Where Do Things End With Vlad? (h/t romad1)

[romad1]

Damn shame

 

Romanian constitutional court orders rerun of presidential election due to Russian interference online and elsewhere.

Imagine if the British courts had had the balls to rerun the Brexit vote because of Putin's proven online interference.

#RussiaReport #PutinsBrexit

[Tigeraholic1]

“Sometimes you have to sacrifice democracy to save democracy,” said Igor Bergler, a bestselling Romanian novelist and political satirist. The constitutional court’s decision was needed to prevent a potential dictator from coming to power, he said. “But it is a clearly antidemocratic step that sets a very dangerous precedent.”

 

When you have to supress the vote and "try again" you are no longer a democracy.

[Tiger337]

On 12/27/2024 at 8:24 AM, Tigeraholic1 said:

I was pointing to bluesky being an unchecked LW echo chamber. 

So?  The Tigers forum here does not allow political talk - left or right - and that's a good thing.  When I go on social media, it is mostly for baseball, so I only follow baseball people.  My choice.  I don't want to see ANY political talk and it is set up so that I can limit it.  The problem with twitter is that it is actively trying push right wing propaganda on me all the time and it's hard to get away from it even if I only follow basebal people.  

Edited December 29, 2024 by Tiger337

[Deleterious]

3 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

So?  The Tigers forum here does not allow political talk - left or right - and that's a good thing.  When I go on social media, it is mostly for baseball, so I only follow baseball people.  My choice.  I don't want to see ANY political talk and it is set up so that I can limit it.  The problem with twitter is that it is actively trying push right wing propaganda on me all the time and it's hard to get away from it even if I only follow basebal people.  

Twitter has a tab called "Following" that you can click on.  Stay on that and all you get is the people you follow and what they retweet.  

 

[Tiger337]

11 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

Twitter has a tab called "Following" that you can click on.  Stay on that and all you get is the people you follow and what they retweet.  

 

Yes, it's not really "hard" to get away from, but sometimes they switch it to "for you" automatically and that's where they feed me right wing propaganda.  You would think that "for me" would be baseball or sports people that I am not following, but their algoithm does not work that way.  Their "what's happening side bar" always suggests either Alex Bregman or some right wing conspiracy theory.  At least they got the Bregman part right. 

Blue Sky is much cleaner.  The problem with it so far is that there are a lot of people who are on both twitter and bluesky who still mostly post on twitter (probably because they have more followers over there).  

    

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

“Sometimes you have to sacrifice democracy to save democracy,” said Igor Bergler, a bestselling Romanian novelist and political satirist. The constitutional court’s decision was needed to prevent a potential dictator from coming to power, he said. “But it is a clearly antidemocratic step that sets a very dangerous precedent.”

 

When you have to supress the vote and "try again" you are no longer a democracy.

Like a lot things, the reality is it's a spectrum everywhere.  A quick analysis of the US Senate and electoral college show the US is somewhat flawed democracy. Manipulated elections are a favorite sham of Russian imperialism, so  I suppose better that there be a mechanism to reject one than not . Dangerous, yes.  If you are in a place where there is no good answer you best take the least bad one. 

But in Bergler's quote, I think the flaw is in his semantics. Democracy is more than just elections. Russia proves nothing if not that. If a society's rejection of an election is a better reflection of the will of the majority of the people, that is still democracy. The question as always is where is the actual truth.

[romad1]

Like J6

[Tigeraholic1]

20 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

 

But in Bergler's quote, I think the flaw is in his semantics. Democracy is more than just elections. Russia proves nothing if not that. If a society's rejection of an election is a better reflection of the will of the majority of the people, that is still democracy. The question as always is where is the actual truth.

However if you can't trust election results then you have lost the democracy angle.

[Tigeraholic1]

 

[CMRivdogs]

On 12/30/2024 at 9:04 AM, Tigeraholic1 said:

However if you can't trust election results then you have lost the democracy angle.

Does this apply to 2020 as well?

[mtutiger]

20 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

Does this apply to 2020 as well?

In b4 "only the crazy libruls care about that lol"

[Tigeraholic1]

37 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

Does this apply to 2020 as well?

Still trying to find the 5 million Biden voters who stayed home this election cycle. I personally have yet to meet one, you? They must have been really pissed when they tried to install Harris with out a primary......

Edited January 2 by Tigeraholic1

[mtutiger]

Uhh, we can have debates about the efficacy of Harris' campaign (that horse has been flogged to death at this point), but given Biden's standing and unpopularity relative to hers in the polls, it seems very likely he would have received less votes than Harris ultimately did. And the party would likely have not gained a seat in the House and done worse in the Senate as well.

[CMRivdogs]

TA1 is a one trick pony

[mtutiger]

3 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

TA1 is a one trick pony

It's definitely a challenge to get a straight answer off of anything that is remotely challenging, that's for sure.

[Tigeraholic1]

I will never undestand how 5 million voters showed up to make sure Trump did not get re-elected but stayed home the next time. Will just be one of history's mysteries.

[ben9753]

5 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

I will never undestand how 5 million voters showed up to make sure Trump did not get re-elected but stayed home the next time. Will just be one of history's mysteries.

"stayed home"... hmm.

We know what you're insinuating.

I think the most likely answer is some of the machines flipped Harris votes to Trump in battleground states. 

[mtutiger]

11 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

I will never undestand how 5 million voters showed up to make sure Trump did not get re-elected but stayed home the next time. Will just be one of history's mysteries.

Voters really dislike inflation and took their anger out on Biden/Harris? Both in terms of some level of vote switching and a less motivated electorate?

It really isn't that hard to understand, not everything is a conspiracy.

[ben9753]

@mtutiger You reacted to my post as a joke, but the fact that run of the mill MAGA's take this as proof positive that the 2020 election was stolen, but not even a single Dem, not even the most radical left wing liberal has even suggested this as proof that the 2024 election was stolen, even though its exactly the same logic, is telling to me.

Edited January 2 by ben9753

[Tigerbomb13]

Democrats decided to  steal the  last election, but not this one for some reason

Edited January 2 by Tigerbomb13

[mtutiger]

2 minutes ago, ben9753 said:

@mtutiger You reacted to my post as a joke, but the fact that run of the mill MAGA's take this as proof positive that the 2020 election was stolen, but not even a single Dem, not even the most radical left wing liberal has even suggested this as proof that the 2024 election was stolen, even though its exactly the same logic, is telling to me.

Oh, I get it, trust me....

[Tigerbomb13]

“Some people are saying…” (i.e. end wokeness and Charlie Kirk)

[oblong]

2 minutes ago, Tigerbomb13 said:

Democrats decided to  steal the  last election, but not this one for some reason

and they could do it in 2020 when they didn't run the executive branch.

One side lost 6M votes, the other side gained 3M votes.  3M fewer people voted.

3+3=6.

 

 

 

[mtutiger]

1 minute ago, oblong said:

and they could do it in 2020 when they didn't run the executive branch.

One side lost 6M votes, the other side gained 3M votes.  3M fewer people voted.

3+3=6.

 

 

 

2020 is such a terrible election to use as a baseline for turnout as well given the environment that it took place in.... people were more tuned into the news and primed to vote than in 2024 because many were stuck at home watching the news.

People were less engaged this time around, not a huge surprise that there was less turnout.

[mtutiger]

Just shameless lying... 

Edited January 2 by mtutiger