US Politics: The Roll Call Heard Across America

[Fragile Bird]

I was really moved by the Roll Call. I hope the Democrats keep that for future conventions. 

eta: I realize this isn't a very witty title, but damn that was great.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Thanks BIRD!

Okay, so I've joked here before about some political insider things I've gotten to enjoy over the years. One was about the time I got to meet Dr. Jill Biden. She was lovely, even if I don't exactly enjoy working a 14-16 hour day before till Midnight prepping only to have to be dressed to the nines at 8AM or so to greet a VIP visit the following morning. But I always remember she had this beautiful aide wearing a green dress and a giant pearl necklace and hot damn, she was in that introductory video, lol. 

[Jaxom 1974]

The only thing about the roll call that I found potentially irritating, if it were done in the future, is the one upmanship it would create with costumes and settings...it'd be a 60 second Eurovision or something... 

[Fragile Bird]

Speaking of beautiful, that picture of Jill Biden at 26 was stunning! She was gorgeous!

[Guest]

Nm...I must be higher than I thought.

[Week]

15 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

Nm...I must be higher than I thought.

Story of my night.

[AverageGuy]

34 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Sorry, WAPO, there is a paywall, but this is the key part.

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s convention speech serves as warning to Democratic establishment and Biden

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/rep-ocasio-cortezs-convention-speech-to-serve-as-warning-to-democratic-establishment-and-biden/2020/08/18/28c3d34a-e155-11ea-8dd2-d07812bf00f7_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-high_newgeneration-810p%3Ahomepage%2Fstory-ans

Isn't a united front for the next 2.5 months a good idea?

[Guest]

What is with the clapping Zoom people?? I missed that one.

And K.O.O.L. and the Gang. 

Did that really happen?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

59 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Speaking of beautiful, that picture of Jill Biden at 26 was stunning! She was gorgeous!

Your words, not mine, but her glamour shot was.....damn. 

[Centrist Simon Steele]

22 minutes ago, AverageGuy said:

Isn't a united front for the next 2.5 months a good idea?

All I can say is yas queen. 

[Martell Spy]

So, I just read that Republicans are planning to have a Democrat speak out against Biden at their convention. Who will it be? I'm going to guess Joe Lieberman. Or runner up, Dick Morris, who is not really a Democrat.

[DMC]

18 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

So, I just read that Republicans are planning to have a Democrat speak out against Biden at their convention. Who will it be? I'm going to guess Joe Lieberman. Or runner up, Dick Morris, who is not really a Democrat.

Doubt it's Lieberman, and no one cares about Dick Morris.  My best guess would be Vernon Jones, who's already endorsed Trump.

[The Anti-Targ]

Speaking of roll call, what is the minimum number of votes cast nationally for people to be satisfied that voter suppression was not significant in this election? Conversely what is the maximum number where one would be satisfied that voting fraud was not significant?

For the last 50 years 1968-2016 the highest voter turnout was 60.7% (1968) and the lowest was 49% (1996). The average over that period looks like about 55%. The lowest ever turnout is 48.9% in 1924, the highest ever is 81.8% in 1876. If voter turnout is between 49% and 61% (rounding up) there is probably not a strong case for nation-wide voter suppression or voting fraud. It seems like there is an absolute floor in terms of voter turn out, you can always rely on about 49% of the population turning up to vote. And there has been a sinking lid of the maximum number of people who can be bothered going out to vote. Obama-mania (or hysteria depending on your perspective) only managed to gt a contemporary high of 58%.

I'm not sure there is much danger of 60% or even 58% being exceeded. But if there is only a 48% or less turnout is that highly suspicious of widespread voter suppression, or can it be explained away by legitimate concerns of voters choosing not to risk poll queues for fear of catching COVID?

Is there a % below which there is a danger of significant civil unrest because of anger over real or perceived voter suppression?

[Fragile Bird]

George Takei:

”The RNC has confirmed Bellatrix LeStrange and Ramsey Bolton have been added to their list of GOP Convention speakers”

[Jace, Extat]

16 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

George Takei:

”The RNC has confirmed Bellatrix LeStrange and Ramsey Bolton have been added to their list of GOP Convention speakers”

Ramsay.

FINO

[Fragile Bird]

12 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

Ramsay.

FINO

Quoted as written!

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

5 hours ago, DMC said:

My best guess would be Vernon Jones, who's already endorsed Trump.

Every state legislature has its batch of strange characters on both sides. Frankly a lot of people don't want those jobs, and staff can actually be paid better than EOs themselves in some places. 

4 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

George Takei:

”The RNC has confirmed Bellatrix LeStrange and Ramsey Bolton have been added to their list of GOP Convention speakers”

Word has it Hans Gruber is going to be their opening night MC.

[Fragile Bird]

@Rippounet the summer between graduating from university and going to law school my best friend and I went to Europe for 6 weeks, living in pensions and surviving on espresso and toast for breakfast, fruit for lunch and a real meal for dinner. We had some fantastic food and lots of mediocre house wine! We spent 4 weeks in Italy, 2 weeks in Slovenia (my friend said we had to or her relatives would never speak to her again) and then headed to France and Spain. We never got past Nice, because we found a lovely room to stay in, and used it as a base to visit Menton, Monte Carlo, and Cannes, and that funny pebbly beach in Nice was actually a great place to people watch in August. There was this restaurant on the Promenade des Americains, L’Aventura, spelled in Spanish not French (is that one r or two?) where we feasted like kings.

Anyway, my friend liked to wake up at 6:30 am, walk to a bakery down the street for opening and buy us croissants and coffee for breakfast every morning. That was heaven! And has been impossible to duplicate here, alas, with no local French bakery. My neighbourhood is Portuguese and the things they call croissants are an abomination. The local grocery store bakes decent croissants every morning, but nothing like the ones in Nice.

Poor, misguided Ty, right?

(My friend spoke 5 languages fluently, returning to Toronto to get her PhD (on full scholarship) and taught at the UofT her whole life.)

[JGP]

[sips coffee]

Croissants are my 10 years preferred breakfast. And she's starting to get picky about them. Little snob.

[Fez]

6 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Speaking of roll call, what is the minimum number of votes cast nationally for people to be satisfied that voter suppression was not significant in this election? Conversely what is the maximum number where one would be satisfied that voting fraud was not significant?

For the last 50 years 1968-2016 the highest voter turnout was 60.7% (1968) and the lowest was 49% (1996). The average over that period looks like about 55%. The lowest ever turnout is 48.9% in 1924, the highest ever is 81.8% in 1876. If voter turnout is between 49% and 61% (rounding up) there is probably not a strong case for nation-wide voter suppression or voting fraud. It seems like there is an absolute floor in terms of voter turn out, you can always rely on about 49% of the population turning up to vote. And there has been a sinking lid of the maximum number of people who can be bothered going out to vote. Obama-mania (or hysteria depending on your perspective) only managed to gt a contemporary high of 58%.

I'm not sure there is much danger of 60% or even 58% being exceeded. But if there is only a 48% or less turnout is that highly suspicious of widespread voter suppression, or can it be explained away by legitimate concerns of voters choosing not to risk poll queues for fear of catching COVID?

Is there a % below which there is a danger of significant civil unrest because of anger over real or perceived voter suppression?

It all depends on how many wanted to vote and weren't able to, not what the raw percentage is. If 60% of people wanted to vote and only 55% were able to, that means there was massive voter suppression even though the final tally ended up right in the normal range.