Noob question, why? I thought lower rates = cheap money = more investment = STONKS
But the fed makes rate cuts to fluff stonks when the economy is bad, ergo NOT STONKS
A big cut could signal that they waited too long and they think they need a Hail Mary to avoid a recession.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/14/politics/donald-trump-harris-election-outcome-denial/index.html
“he could question the election outcome if he loses”. Have they been living under a rock? Even if he loses in a landslide he will still challenge the results.
Maybe I’m sweet summer child but questioning election result when your the actual president seems a much different situation than when you just a loser imo
3 Likes
Yeah I’m 0% concerned about this certification bullshit this time. We have the federal government under our control this time, they aren’t going to procedurally overturn the government of the US by picking some random yokels for various local/state election jobs.
And it’s not like the courts, even right wing courts, have been subtle about this up to now. They’re going to end up in court immediately and lose badly on the spot.
I think more likely than not they don’t do anything because the people they’re counting on fold under a light breeze.
My main concern would be the same as my main concern four years ago: Y’all Queda rolling into Philly, Detroit, Milwaukee, Atlanta, etc with F-150s and AR-15s and setting ballots on fire before they’re counted, or shooting up a couple polling places in minority areas to scare people out of voting.
There’s no legal recourse for that, but thankfully they didn’t try it in 2020 and hopefully they don’t this time.
They may be able to get a couple states certification hung up in court by local precincts refusing to certify. IIRC Georgia may be an issue. But, this requires SCOTUS to literally turn us into a fascist one party state. I’m not saying they wouldn’t do that, perhaps, but if they are we were toast a few years ago and just hadn’t realized it yet.
Yeah that’s a lot less likely with Trump not in the White House. I’m pretty sure what you just described could get FBI counterterrorism stuff scrambled on you in 2024.
1 Like
Yeah that’s a good point. Plus I feel like Dem governors are more likely to be keen to the threat in 2024, due to January 6th.
Hopefully seeing a bunch of them locked up over Jan 6 will be a deterrent.
I do worry about a small number of isolated incidents with at least one resulting in violence but I’m going to lol guess the “urban militia” might be enough to take out y’all queda so can see them try this in a not so urban environment, maybe a heavily Hispanic/immigrant area near a border?
There are multiple SCOTUS votes that will support the proposition that state legislatures can decline to certify elections or whatever bullshit they try, and unless the election is a big Trump win rendering this all moot, there’s probably >0 states where this could happen (I don’t know the details of what powers are granted to the legislature vs. the governor in each of these states, but WI, AZ, PA all have red legislatures + blue governor and NH + GA have a red legislature + governor).
You probably don’t get 5 votes supporting it, but that also might depend on how close the election is - I think they’re more likely to make a ruling that changes the election outcome to a Trump victory if it’s close enough, versus choosing to protect their image if it’s a matter of one state meaninglessly running up the score. Like we all lived through Bush v. Gore, they’ve already stepped in to stop a count that looked like it might not go their way and be like “sorry, deadlines are deadlines, the results we have now are final, also nothing in this decision is precedent”.
I dunno, did you see Succession? The election scenario in the show was shockingly plausible and realistic, a vote counting center in Milwaukee mysteriously goes up in flames and thousands of Milwaukee ballots along with it, Dems lose Wisconsin, election over, no do-overs. The idea that we shouldn’t worry about something like that because we’re sure the FBI would stop it from happening to begin with seems…optimistic!
And I am really glad that the state secretaries of state map looks like this (while PA and GA are red, we do have substantial evidence that they would put up with any fuckery from the Trump camp):
2 Likes
Nm, I guess Shapiro appointed an R for some dumbass reason. Lol Shapiroaments.
GA kneecapped the powers of the SoS after 2020 with the “Election Integrity Act of 2021”.
Changes affecting the State Election Board
While most Georgians don’t directly interact with the State Election Board, several changes made by the Republican legislature could have an impact on local elections offices.
The secretary of state will no longer chair the State Election Board, becoming instead a non-voting ex-officio member. The new chair would be nonpartisan but appointed by a majority of the state House and Senate. The chair would not be allowed to have been a candidate, participate in a political party organization or campaign or made campaign contributions for two years prior to being appointed.
The law also says the governor should appoint someone if the position becomes vacant when lawmakers are not in session.
Other changes to the State Election Board’s powers would give the board — and by extension, the legislature — more power to intervene in county elections boards that are deemed underperforming. In addition to the legislature-appointed chair, the five-member board is made up of one member appointed by the House, one appointed by the Senate and one each picked by the Democratic and Republican state parties.
The State Election Board, county commissions or a certain number of state House and Senate members that represent a county could request an independent group to conduct a performance review of their appointed elections board or probate judge that supervises elections, defined in Georgia law as the “superintendent.” SB 202 would allow the State Election Board to suspend the multi-person elections board or probate judge and replace them with a single individual for at least nine months.
The election superintendent is responsible for everything from certifying results, handling polling place changes and hearing challenges to voters’ eligibilities — something that SB 202 clarifies that must be heard in a timely manner after being filed and can include an unlimited number of challenges.
The board could only temporarily suspend up to four election superintendents at a time.
1 Like
She was his Deputy AG as a Republican and switched to Dem when he appointed her AG, and she’s not running for re-election and doesn’t view herself as a politician. So I think it’s safe to say she’ll do the right thing with the election.
2 Likes
Did Maureen Dowd ever have anything interesting to say? I can’t remember reading anything from her where I didn’t have to roll my eyes.
It feels like she exists just to get dunked in by pitchbot.
1 Like
Maureen Dowd hasn’t had anything interesting to say ever except the time she ate too many edibles without checking the dosage like a dumbass and wrote a column about it.
2 Likes
Yeah, Raffensberger in Georgia (and even Kemp) have at least shown that they won’t do this.