606
So terrorism..
No, no, no, no, it’s only terrorism if the perpetrators are brown. If they’re white republicans it’s just a little prankarooni!
*sparkling directed violence
If they’re white republicans ~~it’s just a little prankarooni!~~ they're called freedom™️ fighters!
This is unironically what most of them believe they are.
load more comments
(1 replies)
So terrorism…
load more comments
(1 replies)
I doubt it will happen, but it would be poetic justice if so many people get pissed over this that Trump loses Ohio.
Current model from Silver and the polls raw data averages say it’s not even close. Trump will win the state by a 97.6% to 2.4% spread.
Because so many of you cannot understand modeling vs polling averages… that is the likelihood of a win as a result of taking poll inputs through Silver’s model, reflecting overall chances of a win as a output.
It is NOT polling average percentages.
Doubt
It’s not the spread. It’s the likelihood of him winning the state.
If it starts to make his numbers dip it could trigger them to divert more money to Ohio it hadn't previously meant to. Could have a broader effect.
In the latest version I found of Nate Silver's model (not 538), he has Ohio coming in at 52.4% for Trump and 43.6% for Harris, an 8.8% spread. I did not dig deeper to find the dates or particular polls from Ohio he's basing that on.
However, based on these numbers, he is likely modelling that Trump wins Ohio in 90%+ of outcomes to Harris's <5% of outcomes.
This is the same way he spoke to his model in previous elections. It wasn't that Hillary was expected to win 80-90% of the popular vote or electoral college just weeks before the 2016 election, it was that his model had her winning that percentage of the outcomes when he ran the model.
load more comments
(1 replies)
People are going to mistake those odds for polling numbers...
load more comments
(1 replies)
"... so you're saying there's a chance? ..."
Unfortunately that's not usually the first impact of terrorism. Support for them will rise until they do something stupid, pointless, and tragic. Unfortunately by that time there's thousands of people deep in the ideology in an area and it requires military action to clean up. Telling that something is wrong and we're all hurting brings people in. Killing innocent people drives people away. It's why David Duke is all rhetoric and little action. He can publicly sever himself and the movement from people who do take action while influencing them to do so and advancing his political position.
He needs to be held responsible, but no one has the balls to do it. This is how he’s been allowed to get where he is.
He will not be held accountable. See 2021-01-06
The US has always had domestic terrorism sure, but you can't tell me we didn't legitimately become a straight up terror state once Trump stochastically sent his goons to do his bidding. Courts are citing the pressure these people are causing in their rulings and handlings of Trump, which means the terrorism is working to alter the rule of law. Since the US law system is based heavily on precedent, there's a good chance this alteration of the law will extend beyond just for Trump. All it takes is the right (or wrong depending on your perspective) judge and enough money for a damn good lawyer.
Insert Reagan "we don't negotiate with terrorists" while negotiating with terrorists
By negotiate, you mean work hand in hand with them.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Malcolm X had many supporters. He was held responsible when just a handful of them committed 'terrorist' acts.
Malcolm wasn't innocent in that respect, but far more so than Trump.
So let's entertain the eating of pets thing was real (it's not)... How do these help with that? In what way is disrupting hospitals obviously leading to patient care declining not 10000% worse than, eating a duck or cat or whatever...?
Fuck sake.
For these people the point is clearly not about making anything "better" for anybody other than one orange traitor.
For sure but I'll sure as shit pocket this for a discussion with swing voters and the apathetic.
Proud Boys and KKK have showed up. No good will come of this.
Genuine question: what's the success rate of catching and prosecuting people who make these kinds of threats?
I'm guessing it's either nearly 100% or depressingly low but nowhere in between.
Much lower if you're a right wing domestic terrorist like these fucks, that's for sure.
Those who work forces...
I'd wager a lot of these people are indeed going to be caught because many are Trump cultists without the slightest clue what words like 'opsec' and 'comsec' mean. I think the real danger is the already militarized groups like the proud boys and three percenters using the chaos to sneak in their own bullshit. Essentially thanks to Trump riling up his base it's like a DDOS attack but with terrorists eating up the investigators man-hours instead of a barrage of requests consuming data capacity.
Yup, this is a pretty well-known tactic, sadly. It's effectively just paper terrorism - instead of doing the harder work of getting people incited to ACTUALLY kill people or do violence, you get them to do minor shit instead; bomb threats, assaults, etc, and use that as a smokescreen for the people who were already planning to do violence to go do violence effectively unchallenged.
Depends on the color of the person making the threat
It's so nice to get a rerun of the Nazis for those that missed it the first time round.
How is disrupting a hospital even relevant? So everyone having babies, heart attacks, strokes, perforated bowels from diverticulitis, kids and adults needing appendix removal, car accident victims (like that school bus), and so much more can’t get care or receive delayed care?
How does that help anything?
load more comments
(1 replies)
Terrorist and chief. We have so many more wonderful things to look forward to. The MAGA cult is terrible.
I wish I could say that once the election is over, all this shit will just fade into the rearview.
Jan 6th 2021 however tells us otherwise.
I fear the coming months.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2024
606 points (99.2% liked)
politics
31142 readers
2670 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS