• 0 Posts
  • 40 Comments
Joined 1 month ago
cake
Cake day: January 18th, 2025

help-circle

  • Took me a while but I found what I was thinking of.

    It was the Fired FEC head

    But it wasn’t because she was fired they didn’t go forward, it’s because the board is 3/3 dem/rep so a republican would need to ‘flip’

    Asked by Alicia Menendez, “What is most alarming to you?” she replied, “Well, I can’t talk about anything that would be currently before the commission by law, complaints that are filed and any investigatory action remains confidential until the cases are closed.”

    She then continued. “But I can tell you that in the past we have had 63 separate complaints filed against the president or his political committees –– and not all complaints are well-founded not all complaints are worth the agency’s time to pursue. But our nonpartisan professional staff has advocated that we pursue 31 of those cases and, in not a single one, did we get four votes to move forward.”

    This is one of the things they talked about in the election interference hearings in December too

    “Almost every matter that the FEC has not pursued is associated with the former president [Trump]” (Rep Torres, about 57minutes in)

    Link to thread discussing: https://www.reddit.com/r/somethingiswrong2024/s/JUGCXE7Gab

    Link to full hearing on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/live/mIDJ5whpSHQ



  • They did do a variety of things.

    • limited the dems to 45% on the tabulators after 500 votes
    • suppressed enough votes that they would’ve lost if it weren’t for the massive voter purges and other legislation they shoved through
    • algorithmically induced psychosis in 20% the population

    If any one of these had failed they would’ve lost.




  • Of course it’d be both sides. They use projection to shield themselves. So if they were going to steal an election, they’d accuse the dems of doing it first.

    This isn’t conscious but they think everyone thinks like them so if they’re trying to steal the election obviously the dems are too.




  • auraithx@lemmy.dbzer0.comtoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldNo Way
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    While it might seem simple to attribute the drop-off phenomenon to personal preferences for Trump or against Harris, the SMART Elections analysis shows that this pattern is far more complex and inconsistent with such an explanation. For instance, if Harris were uniquely unpopular, you’d expect her drop-off to be uniformly large across all states, but it isn’t. In Michigan, her drop-off is negligible (0.87%), while in Montana, it’s a staggering -19%, even though Montana has little connection to the pro-Gaza movement that critics say might have influenced her support. Similarly, the Republican drop-off (votes for Trump but not for down-ballot candidates) is just as significant, sometimes exceeding the margins of victory in key swing states. Down-ballot candidates refer to those running for lower-profile positions, such as governors, state legislators, or other local offices, as opposed to high-profile ones like the president. This suggests the issue isn’t simply about liking Trump or disliking Harris but instead points to a mix of unusual voter behaviors or even potential systemic issues in how votes were cast or counted. The consistent pattern of drop-off across vastly different demographics and states demands more scrutiny, not simple assumptions.