predicted the Trump win in 2016

That's why he started all the chatter about "voter fraud" and "election fraud" because he was planning to contest the results. However it surprised the shit out of everybody, including Chump, when he actually won. He couldn't talk about voter fraud anymore, could he?

I thought the preemptive "If I don't win, it was rigged" nonsense suggested the opposite.

or anyone for that matter of predicting the midterms

sad we lost Bobby Kennedy. I think we would be in a different place today

Nader is an okay guy too. Very irrelevant but he did a lot of good things.

and more than capable of coherent speech.

...people.

Al Gore. A corrupt supreme court stepped in and appointed Bush. When the votes were finally counted Al Gore had won. The EC and the popular vote. And nothing was said or done about it. When Turtle didn't allow Obama to appoint his pick nothing was done. That laid the groundwork for this SC. But you go on and give them a pass.

...I hold Nader in extreme contempt.

It goes way beyond his efforts to convert the Supreme Court into a Bible banging clique.

He's a dangerously stupid man, an incompetent thinker, and Trumpian in his self inflation.

Alito is just one bit of evidence of how stupid Nader's beliefs - they cannot be called "ideas"- are, but that is only one example of the pernicious role he has played in American life. If it were limited to scamming poor college students to finance his badly named "PIRG" groups, that would be one thing, but being a pseudo left/liberal, and in that capacity rather Trumpian about it in the manner in which he simply makes shit up, he's been a cancer on American life, one of our media's most malign inventions.

You can feel about him as you wish, make excuses for where he led us, but my view of him is intractable.

People do, however, rarely forgive unpopular facts.

to give us something to hope for.

He actively worked to give us this outrageous Supreme Court dominated by religious bigots working to establish a state religion in defiance of all American norms and traditions.

Moore owns the fact that the worhipful 16th century reactionary inquisitor, Alito, has declared that violent misogynists can place their greasy hands over the bodies of women and force birth on them after rape.

Unfortunately, having no sense of decency, Moore is apparently incapable of understanding disgust.

So much for "there is no difference between Democrats." Moore and his "holier than everyone else" should never be forgiven for what he worked to do to this country, in particular its women.

He can go fuck himself.

I get his emails and he has laid it out really well.

The MSM is owned and managed by right wing domestic oligarchs. Their goal is to demoralize Democrats, not make money.

If their goal was to make money MSNBC would have never fired Keith Olbermann or Dylan Ratigan, or others who were very popular.

If Republicans actually win, that means more chaos against "looser Biden and the Democrats"

If they lose and sue, well that's more chaos that'll bring them eyeballs

So glad I'm not the only one who saw that NYT poll as a tool to demoralize Democratic voters. It's was one of the worse polls I've seen rigged up.

Then the NYT got them a right wing political reporter and shoved that really bad poll at him to claim the Republicans are coming.

The truth is we are out voting GOPers from the start. And the only way the GOP is going to win is if they cheat....and they are cheating as much as the Supremely Religiously Court allows.

Keep voting Dems. It will make a difference.

I mean, they should know better than to try and pass off a poll involving just 700 people as a class A, plus or minus 3% margin of error poll at the time that 538 composite were showing an increasing Democratic party lead.

"We were WINNING but they CHEATED!"

How does posting a likely rigged poll in a liberal paper showing the GOP winning (It was actually a 4% margin of error, the amount it had the GOP winning by.) encourage Dems to vote?????

Polls showing one party or the other leading encourage the winning party to vote.

"Polls influence voter perceptions,” Lawrence said. “And we know that how candidates are doing in the polls can then influence the type of coverage they get."

The media flock to the front-runners. And the more coverage those candidates get, the higher they tend to climb in the polls — a dynamic that can turn into a self-perpetuating cycle."

https://journalism.uoregon.edu/news/six-ways-media-influences-elections

Which is the cycle the NYT was trying to create or at least join in.

And we know more coverage of a candidate or party leads to more votes for that candidate. No coverage leads to No votes.

Trump had a ton of coverage for free and that's one of the reasons he won in 2016.

In fact showing false polls of an unpopular candidate winning is a common tool used by governments to influence voting in foreign countries and their own country. Russia and the US use it as a staple in their espionage and manipulation of elections.

What happened to this:

"One of the reasons I made this movie is that I've come to the conclusion that the old guard of the Democratic Party is a greater roadblock to social progress than Trump is. Because they're taking half-measures, because they're beholden to the same money and interests."

Suddenly that went away? A tsunami washed that myth away? What about The Revolution narrative? You're the media, Moore.