#contested ballots

[aibidil]

This is only relevant if you or someone you know lives in North Carolina:

A candidate for NC Supreme Court, Jefferson Griffin, lost by a small margin, confirmed by two recounts. He’s suing the Board of Elections, arguing that 60,273 early votes should be nullified. All of these early voters showed their ID and the votes are legal. (For some reason, these voters didn’t have their social security number or driver’s license number in their voter file. Neither the state Board of Elections nor state law says that this makes them ineligible.)

The names of the voters that are contested are publicly available, but most of the voters don’t know they’re on the list and that their vote is in danger of being nullified.

What to do? Visit this website:

Scroll down to the search tool. Search your name and the names of any family or friends who voted in North Carolina in November. (You can narrow it down by County.)

Keep scrolling until you get to the map. If you live in NC, zoom in on your neighborhood — you can’t see the names associated with dots on the map, but you can see if there are people in your neighborhood who should be alerted. If so, you can spread the word.

If you or a friend is on the list, there are instructions for what action to take (calling your local Board of Elections, emailing Jefferson Griffin to ask your name be removed from the list, etc.)

Share this website widely!

[aijamisespava]

BREAKING: Start Voting Now!

Well, the biggest voting event of the year has finally arrived! The ESC250 is open for you to cast your vote for your top 10 favorite Eurovision songs of all time! Of course, since I'm writing this, I have already cast my vote! My ballot is below! You can cast your vote here (you will need to login with an account that can be made in 5 seconds with a Facebook, Google, or Twitter account), and then wait until New Year's Eve to hear the top 250! But remember: you have 4 weeks to cast your vote, so RUNNNN!

This year, I went for a different method for selecting my songs, especially having ranked back to 2002. Switzerland 2021 is my favorite of all time, so it gets my 12 points. Belgium 2015 is another favorite (plus the artist's discography slaps) so that song gets my 10 points. As Aijamisespava, it would be borderline sacrilege to not include Latvia and Serbia's 2023 entries, so they're my 8 and 7 points. My top 2 of Eurovision 2024 got my 6 and 5 point vote (but really Belgium 2024 is gonna be a favorite and Serbia 2024 is an entry that's very personal to me). I gave Norway 2024 my underrated vote as I will stand on the hill that that song is so underrated, giving it my 4 points. Getting 2000s representation is Moldova 2007 in my 3 point vote. Estonia 2007 has been on my mind so I gave it my 2 points. The difference in my method is a random draw for my 1 point vote. From now on, I will randomly pick a song to get my 1 point of the songs I ranked. This year, Bosnia & Herzegovina's 2005 entry won the draw, so maybe keep your eyes open for a deep dive on that song in the future? Maybe?

[anistarrose]

Please don't tune out when you get to the non-partisan section of your ballot this November. First off, where state Supreme Court justices are elected, Republicans are trying their darndest to elect candidates who will destroy reproductive freedom, gut voting rights, and do everything in their power to give "contested" elections to Republicans. Contrast Wisconsin electing a justice in 2023 who helped rule two partisan gerrymanders unconstitutional, versus North Carolina electing a conservative majority in 2022, who upheld a racist voter ID law and a partisan gerrymander that liberal justices had previously struck down both of.

Second, local judicial offices will make infinitely more of an impact on your community than a divided state or federal legislature will. District and circuit courts, especially, are where criminalization of homelessness and poverty play out, and where electing a progressive judge with a commitment to criminal justice reform can make an immediate difference in people's lives.

It's a premier example of buying people time, and doing profound-short-term good, while we work to eventually change the system. You might not think there will be any such progressive justices running in your district, but you won't know unless you do your research. (More on "research" in a moment.)

The candidates you elect to your non-partisan city council will determine whether those laws criminalizing homelessness get passed, how many blank checks the police get to surveil and oppress, and whether lifesaving harm reduction programs, like needle exchanges and even fentanyl test strips, are legal in your municipality. Your non-partisan school board might need your vote to fend off Moms for Liberty candidates and their ilk, who want to ban every book with a queer person or acknowledgement of racism in it.

Of course, this begs the question — if these candidates are non-partisan, and often hyper-local, then how do I research them? There's so much less information and press about them, so how do I make an informed decision?

I'm not an expert, myself. But I do think/hope I have enough tips to consist of a useful conclusion to this post:

Plan ahead. If you vote in person, figure out what's on your ballot before you show up and get jumpscared by names you don't know. Find out what's on your ballot beforehand, and bring notes with you when you vote. Your city website should have a sample ballot, and if they drop the ball, go to Ballotpedia.

Ballotpedia in general, speaking of which. Candidates often answer Ballotpedia's interviews, and if you're lucky, you'll also get all the dirt on who's donating to their campaign.

Check endorsements. Usually candidates are very vocal about these on their websites. If local/state progressive leaders and a couple unions (not counting police unions lol) are endorsing a candidate, then that's not the end of my personal research process per se, but it usually speeds things up.

Check the back of the ballot. That's where non-partisan races usually bleed over to. This is the other reason why notes are helpful, because they can confirm you're not missing anything.

I've seen some misconceptions in the reblogs, so an addendum to my point about bringing notes on the candidates: I strongly suggest making those notes a physical list that you bring polling place with you. Many states do allow phones at the polling place, but several states explicitly don't — Nevada, Maryland, and Texas all ban phones, and that may not be an exhaustive list. There may also be states that allow individual city clerks to set policies.

You should also pause and think before you take a photo of your ballot, because even some states that don't ban phones still ban ballot photographs. But whether it's a photo, or just having your phone in general — in an environment as high-risk for voter suppression as the current one, you don't want even a little bit of ambiguity about your conduct. Physical notes are your friends.

[reasonsforhope]

Kamala Harris just announced that her vice president will be Minnesota governor Tim Walz. Based on the coverage so far I'm really reassured by this decision.

The Washington Post did an obviously great job of making a prepared article for each option, considering how long an article they had up 7 minutes after the announcement.

((Okay technically it's not an official announcement yet it's "according to three people familiar with the pick, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a decision that is not yet public." But listen. I am 99% sure this is a weather balloon. (Meaning: a deliberate leak to gauge reaction.) Because the sheer weakness or incompetence on the part of the Harris campaign that it would take for three people to all confirm that within a few hours hours of each other and the planned announcement it is massive.))

-via The Washington Post, August 6, 2024

Honestly this decision, from everything I've read and can tell, looks like it's brilliant politics.

Important Context: The vice president(ial candidates)'s job in an election is not to be similar to the president. The vice president's job on the ballot is very, very much specifically to be different from the president. Why? So they can cover each others' weaknesses. Especially regionally.

(Sidenote: I feel a bit ridiculous saying this. But genuinely if you want to get a stronger understanding of how US elections really work. Go watch seasons 6 and 7 of The West Wing. Genuinely, a lot of politicians have said - especially back in its day - that that was the most accurate depiction of an election they'd ever seen. Also specifically features an entire arc about a contested Democratic primary convention, so also very good if you're interested in understanding weird nominating convention shenanigans.)

From the article:

"Harris’s choice for a running mate was among the most closely watched decisions of her fledgling campaign, as she sought to bolster the ticket’s prospects for victory in November and rapidly find someone who could be a governing partner. In picking Walz, she has selected a seasoned politician with executive governing experience and signaled the importance of Midwestern battleground states such as Wisconsin and Michigan.

Walz’s foray into politics came later in life: He spent more than two decades as a public school teacher and football coach, and as a member of the Army National Guard, before running for Congress in his 40s. In 2006, he defeated a Republican to win Minnesota’s 1st Congressional District--a rural, conservative area--and won reelection five times before leaving Congress to run for governor.

Walz was first elected governor in 2018 and handily won reelection in 2022. Though little-known outside his state, Walz emerged publicly as one of the earliest names mentioned as a possible running mate for Harris, and in the ensuing days he made the rounds on television as an outspoken surrogate for the vice president...

“These are weird people on the other side. They want to take books away, they want to be in your exam room. … They are bad on foreign policy, they are bad on the environment, they certainly have no health care plan, and they keep talking about the middle-class,” Walz told MSNBC in July. “As I said, a robber baron real estate guy and a venture capitalist trying to tell us they understand who we are? They don’t know who we are.”

Walz also has faced criticism from Republicans that his policies as governor were too liberal, including legalizing recreational marijuana for adults, protecting abortion rights, expanding LGBTQ protections, implementing tuition-free college for low-income Minnesotans and providing free breakfast and lunch for schoolchildren in the state.

But many of those initiatives are broadly popular. Walz also signed an executive order removing the college-degree requirement for 75 percent of Minnesota’s state jobs, a move that garnered bipartisan support and that several other states have also adopted.

“What a monster. Kids are eating and having full bellies, so they can go learn, and women are making their own health-care decisions,” Walz said sarcastically in a July 28 interview with CNN when questioned whether such policies would be fodder for conservative attacks, later adding: “If that’s where they want to label me, I’m more than happy to take the [liberal] label.”

Walz also spoke at a kickoff event in St. Paul for a Democratic canvassing effort, casting Trump as a “bully.”

“Don’t lift these guys up like they’re some kind of heroes. Everybody in this room knows--I know it as a teacher--a bully has no self-confidence. A bully has no strength. They have nothing,” Walz said at the event, sporting a camouflage hunting hat and T-shirt.

Walz has explained that he felt some Democrats’ practice of calling Trump an existential threat to democracy was giving him too much credit, which prompted his decision to denounce the GOP nominee instead as being “weird.”

“I do believe all those things are a real possibility, but it gives him way too much power," Walz said on CNN’s “State of the Union” regarding the Democrats’ rhetoric. “Listen to the guy. He’s talking about Hannibal Lecter, shocking sharks, and just whatever crazy thing pops into his mind.”

If Walz is elected vice president, under state law, Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan (D) would assume the governorship for the rest of his term. Minnesota Senate president Bobby Joe Champion, a Democrat, would become lieutenant governor."

-via The Washington Post, August 6, 2024

--

This guy. Sounds like. fucking Moderate swing-state/rural/Midwestern/southern/"heartland"/working class white voter catnip. He sounds like he's also a very smart politician and strong campaigner. And he's apparently genuinely a good guy with a good record, too.

He sounds like he's going to do a really good job of appealing to voters in several of the big deal swing states without being from any of them specifically. Which means it doesn't feel like pandering to one of the states involved (and thereby spurning the others), which is also great.

(Also he was the one who started "weird" @ conservatives and I think we should take that seriously as a very good political instinct/move. Judging in large part by how it has so clearly hit an actual nerve with conservatives like so little else. Also hugely relevant: that post going around about how part of why conservatives are so upset about "weird" is because in the Midwest, "weird" specifically also implies anti-social or harmful behavior.)

Officially feeling more optimistic about Trump not winning in November

[glo-shroom]

Hey guys. So, between bomb threats in dozens of polling locations across several swing states, burned ballot boxes, an uncounted number of absentee ballots being contested and rejected, voter purging, PA with thousands of mail in ballots that need to be re-scanned as well as Elon Musk literally paying PA citizens to vote, and the second highest record voter turnout in the past century but yet currently still 15 million less blue votes compared to the 2020 election (granted counting has not finished yet), there's been a lot of call for a recount and investigation, which I personally feel like is absolutely worth doing. So anyone who can, I direct you here to make your requests on this ASAP

edit: I'll keep my original text here but since some of this is already quickly becoming outdated and I'm now seeing much better posts than mine circulating, I'm turning off reblogs, here's a good post to check out

[godbirdart]

so Canada's federal election just got bumped up to April 28th, 2025, and you all know what that means. it means yall have to see me make another long-winded post about it.

let's recap: WHY THE ELECTION DATE: APRIL 28, 2025?

Typically, Canada's federal election is hosted on the third Monday of October once every four years. The reason Canada is hosting it in April is because Carney, the new Prime Minister, requested a Dissolution of Parliament. This action can be requested at any point by request of the sitting Prime Minister or by the King of Canada, but cannot go forward without the approval of the sitting Governor General. The Governor General serves as the King's representative within Canada, among a variety of other constitutional duties, and thus oversees the procedure.

WHO ARE THE POLITICAL PARTIES?

Canada's parliament is currently [as of March 2025] occupied by five political parties. There are more than just these five, but these ones are considered the main players in Canadian Politics. ◦ New Democratic Party / Policies & Publications ◦ Bloc Québécois / Policies & Publications [French] ◦ Green Party / Policies & Publications ◦ Liberal Party of Canada / Policies & Publications ◦ Conservative Party of Canada / Policies & Publications

HOW DOES ALL THIS WORK?

I've seen a few comments floating around treating former Prime Minister Trudeau's tag-out with replacement Prime Minister Carney like it was a federal election [it was not] and that it was somehow illegal [it was perfectly legal]. Being America's neighbor has even Canadians confused as to how our own election system operates, so here are the cliff notes: ◦ You are eligible to vote in Canada if you are a Canadian citizen, are 18 years or older, and can prove your identity and address. ◦ Eligible voters can still register to vote at the polling station if they forgot to register in advance. ◦ Eligible voters can vote early on specific days, register for mail-in voting, vote at an Elections Canada office, or vote on election day itself before polling stations close in their respective time zone. ◦ Eligible voters can still vote while incarcerated, homeless, live abroad, or are outside of Canada during the election. ◦ Employers are obligated to give employees three hours off from work to vote. ◦ Federal elections do not utilize automatic ballot-counting machines. If someone's going off about ballot-hacking or interference, they likely haven't voted in a Canadian federal election. From casting ballots to counting, Canadian voting is largely analog. All golf pencils and paper. ◦ Canada does not vote to elect the Prime Minister specifically. There are 343 Ridings [Electoral Districts] across Canada. These correspond with the 343 seats in the House of Commons:

Each riding elects a member of Parliament to represent them in the House of Commons. Each member of Parliament is typically affiliated with a political party, but they can be independent. The party that wins the most seats in the House becomes the prevailing government and that party's leader becomes Prime Minister. ◦ This is not a celebrity contest. Election ballots vary from riding to riding and list the names of the candidates running for Parliament within each individual district. Party leader names only appear if they happen to be the representative for your particular riding. Voters can find out their riding's candidates using the Elections Canada website.

While Canadian elections don't have nearly the same sensationalism as the States, these basics should still give you the knowledge to recognize when someone [or a bot] is trying to manufacture social media outrage or otherwise spew some bullshit. So I'm going to close this all off with this:

Elections are not Team Sports

In the social media era, it can be alarmingly easy to get swept up in hype and spectacle. Canada operates on a multi-party system, sure, but you still need to pay attention and read into to the policies and guarantees each party is dangling in front of you. Don't just leave it to election day vibes. You need to think critically about who you want writing the legislation, and that also means equipping yourself with the awareness to vote strategically. If you live in a riding that's detrimentally attached to a party whose policies conflict with human rights and values, you may need to place your vote in the candidate whose party has the best chance to oust them - even if that party isn't the one you'd personally prefer to vote for.

Be critical, don't get swept away, and please spare a thought for Canada's House Hippo. They've been trending increasingly endangered since the 90's, but thanks to conservation efforts in the late 2010's they've a fighting chance to make a comeback.

[nodynasty4us]

Remember to vote down-ballot

If you live in the United States, you haven't been able to escape hearing about the presidential contest between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris.

But don't forget that there are other races on your ballot too. Research them before you go to the polls and decide how you are going to vote. You can find out who is running in your area on a local government website or at Ballotpedia.

Everywhere in the United States, you can vote on who to send to the House of Representatives.

In two thirds of the states, you can vote for a Senator.

In some states, various state and local officials are on the ballot. (In other states these contests are held in non-presidential years.)

Some states are holding referendums. You can vote for or against an amendment to your state's constitution, or for or against a law that the legislature has sent to an election.

In some localities you can vote on a bond issue that would authorize a local government to levy taxes for a special project.

If it's too much to remember, you can bring notes with you into the voting booth about who and what you want to vote for.

Some of you are not planning to vote because you hate both Harris and Trump. But you might find the other races to be meaningful to you. Get out and vote even if you leave the top of the ballot blank.

[cryptotheism]

Hey sorry if it's a bother but I figured I'd ask you since you have so much experience with conspiracy talk and the like. What do you think about people claiming that Trump definitely cheated in some way and bringing up "36 bomb threats" or contested absentee ballots as proof?

I haven't seen any evidence to support Trump cheating. Nobody is immune to conspiracy thought.

[reality-detective]

Just to be clear:

Monkeypox or bird flu don’t actually have to be legitimate threats in order for the Deep State to accomplish their goals.

They just need an excuse to put more mail-in ballots in circulation.

They just need a “global health emergency” on paper, in order to enact emergency powers and Democrat governors can send out millions of mail-in ballots to every registered voter. They harvest the ballots, stop the counting in the swing states at 3:00 AM on election night, then deliver the harvested ballots to Democrat districts in contested swing states, and the steal is on.

That's how it's done. 🤔

[saywhat-politics]

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin’s Democratic attorney general asked a court on Friday to block billionaire Elon Musk from handing out $1 million checks to voters this weekend, just two days before the state’s hotly contested Supreme Court was to be decided.

Attorney General Josh Kaul asked the Dane County Circuit Court to issue an emergency injunction to stop the Musk event, which he announced on his social media platform X. Musk initially said the money would go to voters in the Supreme Court race, then deleted that and said it would instead go to signers of his petition targeting “activist” judges.

Musk’s America PAC earlier this week gave $1 million to a Green Bay man who urged voters on Friday to cast their ballots for the Musk-backed court candidate Brad Schimel. He also has the endorsement of President Donald Trump.

Schimel, a Waukesha County judge, faces Democratic-backed Dane County Circuit Judge Susan Crawford in Tuesday’s election. Ironically, Kaul’s injunction request was randomly assigned to Crawford but her spokesperson said she would recuse.

[mariacallous]

Sede vacante. The Holy See is vacant.

Pope Francis, the first Latin American pontiff in history, died at age 88 on Monday at his residence in Vatican City. Born Jorge Mario Bergoglio in Argentina, he led the Catholic Church for 12 years.

Francis was hospitalized for 38 days in February for double pneumonia. His doctors later revealed that he had had two close brushes with death. Francis was discharged from the hospital a month ago and had made several public appearances since. Most notably, he attended the Vatican’s celebrations on Easter Sunday. “Dear brothers and sisters, Happy Easter,” Francis told the crowds, before being driven across St. Peter’s Square on the popemobile, waving at the faithful. In hindsight, it was a fitting send-off for a pontiff who had become the people’s pope.

At times like these, the ways of the Vatican can appear mysterious. What happens after a pope dies? Who governs the Holy See? And how is a pope elected? Most non-Catholics are probably trying to remember the plot of the 2024 movie Conclave right now.

All eyes are now on the camerlengo, or chamberlain, Cardinal Kevin Joseph Farrell. He will run the Holy See until a new Holy Father is elected. No time is wasted after the pope dies. His body is quickly embalmed and then put on display for three days in St. Peter’s Basilica in Vatican City.

Next comes the funeral, which also takes place in St. Peter’s Basilica or, if the weather permits, just outside, on St. Peter’s Square. The dean of the College of Cardinals always presides over the ceremony. Giovanni Battista Re, the current dean, has served in the Curia since the 1960s. If anyone knows how to compose a homily, it’s a man who has seen the deaths of multiple popes.

Since the beginning of the 20th century, popes have been buried in the ornate grottoes beneath St. Peter’s Basilica. But, in 2023, Francis decided to break with protocol. He will be interred in St. Mary Major, a basilica in the center of Rome, because of his “great devotion” to the Virgin Mary.

Although the official mourning period for the pope lasts nine days, the process for selecting a successor starts as soon as he has drawn his last breath. As the Italian proverb goes, morto un papa, se ne fa un altro. When a pope dies, another is made. In other words, not even the vicar of Christ is irreplaceable.

The new pope is chosen by conclave, the papal election dramatized in the hit film. It occurs roughly two weeks after the pope’s funeral. Only cardinals under the age of 80 can take part in it. This means that, out of a current total of 252 cardinals, 138 will pick the next leader of the Catholic Church—a global institution with more than 400,000 clergy members and 1.3 billion lay Catholics.

The conclave occurs in the Sistine Chapel, beneath a ceiling painted by Michelangelo. The doors are locked, and the cardinal electors can have no contact with the outside world. During this time, they are supposed to let the Holy Spirit guide their decision. Concretely speaking, it works like this: Cardinals are given a piece of paper with a header in Latin that reads simply, “I elect as supreme pontiff,” and they write down the name of their chosen candidate below.

To win, a candidate must secure a two-thirds majority. Until that happens, voting continues. Only one round is held on the first day of the conclave, but after that, up to four rounds can take place each day.

While the conclave is à huis clos, the outside world watches closely. The cardinals have only one way to communicate their progress: a chimney on St. Peter’s Square, connected to the Sistine Chapel. When a vote is inconclusive, the cardinals burn the ballots. In a separate furnace, they add chemicals to produce black smoke. When a pope has been elected, they burn the ballots one last time; this time, the smoke turns white. Habemus papam.

Conclaves vary in length. In 2013, Francis was elected after only 24 hours. By comparison, it took cardinals five days and 14 rounds to choose Pius XI in 1922.

Though the conclave is the final act in “making” a pope, what happens before matters, too. In the days leading up to it, the dean of the College of Cardinals convenes general congregations. All the cardinals, regardless of their age, take part. General congregations provide an opportunity to discuss the direction of the church and the qualities that the next pope should have.

The whole process is akin to politics, just swap the dark suits for bright red soutanes. “If history teaches us anything about papal conclaves, it is that the Holy Spirit is far from the only influence at play,” said Jessica Wärnberg, a historian who has conducted extensive research in Vatican archives and written a book on Rome and the popes, titled City of Echoes. She added that it has always been political. “Historically, major political powers, such as France and Spain, worked hard to sway voting. Today, factions are shaped along more ideological lines.”

But campaigning for the papacy is nothing like campaigning in a liberal democracy. For one, it’s very hush-hush. There are no leaflets or campaign ads. For another, cardinals eyeing the papacy are never open about their ambitions. Instead, they rely on allies to quietly drum up support. Subtlety is the mot d’ordre.

That’s not to say Vatican politicking isn’t ruthless. Think Game of Thrones but without the bloodshed. Various factions in the church push their champion. But if he isn’t able to garner enough support, a champion is ditched without mercy, no matter how preeminent he might be.

And, just as in Game of Thrones, it isn’t immediately clear who will win in the end. This is especially true of the upcoming conclave. “All bets are off when it comes to predicting who will succeed Francis,” said Philip Shenon, a former investigative reporter at the New York Times and the author of Jesus Wept, a new book on the modern church. “There’s no obvious front-runner.”

One reason why is that Francis completely overhauled the College of Cardinals. He appointed 110 out of the 138 cardinals who will vote in the conclave. That’s nearly 80 percent. The catch: Many of them come from far-flung corners of the world. They have spent little time together and therefore barely know one another.

Who wins is thus anyone’s guess. “It might be somebody very exotic, since many cardinals are from the other side of the world,” said Frédéric Martel, the author of In the Closet of the Vatican, an investigation into homosexuality in the church that draws on 1,500 interviews, including with prelates. “In fact, it might be a big surprise,” Martel added, “since nobody will have known of the sociology of the new conclave!”

This hasn’t stopped all of Rome from buzzing about the papabili, or the “pope-able.” For Martin Palmer, the CEO of FaithInvest, an NGO that works closely with the church, and a member of the Vatican COVID-19 Commission, the next pontiff will come from one of two factions within the church: He will belong either to “the right wing” in the United States and Africa or to the more liberal “Francis appointments” in Asia and Africa.

On the right, Palmer identifies Robert Sarah, a 79-year-old cardinal from Guinea, as a papabile. Sarah has long been in the mix to succeed Francis. A former prefect of the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, the Vatican department overseeing the Latin Church’s liturgy, he is the anti-Francis candidate.

A traditionalist heavyweight who doesn’t pull his punches, Sarah has echoed the white-nationalist Great Replacement conspiracy theory. Europe, he said in 2019, is at risk of being “invaded by foreigners, just as Rome has been invaded by barbarians.” As he sees it, the continent is locked in an existential battle with the Islamic faith. “If Europe disappears, and with it the priceless value of the Old Continent, Islam will invade the world, and we will completely change culture, anthropology, and moral vision.”

Without surprise, Sarah takes a hard line on homosexuality. He has slammed Francis’s decision to allow same-sex couples to receive sacraments. And he has likened “homosexual and abortion ideologies” to “Nazi-Fascism and communism.”

Another conservative contender, Palmer said, is Raymond Burke, a 76-year-old cardinal from the United States. Best known for his love of the cappa magna, Burke is as outspoken in his statements as in his fashion choices. He has repeatedly criticized Francis—so much so that the pope took away his subsidized Vatican apartment. The American papabile has close ties to the Make America Great Again movement. For many years, he was an ally of Steve Bannon until the two fell out. Still, Burke remains a power player in U.S. conservative Catholic circles.

In the age of Trump, however, that may be a liability. Palmer, who was recently at the Vatican, said that “the negative impact of Trump around the world has significantly cast a cloud over right-wing American rhetoric. Burke and by implication Sarah are seen as tainted by their association with Trump-style politics.”

As a consequence, a staunch conservative like Sarah or Burke may not have the numbers to win. “Sarah and Burke have zero chance—or as many chances as Trump to win the Eurovision,” Martel quipped. “They are ultra-right-wing and ultra-marginal figures. It’s a joke!”

Shenon put it more diplomatically. “Well, conservatives could try, and they probably will,” he said. “But when the doors to the Sistine Chapel are bolted shut, there just aren’t that many of them in the College of Cardinals��at least not enough of the rock-ribbed archconservatives who would vote for a candidate who would reverse Francis’s legacy.”

The next pontiff, Shenon predicts, will at least maintain some degree of continuity with Francis. “Whatever happens, it’s fair to assume that the next pope will not have a dramatically different vision of the church’s future,” Shenon said. He believes that the cardinal electors appointed by Francis “doubtless feel great loyalty to Francis’s progressive legacy.”

Among them, Shenon identifies Cardinal Pietro Parolin—the Holy See’s secretary of state since 2013—as an “obvious candidate.” The 70-year-old Italian prelate would respect the late pope’s agenda. He has said Francis’s reforms were “the action of the Spirit, [so] there can be no U-turn.” If the cardinal electors are looking for a safe pair of hands, someone who knows the Curia and can safeguard Francis’s achievements, then Parolin is their man.

In a similar vein, Martel points to Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, the 69-year-old archbishop of Bologna. Zuppi has Francis’s trust. Crucially, as the head of the Italian Episcopal Conference, he’s also popular with many prelates.

But if they want a bolder choice, then cardinal electors could go for the Ghanaian Cardinal Peter Turkson. The 76-year-old is the chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and Social Sciences. He has long been ranked as a papabile, even though his star has dimmed after he fell out with Francis. But don’t count him out, said Palmer, who has worked with Turkson and thinks that “he really speaks for the engaged African Church.”

Palmer also thinks that Cardinal Luis Tagle, the former archbishop of Manila, has a serious chance. Hailed as the “Asian Francis,” Tagle is a progressive. He backed Francis in his drive to protect the environment and his plans for a more inclusive church. “My vision for a synodal church is a church that rediscovers this wonderful gift of the Spirit given to the whole church in Vatican II,” Tagle said in 2023, referring to the Second Vatican Council, which modernized the church in the 1960s and has been attacked by conservatives ever since.

The Filipino prelate has also taken a more compassionate approach to doctrinal matters, deploring the “harsh words that were used in the past to refer to gays and divorced and separated people, the unwed mothers, etc.”

At 67, Tagle is young by papal standards. Francis was elected at 76, Benedict XVI at 78. If he does become pope, then he would have the time to enact sweeping reforms. “In recent years, Francis has seemed pretty convinced his agenda—and the spirit of Vatican II—will survive his papacy,” Shenon said, “which is why he keeps insisting with a smile that his successor will call himself John XXIV.” John XXIII was the pope who initiated Vatican II. Tagle could well be the kind of successor Francis envisioned—perhaps even taking the name John XXIV.

If neither conservative nor liberal factions manage to win enough support among the cardinal electors, then a compromise candidate may emerge. “Historically speaking, divided conclaves have often favored ostensibly neutral candidates,” Wärnberg said. “A papabile with a lower public profile, such as the careful and erudite Cardinal Peter Erdo of Hungary or the reserved and pragmatic Cardinal Anders Arborelius of Sweden, could, therefore, emerge.”

In recent months, another ostensibly neutral prelate has shot up to the top of the papabili list: Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, the Latin patriarch of Jerusalem. He’s Italian but has spent most of his career in Israel. This means that he isn’t associated with the Curia and remains something of a blank slate.

On many key issues, Pizzaballa has kept his cards close to his chest. And when he hasn’t, he has sent signals to both liberals and conservatives. With liberals, for instance, he backed Laudato Si, Francis’s 2015 encyclical on environmental justice. But Pizzaballa is also open to the Latin Mass, prized by conservatives. “The cardinal is very meticulous in liturgical celebration and has no problem with the traditional Mass,” David Neuhaus, a former patriarchal vicar for Hebrew-speaking Catholics in the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem, told National Catholic Register.

Despite being only 59, Pizzaballa has plenty of political experience. In 2014, he orchestrated the “peace prayer” in the Vatican Gardens, a landmark summit between Francis, then-Israeli President Shimon Peres, and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Similarly, Pizzaballa has tried to strike a measured tone over the Gaza war, talking both about the horrors of the Oct. 7, 2023, massacres and the suffering of the Palestinian people.

Another compromise candidate could be the Canadian Cardinal Michael Czerny. “If the conclave is looking for a safe caretaker pope to ease the transition from the dynamism of Francis, Cardinal Czerny, the cardinal at the head of the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development, is also a possibility. Quiet, efficient, and running the Laudato Si Dicastery, it is his dicastery that will guide that most radical of encyclicals,” Palmer said. “But don’t expect the church to be quite so on message about climate or the environment post-Francis.”

Conclaves aren’t an exact science. With a few exceptions, they are notoriously difficult to predict. The papabili seldom get to sit on the throne of St. Peter. The Italians have a proverb to that effect. Chi entra papa in conclave, ne esce cardinale. He who enters the conclave as pope leaves it as cardinal.

[aijamisespava]

Quick Eurovision/Life Update!

Hi everyone! As the time draws closer and closer to Junior Eurovision, I will note that I still haven't got around to ranking the songs, but hope to have some time to do it this week.

But there's also another thing that I want to talk about. ESC250 has opened its voting! For those unfamiliar, everyone in the fandom can vote for their top 10 favorite Eurovision songs (of ALL TIME) with the points system used in the contest! Then, on New Years Eve, they share the top 250 songs! It's super exciting because you get to see how many people like the same songs as you!

You can vote with this link, but you will need to sign up for an account, which all you need is a Facebook or Gmail account or whatnot, then get voting!

Of course, what kind of Eurovision page would I be if I didn't share my vote with you? Here are the 10 songs I'm giving points to!

I don't know when the voting is going to close, so get your votes in FAST! And then, we can see the results to ring in the 2024 year and brace for another year of Eurovision songs!

[sniperct]

I'm curious about your opinion on recent events with Biden. Do you think it's likely another Democrat will either run against him in the coming months or replace him altogether? A lot of talk about Kamala replacing him but I don't think she wants to as she's a pretty staunch supporter of his.

The only way biden gets replaced at this point is if he's dead.

We would 100% lose. Voters hate hate hate it when a party is so messy as to replace their candidate mid-run. I saw a headline saying this is biden's LBJ moment. OVER ONE DEBATE (also, uh, who won in 1968 after the dems had a contested convention? It sure as shit wasn't the democrat)

If one bad debate mattered, Reagan and Obama would have both lost their re-election bids.

Additionally, Biden has made 15 appearances in 8 cities in 9 days. Like...that's a lot. And he's been sharp in every one. And plenty of other candidates have had really bad debates and did fine in the election. We're many months out polls are noise at this point (and remember in 2022 when the red wave didn't materialize despite every poll showing republicans headed for a massive win. Polls haven't been accurate in a long, long time)

The media has also screamed for ...well every democratic candidate since Bill Clinton to resign while being mysteriously silent on the age and qualifications for Republicans, further proving the old adage 'its okay if you're a republican'. Funny how no one is calling for the convicted felon and proven rapist to resign even though he's almost the same age as Biden.

They're also already running hit-pieces on Harris(boy does the media hate Harris), and will do the same for any other candidate. The NYtimes in particular has been extremely vindictive and one-sided (they did the same to hillary)

Also a lot of this call for biden to step aside originated on the right before getting amplified on the left.

They're already prepared to sue to prevent another candidate from getting on ballots in many states and could succeed in that. In which case, auto-win for trump.

Lastly, anyone but biden or harris would mean they start from scratch money-wise; legally they can't give the 100s of millions biden has already raised (far out raising trump by the way) to any other candidates.

Democrats are very good at eating their own, we form our own circular firing squads at the drop of a hat. All of this is noise that detracts from the many, many things biden has actually done to improve the country and our lives or having the most progressive agenda of any US president.

But the media likes to keep quiet about the good stuff on the dem side and the bad stuff on the GOP side so *shrug*

[hotcupoteckla]

It's the super majority that gets me.

Like if it was just Trump winning by electoral and really close in the senate but House had more Dem reps?

I probably wouldn't think he cheated, or it would be really hard to contest.

But this? Nah, fam..

He fucking cheated a month ago, that's why he was saying that shit.

He KNOWS if he lost that they cheated? HOW? Because he stuffed the ballots already?!

They lie? They cheat? They steal?

Motherfucker, that's you!

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

by Dion J. Pierre

In Washington, DC, on March 23, 2025, a group of Georgetown University students and community leaders protest. Photo: Andrew Thomas via Reuters Connect.

Georgetown University’s student government has rescheduled an anti-Israel boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) referendum that it initially scheduled to take place during the Passover holiday following outcry from Jewish students, who argued the original timing effectively disenfranchised them by depriving them of a chance to express opposition to the measure at the ballot box.

As previously reported, the Georgetown University Student Association’s (GUSA) senators voted via secret ballot for a resolution to hold the referendum — which will ask students to decide whether they “support … divesting from companies arming Israel and ending university partnerships with Israeli institutions” — on April 14-16. The move outraged Jewish students, as well as GUSA senators who deplored the body’s passing the measure by allegedly illicit means.

“This referendum, cloaked in the language of human rights, represents not only a troubling overstep into Georgetown’s academic and fiduciary independence but also a campaign rooted in the discriminatory logic of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement,” said a letter the university’s chapter of Students Supporting Israel (SSI) sent to university president Robert Groves. “The passage of this measure would not occur in isolation. It would embolden future efforts to marginalize Jewish and Israeli students, deepen campus polarization, and risk fueling the disturbing rise in antisemitism seen at other institutions. Universities that have permitted such one-sided campaigns are now facing not only fractured communities and repetitional harm but growing federal scrutiny — including potential impacts to public funding.”

GUSA said on Monday that it moved the referendum date, issuing a statement which acknowledged concerns raised by SSI, as well as Chabad Georgetown, Georgetown Israel Alliance, and the Jewish Student Association.

“We made this decision after hearing concerns about the placement of the election during a religious holiday,” the governing body said in a statement posted on Instagram. “Although the election has been rescheduled, formal campaigners may continue to campaign for the referendum until the end of the campaigning period. Individuals may continue to register as formal campaigners until the end of the campaigning period.”

The referendum must still be contested for other reasons, SSI told The Algemeiner on Tuesday.

[schraubd]

Republicans Against Democracy Parts 53258 and 53259

Today, a North Carolina appellate court issued a decision that would effectively steal a tightly contested State Supreme Court race won by Democratic incumbent Allison Riggs, retroactively invalidating thousands of ballots that the state board of elections deemed lawfully cast. The court gave some of the voters in question fifteen days to "cure" alleged defects, but few believe that the pell-mell scramble the decision has unleashed will enable all the voters in question to avoid being disenfranchised. In other cases, the court peremptorily declared that an entire class of voters that long been permitted to vote in North Carolina elections must be excluded after the fact. The decision is norm-shattering in retroactively -- after the election has occurred and ballots have already been cast -- deciding that certain votes by eligible voters will not be counted. Because the race was so close and most of the challenged ballots are from Democrat-heavy constituencies, most observers believe the ruling will be enough to allow the losing Republican candidate to prevail by ex post facto judicial fiat. The decision will be appealed to the North Carolina supreme court (which has a Republican majority even without Riggs recusing, which she will); there is also a federal court case that is sitting in abeyance while the state challenges work their course. Meanwhile, down in Texas, Republican Governor Greg Abbott is refusing to call a special election to fill the seat of deceased Houston-area Rep. Sylvester Turner (D). Abbott nominally justifies the delay on alleged "failures" in how Harris County administers elections; claims that county election officials have dismissed as "nonsense". The actual reason, nobody has any serious doubt, is to keep a Democratic seat empty and prop up the GOP's razor-thin House majority. Can't elect a Democrat if you don't hold an election in the first place! Both of these atrocities are united by a common theme, which is that Republicans fundamentally do not believe in democratic elections (January 6 was proof enough of that; the pardons of the insurrectionists just gilds the lily). And I fully endorse Scott Lemieux's point that these decisions lie downstream of the Supreme Court's abominable Rucho decision: once you validate contempt for the democratic process in the form of extreme partisan gerrymanders, you encourage further contempt in all sorts of other domains. via The Debate Link https://ift.tt/7Ghodau