#US_Election | Logs for 2020-12-10

« return
[00:54:07] -!- c0lo has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
[01:12:31] -!- c0lo [c0lo!~9f99d30a@159.153.yqr.yr] has joined #US_Election
[02:07:00] <c0lo> "They most certainly cannot be the basis for upending Arizona’s 2020 General Election. The Court is left with no alternative but to dismiss this matter in its entirety." https://www.courtlistener.com
[02:11:34] <c0lo> https://www.ajc.com
[02:11:36] <systemd> ^ 03Trump warns Georgia AG not to rally other Republicans against Texas lawsuit
[02:20:30] <requerdanos> https://news.yahoo.com
[02:20:40] <systemd> ^ 03Trump and 17 states back Texas bid to undo his election loss at Supreme Court
[02:21:51] <requerdanos> It is super-disturbing to me that the president and seventeen(!) states want to hijack the result of a presidential election
[02:42:39] <FatPhil> "17 states"? how are these whole states making their opinions known?
[02:44:02] <requerdanos> "In a separate brief, lawyers for 17 states led by Missouri's Republican Attorney General Eric Schmitt also urged the justices to hear the case."
[02:45:14] <requerdanos> "In addition to Missouri, the states joining Texas were: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and West Virginia. All of the states were represented by Republican officials in the filing. All but three of the states have Republican governors."
[02:51:20] <FatPhil> ah, ta. however, "lawyers for" is still ambiguous. AGs? Or just angry white men who aren't AGs?
[02:52:18] <FatPhil> wow, that ducey case is horribly written, it's like high-school debate club!
[02:52:36] <requerdanos> this article just says "Republican officials", who are predominantly represented by attorneys general I would think
[02:53:36] <requerdanos> I mean, whatever position, here's the deal: If you advocate throwing out entire states full of votes to get your way, no one should ever vote for you again, for any post.
[02:53:47] <FatPhil> to speak for the state on matters of law, one would *hope*. But often hopes are confounded.
[02:54:34] <FatPhil> ah, but what if the majority of the voters in your state like your grandstanding?
[02:55:07] <FatPhil> the paradox of democracy is that even the wrong become write if enough people think that way.
[02:55:49] <requerdanos> then those voters perhaps are missing the significance of the grandstandor's actions as they pertain to respect of the voter
[03:14:11] <FatPhil> but our team must win!
[03:14:27] <FatPhil> the other side are wrong
[03:15:14] <FatPhil> the average mental age of a partisan voter is about 7.
[03:48:03] <c0lo> Heh, FatPhil, this context is a bit more intersting than that.
[03:49:19] <c0lo> The way I understood, the suit doesn't alleges fraud, but the argument is that "the voters in our state will be disappointed not to have Trump as the president".
[03:50:29] <c0lo> Which, if admitted as an argument, opens the way for a counter-suit in which the coast states will say "Our voters will be disappointed to have Trump as the president".
[03:52:01] <c0lo> This is equivalent with "We're all asking scotus to rule that popular vote overrides the electors system set by the Constitution"
[04:34:49] -!- Runaway1956 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
[04:34:59] -!- Runaway1956 [Runaway1956!~some@67.223.okg.wi] has joined #US_Election
[05:31:59] <c0lo> Was curious what with that "1 in a quadrillion to the power of 4". Got it. Based on the "if the voters in 2020 had the same Dem vs Rep preferences as they had in 2016, then..."
[05:32:23] <c0lo> https://reason.com
[05:32:24] <systemd> ^ 03More on Statistical Stupidity at SCOTUS
[07:16:09] <chromas> https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net
[08:34:25] <FatPhil> yeah, that 2nd hypothesis was precisely the one I most objected to in the Shiva drivel. Totally absurd assumption, going directly against what I would have presumed was real world behaviour.
[09:11:40] <c0lo> What's interesting is how scientific tools are subverted on a "faith based science" - it fits with my belief, so it must be true.
[09:12:14] <c0lo> It's not that the hypothesis is invalidated by the reality, but...
[09:12:48] <c0lo> ... if the reality shows different, it must be something nefarious going on.
[09:14:01] <c0lo> Same kind of "logic" that goes into "build your own conspiracy theory".
[09:23:46] <FatPhil> I give primacy to physics, so will assume that all voters are spherical cows in a vacuum.
[09:29:38] <c0lo> See also https://www.springer.com
[09:29:39] <systemd> ^ 03Rogue and Shock Waves in Nonlinear Dispersive Media
[09:45:03] <FatPhil> I love the "it must be" part. Being wrong is *proof* that you're right!
[10:06:18] <c0lo> Just find a extra dot to connect which explains how right you are. Make it outlandish, like Chavez and seargeant Schum... err, the 305th Military Intelligence Battalion will do.
[10:07:24] <requerdanos> chavez, being dead, won't mind
[10:09:15] <c0lo> requerdanos s/mind/mock them/
[10:09:34] <requerdanos> chavez, being dead, won't mock them
[10:10:21] <c0lo> requerdanos++ thanks
[10:26:48] <FatPhil> ah, to answr my own question, and confirm the hoped-for answer - yes, all attorneys general: https://www.zerohedge.com
[10:46:06] <requerdanos> Thanks for that
[10:48:18] <requerdanos> I do so hope you lose your hundred dollars.
[11:05:29] <c0lo> FatPhil, a declaration of adherence was circulated too (so not only the AG-es) https://twitter.com
[11:05:31] <systemd> ^ 03Twitter ( https://mobile.twitter.com )
[11:24:57] <FatPhil> requerdanos: that's the nicest thing anyone's said to me since the last time I spoke to the taxman.
[11:25:20] <requerdanos> I say it with all brotherly love, of course.
[11:26:02] <FatPhil> That Philadelphia spirit.
[11:26:06] <FatPhil> So, basically, a coup!
[11:26:39] <requerdanos> that kind of thinking is activating my acid indigestion
[11:30:10] <FatPhil> How can they sign an amicus brief - they have no information to offer. Amicus briefs are nothing to do with being friendly, they're no facebook thumbs up, they are an offer to the court of additional insight or facts they might otherwise not have access to. These people have neither.
[11:31:31] <FatPhil> Everything's been gamified now, even the legal system, apparently. Get 10 senators to sign up, and we'll take 10% off the costs awarded!
[11:34:57] <c0lo> I'm sure that both the gaming and gambling industry will vehemently protest your assertion, FatPhil. What you use in your example is "sales". Fire sale to be precise.
[11:35:14] <c0lo> Or is it "fired" sale?
[11:37:29] <c0lo> I find interesting that the Lincoln Project go not only after Trump but after all Trumpistas inside GOP. E.g. their anti-ad for GA runoff https://www.youtube.com
[11:37:30] <systemd> ^ 03On the Ballot
[11:40:22] <requerdanos> you have to get all the cancer or it grows again
[11:42:05] <FatPhil> Maybe they're just not republicans after all? Time for a new party, perhaps? Bring back the Whigs!
[11:42:17] <c0lo> Reasonable/rational, yes. Do you expect this from politicians, tho'?
[11:42:59] <requerdanos> I expect enough voters to recognize the cancer and vote it out. Well, no, I don't really expect that, but one would hope.
[11:44:00] <requerdanos> The "evangelical" voters would cheerfully vote in satan and all his demons if they ran on a "pro-life" platform, as the repubs typically do, as an example of what kind of thinking rationality and reason are up against
[11:44:47] <c0lo> FatPhil. Yea... naaah, not yet. Don't have their own brand yet - https://youtu.be
[11:44:49] <systemd> ^ 03The Lincoln Project Gives Thanks ( https://www.youtube.com )
[11:47:59] <c0lo> requerdanos, yes, my expectations on their voter base align quite well with "statistical ensemble of spherical cows in vaccuum" model put fwd by FatPhil. What puzzles me however is to see politicians behaving reasonable.
[11:48:17] <c0lo> I mean... come on! It's still 2020!
[11:48:33] <requerdanos> it is a minority of reasonability if that's any consolation
[11:48:54] <c0lo> Good point.
[11:49:20] <c0lo> It's still more than my expectation.
[11:53:50] <requerdanos> maybe the rationality is a response to how far unhinged many of the people in high enough places to know better have become of late
[12:09:15] <c0lo> Hope springs eternal...
[12:10:20] <requerdanos> that would be ideal(istic)
[12:19:05] <FatPhil> Help! A stronger penis = Hope springs eternal
[12:26:05] <c0lo> "A stronger penis" is wishful thinking now, FatPhil, there's no hope for it.
[12:56:15] <c0lo> (chuckle) https://www.rawstory.com
[12:56:15] <systemd> ^ 03Trump ripped Georgia AG in ‘furious’ 15-minute-long call demanding he stay away from Texas lawsuit
[12:57:20] <Bytram> just. hang. up.
[13:34:07] <c0lo> Yea, nah. "scotus ordered me to answer by today. I'll see you in court, maybe" then hang up.
[13:37:58] <FatPhil> gotta get some perhaps-veiled insults in to make trump temporarily feel smaller and make him madder before hanging up.
[13:41:59] <c0lo> nothing would make trump madder than ignoring him. Even a "fuck you, prick" is better than nothing for a narcisist.
[13:43:44] <FatPhil> I've known people who clearly have NPD, and Trump's pretty damn close to that, so yeah, straight insults don't work.
[13:44:37] <c0lo> Interesting https://twitter.com
[13:44:37] <systemd> ^ 03Twitter ( https://mobile.twitter.com )
[13:45:40] <FatPhil> A friend who works deep in the beer industry once told me that the best way to piss off Anheuser Busch workers was not to insult the taste of Bud, but to just call is "useless" or "pointless". The difference is subtle.
[14:11:29] <requerdanos> The opposite of love is not hate, but apathy
[16:52:34] -!- Runaway1956 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
[16:52:35] -!- Runaway1956_ [Runaway1956_!~some@67.223.okg.wi] has joined #US_Election
[17:50:17] <chromas> The opposite of 1 is not -1, but 0
[23:12:26] <Runaway1956_> and the opposite of chromas is samorhc
[23:13:41] * Runaway1956_ wants to put chromas and samorhc into the supercollider and fire them at each other
[23:19:47] <chromas> The opposite of Runaway1956 is AzumaHazuki