McConnell urges GOP senators not to object to Electoral College vote - The Hill

a reply to: Astyanax

Well said.

Yeah, the timing is what attracted my eye.

How do you figure this squares with him needing to pick up at least one seat in GA?

There's already been rumblings from Trump to punish Perdue and Loeffler.

a reply to: DanDanDat

Haven't you heard?

Apparently there's been a massive conspiracy underway including everyone from Bill Barr to the Supreme Court to the DOJ to the FBI to Brian "Thank you Mr. Trump may I have another" Kemp to steal the election from Trump's landslide win.

Everyone that doesn't try to help Trump Stop the Steal is Deep State. According to some at least.

Myself? You can say whatever you like about McConnell and I've said most of it ... he's a cagy old coot. He picked his time exactly to do this.

I'm just wondering why it was the best time.

a reply to: Gryphon66

You saying Mitch is playing 4D chess while the President is playing 1D tic-tac-toe?

a reply to: Boadicea

Have to disagree with you again Bo. There are no lessons to be learned here.

Here's my logic: Trump has become (except when he was useful for judicial appointments and distraction) a "unifying force" between establishment Democrats and Republicans. Keep in mind that I know they're all psychopaths and that there are not two "teams."

All we have seen thus far (and all we ever see) is bread-and-circuses ... a dumb-show to distract and divide us.

The net effect of Trump, however, along with splitting us off from Europe and NATO, keeping the economy on the same trend-lines that they designed during the Obama Administration ... is basically a shuffling of the characters.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Gryphon66

You saying Mitch is playing 4D chess while the President is playing 1D tic-tac-toe?

In my own estimation of the two men's abilities, I would not disagree with that analogy.

a reply to: Gryphon66

All we have seen thus far (and all we ever see) is bread-and-circuses ... a dumb-show to distract and divide us.

You've made several good points, and make a good point overall. I fully agree that all we've seen is bread-and-circuses and I'll add behind smoke and mirrors...

But that's because every effort to determine the truth of the matter has been hindered, thwarted, and obstructed every step of the way. We have been told ten ways from Sunday to STFU and that we don't have a right to the truth. Whereas you seem to think this is okay because there was nothing to investigate to begin with, I think ONLY a proper investigation can tell us that.

Maybe it's my own pride and ego, but hell would freeze over before I would take office under such conditions. I would be demanding a thorough and in-depth audit with full transparency if for no other reason than to prove every damn lying liar to be the lying liars they are. And then I would rub their noses in it every freaking day of my presidency (and probably beyond!). I would make sure the whole damn world knew they were willfully undermining a fair and honest election -- and therefore our nation -- for their personal gain.

I said from the start we need to let the process play out. It is. And how it is playing out is just as instructive and telling in some ways as a proper investigation and examination of poll records. They've made their beds.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I'm just as disappointed as anyone else.

I just gave up on him before other people.

We'll have to find someone else to carry out our wishes, he didn't make the cut.

a reply to: Boadicea

We disagree on that issue, but, given that ... what further should have been done than allowing those who feel like there have been almost innumerable cases of fraudulent activity regarding the election and vote counting to bring those cases in courts of law with all the evidence of their claims laid out?

What other way to we have to officially arbitrate the facts beside our judicial system?

a reply to: Gryphon66

What other way to we have to officially arbitrate the facts beside our judicial system?

That's a very good question. Perhaps more important, should election integrity even be subject to arbitration? It seems to me that there should be no need for arbitration. There should be a way to track and identify each and every vote, and therefore there should be no doubt to even arbitrate. Either the numbers are right or they are wrong, and we should be able to easily determine that, with full transparency.

As long as a court can choose whether or not they want to take the case, there is no guarantee that evidence will be introduced, examined, and arbitrated. As long as the people have no standing in court, we have to rely on (partisan) candidates to be able to protect/defend their candidacy, in their best political interests -- rather than our best interests. We do not have this now. Too many people do not trust the elections, too many people do not trust their elected representatives, too many people do not trust law enforcement, too many people do not trust the courts.

We have a crisis of confidence.

a reply to: Boadicea

I absolutely agree.

There is no reason given current technology capabilities that we cannot create a cohesive and comprehensive voting system that could include all legitimate voters.

The issue with that is that the Constitution reserves to each State the absolute right to conduct their own elections according to their own laws, with the only exception being that Americans cannot be denied the right to vote for certain arbitrary reasons (race, religion, sex, etc.) as those are nationally protected classes.

I have to approach the question at two different levels, Bo. If I set my mind to accept any baseline consensus reality, I have to believe that our court systems are the best and most equitable way we've designed to balance out political differences with provable facts. (Yes, I know the judciary is also political, that's another aspect of the issue.)

However, the other level, the more realistic level, is that I know that the choices we are given at the level of "consensus reality" aren't real, but is a constructed "alternate reality" that pacifies the greater portion of the population into resonnating betwen anxiety and apathy. Thats' politics. That's the economy. That's entertainment.

A false dichotomy is offered, we are focused onto one of two teams, we do their work for them.

But I digress. Yes, there is no reason we shouldn't expect a fully auditable and secure voting system in this country.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
It just seems like a very bold move for McConnell.

Nah, it's called a last ditch attempt at self preservation...

Because he knows he is on the list of traitors soon to be exposed.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Gryphon66
It just seems like a very bold move for McConnell.

Nah, it's called a last ditch attempt at self preservation...

Because he knows he is on the list of traitors soon to be exposed.

You might be right.

However, there's zero indication that any of these fantasies about military tribunals/civil war/etc. will occur.

It does demonstrate quite clearly who the core authoritarians are. Didn't get your way; burn the place down.

Thankfully that's not going to happen.

a reply to: Gryphon66

However, the other level, the more realistic level, is that I know that the choices we are given at the level of "consensus reality" aren't real, but is a constructed "alternate reality" that pacifies the greater portion of the population into resonnating betwen anxiety and apathy. Thats' politics. That's the economy. That's entertainment. A false dichotomy is offered, we are focused onto one of two teams, we do their work for them.

Well... damn!

I need to think on this for a while.

a reply to: Gryphon66

How do you figure this squares with him needing to pick up at least one seat in GA?

There's already been rumblings from Trump to punish Perdue and Loeffler.

I think you answered the question yourself. This is to encourage Republicans to come back to the fold. With 'Trash the GOP' trending, he doesn't have much choice. Hardcore Trump fans are a liability to the caucus, not an asset any more. Most of them probably won't even vote.

It's not risk-free but I reckon he's playing the odds.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: DanDanDat

Haven't you heard?

Apparently there's been a massive conspiracy underway including everyone from Bill Barr to the Supreme Court to the DOJ to the FBI to Brian "Thank you Mr. Trump may I have another" Kemp to steal the election from Trump's landslide win.

Everyone that doesn't try to help Trump Stop the Steal is Deep State. According to some at least.

Myself? You can say whatever you like about McConnell and I've said most of it ... he's a cagy old coot. He picked his time exactly to do this.

I'm just wondering why it was the best time.

I don't see what is so remarkable about the time he chose to though his support behind Biden.

McConnell has never supported Trump (rightly or wrongly) and instead has used Trump to deflect from his own do nothing (except for himself) Senate leadership. To him it doesn't mater who is President Trump or Biden; its all the same. So it's not remarkable that he would support Biden at this time after all the challenges are over and the potential for him having picked the wrong side has passed.

a reply to: Astyanax

Perhaps.

I've seen a lot of articles from non-politicians who are ready to bring the Republican Party back to it's ideological foundations. Actual conservatism rather than the media-driven glorification of division.

Core principles like limited government, support for small and local business, constitutional civil rights, etc.

We will see.

a reply to: DanDanDat

McConnell is a numbers guy.

He needs at least one Republican Senator for GA.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: DanDanDat

McConnell is a numbers guy.

He needs at least one Republican Senator for GA.

He knows he'll get two

a reply to: DanDanDat

Not if pelosi has her way she wont.

originally posted by: DanDanDat

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: DanDanDat

McConnell is a numbers guy.

He needs at least one Republican Senator for GA.

He knows he'll get two

Maybe not. There's a record number of early voters and absentee voting already.