Alaska Turning Blue?

[Jonada]

I've got to admit, I haven't been paying any attention to this race leading up to today, so I don't know how much of a shock this is or isn't, but I couldn't believe it when I saw a democrat won a statewide race in Alaska.

Peltola beats Palin, wins Alaska House special election

Democrat Mary Peltola has won the special election for Alaska’s only U.S. House seat, besting a field that included Republican Sarah Palin.

apnews.com

 

[TigerGrowls]

BREAKING: DEMOCRAT Peltola DEFEATS Republican Sarah Palin in Alaska Special Election -- FIRST DEMOCRAT WIN IN 50 YEARS! -- THANKS TO RANKED-CHOICE VOTING AND MAIL-IN BALLOTS | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

STOLEN— Democrat Mary Peltola defeated Sarah Palin in the Alaska Special election to replace Rep.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

BREAKING: DEMOCRAT Peltola DEFEATS Republican Sarah Palin in Alaska Special Election — FIRST DEMOCRAT WIN IN 50 YEARS! — THANKS TO RANK CHOICE VOTING AND MAIL-IN BALLOTS​

By Jim Hoft
Published August 31, 2022 at 8:10pm

STOLEN—
Democrat Mary Peltola defeated Sarah Palin in the Alaska Special election to replace Rep. Don Young in Congress.
She is the FIRST DEMOCRAT to win the House seat in solid red Alaska in 50 Years!
Rank choice voting and mail-in ballots were implemented by referendum in 2020.
TRENDING: BREAKING: DEMOCRAT Peltola DEFEATS Republican Sarah Palin in Alaska Special Election -- FIRST DEMOCRAT WIN IN 50 YEARS! -- THANKS TO RANK CHOICE VOTING AND MAIL-IN BALLOTS
The Gateway Pundit previously reported earlier this month that Republicans in Alaska passed rank-choice voting in 2020. This confusing system is only being pushed by RINOS and radicals in conservative red states. It allows Democrats to even the playing field when they have no chance of winning.
Republicans also passed mail-in voting.

RINOs and Democrats Just Stole Future Elections in Deep Red Alaska -- And the Republican Party DID NOT LIFT A FINGER to Stop It | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

In the coming days Dinesh D’Souza and Salem Media will release the much-anticipated movie “2000 Mules” on the 2020 presidential election heist.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

These Republican lawmakers in state after state are straight from hell!
ALASKA IS LOST!

President Trump won Alaska by 10 points in 2020.
Again — We warned about this back in May! Alaska moved to mail-in voting. And at the same time, they dropped signature verification on ballots.
These new rule changes will ensure the state becomes the next Oregon or California.
Republicans just gave the state away. How tragic.

RINOs and Democrats Just Stole Future Elections in Deep Red Alaska -- And the Republican Party DID NOT LIFT A FINGER to Stop It | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

In the coming days Dinesh D’Souza and Salem Media will release the much-anticipated movie “2000 Mules” on the 2020 presidential election heist.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Yahoo reported:

In a historic election, Sarah Palin has lost her bid to serve out the remainder of Republican Rep. Don Young’s term in the U.S. House, which ends in January. Rep. Young died in March at age 88.
The results from the State Review Board were announced live via Facebook Wednesday night, revealing that Democratic candidate Mary Peltola brought in 91,206 votes, while Palin’s count was 85,987.
With her victory, Peltola becomes the first Democrat to hold the seat in 50 years and also the first woman and first Indigenous Alaskan.
The special election on Aug. 16 marked the first time Alaska voters used ranked-choice ballots in a general election. State officials allowed a large window of time for mail-in ballots to arrive, delaying the final results…
…The special election process, which came after Alaska voters approved a ranked-choice voting initiative in 2020, had voters rank their top candidates in order of preference. If a candidate won more than 50% of first-choice votes, they would win the race outright. But if not, the ranked-choice comes into play, with the lowest-ranking candidates being eliminated, round by round, until one person on the ballot receives more than 50% of the votes.
Palin’s opponents in the concurrent House races have included the state-backed Republican candidate Nick Begich and a former state representative, Peltola.

 

[Jonada]

If a person finds ranked choice voting to be too confusing, then that person is probably too stupid to be allowed to vote.

 

[dpic73]

BREAKING: DEMOCRAT Peltola DEFEATS Republican Sarah Palin in Alaska Special Election -- FIRST DEMOCRAT WIN IN 50 YEARS! -- THANKS TO RANKED-CHOICE VOTING AND MAIL-IN BALLOTS | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

STOLEN— Democrat Mary Peltola defeated Sarah Palin in the Alaska Special election to replace Rep.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

BREAKING: DEMOCRAT Peltola DEFEATS Republican Sarah Palin in Alaska Special Election — FIRST DEMOCRAT WIN IN 50 YEARS! — THANKS TO RANK CHOICE VOTING AND MAIL-IN BALLOTS​

By Jim Hoft
Published August 31, 2022 at 8:10pm

STOLEN—
Democrat Mary Peltola defeated Sarah Palin in the Alaska Special election to replace Rep. Don Young in Congress.
She is the FIRST DEMOCRAT to win the House seat in solid red Alaska in 50 Years!
Rank choice voting and mail-in ballots were implemented by referendum in 2020.
TRENDING: BREAKING: DEMOCRAT Peltola DEFEATS Republican Sarah Palin in Alaska Special Election -- FIRST DEMOCRAT WIN IN 50 YEARS! -- THANKS TO RANK CHOICE VOTING AND MAIL-IN BALLOTS
The Gateway Pundit previously reported earlier this month that Republicans in Alaska passed rank-choice voting in 2020. This confusing system is only being pushed by RINOS and radicals in conservative red states. It allows Democrats to even the playing field when they have no chance of winning.
Republicans also passed mail-in voting.

RINOs and Democrats Just Stole Future Elections in Deep Red Alaska -- And the Republican Party DID NOT LIFT A FINGER to Stop It | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

In the coming days Dinesh D’Souza and Salem Media will release the much-anticipated movie “2000 Mules” on the 2020 presidential election heist.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

These Republican lawmakers in state after state are straight from hell!
ALASKA IS LOST!

President Trump won Alaska by 10 points in 2020.
Again — We warned about this back in May! Alaska moved to mail-in voting. And at the same time, they dropped signature verification on ballots.
These new rule changes will ensure the state becomes the next Oregon or California.
Republicans just gave the state away. How tragic.

RINOs and Democrats Just Stole Future Elections in Deep Red Alaska -- And the Republican Party DID NOT LIFT A FINGER to Stop It | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

In the coming days Dinesh D’Souza and Salem Media will release the much-anticipated movie “2000 Mules” on the 2020 presidential election heist.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Yahoo reported:

How dare a Democrat win under the rules in this Red state, huh? Youngkin won Virginia under rank choice as well. You ok with that or should we overturn that election?

 

[TigerGrowls]

How dare a Democrat win under the rules in this Red state, huh? Youngkin won Virginia under rank choice as well. You ok with that or should we overturn that election?

I didnt say that. Made no comment but posted the article. The mail in balloting concerns me more.

 

[ctcseb]

How dare a Democrat win under the rules in this Red state, huh? Youngkin won Virginia under rank choice as well. You ok with that or should we overturn that election?

You will see more of more of this. Republicans are starting to attack RCV in full force because it allows for better representation and gaming elections (gerrymandering, etc) is GOP’s way of slowing down the the impact of demographic changes that will be turning the country blue over the next two decades.

In this particular case, some Republican voters who didn’t want Palin voted for other Republican candidates as their first choice. From another article I read, 55% of these voters had Palin as second choice but 45% of them rejected Palin so much they had the Dem as their second choice. This helped put the Dem gal over the top.

Obviously, this is an incredible example of RCV working properly and truly reflecting the wishes of the voters. But some perniciously dishonest Republicans are trying to misrepresent what happened by adding up all the votes for a Republican candidate in the first round and showing that it adds up to more than 50%. They are ignoring the 45% of Republican voters for the non-Palin candidates who rejected her and would rather see the other gal win. Obviously, lots of people are too dumb to understand that and are crying foul and some do understand that but don’t have the integrity to accept it and would rather try to score political points.

RCV in the primaries + open primaries would be the end of MAGA nationwide. The reason is that right now, candidates have to cater to the 10% to 20% of most extreme voters (either side, also applies to the progressives woke candidates) to win a primary. This leads to high partisanship and refusal to compromise. With RCV and open primaries, candidates would have to win over 50% of the voters (across choice tiers, first, second, third), so now you have to truly appeal to most. This would be a game changer that could put democracy back on track. Which is why the GOP is fighting it tooth and nails.

 

[dpic73]

I didnt say that. Made no comment but posted the article. The mail in balloting concerns me more.

Why?

 

[dpic73]

You will see more of more of this. Republicans are starting to attack RCV in full force because it allows for better representation and gaming elections (gerrymandering, etc) is GOP’s way of slowing down the the impact of demographic changes that will be turning the country blue over the next two decades.

In this particular case, some Republican voters who didn’t want Palin voted for other Republican candidates as their first choice. From another article I read, 55% of these voters had Palin as second choice but 45% of them rejected Palin so much they had the Dem as their second choice. This helped put the Dem gal over the top.

Obviously, this is an incredible example of RCV working properly and truly reflecting the wishes of the voters. But some perniciously dishonest Republicans are trying to misrepresent what happened by adding up all the votes for a Republican candidate in the first round and showing that it adds up to more than 50%. They are ignoring the 45% of Republican voters for the non-Palin candidates who rejected her and would rather see the other gal win. Obviously, lots of people are too dumb to understand that and are crying foul and some do understand that but don’t have the integrity to accept it and would rather try to score political points.

RCV in the primaries + open primaries would be the end of MAGA nationwide. The reason is that right now, candidates have to cater to the 10% to 20% of most extreme voters (either side, also applies to the progressives woke candidates) to win a primary. This leads to high partisanship and refusal to compromise. With RCV and open primaries, candidates would have to win over 50% of the voters (across choice tiers, first, second, third), so now you have to truly appeal to most. This would be a game changer that could put democracy back on track. Which is why the GOP is fighting it tooth and nails.

Another thing I read was there was a big push by Republicans to not rank Peltola at all, but she still won even though she was massively outspent by the other candidates.

I also wanted to note that progressive Democrats haven't been winning primaries for the most part as the Left has been voting for the most pragmatic candidates, which shows that we prefer to stay on the center-left. Let's hope the extremes on both sides keep losing.

 

[TigerGrowls]

Why?

CHEATING!!!!

 

[DW4_2016]

CHEATING!!!!

Don’t worry about not having any evidence

 

[dpic73]

CHEATING!!!!

"Despite this dramatic increase in mail voting over time, fraud rates remain infinitesimally small. None of the five states that hold their elections primarily by mail has had any voter fraud scandals since making that change. As the New York Times editorial board notes, “states that use vote-by-mail have encountered essentially zero fraud: Oregon, the pioneer in this area, has sent out more than 100 million mail-in ballots since 2000, and has documented only about a dozen cases of proven fraud.” That’s 0.00001 percent of all votes cast.*** An exhaustive investigative journalism analysis of all known voter fraud cases identified only 491 cases of absentee ballot fraud from 2000 to 2012. As election law professor Richard L. Hasen notes, during that period “literally billions of votes were cast.” While mail ballots are more susceptible to fraud than in-person voting, it is still more likely for an American to be struck by lightning than to commit mail voting fraud."

The False Narrative of Vote-by-Mail Fraud

Mail ballots are essential for holding a safe election amid Covid-19, and security concerns can be easily addressed.

www.brennancenter.org

 

[TigerGrowls]

"Despite this dramatic increase in mail voting over time, fraud rates remain infinitesimally small. None of the five states that hold their elections primarily by mail has had any voter fraud scandals since making that change. As the New York Times editorial board notes, “states that use vote-by-mail have encountered essentially zero fraud: Oregon, the pioneer in this area, has sent out more than 100 million mail-in ballots since 2000, and has documented only about a dozen cases of proven fraud.” That’s 0.00001 percent of all votes cast.*** An exhaustive investigative journalism analysis of all known voter fraud cases identified only 491 cases of absentee ballot fraud from 2000 to 2012. As election law professor Richard L. Hasen notes, during that period “literally billions of votes were cast.” While mail ballots are more susceptible to fraud than in-person voting, it is still more likely for an American to be struck by lightning than to commit mail voting fraud."

The False Narrative of Vote-by-Mail Fraud

Mail ballots are essential for holding a safe election amid Covid-19, and security concerns can be easily addressed.

www.brennancenter.org

Disagree with all this.

 

[dpic73]

Disagree with all this.

Shocker!

 

[gardentiger]

A democrat won in Alaska...lmfao. Yes, alaska is turning blue. She won with 40% of the vote. She'll have to defend the seat in Nov.

 

[DW4_2016]

Disagree with all this.

Now that you bring up these facts I can see where you’re coming from.

 

[dpic73]

A democrat won in Alaska...lmfao.

I can see a blue wave from my house

 

[dpic73]

Yes, alaska is turning blue. She won with 40% of the vote. She'll have to defend the seat in Nov.

That was in the first round and she still would have won since it goes to rank choice if you don't reach 50%. Palin was in second place at 31% in the first round so it would have been a bigger win for Peltola before the rank choice voting.

 

[scotchtiger]

Let's hope the extremes on both sides keep losing.

Here here.

 

[nytigerfan]

I didnt say that. Made no comment but posted the article. The mail in balloting concerns me more.

magas: mail in voting makes it too easy for people to vote!

also magas: rank choice voting makes it too hard to vote!

 

[scotchtiger]

demographic changes that will be turning the country blue over the next two decades.

GOP needs to completely flush Trump in the coming years and take a hard look at its platform and appeal. There is plenty of room for millennials, Hispanics and gen Z in the republican party of its able to adjust policy and tailor messaging appropriately. Right now we have a party of no policy (pubs) and of bad policy (dems). A party with decent policy and without a divisive leader can and should grow.

 

[WapPride]

i was excited about a 3rd party option until i saw andrew yang's worthless ass was a part of it

 

[nytigerfan]

i was excited about a 3rd party option until i saw andrew yang's worthless ass was a part of it

I saw him interviewed the other day, he was asked about abortion. He could not give an answer, simply because that would derail the Forward party before it got started. If he says pro-choice, then they lose a ton of potential republican switchovers. And vice versa.

 

[yoshi121374]

GOP needs to completely flush Trump in the coming years and take a hard look at its platform and appeal. There is plenty of room for millennials, Hispanics and gen Z in the republican party of its able to adjust policy and tailor messaging appropriately. Right now we have a party of no policy (pubs) and of bad policy (dems). A party with decent policy and without a divisive leader can and should grow.

What do you think of the new "Forward" party? They seem to be presenting themselves initially as exactly this.

 

[scotchtiger]

I saw him interviewed the other day, he was asked about abortion. He could not give an answer, simply because that would derail the Forward party before it got started. If he says pro-choice, then they lose a ton of potential republican switchovers. And vice versa.

It’s wild to me that abortion is such an influential category. It’s not even on the radar for me as far as determining which candidate or party to support.

 

[scotchtiger]

What do you think of the new "Forward" party? They seem to be presenting themselves initially as exactly this.

Don’t really know much about them. If they are for small government, common sense, personal responsibility, low taxes, minimal entitlements, fixing healthcare at the root of its problems (ie not free insurance), etc etc then I should take a look.

 

[WapPride]

It’s wild to me that abortion is such an influential category. It’s not even on the radar for me as far as determining which candidate or party to support.

it wasn't a mainstream platform until the late 70s/80s with the southern baptist convention reversing their previous beliefs and coming out strongly against it. they then threw all their support behind Reagan who was a vocal anti abortionist. this coupled with women's rights activists coming out in the same timeframe supporting a woman's right to choose and backing the democrats pretty much lead to the highly partisan issue we have today.

the funny part is, it doesn't start to become a partisan issues until the 80s. 45 republicans and democrats supported a ban on abortion in '83 (Biden being one of those who supported a ban). in '91 41% of republicans and 45% of democrats supported a woman's right to choose, and by the turn of the century those numbers became much more polarized by political party.

 

[ctcseb]

GOP needs to completely flush Trump in the coming years and take a hard look at its platform and appeal. There is plenty of room for millennials, Hispanics and gen Z in the republican party of its able to adjust policy and tailor messaging appropriately. Right now we have a party of no policy (pubs) and of bad policy (dems). A party with decent policy and without a divisive leader can and should grow.

I wish I could have liked your post twice. Since I can’t, just adding a comment to say how accurate I believe your thoughts to be.

 

[ctcseb]

What do you think of the new "Forward" party? They seem to be presenting themselves initially as exactly this.

Been looking into them and it’s a bit too soon to tell. They were started by Andrew Yang but they merged three weeks ago with SAM and RAM, one being a centrist organization, the other anti-Trump Republicans. So, they have been attacked by all sides…

They have really confused people because they are trying to have national impact through local relevance. What they are trying to do is not have a single set of ideology that they apply everywhere. Because this is what leads to Republicans not gaining traction in California and Democrats not gaining traction in Montana. What they are shooting for is creating a solution space that eliminates the extremes in the right and left and find common ground in between. What it also means is a Forward Party candidate in Montana may not be 100% aligned with another Forward Party candidate in, say, New York City. They don’t see this as a bug but as a feature. They want candidates that share common values and principles (they have them on their web site) but see it as beneficial that candidates represent who they were elected by (vs. the one size fits all ideology of a party) and policy preferences may vary (like voters’ preferences).

This flexibility has been very poorly received and a PR nightmare. People want immediate policy preferences, so that they can figure out whether to agree or disagree. Progressives in particular absolutely hate the FP. If moderate democrats leave for the FP, the AOCs of the world will lose their leverage. They have added 22,000 volunteers in 3 weeks and have a bit of momentum.

For now, the primary focus of the FP is democracy reform. They are trying to support ranked choice voting initiatives (and term limits, etc). They won’t have any candidates in November and aren’t trying to play spoiler anywhere. I feel like the trajectory is interesting but it’s too soon to tell how legit the movement is.

 

[yoshi121374]

Been looking into them and it’s a bit too soon to tell. They were started by Andrew Yang but they merged three weeks ago with SAM and RAM, one being a centrist organization, the other anti-Trump Republicans. So, they have been attacked by all sides…

They have really confused people because they are trying to have national impact through local relevance. What they are trying to do is not have a single set of ideology that they apply everywhere. Because this is what leads to Republicans not gaining traction in California and Democrats not gaining traction in Montana. What they are shooting for is creating a solution space that eliminates the extremes in the right and left and find common ground in between. What it also means is a Forward Party candidate in Montana may not be 100% aligned with another Forward Party candidate in, say, New York City. They don’t see this as a bug but as a feature. They want candidates that share common values and principles (they have them on their web site) but see it as beneficial that candidates represent who they were elected by (vs. the one size fits all ideology of a party) and policy preferences may vary (like voters’ preferences).

This flexibility has been very poorly received and a PR nightmare. People want immediate policy preferences, so that they can figure out whether to agree or disagree. Progressives in particular absolutely hate the FP. If moderate democrats leave for the FP, the AOCs of the world will lose their leverage. They have added 22,000 volunteers in 3 weeks and have a bit of momentum.

For now, the primary focus of the FP is democracy reform. They are trying to support ranked choice voting initiatives (and term limits, etc). They won’t have any candidates in November and aren’t trying to play spoiler anywhere. I feel like the trajectory is interesting but it’s too soon to tell how legit the movement is.

Thanks for that info. I haven't done a deep dive, but that definitely sounds intriguing.

 

[adgjunior]

I saw him interviewed the other day, he was asked about abortion. He could not give an answer, simply because that would derail the Forward party before it got started. If he says pro-choice, then they lose a ton of potential republican switchovers. And vice versa.

Why wouldn’t he just answer it by giving his belief, then follow that up with “but the Forward Party is open to candidates from both sides of the issue and that is what distinguishes us from the other two parties. We are candidate driven, not issue driven. We don’t force our candidates to all vote the same”?

 

[yoshi121374]

Why wouldn’t he just answer it by giving his belief, then follow that up with “but the Forward Party is open to candidates from both sides of the issue and that is what distinguishes us from the other two parties. We are candidate driven, not issue driven. We don’t force our candidates to all vote the same”?

Probably trying to be unique and show the differences in the party. If he says a position, then that is the positions of the party.