I don't think there's any doubt that our election laws, and our adherence to them, are not anywhere as good as they should be. But with that said, I don't think our byzantine systems of election laws is threatening Democracy or the Republic. I don't think elections are routinely being stolen.

Today's GA election will start a trend.

[Ibanez]

I don't think there's any doubt that our election laws, and our adherence to them, are not anywhere as good as they should be. But with that said, I don't think our byzantine systems of election laws is threatening Democracy or the Republic. I don't think elections are routinely being stolen.

Today's GA election will start a trend.

Only if Republicans lose. Those snowflakes can't handle losing.

[SDHornet]

Today's GA election will start a trend.

Only if Republicans lose. Those snowflakes can't handle losing.

Depends on how that loss comes about. Another night of shenanigans and you have the trend. I think the DNC has wised up to have even more ballots stuffed and it won't have to come to that.

[GannonFan]

Today's GA election will start a trend.

Only if Republicans lose. Those snowflakes can't handle losing.

Of course. The Resistance and #notmypresident and the '08 #endofanerror were all great examples of handling losses with grace and dignity.

[Winterborn]

Only if Republicans lose. Those snowflakes can't handle losing.

Of course. The Resistance and #notmypresident and the '08 #endofanerror were all great examples of handling losses with grace and dignity.

Not liking to lose is a universal human condition.

[Ibanez]

Only if Republicans lose. Those snowflakes can't handle losing.

Of course. The Resistance and #notmypresident and the '08 #endofanerror were all great examples of handling losses with grace and dignity.

They aren't...but then again they weren't actively seeking to overthrow the election, beg states to find votes and flip the state, ask the VP to not certify the results. There's always going to be sore losers, that's expected. But I think Trump and MAGA world have gone beyond the normal whining and pouting.

[Ibanez]

Only if Republicans lose. Those snowflakes can't handle losing.

Depends on how that loss comes about. Another night of shenanigans and you have the trend. I think the DNC has wised up to have even more ballots stuffed and it won't have to come to that.

So, the Republicans in Georgia's government are too stupid to secure their own elections?

Well, they were in November but if they Republicans get the outcome they desire tonight, then it's back to being a fair election, right?


And what about those Republican's that won in October? Are their victories not suspect? If Trump lost, then how'd all those down ballot tickets win?

[GannonFan]

Of course. The Resistance and #notmypresident and the '08 #endofanerror were all great examples of handling losses with grace and dignity.

They aren't...but then again they weren't actively seeking to overthrow the election, beg states to find votes and flip the state, ask the VP to not certify the results. There's always going to be sore losers, that's expected. But I think Trump and MAGA world have gone beyond the normal whining and pouting.

There were campaigns to find enough electors willing to be unfaithful electors and change their votes the last time around. Hillary wasn't as bombastic or as uncouth as Trump, that's the real difference. That and the fear porn that the media has developed into. Heck, watch ABC News and their evening broadcast - everything (even the non-political stuff and even the non-COVID stuff) is presented as if the world is on the precipice. We're in the end times here, no doubt.

[Ibanez]

Of course. The Resistance and #notmypresident and the '08 #endofanerror were all great examples of handling losses with grace and dignity.

Not liking to lose is a universal human condition.

True. And there are going to be pouters and people that throw out stupid things like " Impeach 45' or "#ErrorInChief". But to actively engage and demand that votes just be found, materialized out of thin air is next level craziness.