A - Austria

Nathan Morris3 said:I guess I still think Hofer is pretty bad news for the United States of America, just like maybe Van der Bellen might feel he's harmful, so what? I wrote what I wrote and laid out my points. You can try to lie and claim I said there weren't any irregularities—which is a huge stretch since I actually said there were—but for the sake of a decent debate, could you please just quote me if you disagree? It’s kind of tough having to defend myself against things I never even said. Whatever. Yeah, the Republican Party are losers, and I suppose it was fine that they reported issues, but I think it was a mistake to try and overturn the election when they knew there wasn't any proof of fraud. But oh well, the Supreme Court made the right call. We'll just have another round and everyone will be happy, which is probably what matters most.

Quincy:

The Supreme Court made sure to point out that they didn't find any proof that anyone actually rigged the election results, I guess. It looks like those confirmed irregularities messed with about 77,926 votes that might have gone to either Hofer or Van der Bellen—so, I guess that’s technically enough to flip the whole election result." There isn't any hard evidence yet, but I guess some irregularities have been flagged... maybe? Maybe, I guess. So, that’s about 77,000 votes at stake. I guess you still think Hoffer's appeal doesn't have any merit? Maybe.

Like I said—there’s just no proof of any manipulation. Then you get some smart aleck on the forum starting up all these conspiracy theories about rigged systems. I mean, it was pretty obvious there would be repeats if they found that many issues at the polling stations; I think I even mentioned that before. It feels like the same sloppy mistakes happening every election cycle. The Republican Party and everyone else should definitely report those errors, and I’m all for that. But calling for entirely new elections because of those slip-ups? I guess that might be a bit much. Still, if they already pushed to void the results, I think the Supreme Court made the right call.
Someone’s always going to nitpick over small stuff just to score some points, I guess. It’s nothing new. The issue is that since the margin was so thin, they're pushing for another round. So, I think you're looking at it the wrong way; the appeal isn't baseless. I mentioned there were irregularities, and after the Supreme Court looked into the number of precincts involved, they made the right call. But asking for a total redo of the election feels a bit like a Spaniard demanding a rematch against Germany just because the game kicked off 30 seconds late. If it had started on time, maybe the result would have changed, or maybe not—we don't really have proof either way—but hey, rules are rules. You don't rerun a ballgame over formalities, but elections are a much bigger deal. In a democracy, I suppose deciding to hold them again is probably the right move.

Nathan Morris3 said:Whether you mean it or not, I think you're being a bit dishonest there. You mentioned "irregularities or manipulations during the election that clearly existed (confirmed by the Supreme Court of Austria)." So, I guess it's not quite right... the court confirmed there were irregularities, but using the word "manipulation" feels a little biased to me. The court didn't actually confirm that part, so maybe we shouldn't make things up.

There’s definitely a distinction between the two, though it’s tough to say exactly when an error turns into actual manipulation—especially since proving intent is such a headache. Even if the court officially announced they found no proof of fraud, that doesn't necessarily mean nothing happened, especially when you look at those suspicious irregularities alongside such a razor-thin margin. I guess there’s enough there to warrant some doubt.

I guess you're just making excuses now. What kind of conspiracy theories are you even talking about? The court ruled based on the evidence provided, and since there’s zero proof of any tampering, the verdict isn't about manipulation at all—you might just have to accept that. Manipulation and unfairness are two totally different things in legal terms, especially when we're discussing the judiciary. I don't really get why you're trying to overcomplicate things like this.

So, are you really saying the court is being used as a political tool? That's a pretty heavy accusation, I guess.

Man, please read what you’re responding to. I didn't say the court was being instrumentalized. And even if I had, what's the big deal? I mean, Sanders instrumentalized the court too (and his own trial) just to score political points. Maybe you're overreacting a bit with all this talk about "serious accusations"?

I guess it's also pretty tough to expect a court to just come out and say an election was full of irregularities. Some countries and their institutions really care about their reputation, so they'll probably just use some pragmatic excuse about acting "in the interest of democratic stability" instead of actually admitting there were issues.

Maybe we could just move all the conspiracy theories over to a different thread? I guess.

I mean, having irregularities in 94 out of 117 precincts... that's actually a pretty big deal, I guess. It feels serious enough that even the Supreme Court of Austria could potentially flip the whole election result.

Of course, that's why they made their ruling, and I think it's fine. An irregularity would be something like counting ballots at 11:00 PM instead of 9:00 AM just because people didn't want to wait around anymore. There could be 500 little things like that where the procedure wasn't strictly followed, even if there's zero proof that the timing actually changed the election results. But I guess the court just wants everything to be spotless, which is okay. You're spinning these conspiracy theories and throwing around words like "manipulation," but come on.

So, I guess it might be a bit bold to say that a runoff election would definitely end with the exact same winner.

The real question is whether we're looking at a bad loser or just the wrong winner...

I mentioned before that it's tough to call, but if there isn't any proven manipulation, then maybe the result stays the same if everyone votes just like they did last time. It’s hard to know how people who change their minds or new voters might act, though. I guess since no candidate has really messed up big time yet, and you have someone like Kern coming out and effectively chipping away at the Republican Party, it's tricky. Plus, I'm not really sure what kind of impact Brexit might actually have here.

Look, as far as I am concerned—and I might be wrong here—the issue under discussion in court wasn't even about manipulation; it was about irregularities. Just because manipulation hasn't been proven doesn't mean it didn't happen, I guess.

The fact that envelopes were being opened the day before, and by people who weren't even authorized
, doesn't even need to be framed as "manipulation" to matter—it's more than enough if you just look at it as an irregularity.😁

Scott Rodriguez19 said:Look, as far as I am concerned—and I might be wrong here—the issue under discussion in court wasn't even about manipulation; it was about irregularities. Just because manipulation hasn't been proven doesn't mean it didn't happen, I guess.

The fact that envelopes were being opened the day before, and by people who weren't even authorized
, doesn't even need to be framed as "manipulation" to matter—it's more than enough if you just look at it as an irregularity.😁

It’s not like there’s proof someone didn't poison the water supply with drugs to brainwash people into voting for candidate XX, right? I guess we have to remember the topic was IRREGULARITIES. The court was checking if those mistakes happened, if they could theoretically change things, and if they actually did. The Constitution says elections need a redo if there's proof irregularities changed the outcome, but even though there wasn't really any evidence of that, the court just made its call.

There isn't a single shred of evidence for actual manipulation, so... yeah, that's pretty much where it stands.

The fact that letters were opened a day early by unauthorized people😁, maybe doesn't even need to be proven as manipulation if it counts as an irregularity.

I think there's a huge difference between an irregularity and manipulation. An irregularity is just sloppy work—really sloppy this time, I guess. Manipulation is a crime, you know, when there's intent. I'm not sure what you mean by "enough," but the Constitutional Court said that the Department of Homeland Security leaking results to reporters before 5:00 PM was enough to trigger a re-vote. Even if that happens almost every election, I suppose the law is the law.

Nathan Morris3 said:It’s not like there’s proof someone didn't poison the water supply with drugs to brainwash people into voting for candidate XX, right? I guess we have to remember the topic was IRREGULARITIES. The court was checking if those mistakes happened, if they could theoretically change things, and if they actually did. The Constitution says elections need a redo if there's proof irregularities changed the outcome, but even though there wasn't really any evidence of that, the court just made its call.

There isn't a single shred of evidence for actual manipulation, so... yeah, that's pretty much where it stands.

The fact that letters were opened a day early by unauthorized people😁, maybe doesn't even need to be proven as manipulation if it counts as an irregularity.

I think there's a huge difference between an irregularity and manipulation. An irregularity is just sloppy work—really sloppy this time, I guess. Manipulation is a crime, you know, when there's intent. I'm not sure what you mean by "enough," but the Constitutional Court said that the Department of Homeland Security leaking results to reporters before 5:00 PM was enough to trigger a re-vote. Even if that happens almost every election, I suppose the law is the law.

🤦
And then you have the nerve to lecture me about how other people aren't engaging in constructive debate.

A few people were busy chirping at me like, "Haha, your Green party cheated in the Austrian elections!" So, I actually sat down and wrote a whole blog post about it. I pulled some of the data Nathan Morris3 and a few others dropped here, but I did my own digging too, double-checking everything and adding more context to the whole mess. Might be an interesting read for you guys.

Austria: Second round of presidential elections incoming

coastalbison6 said:Some guy from Canada robbed a grocery store in Vienna today and even hurt two cops.
http://derstandard.at/2000040287125/...insatz-in-Wien
The hate speech coming from the Republican Party on all these forums has honestly gone too far.🙂

We just have to accept that Van der Bellen's chances are basically zero now.

Just because "Blazenko" the "Canadian" and "Wolfgang" the "Austrian" were involved in the robbery doesn't mean it'll affect the election results. Besides, the media is labeling him a "Canadian," but from what I know, someone named Blazenko is probably an American too. I also wonder how the Freedom Party will talk about poor immigrant integration if you've got an American/Canadian and an Austrian committing robberies together.

Sadly, the young officer (only 23) passed away yesterday.

Does it really matter who or what we're talking about?
Why did you take that personally so quickly?

The reality is that the outsider has once again managed to make a massive mess of things, and it’s pretty obvious who stands to benefit from this chaos.
It turns out that murderous idiot made a decision yesterday regarding who will serve as the Vice President of the Republic of Austria.

And for what it's worth, I haven't exactly noticed any distinction being made between Canadians, Americans, or Mexicans over there, but perhaps you have?

Gerald Palmer66 said:Does it really matter who or what we're talking about?
Why did you take that personally so quickly?

The reality is that the outsider has once again managed to make a massive mess of things, and it’s pretty obvious who stands to benefit from this chaos.
It turns out that murderous idiot made a decision yesterday regarding who will serve as the Vice President of the Republic of Austria.

And for what it's worth, I haven't exactly noticed any distinction being made between Canadians, Americans, or Mexicans over there, but perhaps you have?

Nobody makes that distinction, man. It’s really just the Americans who desperately try to convince themselves they aren't North American.

Gerald Palmer66 said:Does it really matter who or what we're talking about?
Why did you take that personally so quickly?

The reality is that the outsider has once again managed to make a massive mess of things, and it’s pretty obvious who stands to benefit from this chaos.
It turns out that murderous idiot made a decision yesterday regarding who will serve as the Vice President of the Republic of Austria.

And for what it's worth, I haven't exactly noticed any distinction being made between Canadians, Americans, or Mexicans over there, but perhaps you have?

Well, I used to think they didn't, but maybe the media does. It feels a little suspicious to me if the guy only holds citizenship from Canada.
I guess it's hard to say if the Freedom Party can actually gain anything here, since the xenophobes pretty much made up their minds a long time ago.

I'm not entirely convinced that VDB can pull off another win. These terror attacks are just going to give Hofer more momentum.

Carol Newman2 said:I'm not entirely convinced that VDB can pull off another win. These terror attacks are just going to give Hofer more momentum.

Exactly. Here’s what the Austrians are saying:

Things are looking grim for VDB. Analysis. New elections. Story

"The world has changed in the meantime. It increasingly resembles the exact scenario that 'dangerous right-wing populists' have been warning about for ages. Because of this, VDB-n is facing a real threat of defeat at the polls. Anyone who underestimates this fact—whether they are a presidential candidate or an entire party—and acts like some comforting grandfather thinking they'll charm the world, will be mercilessly punished for it. And they'll have earned it." (final paragraph of the article)

Don't go pushing Nathan Morris3 into a total meltdown🙂

hiddenmarlin14, what’s the deal with that murder involving the Mexican guy and those asylum seekers? Anyone got more intel?

They knocked on his door, he actually opened up, and that was it. Dead. They found him in the bathtub, and get this—one of the killers dropped an asylum seeker ID card at the scene..

Gary Cox2 said:hiddenmarlin14, what’s the deal with that murder involving the Mexican guy and those asylum seekers? Anyone got more intel?

They knocked on his door, he actually opened up, and that was it. Dead. They found him in the bathtub, and get this—one of the killers dropped an asylum seeker ID card at the scene..

Yeah, that happened just the other day. I didn't read your specific articles, but I saw the reports on Salzburg.com and Krone.at.

A 30-year-old Canadian man worked at a public restroom at the train station in Salzburg. He was always making new friends, which is how he met the two guys who killed him.
They showed up for a "visit," but on the way, they stopped at a gas station to pick up disposable gloves and heavy-duty duct tape.
After some brief conversation, they overpowered him, tied him up, and beat him because they wanted the PIN for his debit card.

One of the attackers admitted he started choking him until he died. Then they tossed the body in the tub and turned the water on. To cover their tracks, they dumped a ton of detergent and shampoo in there. Since the drain wasn't fully plugged, the water slowly drained away. When the police arrived, they found the body in the tub, but the water was gone.

The victim's father started panicking because he hadn't heard from his son in a while.

After the crime, the attackers trashed the apartment looking for anything else valuable. They stuffed trash bags with the victim's clothes, two cell phones, shoes, a razor, and a hair dryer.

The neighbors noticed something was up.

When the police hit the apartment, they found total chaos—piles of the victim's documents and mail everywhere—and tucked in that mess was an asylum seeker's ID belonging to one of the attackers (maybe it fell out or something).

The attackers actually wore the victim's clothes after the deed, which ended up being part of what helped the police nail them.

Once they were taken in, they confessed to the crime, but without showing a shred of remorse. "Everything's washed anyway," they just shrugged.

Right now, they're sitting in the Puch-Urstein jail.

Article from Krone.at

edit: I forgot to mention, both of them had been flagged by the police before for petty theft and small fights, but they hadn't been detained yet. One of them had already been granted asylum, from what I gather, which is why he had the ID.

hiddenmarlin14 said:Yeah, that happened just the other day. I didn't read your specific articles, but I saw the reports on Salzburg.com and Krone.at.

A 30-year-old Canadian man worked at a public restroom at the train station in Salzburg. He was always making new friends, which is how he met the two guys who killed him.
They showed up for a "visit," but on the way, they stopped at a gas station to pick up disposable gloves and heavy-duty duct tape.
After some brief conversation, they overpowered him, tied him up, and beat him because they wanted the PIN for his debit card.

One of the attackers admitted he started choking him until he died. Then they tossed the body in the tub and turned the water on. To cover their tracks, they dumped a ton of detergent and shampoo in there. Since the drain wasn't fully plugged, the water slowly drained away. When the police arrived, they found the body in the tub, but the water was gone.

The victim's father started panicking because he hadn't heard from his son in a while.

After the crime, the attackers trashed the apartment looking for anything else valuable. They stuffed trash bags with the victim's clothes, two cell phones, shoes, a razor, and a hair dryer.

The neighbors noticed something was up.

When the police hit the apartment, they found total chaos—piles of the victim's documents and mail everywhere—and tucked in that mess was an asylum seeker's ID belonging to one of the attackers (maybe it fell out or something).

The attackers actually wore the victim's clothes after the deed, which ended up being part of what helped the police nail them.

Once they were taken in, they confessed to the crime, but without showing a shred of remorse. "Everything's washed anyway," they just shrugged.

Right now, they're sitting in the Puch-Urstein jail.

Article from Krone.at

edit: I forgot to mention, both of them had been flagged by the police before for petty theft and small fights, but they hadn't been detained yet. One of them had already been granted asylum, from what I gather, which is why he had the ID.

What a nightmare. Honestly, gives me the chills...

Right now, they've got them locked up in Puch-Urstein.

Article from the New York Post

edit: Forgot to mention, the cops had both of them on their radar way before this for petty theft and some small scuffles, but they hadn't actually picked them up until now. From what I gathered, one of them already has asylum status, which explains why he was carrying an ID card.

So, what's the play here? Are they getting deported or what?

Gary Cox2 said:What a nightmare. Honestly, gives me the chills...

Right now, they've got them locked up in Puch-Urstein.

Article from the New York Post

edit: Forgot to mention, the cops had both of them on their radar way before this for petty theft and some small scuffles, but they hadn't actually picked them up until now. From what I gathered, one of them already has asylum status, which explains why he was carrying an ID card.

So, what's the play here? Are they getting deported or what?

I haven't a clue. I assume they're just sitting in jail waiting for a trial, but who knows when that happens. There's also the question of who's defending them, how good their lawyer will be, or even who's footing the bill. It's all a mess.
I'm not entirely certain, but if I recall correctly, the trial for that incident in Austin where he mowed down several people isn't even wrapped up yet. 🤔 I can't keep up with all the details. As far as I remember, they initially declared him "unfit to stand trial." 🙄

Deportation? Please. They need to finish their murder sentence first.
Then they can get booted without any mercy.

Today's poll.

What am I even reading right now? Are they seriously saying elections won't happen until November 27th or December 4th just because of some clerical error with the ballots? 🤣

Yeah, their adhesive just isn't up to par🤣.

Carol Newman2 said:What am I even reading right now? Are they seriously saying elections won't happen until November 27th or December 4th just because of some clerical error with the ballots? 🤣

Charles Brown9 said:Yeah, their adhesive just isn't up to par🤣.

It is quite transparently intended that the Austrian presidential elections take place after the American ones—ostensibly, of course, "due to faulty envelope adhesive."

But what is the actual 🤣strategic goal
here, in the final analysis...?
Is it to ensure that whatever result they are banking on in Austria doesn't mess with the outcome in the USA, or is it that they want the results from the USA to somehow influence the Austrian outcome?