Kevin McCarthy confirmed that someone was shot.
Yeahbut … apparently, CFSG has Tweeted asking for people to be calm.
Day late, dollar short, criminally insane.
Well. I knew there would be problems. The plane full of ppl chanting at Romney yesterday boded poorly, and I KNEW damn well all those ppl weren’t traveling all that way just to mill about aimlessly. This is the direct result of 20 years of lies. They’re fed up with a bunch of imaginary shit they were told by con-men and they’re not gonna take it anymore. This is what happens when you get your political views from friggin’ former morning disk-jockeys(Rush, Glen Beck).
White House Counsel probably pointed out to him that he’s getting close to incitement, so he’d better back it down.
In other news, Ossoff’s lead is up to 18,423
I’ve said for nearly four straight years …
President Trump has taken every conceivable position on every possible issue. He has affirmed and disavowed every position he’s ever held. He was both deadly serious and totally kidding. The strategy ? No matter the outcome, he can point to ‘evidence’ that he called it right from the beginning.
The AP, with other news organizations, has just called the election for Ossoff.
Ossoff’s lead is now 24,859, which is just outside the threshold for a government paid recount.
Excellent, as I have no doubt that Republicans will try everything to delay and obstruct seating Ossoff and Warnock. Not having the cover of the recount threshhold should help a little bit.
What’d I tell ya? 
I am quite happy to have been wrong.
Surprisingly, 538’s early November prediction that the odds of a Democratic sweep were about 3 in 4 has been supported.
What can I say? Last night I had visions of Warnock and Ossoff yanking defeat from the jaws of victory. Glad to see I was wrong.
Didn’t happen.
I posted that exact same link myself. Scroll up to about 490 something to understand the context.
And then look around 599
Uh, Doctor, I have been informed on other boards that fact checking organizations are biased and liberal-leaning.
I found this thread to be a great aggregator of the latest updates from many sources. Thank you to all stayed up late and contributed.
Yes, BUT YOU DIDNT READ IT. They did not darken Obama’s skin, they darkened the entire video.
That was exactly the point of the link you shared, yet you posted "When Clinton darkened Obama’s skin…"
Yes…so why is Kelly Loffler accused of being a racist for the same thing?
Loffler deliberately altered a picture of a Jewish foe to make his nose “more jewish.” Clinton did not alter the picture of Obama at all. The people who made the ad may have darkened the entire video, but not just Obama. It also just could be the way the ad look son Facebook.
" Without access to the project files of the editor who produced this ad, we can’t measure precisely what color manipulations were performed. However, we can offer some observations based on our own experience, if you’ll bear with a brief interlude of techy nerd-speak.
Some of the differences may be due to video compression required by YouTube, which encodes video to Flash format and re-sizes it, using its own required parameters before posting. The Clinton camp may have had one color scheme in its original video and ended up with a slightly different one after YouTube’s processing.
In our experience posting videos to our Just the Facts feature, conversion to Flash format drives up contrast and reduces the mid-range color values that are frequently found in flesh tones and facial detail. We’ve noticed that Obama, and other candidates, appear drained of a bit of their color in some of our videos after they’ve been processed for posting.
Still, the Clinton ad makers may have darkened the Obama images intentionally, to some degree. When it comes to video editing, the possibilities are overwhelming. But that doesn’t necessarily mean their motives were racist. We note that the entire ad is cast in dark tones and even Hillary Clinton herself appears in shadows, as though she were working late into the night."