• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

On Deck: 2022



Oh just publicly plotting to steal elections and getting cheers.
 
Guy who predicted sad tale of Trump election says blue tsunami upcoming. Yup... Michael Moore was very fearful of rural and suburban voters helping to put Trump in the White House. He was *sigh* correct. But this year, which is one of the odder mid-term election years due to conflicting economic signals and a Dobbs SCOTUS decision that led to a 3 to 2 abortion win in Kansas, is in my impression much harder to predict than normal. Polling has been slow to show powerful incumbents reaching the 50+% we know they'll get. It shows close races in North Carolina, but also Nevada? Red wave... but the Georgia senate race is too close to call? And with mid-terms, we know turnout is usually lower than usual. That last part is one reason Democrats suffer a bit in mid-terms (ignore 2006), especially if they have the White House.

But the polls have a problem this year mainly with Dobbs. See, if this were a General Election, it is very possible the polls could be on, but with this being a mid-term election, women turnout is likely going to be under estimated.

You listen to alt-right radio, they swear this is a fait accompli for the GOP. They think Colorado and Arizona are in play (why not Washington?). The polling doesn't support their claims. It seems impossible to think that Georgia is too close... that North Carolina will be within 5 pts, and there is a red wave. So either the polling is way off in the GOP favor or the polling is conflicted. And I've been warning for a bit that polling was going to be impossible this year post-Dobbs.

So Michael Moore who was right on Trump is hopefully right about the dismantling of the GOP. Granted, a Blue wave means gaining a couple Senate seats and a handful of House seats. Though, perhaps the bigger picture in all of this is actually the State Legislatures. But I don't know if this wave would carry that far down the ticket. Granted, the alt-right fascist cancer is quite devastating down there.

The truth is, we don't know how this will unfold. I think there are narratives to support a red wave (economics and fascism), blue wave (anti-SCOTUS Dobbs ruling and women finally wake up), middle (fucking America can't make up its mind). Time will tell if Moore is right. I remember Zogby having a great election and then blowing it in 2004 and getting rendered mute from there.
 
A poll to toss on the heap of "Well, that explained the blue wave".
article said:
About two-thirds of Democrats and half of independents cited the Supreme Court’s decision as a motivator for voting, as did a third of Republicans.

Among that same group, 76 percent of respondents said they plan on voting for candidates who want to protect access to abortion, compared to 17 percent who said they plan on voting for candidates who want to limit abortion access.
Click to expand...
That is about 5 to 1. And in a vacuum, it seems like one data point. After Kansas, it could explain a massive blue tsunami. This wildcard is the wildest card in election politics, possibly ever. Politics has a tendency of having huge issues normalizing after time. For women, however, they are reminded every month about the significance of Dobbs.

What happens on Election Day comes down to this:
article said:
Overall, 44 percent of women voters under age 50 said they are more motivated to vote in November than in previous elections. About 59 percent of women ages 18 to 49 said the Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade has made them more motivated to vote.
Click to expand...
How many more women show up than typically do in a mid-term. And what is that number relative to additional turnout for men. Women generally edge towards the Democrats. Women voting to support abortion rights would heavily skew towards Democrats. And if they are disproportionately turning out in higher numbers relative to men, Election Night could be what we were hoping expecting 2016 was... and not what it became.

On alt-right AM radio, they are unbelievably certain as to the crimson (well red, the listeners wouldn't know what the word crimson meant) wave. At least, that is how they are talking, perhaps getting the insurrection engine running for 2024, because internal polls are frightening the hell out of the alt-right and GOP (perhaps another reason why the GOP is desperate to support Walker).
 
Michael Moore called Trump's election correctly when all the pollsters were telling us Hillary Clinton would win. Now that the pollsters tell us the GOP wil retakes the House, Moore is predicting angry women will keep the House in Democratic hands. And the Senate. I hope he is right.

I just recieved my official vote by mail ballot request form and I am mailing it off today.
 
 
THE PERSUADERS by Anand Giridharadas on Twitter: "Maybe it’s me, but I don’t think political parties should communicate like passive-aggressive exes. ..." / Twitter
Maybe it’s me, but I don’t think political parties should communicate like passive-aggressive exes.

What may well work for fundraising is simultaneously turning people off.

Beating fascism is going to require a messaging renaissance on the left.

I don’t want to be guilt-tripped about what I’m not doing for you (I can’t donate anyway). I want to hear the extraordinary, thrilling vision of the country you’re going to have the backbone to usher in if you win.

When is the last time one of these emails invited you to a stirring communal event in your area? Or shared a song with you? Or made an inspiring case for an idea that you hadn’t thought of? Or offered a brilliant video teaching you how to defang disinformation from relatives?

The stakes are too high for the pro-democracy side to be constantly annoying its own base with emails.

There are experts like @anatosaurus who have proven better methods. Study them.
Click to expand...
Anat Shenker-Osorio's Twitter username is anatosaurus -- I like that.
 
Anand Giridharadas inlined a picture of
Joe Biden emailed you.
Barack Obama emailed you.
Hillary Clinton emailed you.
Amy Klobuchar emailed you.
Jamie Raskin emailed you.
JB Pritzker emailed you.
Raphael Warnock emailed you.
John Fetterman emailed you.
Tim Ryan emailed you.
SO many top Democrats emailed you asking you to help elect state Democrats, but we don't see your name on our September donor list?
Click to expand...

Crow on Twitter: "@AnandWrites This was E.Warren's most recent email. This is how it's done. (pic link)" / Twitter
Sen. Elizabeth Warren
From the bottom of my heart, I'm deeply grateful for everyone who pitched in to help hit our September goal.

also know not everyone can always make a donation, and there are so many ways to be in this fight from making calls and knocking on doors to getting the word out to your family and friends. It all adds up, and I appreciate everything you can do.

Person to person, one conversation and one contribution at a time, we're growing our grassroots movement. We're getting ready to protect and expand our Democratic majorities. We're fighting to elect champions for working people up and down the ballot.

And side by side, we'll keep fighting for bold reforms that touch people's lives and put power in the hands of working people.

It's only possible because of supporters like you. And it is an honor to fight by your side.

Thanks for being a part of this,
Click to expand...

Here's a place to do research:
Archive of Political Emails
 
I like these responses:

Mark Coatney on Twitter: "@AnandWrites I subscribe to dozens of these, both Dem and GOP, and I have never, ever, received one that asked me for anything but money. Which pretty much shows me how they view constituents" / Twitter
The main exception seems to be AOC.

Lalura☮️ K💃A💃N💃S💃A💃S 🌊💚 on Twitter: "@mcoatney @AnandWrites I responded to an email that I would be happy to WORK on a campaign and all I ever get back is requests for money.
YO DNC-THOSE EMAILS ARE tRUMPY!" / Twitter
Good call. If one can work on a campaign, then why not?

Good Trouble on Twitter: "@mcoatney @AnandWrites "We let Roe v Wade be destroyed despite having advanced warning and the ability to code it into law. But with your $20 we could do it in [Enter election year here]."" / Twitter
That's an annoying thing about the Democratic leadership's response to the Supreme Court revoking Roe vs. Wade. It asked for funds, and apparently didn't even say that with enough Democrats, they could codify RvW into law.

jared justice on Twitter: "@GoodTroublers @mcoatney @AnandWrites Also, the phrase that comes up EVERY single time- “this is the most important election of our lives!”" / Twitter

Darcy DiNucci on Twitter: "@AnandWrites Same reason I stopped subscribing to The Nation. They sent us a “we thought you cared, guess not” subscription letter and I was “nope.”" / Twitter

Dark Corbu on Twitter: "@AnandWrites Not sure which dem umbrella org this is but I quit giving to all of them after they propped up Henry forced-birth cuellar in the primaries. I pick individual candidates and give to them now." / Twitter
Good idea.
 
@Derec; — You've had over a week to respond. Or to retract your ignorant assertions.

Did you miss this refutation?

Swammerdami said:
Derec said:
The rioters that invaded the Capitol were relatively small in number too. Far fewer than the numbers of 2020 rioters.
I am sure that, had Trump won in 2020, there would have been similar rioting to January 6th.
Click to expand...

This is either very disingenuous or else very stupid. Was there rioting similar to J6 when Trump won in 2016? Or when Bush won in 2000? How many Democratic Governors or Congressmen have actively supported sedition or insurrection?

No. There are no counterparts on the left TODAY comparable to the Oath Keepers, MTG, and other scumbags who commit insurrection. Times change; 50 years or 100 years ago the outlook might have been different. But this discussion is about TODAY.

The whine "Same-same" when the crimes of Trump-suckers and other Trump enablers are detailed exposes the whiner as useless and uninformed. Especially confused or stupid are the Trumpists and Trump enablers who reach back to the 1970's to find examples of leftists to compare with TODAY's Neo-Nazis, Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, etc. Times change.


Derec writes of "Your side." To be compared with "Derec's side"? Let's see:

Derec said:
Your side loves to harp on things like the Tulsa Massacre of 1920.
Click to expand...

Apparently you're unaware that the Board has a Search function. It quickly disposes of this whine. Here are the two most recent mentions of "Tulsa":
(Neither seems like a "harping;" perhaps Derec can point to the "harping" posts if these aren't they.)

Jimmy Higgins said:
Oblivious to US History, former President Donald Trump suggests, on the Hugh Hewitt Show, that an indictment against him could lead to "problems in this country the likes of which perhaps we’ve never seen before."

Civil War, backlashes against Unions, Nat Turner [Slave] Revolt, Shay's Rebellion, Kent State, Harper's Ferry, Bleeding Kansas, Tulsa Race Riots...

...we've seen violence in this country before. Just not because of a orange painted baboon. January 6th was unprecedented not because people died.
Click to expand...

Nat Turner's Slave Revolt and the Tulsa Massacre had opposite racial alignment, and opposite civil stance: Tulsans wanted to destroy black property, while Nat Turner wanted to regain possession of his own person.

Ergo Mr. Higgins's examples were not of the "Me Good, You Bad" ilk we see from the anti-rationalists. Given this, it might be amusing to hear how Derec defines "Your side."

The other recent post mentioning Tulsa was by Swammi myself. But it was NOT used as accusation against present-day insurrectionists. It was in a thread discussing how a new Civil War might play out. There is a real possibility that incidents similar to the Tulsa Massacre might play out concurrently in multiple cities. My intent was to give a possible model for massive violence in America. While sapient Americans realize that the larger threat TODAY comes from "the Right," note that the model is workable whether blacks take up arms against whites, or vice versa, or both.

Swammerdami said:
Consider the Tulsa Massacre of 1921, where white lynch mobs operated with the help of city officials. Do you think such a thing cannot happen again?
. . .
But the Trumpist mobs will mostly target blacks and obvious "foreigners", e.g. Muslims. Not only will these victims be easy to identify — and overwhelmingly vote for "Bidenist Fascism" — but white Bidenists will offer less resistance if they are not personally targeted.
. . .
Prominent white liberals will get death threats, as well as FBI agents, etc. whose names Trump maliciously leaks to his soldiers. Anyone with Biden bumper-stickers or who is otherwise an obvious "liberal" will be in fear. But the majority of violence will be directed at blacks and certain immigrant groups. The Trumpists won't seek large-scale genocide; they'll be satisfied with the certainty of political hegemony. Don't forget that if ONLY whites could vote, the Trumpists would win every election in a landslide.

I HOPE I'm wrong about all this, but the danger is very real. Hatred, ignorance and lying have been common throughout history, but the amplification of hatred and lies by social media and malicious magnates like Rupert Murdoch is something new. The future will be very bleak even if civil war is averted.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Swammerdami said:
Swammerdami said:
...
Derec writes of "Your side." To be compared with "Derec's side"? Let's see:

Derec said:
Your side loves to harp on things like the Tulsa Massacre of 1920.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Wait a sec...

So, if the Tulsa Massacre happened on "our side" or whatever, doesn't that mean it was perpetrated by "Derec's side"?

And wouldn't that make "Derec's side"... You know... The ones massacring black folks for being black?

And you make a good point of "doth protest too much".

Just mentioning it because Derec brought it up...
 
THE PERSUADERS by Anand Giridharadas on Twitter: "When is the last time one of these emails invited you to a stirring communal event in your area? Or shared a song with you? Or made an inspiring case for an idea that you hadn’t thought of? Or offered a brilliant video teaching you how to defang disinformation from relatives?" / Twitter

So I compared Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez - Archive of Political Emails and Nancy Pelosi - Archive of Political Emails

NP did nothing but fundraising, and while AOC did some, she had messages like
That last one:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "I find the whole idea of treating an email list like a scammy ATM gross. Communication should be respected and valued.
The avg contribution to my campaign is ~$16. That’s a serious responsibility, so even if ppl can’t donate it’s my goal for them to still benefit from our emails" / Twitter
While this shouldn’t set us apart, our team is committed to treating you and your fellow supporters with respect, which is why we follow — what we think are! — pretty basic rules:
  • NO panicky subject lines, fear mongering, fake donor matches, clickbait petitions, or basically any tactic that makes you want to hit the “report spam” button.
  • YES to sharing volunteer opportunities and emergency funds, supporting up-and-coming progressive candidates, providing informative content, sending out real petitions with real targets, and (only when we need it) respectfully asking for your donation.
Too many politicians and organizations see their grassroots supporters as an ATM machine. They use scare tactics, guilt and shame, and downright misleading language to coax people into donating.

Team AOC is determined to rise above that and treat you and our other grassroots supporters with respect, but just like all the other campaigns in your inbox, we do have fundraising goals.

And in an election year like this year’s, hitting our fundraising targets means that we’re able to support other progressive candidates running for local and higher office, as well as keep Alexandria in Congress speaking truth to power.

So, would you be able to match our average contribution of $16 — or whatever you can afford — right now as we head into the last 34 days before the midterm elections?
Click to expand...
Her campaign doesn't quite follow those rules, it seems to me, but her e-mail list has lots of nice stuff in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom