So far at I can tell, right now it's eight Democratic electors and zero Republican electors.
This isn't happening.
There is one confirmed Republican defector. Lawrence Lessig has since provided a means for electors to communicate anonymously, so we won't know how many defect from either side until December 19th.
The Hamilton Electors suffered a blow today when John Kasich said to not choose him.
To be clear, despite all these post-election hurdles cropping up, Donald Trump will be president 99.9% certain. If I was in a betting market, I would not put money on anything keeping Donald Trump from entering office. Jill Stein will not change the election outcome, smooth transition of power through the electoral college is one of the few bipartisan issues left on the Federal Government level, and not matter how much his opponents want it, if Trump has gotten this far, spontaneously combusting isn't going to keep him from taking office.
To be clear, despite all these post-election hurdles cropping up, Donald Trump will be president 99.9% certain. If I was in a betting market, I would not put money on anything keeping Donald Trump from entering office. Jill Stein will not change the election outcome, smooth transition of power through the electoral college is one of the few bipartisan issues left on the Federal Government level, and not matter how much his opponents want it, if Trump has gotten this far, spontaneously combusting isn't going to keep him from taking office.
I agree wholeheartedly.
There may be a an very tiny chance something comes of all this that actually stops Trump but chances are it will have much more effect on what happens after Trump is inaugurated.
So Michigan Republicans hate the idea of people checking the vote, and they're pushing a retroactive law which increases the costs of recounts under certain conditions, in what looks like an attempt to punish Jill Stein for trying to get one. [link]
Honestly, I figured the recounts were just an attempt by Stein to get some support, but the more I hear about Republicans trying to stop them the more I think there might be something to claims of fraud or whatever.
No, Michigan Legislators hate the idea of being on the hook for the costs of a recount instigated by a person who cannot possibly win. The Proposed Michigan retroactive law wouldn't stop the recount it would shift the full cost (rather than just the $1,000,000 of the current law) to a candidate who was not within, I believe, 5% of the winning candidate.
Jill Stein has *absolutely no chance* of winning. She paid her cost, but the state is on the hook for somewhere between 10 and 12 million dollars, at least, to conduct the recount.
Let's be honest here: Jill Stein is operating on behalf of Hillary Clinton. Whether at the direction of Clinton (unlikely), or out of some misguided attempt to shift the election results. In either case, the end goal has absolutely nothing to do with "checking the integrity of the voting process" and everything to do with "what can I do to try and make Hillary win". The selection of states that she filed for a recount in makes that abundantly clear.
Let's be honest here: Jill Stein is operating on behalf of Hillary Clinton. Whether at the direction of Clinton (unlikely), or out of some misguided attempt to shift the election results. In either case, the end goal has absolutely nothing to do with "checking the integrity of the voting process" and everything to do with "what can I do to try and make Hillary win". The selection of states that she filed for a recount in makes that abundantly clear.
What can I do to try and make Hillary win?*
*If she lost due to electoral fraud, because that's kind of an important thing.
If she's worried that electoral fraud changed the outcome of the election, and has a limited budget to investigate, it doesn't seem that unusual to me that she'd investigate the states that were actually in play, as opposed to safe states.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from MD »
I am willing to bet my collection that Frozen and Solid are not on the same card. For example, Frozen Tomb and Solid Wall.
If Frozen Solid is not reprinted, you are aware that I'm quoting you in my sig for eternity?
Let's be honest here: Jill Stein is operating on behalf of Hillary Clinton. Whether at the direction of Clinton (unlikely), or out of some misguided attempt to shift the election results. In either case, the end goal has absolutely nothing to do with "checking the integrity of the voting process" and everything to do with "what can I do to try and make Hillary win". The selection of states that she filed for a recount in makes that abundantly clear.
What can I do to try and make Hillary win?*
*If she lost due to electoral fraud, because that's kind of an important thing.
If she's worried that electoral fraud changed the outcome of the election, and has a limited budget to investigate, it doesn't seem that unusual to me that she'd investigate the states that were actually in play, as opposed to safe states.
There isn't any evidence (despite Trump's claims) of electoral fraud. None. I'm fine with her requesting a recount. I think it also makes a lot of sense to make the person requesting that recount pay the actual costs of it if they don't have a reasonable chance of winning as a result of it.
As a tax payer in Michigan, Jill Stein is wasting my money. It's made worse because rather than just outright admitting that she's trying to swing it for Hillary she's making a BS claim that she is trying to restore confidence in the electoral system and that she selected the states she did because of their counting process.
Let's be honest here: Jill Stein is operating on behalf of Hillary Clinton. Whether at the direction of Clinton (unlikely), or out of some misguided attempt to shift the election results. In either case, the end goal has absolutely nothing to do with "checking the integrity of the voting process" and everything to do with "what can I do to try and make Hillary win". The selection of states that she filed for a recount in makes that abundantly clear.
What can I do to try and make Hillary win?*
*If she lost due to electoral fraud, because that's kind of an important thing.
If she's worried that electoral fraud changed the outcome of the election, and has a limited budget to investigate, it doesn't seem that unusual to me that she'd investigate the states that were actually in play, as opposed to safe states.
There isn't any evidence (despite Trump's claims) of electoral fraud. None. I'm fine with her requesting a recount. I think it also makes a lot of sense to make the person requesting that recount pay the actual costs of it if they don't have a reasonable chance of winning as a result of it.
As a tax payer in Michigan, Jill Stein is wasting my money. It's made worse because rather than just outright admitting that she's trying to swing it for Hillary she's making a BS claim that she is trying to restore confidence in the electoral system and that she selected the states she did because of their counting process.
I hate to be bearer of bad news, but Jill Stein is not conducting the recount to flip the election. You've got it backwards. Jill Stein is taking advantage of the discontent with the outcome of the election to force continuing Green issues of hating electronic voting and being suspicious of the "establishment". The reason Jill chose those 3 states is because she knew she could crowdsource the funds to kick off the recount.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is that you should be even more pissed at Jill than you already are because she went into this not caring whether the results changed, but to make an ideological point. The Green Party also did this in 2004 and started the anti-electronic movement because of it, so I'm not sure what I'll make of this until we see the consequences of the recount besides the election not changing.
Here are my thoughts as lean-towards-Green:
1. I support the recount on the grounds that that we should check such an enexpected outcome that's so close. While I admit that there was a bias it would change the election (that faded by Sunday), the "let's see the sausage making process" does have my attention.
2. If someone was going to go check the Jill Stein thread, they'd probably not be surprised when I say stiffing Stein with the entire recount cost would be something I'd do not just because it's a wasteful burden on the Michigan taxpayers. I support making Jill Stein grandstanding mean that Jill Stein covers more of the costs to grandstand. I feel like if Michigan finds something (they won't), then shifting costs would not be justified… but I'm typing on my phone during my lunch break, so we can come back to nuance and exceptions if you desire in a later post. What I will say is that I'm against the retroactive date for the same reason we can't oust Trump based on losing the popular vote. Dr. Stein followed the law to her advantage just like Trump won based on the current election system. To change that midstream would ultimately undermine trust for a significant portion of the population.
3. I think there should be election reforms beyond Michigan shifting the cost of the burden. I hope they look into them in addition to raising the barrier to ask for a recount. Jill Stein is riding a wave of discontent. Creating more barriers in the process is not going to quell that discontent and ultimately plays into her message on her now expanded audience. The solution between accessibility to voting verification and burdening taxpayers? I dunno. If anything, that should be part of the conversation/debate when we come back to this from a historical standpoint. And hopefully next time this debate happens it won't be because Jill Stein is making another expensive protest.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
So I've only been loosely paying attention to this, but there seems to be more potentially serious stuff coming up with regards to Trump's Russia connections and the Electoral College and all of that. Surprised that it hasn't been brought up, but it at least seems to have become a bigger issue and could potentially influence what the EC does. It's also possible it's getting blown out of proportion too and that's why it hasn't been brought up here, but if not I'd be curious to hear more thoughts.
So I've only been loosely paying attention to this, but there seems to be more potentially serious stuff coming up with regards to Trump's Russia connections and the Electoral College and all of that. Surprised that it hasn't been brought up, but it at least seems to have become a bigger issue and could potentially influence what the EC does. It's also possible it's getting blown out of proportion too and that's why it hasn't been brought up here, but if not I'd be curious to hear more thoughts.
Unless there is a real "smoking gun" that can prove serious Russian involvement (eg voting machine hacking), this will not amount to much and the electors will vote along party lines.
Reminds me of the flag burning amendment that was floated a number of years ago before 9/11 and Terry Shiavo. Both news stories really turned me off to politics, because they were inconsequential. Shiavo was a vegetable with no hope of returning to any semblance of a normal life, and had previously stated to her husband in passing that she wanted to die if ever like that.
The flag burning amendment was inherently unconstitutional and a waste of time to even discuss.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life is a beautiful engineer, yet a brutal scientist.
1st, my ballpark: Dr. Jill Stein's recount efforts. They're done. The Michigan Supreme Court declined to reinstate the Michigan recount, killing the effort*, Pennsylvania's recount never took off after being denied in federal court**, and Wisconsin's recount completed with additional votes being found for Clinton and Trump (and likely others), but in the end the net gain of the recount was just over two hundred more votes for Donald Trump. To read more, click here. So... Donald Trump definitely won Wisconsin.
*While Michigan will not have a complete recount, irregularities in the votes that were counted showed so the state of Michigan is going to have a comprehensive audit.
**The real defeat for Dr. Stein was when a judge separately declined to allow the Stein Campaign access to run a forensic analysis of the voting machines, which was what she really wanted to do because when the Green Party did that twelve years ago it started an anti-electronic voting movement that has at the least resulted in California moving away from electronic voting.
Takeaways:
1. The National Democratic Party is currently so far off its game at this moment that the Green Party managed to get at least fifteen minutes of fame in a neutral way (as opposed to negative; I dunno if this will go down as positive, but it could). As someone on the inside, I don't think the Green Party currently has the operatives to capitalize on this to turn it into a momentum to grow, nor do I think that the Democrats will stay off their game long enough for the Greens to gain that much attention. Then again, this election has defied expectations in so many ways, so sure, why not? I will say though that it would spell trouble for the Left/liberals/progressives/whatever-left-leaning-label-you-choose in the current political climate and structures if they split into two political parties evenly rather than a major coalition that exists(ed?) in the Democrats because for the time being it looks like all Republican splintering has at the least gilded over with their surprise victory.
2. Voting Machines were likely not hacked. There's other ways to "hack" an election, and so I never expected that angle to come to fruition unless someone we weren't expecting did it.
3. This could be a troubling sign for Democrats in terms of fundraising. Let's be blunt: Jill Stein took advantage of distraught Democrat Voters desperate to reverse the election to fund this recount (and I've been in touch with people that do think that may have been D. Stein's hope as well; I guess I won't know unless I ever actually ask her). Her actual execution strategy was questionable, but I don't believe she scammed donors as Donald Trump accuses. However, that frustration Dr. Stein capitalized on is not going away. While I trust Dr. Stein to be honest, transparent, and use donor funds as appropriately as she can... others are likely to come along with real scams. This problem plagued the Tea Party Movement for the past five years because people started realizing they could capitalize on the political anxieties of the opposition party.
2nd, Russia. The CIA has now confidently declared that Russia not only intervened in the election to smear Secretary Hillary Clinton, but they also did it with the expressed purpose of putting Trump in the White House. This has raised an entire slew of new anxieties, the latest being Trump's Secretary of State nomination being an ExxonMobil executive with strong ties to Russia. There is growing bipartisan concern about this, but both sides are approaching the issue with caution. The Democrats don't want to appear to be sore losers and the Republicans don't want to tear down the man that just carried them into keeping a House and Senate majority.
Takeaways:
1. The world has entered a new era of cyberwarfare. A foreign government interfering with an election is nothing new. A foreign government has tried to breach a foreign government's systems for intelligence before. The United States has too! This the first time a cyberattack has been weaponized against a first world power (the first time period that we know of is the US and Israel hacked Iran to mess with a virus called Stuxnet). This is an escalation from the anxieties of agencies (China) passively taking information for intel. No one is really sure yet where we go from here (or what Obama may do in his final days about it).
2. A foreign government hacked the voters, not the voting machines. I never believed that ties to Russia would have been found in voting machines. Their propaganda campaign through Wikileaks and apparently contributing to Fake news did most of the work to render changing votes obsolete. Anything that they missed is looking likely to have been covered by James Comey. Email is not a secure form of communication. Between the Clinton server and the hacks, I feel confident in always tacking that on as a major lesson for the entire election.
3. Russia will likely be making major moves on the political stage, and there's a good chance that the United States will either be passive or support them. I normally hate red scares, but Trump seems Putin friendly, the US is the largest contributor to NATO, and Putin needs to get around NATO to fulfill his political ambitions. I feel it may be an appropriate time to have concerns.
3rd, the Hamilton Electors. With the growing Russia influence in the election, the Hamilton electors (and the Clinton campaign) have pounced to try to get security briefings out to the electoral college before the 19th. That's really all they have going right now since they were just hit with a loss in court in Colorado. Source. Also, the RNC has started a whip operation to crackdown on their own electors to keep them voting for Trump. Source
Takeaways:
1. It's probably still not going to work. I guess it's gotten serious enough the RNC is formally involved, but yeah, that's not saying much.
But outside the election, concerns should start shifting more towards the government that Donald Trump is building, and that's going to be difficult enough since Donald Trump can essentially throw people off because he knows how to give the media the run around by being a reality star.
Email is not a secure form of communication. Between the Clinton server and the hacks, I feel confident in always tacking that on as a major lesson for the entire election.
Liberal fascist is such a perfect oxymoron that I honestly can't tell if this guy is trolling. I've already posted examples of how social justice movements are about fixing measurable problems in society so I'm not going to argue against the hurt feelings claim because it's so far wrong I don't feel like bothering with it.
Whatever.
Has anyone mentioned Trump's pick for the EPA or do I get to do it first? He's Scott Pruitt, and he's been in the pocket of the fossil fuel industry for a while. [link]
For someone who ran partially on a campaign of being so rich that he can't be bought, Trump's cabinet has a disturbing number of corrupt lobbyists.
To be fair, the millionaires probably aren't much better. I hope y'all like trickle down economics. [link]
It's a sad day for the America. Anyone want to take bets on exactly how bad things will get?
I fix'ed it. It is not a sad day for us. Most of us find this hilarious.
As a world superpower, what America does affects almost every living person on the planet. Regardless of your political leanings, you can't say that the results of the US election only affect America.
President-elect Donald Trump told MSNBC host Mika Brzezinski that he's fine with a nuclear arms race developing, Brzezinski said Friday morning.
The "Morning Joe" co-host said Trump privately told her he is confident that the U.S. can “outlast” any other country.
“Let it be an arms race, we will outmatch them at every pass ... and outlast them all,” Brzezinski recounted Trump saying.
President-elect Donald Trump told MSNBC host Mika Brzezinski that he's fine with a nuclear arms race developing, Brzezinski said Friday morning.
The "Morning Joe" co-host said Trump privately told her he is confident that the U.S. can “outlast” any other country.
“Let it be an arms race, we will outmatch them at every pass ... and outlast them all,” Brzezinski recounted Trump saying.
Semi-related: the Trump campaign crew are all such nice people. [That's sarcasm.]
I mean, Yeah. I'm pretty sure at this point we're singing to the choir here. While the posters here have a wide array of beliefs, I feel the majority of posters left on the debate forum are not looking forward to a Trump presidency. I'm not sure who here wants to debate promoting nuclear proliferation and/or modernization (the of which, I'd like to point out, was something President Obama began).
Also, should the $#!† Trump is going to do just be an entirely new thread? The election itself is over, over. It ended on Monday with the Electoral College.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
Also, should the $#!† Trump is going to do just be an entirely new thread? The election itself is over, over. It ended on Monday with the Electoral College.
Ehh, I would say wait until he gets sworn in and it officially begins.
Go vote for your master slaves... Wait wrong master... Russians hacked LOL!!!!!!!!!! Russia Russia Russia, Fake news, lalalalalaa don't have an argument.... lalalala Racist, Xenophobe, Sexist.
I mean, Yeah. I'm pretty sure at this point we're singing to the choir here. While the posters here have a wide array of beliefs, I feel the majority of posters left on the debate forum are not looking forward to a Trump presidency. I'm not sure who here wants to debate promoting nuclear proliferation and/or modernization (the of which, I'd like to point out, was something President Obama began).
I never knew the word for this until recent events: echo chamber.
That was the best part of the whole election - the revelation of many.
I'm not sure who here wants to debate promoting nuclear proliferation and/or modernization
This is probably a point for its own thread, but the theoretical world-wide extreme of nuclear proliferation feels very similar to world-wide anarcho-capitalism taken to its logical extreme.
That was the best part of the whole election - the revelation of many.
It was certainly eye-opening to see how large of a percentage of our electorate does not have or choose to exercise critical thinking skills, certainly.
But for that portion of the electorate, I fear the revelation has only just begun. Then there are the people who will continue to sing Trump's praises no matter what the man does. I fear no revelation will ever reach them.
That was the best part of the whole election - the revelation of many.
It was certainly eye-opening to see how large of a percentage of our electorate does not have or choose to exercise critical thinking skills, certainly.
I don't that's a helpful attitude you are expressing there.
As far as being concerned with critical thinking, being very dismissive of large swathes of opposing points of view, especially when focused on the people, is not a very consistent thing to do.
We can be a little more open minded here.
Being very dismissive will only help validate these opinions after all, that's part of how we got here. And I'd say the same issue can help explain why so many people were as surprised as they were by this result.
But for that portion of the electorate, I fear the revelation has only just begun. Then there are the people who will continue to sing Trump's praises no matter what the man does. I fear no revelation will ever reach them.
I agree.
And I think what is necessary is to work across a more fundamental divide that transcends specific points, a divide in what information people look at, what language people use in talking about these issues, what basic principles they are working from.
We have more access to information than ever, and increasingly so. But people, in general, are fairly apathetic and lazy compared to the true depth of what we are dealing with.
We need to drive more engagement in detailed analysis that considers many perspectives, rather than engagement in emotional rhetoric and shallow, attention grabbing articles. It's not an issue that applies to some of us- almost everyone could do better.
I think that's the biggest lesson from all of this, and I think YamahaR1 was getting at this same sort of idea.
That was the best part of the whole election - the revelation of many.
And what revelation is that?
I believe social media, mainstream media, television and the internet do a very good job of silencing opinions they don't like. This leads people to believe that everyone (the overwhelming majority) thinks the same - that everyone is on the same page. On the night of the election, you could see just how shocked every news anchor (and comedians like Trevor Noah) were. I think the same of this forum - if you drive out everyone potentially guilty of wrongthink, you've only tricked yourself. I also believe (per another thread) that hitting people with the racist or bigot stick on every topic or repeatedly demonizing white people simply shuts down the conversation. In this very thread alone there's many negative comments demonizing white people - that's acceptable racism.
There is one confirmed Republican defector. Lawrence Lessig has since provided a means for electors to communicate anonymously, so we won't know how many defect from either side until December 19th.
The Hamilton Electors suffered a blow today when John Kasich said to not choose him.
_____________________________________________________________________
To be clear, despite all these post-election hurdles cropping up, Donald Trump will be president 99.9% certain. If I was in a betting market, I would not put money on anything keeping Donald Trump from entering office. Jill Stein will not change the election outcome, smooth transition of power through the electoral college is one of the few bipartisan issues left on the Federal Government level, and not matter how much his opponents want it, if Trump has gotten this far, spontaneously combusting isn't going to keep him from taking office.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
I agree wholeheartedly.
There may be a an very tiny chance something comes of all this that actually stops Trump but chances are it will have much more effect on what happens after Trump is inaugurated.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
No, Michigan Legislators hate the idea of being on the hook for the costs of a recount instigated by a person who cannot possibly win. The Proposed Michigan retroactive law wouldn't stop the recount it would shift the full cost (rather than just the $1,000,000 of the current law) to a candidate who was not within, I believe, 5% of the winning candidate.
Jill Stein has *absolutely no chance* of winning. She paid her cost, but the state is on the hook for somewhere between 10 and 12 million dollars, at least, to conduct the recount.
Let's be honest here: Jill Stein is operating on behalf of Hillary Clinton. Whether at the direction of Clinton (unlikely), or out of some misguided attempt to shift the election results. In either case, the end goal has absolutely nothing to do with "checking the integrity of the voting process" and everything to do with "what can I do to try and make Hillary win". The selection of states that she filed for a recount in makes that abundantly clear.
*If she lost due to electoral fraud, because that's kind of an important thing.
If she's worried that electoral fraud changed the outcome of the election, and has a limited budget to investigate, it doesn't seem that unusual to me that she'd investigate the states that were actually in play, as opposed to safe states.
There isn't any evidence (despite Trump's claims) of electoral fraud. None. I'm fine with her requesting a recount. I think it also makes a lot of sense to make the person requesting that recount pay the actual costs of it if they don't have a reasonable chance of winning as a result of it.
As a tax payer in Michigan, Jill Stein is wasting my money. It's made worse because rather than just outright admitting that she's trying to swing it for Hillary she's making a BS claim that she is trying to restore confidence in the electoral system and that she selected the states she did because of their counting process.
I hate to be bearer of bad news, but Jill Stein is not conducting the recount to flip the election. You've got it backwards. Jill Stein is taking advantage of the discontent with the outcome of the election to force continuing Green issues of hating electronic voting and being suspicious of the "establishment". The reason Jill chose those 3 states is because she knew she could crowdsource the funds to kick off the recount.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is that you should be even more pissed at Jill than you already are because she went into this not caring whether the results changed, but to make an ideological point. The Green Party also did this in 2004 and started the anti-electronic movement because of it, so I'm not sure what I'll make of this until we see the consequences of the recount besides the election not changing.
Here are my thoughts as lean-towards-Green:
1. I support the recount on the grounds that that we should check such an enexpected outcome that's so close. While I admit that there was a bias it would change the election (that faded by Sunday), the "let's see the sausage making process" does have my attention.
2. If someone was going to go check the Jill Stein thread, they'd probably not be surprised when I say stiffing Stein with the entire recount cost would be something I'd do not just because it's a wasteful burden on the Michigan taxpayers. I support making Jill Stein grandstanding mean that Jill Stein covers more of the costs to grandstand. I feel like if Michigan finds something (they won't), then shifting costs would not be justified… but I'm typing on my phone during my lunch break, so we can come back to nuance and exceptions if you desire in a later post. What I will say is that I'm against the retroactive date for the same reason we can't oust Trump based on losing the popular vote. Dr. Stein followed the law to her advantage just like Trump won based on the current election system. To change that midstream would ultimately undermine trust for a significant portion of the population.
3. I think there should be election reforms beyond Michigan shifting the cost of the burden. I hope they look into them in addition to raising the barrier to ask for a recount. Jill Stein is riding a wave of discontent. Creating more barriers in the process is not going to quell that discontent and ultimately plays into her message on her now expanded audience. The solution between accessibility to voting verification and burdening taxpayers? I dunno. If anything, that should be part of the conversation/debate when we come back to this from a historical standpoint. And hopefully next time this debate happens it won't be because Jill Stein is making another expensive protest.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
Unless there is a real "smoking gun" that can prove serious Russian involvement (eg voting machine hacking), this will not amount to much and the electors will vote along party lines.
The flag burning amendment was inherently unconstitutional and a waste of time to even discuss.
Modern
Commander
Cube
<a href="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/the-cube-forum/cube-lists/588020-unpowered-themed-enchantment-an-enchanted-evening">An Enchanted Evening Cube </a>
1st, my ballpark: Dr. Jill Stein's recount efforts. They're done. The Michigan Supreme Court declined to reinstate the Michigan recount, killing the effort*, Pennsylvania's recount never took off after being denied in federal court**, and Wisconsin's recount completed with additional votes being found for Clinton and Trump (and likely others), but in the end the net gain of the recount was just over two hundred more votes for Donald Trump. To read more, click here. So... Donald Trump definitely won Wisconsin.
*While Michigan will not have a complete recount, irregularities in the votes that were counted showed so the state of Michigan is going to have a comprehensive audit.
**The real defeat for Dr. Stein was when a judge separately declined to allow the Stein Campaign access to run a forensic analysis of the voting machines, which was what she really wanted to do because when the Green Party did that twelve years ago it started an anti-electronic voting movement that has at the least resulted in California moving away from electronic voting.
Takeaways:
1. The National Democratic Party is currently so far off its game at this moment that the Green Party managed to get at least fifteen minutes of fame in a neutral way (as opposed to negative; I dunno if this will go down as positive, but it could). As someone on the inside, I don't think the Green Party currently has the operatives to capitalize on this to turn it into a momentum to grow, nor do I think that the Democrats will stay off their game long enough for the Greens to gain that much attention. Then again, this election has defied expectations in so many ways, so sure, why not? I will say though that it would spell trouble for the Left/liberals/progressives/whatever-left-leaning-label-you-choose in the current political climate and structures if they split into two political parties evenly rather than a major coalition that exists(ed?) in the Democrats because for the time being it looks like all Republican splintering has at the least gilded over with their surprise victory.
2. Voting Machines were likely not hacked. There's other ways to "hack" an election, and so I never expected that angle to come to fruition unless someone we weren't expecting did it.
3. This could be a troubling sign for Democrats in terms of fundraising. Let's be blunt: Jill Stein took advantage of distraught Democrat Voters desperate to reverse the election to fund this recount (and I've been in touch with people that do think that may have been D. Stein's hope as well; I guess I won't know unless I ever actually ask her). Her actual execution strategy was questionable, but I don't believe she scammed donors as Donald Trump accuses. However, that frustration Dr. Stein capitalized on is not going away. While I trust Dr. Stein to be honest, transparent, and use donor funds as appropriately as she can... others are likely to come along with real scams. This problem plagued the Tea Party Movement for the past five years because people started realizing they could capitalize on the political anxieties of the opposition party.
2nd, Russia. The CIA has now confidently declared that Russia not only intervened in the election to smear Secretary Hillary Clinton, but they also did it with the expressed purpose of putting Trump in the White House. This has raised an entire slew of new anxieties, the latest being Trump's Secretary of State nomination being an ExxonMobil executive with strong ties to Russia. There is growing bipartisan concern about this, but both sides are approaching the issue with caution. The Democrats don't want to appear to be sore losers and the Republicans don't want to tear down the man that just carried them into keeping a House and Senate majority.
Takeaways:
1. The world has entered a new era of cyberwarfare. A foreign government interfering with an election is nothing new. A foreign government has tried to breach a foreign government's systems for intelligence before. The United States has too! This the first time a cyberattack has been weaponized against a first world power (the first time period that we know of is the US and Israel hacked Iran to mess with a virus called Stuxnet). This is an escalation from the anxieties of agencies (China) passively taking information for intel. No one is really sure yet where we go from here (or what Obama may do in his final days about it).
2. A foreign government hacked the voters, not the voting machines. I never believed that ties to Russia would have been found in voting machines. Their propaganda campaign through Wikileaks and apparently contributing to Fake news did most of the work to render changing votes obsolete. Anything that they missed is looking likely to have been covered by James Comey.
Email is not a secure form of communication. Between the Clinton server and the hacks, I feel confident in always tacking that on as a major lesson for the entire election.
3. Russia will likely be making major moves on the political stage, and there's a good chance that the United States will either be passive or support them. I normally hate red scares, but Trump seems Putin friendly, the US is the largest contributor to NATO, and Putin needs to get around NATO to fulfill his political ambitions. I feel it may be an appropriate time to have concerns.
3rd, the Hamilton Electors. With the growing Russia influence in the election, the Hamilton electors (and the Clinton campaign) have pounced to try to get security briefings out to the electoral college before the 19th. That's really all they have going right now since they were just hit with a loss in court in Colorado. Source. Also, the RNC has started a whip operation to crackdown on their own electors to keep them voting for Trump. Source
Takeaways:
1. It's probably still not going to work. I guess it's gotten serious enough the RNC is formally involved, but yeah, that's not saying much.
But outside the election, concerns should start shifting more towards the government that Donald Trump is building, and that's going to be difficult enough since Donald Trump can essentially throw people off because he knows how to give the media the run around by being a reality star.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Sad day for America.
Art is life itself.
Whatever.
Has anyone mentioned Trump's pick for the EPA or do I get to do it first? He's Scott Pruitt, and he's been in the pocket of the fossil fuel industry for a while. [link]
For someone who ran partially on a campaign of being so rich that he can't be bought, Trump's cabinet has a disturbing number of corrupt lobbyists.
To be fair, the millionaires probably aren't much better. I hope y'all like trickle down economics. [link]
Art is life itself.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Merry Christmas, we're all getting stress ulcers and an updated Doomsday Clock.
[link]
Semi-related: the Trump campaign crew are all such nice people. [That's sarcasm.]
Art is life itself.
I mean, Yeah. I'm pretty sure at this point we're singing to the choir here. While the posters here have a wide array of beliefs, I feel the majority of posters left on the debate forum are not looking forward to a Trump presidency. I'm not sure who here wants to debate promoting nuclear proliferation and/or modernization (the of which, I'd like to point out, was something President Obama began).
Also, should the $#!† Trump is going to do just be an entirely new thread? The election itself is over, over. It ended on Monday with the Electoral College.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
Go vote for your master slaves... Wait wrong master... Russians hacked LOL!!!!!!!!!! Russia Russia Russia, Fake news, lalalalalaa don't have an argument.... lalalala Racist, Xenophobe, Sexist.
You are a Joke!!!!
Go Anarchism!!!!
Legacy: Dark Depths, Pox, Eldrazi Agro
Vintage: Dark Depths, Grey Orge
Pauper: Faerie Ninja
7pt Highlander: BW Combo
EDH: Horobi, (t)Toshiro, (t)Isamaru
I never knew the word for this until recent events: echo chamber.
That was the best part of the whole election - the revelation of many.
My Buying Thread
This is probably a point for its own thread, but the theoretical world-wide extreme of nuclear proliferation feels very similar to world-wide anarcho-capitalism taken to its logical extreme.
But for that portion of the electorate, I fear the revelation has only just begun. Then there are the people who will continue to sing Trump's praises no matter what the man does. I fear no revelation will ever reach them.
And what revelation is that?
I don't that's a helpful attitude you are expressing there.
As far as being concerned with critical thinking, being very dismissive of large swathes of opposing points of view, especially when focused on the people, is not a very consistent thing to do.
We can be a little more open minded here.
Being very dismissive will only help validate these opinions after all, that's part of how we got here. And I'd say the same issue can help explain why so many people were as surprised as they were by this result.
I agree.
And I think what is necessary is to work across a more fundamental divide that transcends specific points, a divide in what information people look at, what language people use in talking about these issues, what basic principles they are working from.
We have more access to information than ever, and increasingly so. But people, in general, are fairly apathetic and lazy compared to the true depth of what we are dealing with.
We need to drive more engagement in detailed analysis that considers many perspectives, rather than engagement in emotional rhetoric and shallow, attention grabbing articles. It's not an issue that applies to some of us- almost everyone could do better.
I think that's the biggest lesson from all of this, and I think YamahaR1 was getting at this same sort of idea.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
I believe social media, mainstream media, television and the internet do a very good job of silencing opinions they don't like. This leads people to believe that everyone (the overwhelming majority) thinks the same - that everyone is on the same page. On the night of the election, you could see just how shocked every news anchor (and comedians like Trevor Noah) were. I think the same of this forum - if you drive out everyone potentially guilty of wrongthink, you've only tricked yourself. I also believe (per another thread) that hitting people with the racist or bigot stick on every topic or repeatedly demonizing white people simply shuts down the conversation. In this very thread alone there's many negative comments demonizing white people - that's acceptable racism.
My Buying Thread