I was reading Heather Cox Richardson's post this morning and the song "Joshua fit the battle of Jericho, Jericho, Jericho.. Joshua fit the battle of Jericho and the walls came tumbling down" Historical note.. looked it up after that " "Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho" is a well-known African-American spiritual. The song is believed to have been composed by slaves in the first half of the 19th century. Some references suggest that it was copyrighted by Jay Roberts in 1865. In 1882, the song was published in Jubilee Songs by M."
Well T and company lost. A federal judge has sided with Bolton
A federal judge on Saturday denied the Trump administration an emergency temporary restraining order to block the release of former national security advisor John Bolton’s book, "The Room Where It Happened."
The big picture: Copies of the book already leaked to a number of media outlets and its biggest claims have been widely published, including Bolton's allegation that President Trump asked Chinese President Xi Jinping to increase agricultural purchases from the U.S. in order to improve his electoral prospects in farm states.
Defendant Bolton has gambled with the national security of the United States. He has exposed his country to harm and himself to civil (and potentially criminal) liability. But these facts do not control the motion before the Court. The government has failed to establish that an injunction will prevent irreparable harm."
https://apple.news/Axdow3EmpRGyr9MNRCTzIvA
@tgraf66 I disagree respectfully. The EC reflects the popular vote to some extent. If the popular vote is big enough this time around, (And, I think it will be.) the EC will be just a formality as it usually is. The KEY is turnout. Democrats MUST turnout in record numbers. I think they will based on the explosion of protests the day after T's inauguration in every state in the country and abroad. AND the stunning mid-terms. One of Hillary's problems was that people believed that she had it in the bag to the extent that it wasn't all that important to VOTE. I don't know a single person this time around who will take this election for granted. In addition, Trump is losing numbers even among so-called Evangelical voters (Down 10 points). He's losing among Seniors in Florida. If those polls continue through to October, he's done.
Posted by: @seeker4
@tgraf66 I disagree respectfully. The EC reflects the popular vote to some extent. If the popular vote is big enough this time around, (And, I think it will be.) the EC will be just a formality as it usually is. The KEY is turnout. Democrats MUST turnout in record numbers. I think they will based on the explosion of protests the day after T's inauguration in every state in the country and abroad. AND the stunning mid-terms.
The popular vote was big enough last time, and we still got what we have. Formality or not, there are a few issues with the EC, as I'm sure you're aware. First, it's outdated, outmoded, and paternalistic and needs to be abolished or *heavily* modified. The second problem is gerrymandered districting that keeps many states from being as blue as they could/should be. Even record blue turnouts in such districts are not likely to make much difference since they are, by design, red districts.
The third, related to the second, is that most states still use the "winner take all" model to allocate EC votes, so all that's needed for the R's in those states is to win the majority in the gerrymandered districts, and the whole state goes red regardless of the true will of the people in those states. While this can be beneficial for both sides in any election, it's still not equitable. I'm certain that there are R districts in the heavily blue states like CA and NY that are just as disenfranchised as the D's are in red states.
Unfortunately, there's little that can be done about the first two problems. Solving the first will require a Constitutional amendment or convention, but for now we have what we have, and we have to deal with it. Any solution to the second is hampered by state-controlled districting, although some small progress has been made in that area. North Carolina (and I think one or two others?) has been forced into more fair districts, so that will be a bit more of a battleground, but I'm not sure how much. Still, unless such redistricting is forced through in state-by-state court battles - or better yet, federalized by amendment - that's not going to change anytime soon, either.
With regard to the third problem, after the 2016 election, several states made non-binding coalition agreements to award all electoral votes to the winner of the overall popular votes in those states. The idea was that if they could get enough states to agree to this such that there were 270 EC votes tied up in them, they could essentially decide the election with just those states. I don't think they managed to get that many in the end, but if the states involved do hold to the agreements that were made, it will definitely be an improvement in terms of honoring the majority vote. However, I'm not a fan of disenfranchisement for anyone of any party, and doing it that way still lacks fairness.
Posted by: @seeker4
One of Hillary's problems was that people believed that she had it in the bag to the extent that it wasn't all that important to VOTE.
I would blame a lot of that on the mass media in 2016. The fact that a few major polls were heavily promoted across most news organizations in the six months before the election drilled home the view that Ms. Clinton would likely win. The media - deliberately or not - created cognitive bias by dismissing and/or ridiculing any polls that showed any possibility that the Orange One even had a chance, even though there were in fact polls saying that it was not only possible, but even likely. Now, in 2020, it's beginning to happen again with the over-promotion of a few polls touting Biden's rise and the Orange One's fall. Hope springs eternal, I suppose, but the definition of insanity still stands.
Posted by: @seeker4
I don't know a single person this time around who will take this election for granted.
Except for those who will again assume that there are enough intelligent people in the country to prevent it from happening again, as well as those who have already been and will continue to be victims of voter suppression, such as those in GA. In KY, the number of polling places has been reduced by nearly 95% from over 3700 to just over 200 for the entire registered voter population of over 3.5 million in the state.
Posted by: @seeker4
In addition, Trump is losing numbers even among so-called Evangelical voters (Down 10 points). He's losing among Seniors in Florida. If those polls continue through to October, he's done.
And you see, that's the problem. Polls are only as good as the honesty and integrity of the data behind them. There were many reports after 2016 that said that some if not many people who took part in the polls flat out lied in their responses, but the media is telling you that the polls say X! The polls say Y! The omnipotent, omniscient polls are sanctioned by us and therefore must be correct! Pfft. I mean no offense, but after the last four years, I'm not falling for that again.
I am - perhaps foolishly - still hopeful for the results, but there are still five more months before the showdown at the voting booth, and I will continue to tell people to ignore the polls and do their civic duty.
@tgraf66 I'm going to try to keep this short. If one uses a poll and believes it's a promise, that would be a mistake. Polls are indicators--moments in time, and they require interpretation and knowledge of the quality of different polling agencies. There are good ones, mediocre ones, and bad ones, but they make the news as if they are equal. Lumping all of them together as if they all equal the lowest common denominator really isn't fair. Further, the good polls account for "false responses". However, not wanting to follow any poll is a position I won't argue with. I am not arguing that you should by any means.
A couple of other points: Hillary's popular vote win wasn't enough by a long shot. Her biggest vote numbers were coming from specific areas and, therefore, not enough to effect the EC. She had very narrow losses in the battleground states. What I am saying now is that turnout needs to be so great that it overcomes the problems with the EC and the differences in how states select their delegates. If the turnout is great enough, it will overcome even gerrymandering enough to win. I know for a fact, that many who thought she had it in the bag, will definitely vote this time.
We totally agree about the EC. It is antiquated and needs to go.
In conclusion: I'm fine with anyone who doesn't want to follow polling as closely as I do, but my field was research so I wince at blanket statements that lump all polling groups into the lowest common denominator. Personally, I'm very interested in all of it: methodology (construction of survey questions), reliability, and on and on. That there is a ten point drop in White Evangelical Support for Trump is exciting to me. I'm aware that the poll captures a moment in time only. I'm not assuming that it will hold. I'm watching to see if it trends over time and across different polls. That poll suggests that their eyes might be opening regarding who Trump is. The question is: if judgeships look good again, will they continue to honor the Faustian deal they made. Or once their eyes are open, can they close them again?
May I serve you all a small plate of Schadenfreüde for Sunday brunch?
Rule #1 of Campaigning-FILL THE ROOM
Rule # 2 of Campaigning-FILL THE ROOM
@laura-f Rule No 3: After you only fill half of the room, lie about it.
#4 And if you say something self incriminating, just later tell people you were joking. Like you tell the country that you deliberately ordered a slowdown of covid testing, “When you do testing to that extent, you’re gonna find more people, you’re gonna find more cases. So I said to my people slow the testing down.” (Trump at Tulsa Rally)
The trump campaign just announced the next rally will be held at Chucky Cheese in Tupelo Mississippi. They are hoping for a sell out crowd!
He must be so mad from his embarrassment that his last tweet was 6hrs ago ?.
Someone wrote this:
These folks who ‘reserved’ the tickets for his rally yesterday, all they really did was get his hopes up for a million people to attend. Playing on his vanity.
Tickets didn’t reserve seats, they did nothing except help him collect phone numbers to beg from.
They did not take away seats from people who wanted to attend. Those people who showed up, that was it, total.
No one was kept from a seat by online ‘ticket reservations.’
He earned that crowd. And claiming lots of people were prevented from entering his big show by protesters, then why weren’t they still outside as his ‘overflow’ crowd?
When you only have a couple ounces of bullshit, you can only spread it so far....