With all Louisiana’s wealth in natural resources and industry, WHY DO WE STAY SO POOR?
Wow, as an outsider (not from Louisiana) I’ve visited the state numerous times, and the impression is always the same—shocking poverty and decay. I’ve always thought of Louisiana as an under-developed state that has just been passed-by the 20th & 21st Centuries. To learn that economically, it’s a very wealthy state with huge economic production and growth from which residents are deriving little to no benefit SCREAMS exploitation. This is a clear lesson in the vital importance of taxes and how they are used.
“No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems – of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.”
well howdy there internet people it’s bo
again so today
we’re going to uh talk about how trump
doesn’t know these people
it’s a common refrain
many of the people who criticize him
criticisms become public
he says he doesn’t know him
never knew her never met him coffee boy
right and his base buys this
the thing is
i feel like by this point they should
that this is just how he disavows people
and throws them under the bus and he did
it to them
what happened on the sixth
his base will call legitimate political
a tourist visit
what did trump call it
a heinous attack
because it could have came back on him
looked bad on him so he disavowed it
tried to move away from it
to uh the people who were there
you know the people wearing like all the
his supporters his movement what did he
you will pay
do not represent our movement
you do not represent our country
he’s pretending that he cares about
because it’s good for him politically
the day after
they weren’t his people he didn’t know
never met him right
certainly didn’t encourage them
to go to the capitol
didn’t say that he was going to walk up
there meet him there all of that stuff
they went under the bus just like
it’s what he does
this is how he disavows people it’s how
from his mistakes
and lets other people pay for them
so many people
going out of their way to try to show
to the former president
it will never
even those people
willing to put themselves at risk
those people willing to quite literally
stand on the front lines for him
willing to be in custody for him
they’re not part of his movement
and they became not part of his movement
as soon as he uh no longer had a use for
it’s just a thought
y’all have a good day
Trump was initially unpredictable because he didn’t act like a normal politician—or human being—but once you get that he doesn’t act like a normal human being, he’s surprisingly predictable.
Six Republicans on the Supreme Court just announced—a story that has largely flown under the nation’s political radar—that they’ll consider pre-rigging the presidential election of 2024.
Republican strategists are gaming out which states have Republican legislatures willing to override the votes of their people to win the White House for the Republican candidate.
Here’s how one aspect of it could work out, if they go along with the GOP’s arguments that will be before the Court this October:
It’s November, 2024, and the presidential race between Biden and DeSantis has been tabulated by the states and called by the networks. Biden won 84,355,740 votes to DeSantis’ 77,366,412, clearly carrying the popular vote.
But the popular vote isn’t enough: George W. Bush lost to Al Gore by a half-million votes and Donald Trump lost to Hillary Clinton by 3 million votes but both ended up in the White House. What matters is the Electoral College vote, and that looks good for Biden, too.
As CNN is reporting, the outcome is a virtual clone of the 2020 election: Biden carries the same states he did that year and DeSantis gets all the Trump states. It’s 306 to 232 in the Electoral College, a 74-vote Electoral College lead for Biden, at least as calculated by CNN and the rest of the media. Biden is heading to the White House for another 4 years.
Until the announcement comes out of Georgia. Although Biden won the popular vote in Georgia, their legislature decided it can overrule the popular vote and just awarded the state’s 16 electoral votes to DeSantis instead of Biden.
An hour later we hear from five other states with Republican-controlled legislatures where Biden won the majority of the vote, just like he had in 2020: North Carolina (15 electoral votes), Wisconsin (10), Michigan (16), Pennsylvania (20) and Arizona (11).
Each has followed Georgia’s lead and their legislatures have awarded their Electoral College votes—even though Biden won the popular vote in each state—to DeSantis.
Thus, a total of 88 Electoral College votes from those six states move from Biden to DeSantis, who’s declared the winner and will be sworn in on January 20, 2025.
Wolf Blitzer announces that DeSantis has won the election, and people pour into the streets to protest. They’re met with a hail of bullets as Republican-affiliated militias have been rehearsing for this exact moment and their allies among the police refuse to intervene.
After a few thousand people lay dead in the streets of two dozen cities, the police begin to round up the surviving “instigators,” who are charged with seditious conspiracy for resisting the Republican legislatures of their states.
After he’s sworn in on January 20th, President DeSantis points to the ongoing demonstrations, declares a permanent state of emergency, and suspends future elections, just as Trump had repeatedly told the world he planned for 2020.
Sound far fetched?
Six Republicans on the Supreme Court just announced that one of the first cases they’ll decide next year could include whether that very scenario is constitutional or not. And it almost certainly is.
Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution lays out the process clearly, and it doesn’t even once mention the popular vote or the will of the people:
“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress… [emphasis added]
“The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons … which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President…”
It’s not particularly ambiguous, even as clarified by the 12th Amendment and the Electoral Count Act of 1887.
Neither mentions the will of the people, although the Electoral Count Act requires each state’s governor to certify the vote before passing it along to Washington, DC. And half of those states have Democratic governors.
Which brings us to the Supreme Court’s probable 2023 decision. As Robert Barnes wrote yesterday for The Washington Post:
“The Supreme Court on Thursday said it will consider what would be a radical change in the way federal elections are conducted, giving state legislatures sole authority to set the rules for contests even if their actions violated state constitutions and resulted in extreme partisan gerrymandering for congressional seats.”
While the main issue being debated in Moore v Harper, scheduled for a hearing this October, is a gerrymander that conflicts with North Carolina’s constitution, the issue at the core of the debate is what’s called the “Independent State Legislature Doctrine.”
It literally gives state legislatures the power to pre-rig or simply hand elections to the candidate of their choice.
As NPR notes:
“The independent state legislature theory was first invoked by three conservative U.S. Supreme Court justices in the celebrated Bush v. Gore case that handed the 2000 election victory to George W. Bush. In that case, the three cited it to support the selection of a Republican slate of presidential electors.”
That doctrine—the basis of John Eastman and Donald Trump’s effort to get states to submit multiple slates of electors—asserts that a plain reading of Article II and the 12th Amendment of the Constitution says that each state’s legislature has final say in which candidate gets their states’ Electoral College vote, governors and the will of the voters be damned.
The Republicans point out that the Constitution says that it’s up to the states—”in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct”—to decide which presidential candidate gets their Electoral College votes.
But the Electoral Count Act requires a governor’s sign-off, and half those states have Democratic governors. Which has precedence, the Constitution or the Act?
If the Supreme Court says it’s the US Constitution rather than the Electoral Count Act, states’ constitutions, state laws, or the votes of their citizens, the scenario outlined above becomes not just possible but very likely. Republicans play hardball and consistently push to the extremes regardless of pubic opinion.
After all, the Constitution only mentions the states’ legislatures—which are all Republican controlled—so the unwillingness of the Democratic governors of Michigan, North Carolina, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania to sign off on the Electoral College votes becomes moot.
Under this circumstance DeSantis becomes president, the third Republican president in the 21st century, and also the third Republican President to have lost the popular vote election yet ended up in the White House.
This scenario isn’t just plausible: it’s probable. GOP-controlled states are already changing their state laws to allow for it, and Republican strategists are gaming out which states have Republican legislatures willing to override the votes of their people to win the White House for the Republican candidate.
Those state legislators who still embrace Trump and this theory are getting the support of large pools of rightwing billionaires’ dark money.
As the highly respected conservative Judge J. Michael Luttig recently wrote:
“Trump and the Republicans can only be stopped from stealing the 2024 election at this point if the Supreme Court rejects the independent state legislature doctrine … and Congress amends the Electoral Count Act to constrain Congress’ own power to reject state electoral votes and decide the presidency.”
I take no satisfaction in having accurately predicted—in March of 2020—how Trump and his buddies would try to steal the election in January of 2021. Or how the Supreme Court would blow up the Environmental Protection Agency.
Trump’s January 6th effort failed because every contested state had laws on the books requiring all of their Electoral College votes to go to whichever candidate won the popular vote in the state.
That will not be the case in 2024.
As we are watching, the Supreme Court—in collaboration with state legislatures through activists like Ginny Thomas—are setting that election up right now in front of us in real time.
We damn well better be planning for this, because it’s likely coming our way in just a bit more than two short years.The Supreme Court is laying the groundwork to pre-rig the 2024 electionSix Republicans on the Supreme Court just announced—a story that has largely flown under the nation’s political radar—that they’ll consider pre-rigging the presidential election of 2024.Republican strategists are gaming out which states have Republican legislatures willing to override the votes of t…https://www.rawstory.com/supreme-court-election/What is the “Independent State Legislature” theory?Wikipedia: Moore v. Harper (Case scheduled for Oct)
The math behind cryptocurrencies.
Help fund future projects: https://www.patreon.com/3blue1brown
An equally valuable form of support is to simply share some of the videos.
Special thanks to these supporters: http://3b1b.co/btc-thanks
This video was also funded with help from Protocol Labs: https://protocol.ai/join/
Some people have asked if this channel accepts contributions in cryptocurrency form. As a matter of fact, it does:
2^256 video: https://youtu.be/S9JGmA5_unY
Music by Vincent Rubinetti: https://soundcloud.com/vincerubinetti…
Here are a few other resources I’d recommend:
Original Bitcoin paper: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
Block explorer: https://blockexplorer.com/
Blog post by Michael Nielsen: http://3b1b.co/crypto
(This is particularly good for understanding the details of what transactions look like, which is something this video did not cover)
Video by CuriousInventor: https://youtu.be/Lx9zgZCMqXE
Video by Anders Brownworth: https://youtu.be/_160oMzblY8
Ethereum white paper: https://goo.gl/XXZddT
Commentsthis was awesome! I was having trouble on understanding the nodes vs. miners as well as the random number / difficulty adjustment but this totally cleared it up!It’s an extremely information dense lecture. You have to watch portions of it again and again to grasp the underlying concepts. But once you’ve finished it, you feel so damn confident.5 years later and I still comeback to this Blockchain explanation to check if my understanding, love itYou have no idea how much I’ve tried to find an article or video actually explaining how cryptocurrencies work. Everyone else just goes around with analogies. They probably don’t understand fully themselves. Thanks man.
This is the clearest video I’ve ever seen, and I still don’t get it.10:00 “The history of transactions is the currency” interesting Edit: 17:30 I love how I now know what a block chain is, and it wasn’t as mind blowing as people on the internet made it seem. And I’m pretty sure blockchains are done in introductory coding courses. (Though not as complex). Edit 2: 18:25 so THAT’S why mining is profitable. I get it now. That circles back to the claim made ~10 mins in. Edit 3: 21:15 So, bitcoin ‘authority’, in essence, is computing power, and bitcoin ‘identity’ is the a blockchain made by the original owner? Great video. As you can see I am still shaky on complete understanding, BUT this was the only useful explaination of Bitcoin and crypto I’ve seen so far (for me). So I am greatful. and maybe this will lead me to understanding others.Prior to watching this I didn’t really understand the link between mining and validating the transactions. Its quite interesting how the system can self-adjust to make sure that mining\validating is always profitable, and therefore even if there is a big crash in mining profitability it should just result in a slowdown of transactions until the system balances. I guess the issue is that there is a big problem if the coin is used for real large scale commerce\business that rely on guaranteed volume. If a large enough proportion of bitcoin transactions were for real vital goods and services, then a crash in mining profitability could drive he value to zero since the value would be much more tied to the amount of volume the system can handle. Lack of trust could continually inflate it, which would then continually make it harder to restore validation capacity. Volatility is an issue for real world business even if the overall trend is continually upwards. If I am correct, then it would suggest that bitcoin will remain a speculation asset and a store of value rather than a replacement for sovereign currencies?at around 20:30, theyre discussing how it isnt viable for Alice to try to commit fraud because she cant out-compute the other miners on the network all by herself. could someone explain what would happen if a group of miners (that formed the majority of the network) decide to commit fraud together?>> It’s 100% possible. And in fact, the top 4 miners of bitcoin have more than 50% of the network’s total hashing power. However, if you have 50% of the total mining network’s computation, you’re probably better off using it to make ~$2.2 Million a day with honest mining than you to defraud a single individual.
>> the specific name for this scenario is a “50% attack”