This also applies to…every DOJ prosecutor.
All the Commodus.
https://twitter.com/aweissmann_/status/1593833618983583744?s=46&t=8LLp8xVKt21Zufx15iO-jg
Checking to see if @ComeySheWrote is available on Twitter
Nm I see they already appointed some rando loser to do it. What in the world does this guy see in being a jobber for Trump? I guess being dumb enough to take the job is the main qualification. At least when Twitter dies the main outlet for gassing up these losers will be gone.
It seems the very special counsel has united the American right and left, who both seem to hate the idea.
1 Like
At this point we’ve already passed on Trump experiencing any kind of justice system consequences. If they were going to go that way they should have grabbed him as Biden was being inaugurated.
I’m just happy that the person least happy about the Democrats feet dragging is now Mitch McConnell.
Who knew attorney generals were bigger cowards that cops?
Everyone but you
2 Likes
Everyone thought that the dems were getting crushed in the last election as well
3 Likes
A valid point actually.
True. But everyone thought we would lose the house and we did. Most, I think, felt we would go down 1-2 in the senate and we will probably be up one. So that thought was wrong, but not quite the same level of wrong as “Trump is gonna get got”.
That remains to be seen.
Hope springs eternal
1 Like
Most people here (not me) thought Dems had zero chance of retaining the House, that even thinking 15% was reasonable was an insane overdose on hopium. If either NY Dems aren’t stupid or DeSantis doesn’t overrule his Republican state legislature, Dems hold in the House.
Well, yeah, but those things are baked into the “zero chance” prediction.
Even so, Dems lost enough winnable races to have had a real shot.
I wasn’t a “zero” chancer’, but I was probably close to that. However, I’m sure a literal zero chancer would tell you that close loss, massive loss, and everything in between were covered by their prediction.
For example (and this is very hypothetical), if someone thought there was a 50% chance of 1 seat minority and a 50% chance of 20 seat minority, then they would conclude there is zero chance of victory. If the 1 seat outcome happens it seems you’re arguing, “See how close they were, they really had chance” and the other guy would respond “No, I thought 1 seat loss was very likely, I just didn’t see a win”. It’s not really resolvable because we can’t run the election a thousand times.
this is a terrible way to look at it. this is like judging an ATS pick by saying “well yeah the 70-point favorite didn’t cover but they DID win straight up”
I think even if they got their preferred gerrymander in NY they aren’t winning 22-4 in a year when Hochul can’t even get to 53%. Maybe they win a couple more seats but probably not 5. I’ll agree that it’s not ideal for them moving forward that they blew it though. SCOTUS taking away 2 D seats between Alabama and Louisiana also hurt.
Nah, that’s two different things. If you bet that ATS, then you are specifically predicting that they will win by 70 plus. If you are only predicting a win, then you bet the money line. And in your example you win.
I personally bet on R winning house and I’ll cash that.
I’m not sure who predicted what, but I’d agree that anyone who predicted something like a 25+ R majority was very wrong.