A Deeply Fractured US

[QV]

He lost the last one. cue complaining about it not being legit even though nobody has been able to prove otherwise Even with the election he did win he still lost the popular vote.

Their system in it's current form is not auditable. There are too many factors with loose controls (mass mail-in-ballots, electronic systems, uncontrolled voter rolls, mass illegal immigration etc.) to be able to say one way or the other... this can only be by design and as a result it's not valid.

Other countries have much more tight election controls and have purposely stayed away from systems that can be manipulated more easily.

 

[MrWhyt]

this can only be by design and as a result it's not vali

so no election in the US has ever been legit? or just the one that Trump lost? If he wins this one how will you prove it's a legit win if the system is not auditable?

 

[Remius]

Remius show us all on your MPRR where you have the advanced mind reading qualification.

Don’t be daft. It doesn’t take that qual to know exactly how you think. You are many things but you are at least consistant in your world view.

As to who will be ok or not, win or lose, we are all likely to be less ok with either a Trudeau and/or Harris win.

See above as to why I just need a PLAR in regards to the mind reading qual. You’ll be ok if Trump loses just like I will be if he wins.

I surmise Trump's chances are greater then what is being offered in the MSM. One metric I base this on is the RCP Direction of Country poll over time. Here you can see that, on average, during Trumps reign of terror, more people felt things were going in right direction and less in wrong direction comparative to prior and current administrations.

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/state-of-the-union/direction-of-country

Except that was reflected in the polls at that time. You are saying that the polls are likely wider in Trumps favour now because a poll “back when” showed a higher favorability rating?

I don’t mind you thinking the polls may not be showing the full picture. I don’t completely disagree. How you get to that conclusion is a bit weird.

 

[QV]

Except that was reflected in the polls at that time. You are saying that the polls are likely wider in Trumps favour now because a poll “back when” showed a higher favorability rating?

I don’t mind you thinking the polls may not be showing the full picture. I don’t completely disagree. How you get to that conclusion is a bit weird.

I'm not saying "polls" are likely wider now. I'm saying the voter sentiment is wider then the current polls of Harris vs Trump suggest. The specific poll I showed is an actual measurement to the theme of "were you better off then or now" - right direction vs wrong direction, which I think is important.

They've had four years of Biden/DNC to contrast and it was on average worse for them than fours of Trump was. A lot of people voted for Biden because they thought it would be better. It wasn't, as that poll shows. Many of them will swing back.

 

[QV]

so no election in the US has ever been legit? or just the one that Trump lost? If he wins this one how will you prove it's a legit win if the system is not auditable?

That's a tougher question. I liken it to the "when did the news become so corrupt wrt politics" question. We only see it so blatantly now because we have social media and the internet, which allows for almost immediate "fact checking" such as producing the whole video, or the entire statement... but for how long has the nightly news been massaging the story for one reason or another before the internet came along?

If I had to guess, I'd say games started to be played with each new variable; electronic voting/tabulating, mass mail-in, etc. These are vulnerabilities that cannot be totally controlled. And by the time you take a look, it's too late.

If Trump wins this one, they just didn't manage to cheat quite enough to get them over the line (like 2016). They overshot in 2020 ('ol crooked Joe Biden getting more votes then the charismatic Obama did is laughable). 2024 will be interesting.

 

[MrWhyt]

If Trump wins this one, they just didn't manage to cheat quite enough to get them over the line (like 2016).

or he cheated enough to win, after all according to you there is no way to ensure the system is legitimate.

They overshot in 2020 ('ol crooked Joe Biden getting more votes then the charismatic Obama did is laughable). 2024 will be interesting.

more people voted in 2020 than in past elections, ergo more people voted for the winning candidate. Makes sense especially given who Biden was running against.

 

[brihard]

or he cheated enough to win, after all according to you there is no way to ensure the system is legitimate.



more people voted in 2020 than in past elections, ergo more people voted for the winning candidate. Makes sense especially given who Biden was running against.

QV’s just setting his preferred narrative up well in advance; he’s been at it for months. In his mind Trump cannot conceivably lose; therefore, if the Dems win narrowly it’s because they cheated. If they win by a relatively large margin it can only be because they cheated. That’s why he strains himself to drop ‘Margin of Cheating’ references every few weeks. Just tell the lie over and over and hope it sticks.

 

[MrWhyt]

In his mind Trump cannot conceivably lose

Well that makes sense, after all a man known for stiffing his contractors, cheating on every one of his wives, being twice impeached, convicted on 34 felony counts with prosecution on more to come, and who openly sucks up to and admires dictators would never cheat in an election. /sarcasm

 

[PuckChaser]

Despite the bickering here showing how deeply fractured the US is and that fracture migrating to Canada, this thread is getting locked up to stop the election spam from spilling over into other threads. If someone has something actually on topic that isn't about the US Election/usual political suspects then please report this post to moderator with your content so we can decide whether its worth opening up a moderation war on 2 fronts.

- Milnet.ca Staff

 

[KevinB]

Very discouraging

https://twitter.com/x/status/1933876250986111061

 

[brihard]

Very discouraging

https://twitter.com/x/status/1933876250986111061

Looks like both have been shot, probably as well as the spouse of at least one. Each were targeted in separate locations in the early morning. Both are state democrats, with Melissa Hortman being the party leader. Shooter was dressed at least somewhat like a cop. No consistent reporting on their condition.

Live updates: Brooklyn Park shelter-in-place after multiple shootings, suspect may be impersonating police | FOX 9 Minneapolis-St. Paul

A shelter-in-place alert was sent out at 5:30 a.m. Saturday morning by the Brooklyn Park Police Department after multiple shootings. A suspect in the shooting may be impersonating law enforcement and should not be approached.

www.fox9.com

If this happened at 2 am, it would have been a bit of time waking everyone up and getting them in in terms of bigger picture major investigation. FBI JTTF will almost certainly be at least hanging out close by in case this evolves to being a terrorism thing. Anyone on the lookout for” would have gone out ASAP, once they had info on what to look for (from witnesses, security cameras etc), but I could see there being delay there if the victims were unable to communicate.

Everyone will have been working balls to the wall for a few hours now.

Needless to say. Targeted shootings (murders?) of two separate state legislators is a huge deal. This is still very developing.

 

[Blackadder1916]

An update. So far, one of the couples are dead.

2 dead, 2 injured after state lawmakers and spouses shot, Minnesota gov says

Authorities are searching for a shooting suspect who dressed as a police officer and fled on foot, officials said.

www.usatoday.com

A Minnesota lawmaker and her husband were killed and another lawmaker and his wife were injured in what Gov. Tim Walz called a “politically motivated assassination.”

Authorities are continuing to search for a suspect who dressed as a police officer, exchanged gunfire with officers and fled, officials said at a Saturday morning news conference.

State Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband were shot and killed and State Sen. John Hoffman and his wife Yvette were shot and wounded in “targeted shootings” in Champlin and Brooklyn Park, two neighboring suburban cities 10 to 20 miles outside Minneapolis.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Were either victim involved in contentious political bills or anything?

 

[brihard]

GovI nor Tim Walz just gave a press conference:

• State Senator John Hoffman and his wife were both shot at around 2 am and are expected to survive.
• At around 3:35 am, police were proactive checking in State Representative Melissa Hortman. As they were on scene, police exchanged fire with a suspect. The suspect escaped. Hortman and her husband Mark were both shot and killed. My inference is that police must have arrived just as the murder was happening.
• Police found a vehicle dressed up as a fake police vehicle. In it they found a manifesto containing a list of targets.
• An active manhunt is underway and police have the identify of the suspect but are not yet releasing it.
• Governor Walz called this a “politically motivated assassination.”

Obviously there’s immediately speculation about party affiliation, voting records, suspect ideology, etc, but police have a manifesto so I won’t bother repeating and speculating. That’ll come out before too long.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Obviously there’s immediately speculation about party affiliation, voting records, suspect ideology, etc, but police have a manifesto so I won’t bother repeating and speculating. That’ll come out before too long.

Any idea why the police wouldn't release the identity of the shooter considering he's armed and in the public?

 

[McG]

Partisans (including those elected into office) have been hyperbolically accusing their opponents of being threats to the nation & enemies of the nation at an increasing rate for years. This has had the dual effects of diluting the significance of such allegations when made legitimately and of increasing the level of hostility within society. This is not unique to the US, but the country has certainly gotten itself to a boiling point.

 

[brihard]

Any idea why the police wouldn't release the identity of the shooter considering he's armed and in the public?

They’re working an active manhunt, I’m not going to send guess their decisions on what to release. They did release a description, which really is a lot more meaningful than a name at this stage. In the background there’s a ton of investigation happening, digging into his background, capturing his social media, stuff like that. As soon as a name comes out a lot of web presence starts getting scrubbed and that can be a hassle. He may live with people who are as of yet totally unaware of this, and police will want a clean house to hit with a search warrant. Lots of reasons to hold that back in the initial hours.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Any idea why the police wouldn't release the identity of the shooter considering he's armed and in the public?

They might be unsure about the true identity of the guy until they actually kill or capture him.

 

[brihard]

They might be unsure about the true identity of the guy until they actually kill or capture him.

He’s already shot it out with cops once. For my money, he’s gonna end up taking the Ambient Temperature Challenge.

 

[Blackadder1916]

As much as many will immediately associate a rise in political violence with the attitudes, pronouncements and general antics of the current US administration, perhaps discussion of this latest incident should be moved to a separate thread or to an existing "general terrorism" thread. There is enough happening in the world that can be directly linked to the Trump administration to fill many more pages here.