Oh man, you have taken the black pill, kek. Q has emphasised many times what these resignations mean. No, they are not leaving because they can be replaced by "strong candidates". Most of these are probably entrenched in their seats for years and have the election system all under their control. Also, these are not the generous folks who would kindly step away right when their guy got the historic number of votes, just to potentially help the party. These are the people who have no choice but to leave.
When you have one person announcing they will not run for the re-election, out of the blue - then you are correct. Thats how it worked historically. Not when a deluge of people start saying that. Not right after what is supposed to be their historic win.
I'm not the intended recipient of the question but at the rate things are going regarding election security, absolutely they could. Why not? A literal tuber got elected president because they control the voting machines.
When you own the voting machines and control the vote counting and can put up visual barriers to block poll watchers from observing your fraud, you can just rig and steal the election again.
The focus on the audits and legal, legitimate elections seems to have evaporated.
I was making a general observation about own personal experience playing the real game of Risk. If you appear too strong. Your opponents will stomp you ruthlessly.
Mario Kart strategy: hang out in the 2 or 3 spot as 1st will get hit hardest by Blue Shells and 1st place seeking power ups. Then 2 and 3 can swoop in for 1st.
This post actually makes sense what you're trying to say. If you said this at the start instead of snark, you'd probably had more support for your original comment.
I completely agree with you btw, congressmen not seeking reelection is actually typical per cycle. What I thought was interesting was the fact that mainstream news is making it seem like it's bad for Dems.
I guess they are starting a new tradition: "Quit while it seems like you are ahead"
If they quit,they get to keep all the money in their campaign fund.
Quit and be replaced with even bigger unscrupulous assholes.
There would be deals worked out in the back. I highly doubt they will get away without a scratch.
How cheering! Keep 'em coming!
u/#Byebye
The article also mentions that Republicans are also leaving office - and not just RINOs; apparently 7 to date.
Have to check again. Maybe.
Only when playing Risk in the middle game.
Oh man, you have taken the black pill, kek. Q has emphasised many times what these resignations mean. No, they are not leaving because they can be replaced by "strong candidates". Most of these are probably entrenched in their seats for years and have the election system all under their control. Also, these are not the generous folks who would kindly step away right when their guy got the historic number of votes, just to potentially help the party. These are the people who have no choice but to leave.
When you have one person announcing they will not run for the re-election, out of the blue - then you are correct. Thats how it worked historically. Not when a deluge of people start saying that. Not right after what is supposed to be their historic win.
Q has mentioned this numerous times: https://qalerts.pub/?q=resignations
I'm not the intended recipient of the question but at the rate things are going regarding election security, absolutely they could. Why not? A literal tuber got elected president because they control the voting machines.
When you own the voting machines and control the vote counting and can put up visual barriers to block poll watchers from observing your fraud, you can just rig and steal the election again.
The focus on the audits and legal, legitimate elections seems to have evaporated.
I was making a general observation about own personal experience playing the real game of Risk. If you appear too strong. Your opponents will stomp you ruthlessly.
Mario Kart strategy: hang out in the 2 or 3 spot as 1st will get hit hardest by Blue Shells and 1st place seeking power ups. Then 2 and 3 can swoop in for 1st.
The underdog position gifts tje sweetest bones.
At least you picked your battlefield proudly.
Did you actually read the entire article?
Probably just read the title.
Except for the fact that they are losing, doomer. NeXt!
Meaning dems are actually strong and just appearing weak right now?
That expression doesn't hold up 100% I've noticed ;)
Wrong. Incumbents have a major advantage. That advantage is gone.
https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/incumbent-advantage
This post actually makes sense what you're trying to say. If you said this at the start instead of snark, you'd probably had more support for your original comment.
I completely agree with you btw, congressmen not seeking reelection is actually typical per cycle. What I thought was interesting was the fact that mainstream news is making it seem like it's bad for Dems.
Dont count them out I think the J6 committee is intended to disqualify many from holding office and there wont be any dems on that list.
Anyone have the original link? I can never hit archives, something with DNS lookup as I get server IP address can't be found.
Actually, it's funny, if I tracert it, cannot resolve, if I ping it, it pings and then I'm able to tracert, and then see the page fine.
Next time it happens I'll try a flushdns if I remember.
Here: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/wave-retirements-rocks-democrats-hopes-holding-house-n1286398