RationalWiki talk:What is going on with the elections?

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

What is going on?

(talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic)

Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>, <3>, (new)



What is it with this McCrae Dowless guy?[edit]

This is the third time he's tried to rig an election in the past four years! — Unsigned, by: Thefantodayhtml5 / talk / contribs

The bill letting the Arizona legislature change their election results[edit]

What in the goddamn fuck? Is that even legal? If so, why, and how could anyone justify that? Fuck me dead. ๐Ÿ’ A S E L A แž“แžทแž™แžถแž™ ๐Ÿ’ 18:04, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about it; Dems now control most of Arizona's state govt. at this point, this bill won't go very far methinks. If anything, I think it's good that after joining tRump in pissing on John McCain's grave and censuring his wife and their governor, this will be the final nail in the coffin for Arizona's GOP chapter. --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularREmail2.gifasoningSee what I've been messing around with 18:41, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
I donโ€™t kno much about Arizona but what mostly concerns me is, could any/every other state with a GOP government also do this?? ๐Ÿ’ A S E L A แž“แžทแž™แžถแž™ ๐Ÿ’ 18:46, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Probably, this new precedent set by the AZ Reps is quite disturbing (especially given the fears of gerrymandering to keep Texas reliably red as much as possible by disenfranchising hispanics, Austiners and blacks for example), but in places like Georgia and Michigan it would also just give the Dems ammunition to use against them methinks. --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularREmail2.gifasoningSee what I've been messing around with 18:51, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Ducey would likely veto such a measure anyways. There are worse republicans than him-Hastur! (talk) 18:53, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
I hear they even censured Ducey for not being right-wing enough. --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularREmail2.gifasoningSee what I've been messing around with 19:04, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Ducey and John McCain's widow. And Jon Kyl, too. Very curious to see how the next elections play out. Particularly the primaries-Hastur! (talk) 19:06, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
It's essentially now guaranteed for the dems, thanks to the Arizona GOP's infighting and self-immolating censurings. And since it seems Ducey won't run against the recently elected Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) in the midterms, I don't see Kelly losing either, especially thanks to shit like this bill he can use against the Reps. --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularREmail2.gifasoningSee what I've been messing around with 08:32, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Sidney "Kraken" Powell tries to get the defamation suit against her thrown out[edit]

Sounds like she's taking a page right out of Tucker Carlson's book here. Honestly wouldn't be too surprised if this works for her;Hope it doesn't though. PhoxyDude (talk) 00:51, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Her defense boils down to - "I was lying and everyone knew I was lying". Ace://about blank 01:21, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
"But me" Thats a key part of the defense, to get around the actual malice clause in defamation. Revolverman (talk) 20:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Don't give the Cyber Punks Ninjas too much credit[edit]

I've found 3 sources from across the political spectrum (one of which might be paywalled) that say that elections experts say that the crank Cyber Ninja auditors made up their numbers. I know it's unlikely to change the results of the election, but from a statistical perspective, their number should be taken with a grain of salt, at best. They should not be given too much credit, or it may set a precedent for more bullshit partisan election audits in the future, even in the face of bipartisan opposition. G Man (talk) 22:29, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Anyway, I just wanted to include this disclaimer so y'all won't think this is another case of wandalism. XD G Man (talk) 22:38, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
For soft paywalls like some prominent online newspapers, article pages can be read through https://archive.is.
Anyway, yeah, the whole thing was discussed earlier in the Saloon Bar and the whole audit seemed like something of a joke, apart from being a waste of money. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 22:49, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

New Sabato predictions for 2022[edit]

Sabato released new predictions following 2021 elections. NV, AZ, GA and PA are tossups. NH is still lean blue (?) and Colorado is likely blue. NC is lean red, while FL, OH and MO are likely red. Everything else is solid. As such, Republicans are projected to have 49, Democrats 47, and two tossups. Republicans need to win just two of them to have a majority, Dems need 3.

For governor, we now have AZ, GA, KS, PA and WI. ME, MI, OR, NV are likely blue, as is MD which will be a pickup. CO, NM, IL, MN, NY, CT, and RI are likely blue, and HI as well as CA (I guess due to the failed recall) are solid blue. NH is lean red (I guess if Sununu retires), while TX, IA, AK, FL, MA, VT and OH are likely red. AR, AL, TN, SC, SD, NE, OK, ID and WY are solid red. Keep in mind VA and NJ already happened.

As for the House of Reps, using the data we have, it currently shows that for the new districts, AK will be likely Republican, DE is safe Democrat (fun fact - they actually flipped in the 2010 red wave to blue. Huh.), AR-01, AR-02, AR-03, and AR-04 as safe Republican, as is IN-02, IN-03, IN-04, IN-05, IN-06, IN-08 and IN-09. IN-01 is likely Democrat and IN-07 is safe Democrat. ME-02 is a tossup but ME-01 is safe Democrat. ND, SD and WY are safe Republican (but keep an eye on the primary in the latter). NE-01 and NE-03 are safe Republican and with gerrymandering, NE-02 is now lean Republican. OR-02 is safe Republican, with OR-04, OR-05 and OR-06 as likely Democrat and OR-01 and OR-03 as safe Democrat. Also, VT is safe Democrat. --American time change coming up November 7, Andrew5 (talk) 14:39, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Huh?[edit]

What happened? My post on the Barbados election at first was +5, but now is -105. Is there a glitch? Or did 110 people dislike my post? I might post this to RW:TS if it gets no replies here. --Andrew5 (talk) 20:02, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Could it be that at some point in the past someone used the wrong poll number? So these votes reflect what happened then? Queexchthonic murmurings 20:06, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Very strange indeed. I just did a quick search for the poll number on the page - it is only used once there, so if it is a duplicate then that is in the archives.Aloysius the Gaul (talk) 21:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
maybe you all hate barbados? racists. AMassiveGay (talk) 21:24, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
I checked the 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020 archves and it's not there. And generally polls don't get over 120 votes. Maybe it's sockpuppetry? --Andrew5 (talk) 21:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Now it's -107...--Andrew5 (talk) 22:10, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Hmm, it might be sockpuppetry, but not related to the Barbados story specifically. The story about Alabama's gerrymandered congressional map getting blocked has 73 downvotes and is -37 overall. The Barbados story is up to 163 downvotes and is -130 overall as of this comment. The stories still have the usual 20-40 upvotes a normal link would get. Why it's only being done with election news and not the other WIGO pages, I don't know. But it is enough to bother me, and I don't usually comment on [what seems like] trivial stuff like this.--GVOLTT (talk) 10:21, 28 January 2022 (UTC)