What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Georgia: the Battle for the Senate (2 Viewers)

AAABatteries said:
Meh - I never watch commercials anyway.  Watching live TV is archaic.
Click to expand...
Wanted to revisit this - I still don’t watch commercials but my wife does.  It drives me insane but it is what it is.  Last night she was watching something and I watched with her - it’s unreal the commercials.  Literally every commercial break has a commercial from each candidate.  I made her start muting the TV.

 
Uh.........if I did this, I would be in deep, deep doodoo.  

GEORGIA SEN. DAVID Perdue initiated the well-timed sale of more than $1 million worth of stock in the tech-banking firm Cardlytics, according to a report from the New York Times, despite previous claims made by Perdue that an outside adviser makes his trades.

Perdue, who sat on the board of Cardlytics before entering office, came under scrutiny this year for trades that occurred in the weeks before the coronavirus shutdown — and also just prior to the CEO of Cardlytics stepping down. This past spring, when Perdue was questioned about the curiously timed trades, he said through a spokesperson that his trades were made by an independent financial adviser, and therefore couldn’t be the result of any inside information he had obtained.

“Since coming to the U.S. Senate, Senator Perdue has always had an outside advisor managing his personal finances, and he is not involved in day-to-day decisions,” Perdue spokesperson Casey Black told The Intercept in March in response to questions about his trading stocks in the run-up to the pandemic-fueled market crash. Asked specifically about the Cardlytics transactions, Black reiterated that “outside, independent financial advisors manage [Perdue’s] retirement savings.”

Yet that Perdue claim is a lie: According to the recent report in the Times, Perdue ordered the trades himself.

On January 21, Cardlytics CEO Scott Grimes emailed Perdue. “David, I know you are about to do a call with David Evans,” Grimes wrote. “As an FYI, I have not told him about the upcoming changes. Thanks, Scott.”

Evans was the company’s chief operating officer. Any “changes” significant enough to be kept from the COO would be likely to move the stock.

Perdue replied: “I don’t know about a call with David or the changes you mentioned.”

The next morning, Grimes wrote back: “David, Sorry. That email was not meant for you. Wrong David!”

Either Perdue knew about the changes and was creating a record that could enable him to deny such knowledge, or he did not know about the changes and wanted to be clear he had no such knowledge.

Whether the message had truly been sent in error or not, Perdue acted shortly thereafter. “Mr. Perdue then contacted his wealth manager at Goldman Sachs, Robert Hutchinson, and instructed him to sell a little more than $1 million worth of Cardlytics shares, or about 20 percent of his position,” the Times reported, citing three sources. “One person familiar with the inquiry into Mr. Perdue’s trades said that the conversation was memorialized in an internal Goldman Sachs record later obtained by the F.B.I.”

Five weeks later, the company announced Grimes was stepping down amid a shake-up of the leadership team, which also included COO Evans, and the stock tanked — falling by nearly two-thirds in two weeks.

The records, including Perdue’s email exchanges, were obtained through grand jury subpoenas as part of an investigation that started earlier this year when a handful of Republican senators came under scrutiny for stock trading at the beginning of the pandemic. The Intercept’s first investigation into Perdue’s trading was published in May, and Perdue was questioned by the FBI in June; the grand jury declined to indict the senator.

Perdue’s spokesperson did not immediately respond to a follow-up request for comment. Perdue’s spokesperson had previously told The Intercept that Perdue was acting on advice from October 2019 to sell Cardlytics shares, a claim repeated to the Times.

Perdue, who is facing a runoff against Jon Ossoff in January, has since been running an ad boasting of having been “totally exonerated.” Perdue bested Ossoff by about 88,000 votes in November but fell just shy of the 50 percent margin needed to avoid a runoff.

As The Intercept previously reported, on March 18, when Cardlytics stock was bottoming out under $30, Perdue bought back the bulk of the shares he had sold — but this time getting them at a steep discount, investing between $200,000 and $500,000 back into the company, according to Senate disclosures. The stock has seen explosive growth since, currently selling at around $115 per share.

Grimes, who is now executive chair of the board, gave $5,600, the maximum allowable contribution by individuals, to Perdue’s campaign in 2019; it was his only contribution to any candidate in the 2020 cycle. Most of the executives involved in that corporate restructuring had helped Perdue win his race in 2014, contributing $24,500, according to campaign finance reports.

That Perdue owned so much Cardlytics stock at all was itself thanks to the generosity of the company’s board. Perdue received stock options in the company for serving on its board, but those options were worthless when he was elected to the Senate in 2014, because the company had yet to go public. The Cardlytics board bailed Perdue out by extending the deadline for exercising his options by years. As The Intercept reported in May:

According to filings with the SEC, Cardlytics “accelerated Mr. Perdue’s options” — which means he was fully granted the ones that had yet to vest — “and extended the post-termination exercise periods applicable to Mr. Perdue’s option grants to October 12, 2020 and January 25, 2022.” Having extra time to exercise the options gives the stock more opportunity to rise, and gives Perdue more time to decide whether to exercise them, thus dramatically reducing his risk. According to his Senate financial disclosure reports, Perdue had the option to purchase the stock at two separate prices, known as strike prices: 59 cents and $1.11. When the value of the company rises above the strike price, the options are said to be “in the money.”

Brian Foley, an executive compensation consultant and managing director of the firm Brian Foley & Company, said that allowing Perdue to leave with all of his options in 2014 was generous of the board, but an understandable decision. Allowing him to stretch the time he had to exercise the options out to 2020 and 2022, he added, was extraordinary, as Cardlytics was not yet a public company, and that window allowed him many years to wait for the company to go public and its stock to rise before deciding whether to exercise his options.

Cardlytics, part of the nascent financial technology industry, collects and analyzes personal consumer and banking data, using financial transaction history to help companies tailor their personalized marketing efforts. That practice puts it up against a host of privacy regulations, and the company proudly markets its ability to stay within the law as a prime selling point. Perdue serves on the Senate Banking Committee and has worked to roll back regulations that govern firms like Cardlytics. Such conflicts of Perdue’s have recently been investigated by the New York Times and the Daily Beast.
Click to expand...
I hope Jon Ossoff pounds the living hell out of this....

 
AAABatteries said:
Wanted to revisit this - I still don’t watch commercials but my wife does.  It drives me insane but it is what it is.  Last night she was watching something and I watched with her - it’s unreal the commercials.  Literally every commercial break has a commercial from each candidate.  I made her start muting the TV.
Click to expand...
It was like that for months here in PA until election day.  I am very thankful we don't have a runoff

 
stlrams said:
Please prove this point.  Because there’s video in Georgia of suitcases of ballots being pulled from under a table. 
Click to expand...
Every study ever done has shown as much.

The video also shows state representatives there and likely poll watchers from both the left and right.

Do you think the video proves statistically significant fraud?

 
sho nuff said:
Every study ever done has shown as much.

The video also shows state representatives there and likely poll watchers from both the left and right.

Do you think the video proves statistically significant fraud?
Click to expand...
It’s very suspicious so at first glance yes.  It shows all the poll workers told to leave then 4 people remove 4 suitcases from under a table 

 
stlrams said:
It’s very suspicious so at first glance yes.  It shows all the poll workers told to leave then 4 people remove 4 suitcases from under a table 
Click to expand...
At a first glance...it looks like statistically significant fraud?  That seems like a major stretch at best to me.

All told to leave?  It shows that?  I dont believe it shows that at all.   Not commentary of OAN or whatever that Chinese video that was posted.  The video itself. 

 
AAABatteries said:
Wanted to revisit this - I still don’t watch commercials but my wife does.  It drives me insane but it is what it is.  Last night she was watching something and I watched with her - it’s unreal the commercials.  Literally every commercial break has a commercial from each candidate.  I made her start muting the TV.
Click to expand...
T&P's

 
General Malaise said:
Uh.........if I did this, I would be in deep, deep doodoo.  

I hope Jon Ossoff pounds the living hell out of this....
Click to expand...
He has been - he’s been tweeting about it, mentioning it in his speeches and has commercials that cover it.  But after what we watched the last four years do we really expect that to matter to a large number of people?  

 
Ted Cruz is the latest conservative to pile on Lin Wood and Sidney Powell for suggesting that MAGA voters stay at home on January 5 unless Perdue and Loeffler demonstrate they’re fighting against the voter fraud that cheated Trump. Cruz called Wood and Powell “clowns”. 
At least on the Internet, most Trump supporters I read strongly support Wood and Powell...

 
AAABatteries said:
He has been - he’s been tweeting about it, mentioning it in his speeches and has commercials that cover it.  But after what we watched the last four years do we really expect that to matter to a large number of people?  
Click to expand...
The senator TRANSACTED on insider information.  That's a felony offense.  What is the rationale for not bringing him up on charges?

 
General Malaise said:
The senator TRANSACTED on insider information.  That's a felony offense.  What is the rationale for not bringing him up on charges?
Click to expand...
I'm not a lawyer so no clue.  But my 47 years of experience tells me that because he's a rich politician there's some loophole or excuse he can provide.  And that 50% of the country will be appalled and 50% will cheer it.

 
General Malaise said:
The senator TRANSACTED on insider information.  That's a felony offense.  What is the rationale for not bringing him up on charges?
Click to expand...
Historically, I believe members of Congress were exempt from prohibitions against trading on insider information.

But that should have ended in 2012.

I don't really know why an independent DOJ wouldn't pursue charges against Senators Loeffler and Purdue (and others). They did an investigation and decided not to bring charges. Maybe the elements include a mens rea that's hard to prove?

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Historically, I believe members of Congress were exempt from prohibitions against trading on insider information.

But that should have ended in 2012.

I don't really know why an independent DOJ wouldn't pursue charges against Senators Loeffler and Purdue (and others). They did an investigation and decided not to bring charges. Maybe the elements include a mens rea that's hard to prove?
Click to expand...
The bolded is the important word here. 

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Historically, I believe members of Congress were exempt from prohibitions against trading on insider information.

But that should have ended in 2012.

I don't really know why an independent DOJ wouldn't pursue charges against Senators Loeffler and Purdue (and others). They did an investigation and decided not to bring charges. Maybe the elements include a mens rea that's hard to prove?
Click to expand...
Just read the specifics a day or so ago, but from my experience (20+ years in securities/hedge funds) when you TRANSACT on insider information - whether knowingly OR unwittingly - that's a crime.  Perdue had insider information about the CEO of a stock he owned stepping down that was not public information.  He can argue that he didn't know what the CEO meant, but there is no doubt that he was in possession of inside information - in an email, no less - and there is no doubt that he transacted in that very stock BEFORE that information was released to the public. 

I am stupefied at how he is getting a pass on this.

 
How I assume Georgia Republicans’ get-out-the-vote is going

Dave,

Thank you so much for all that you’re doing to get out the vote in Georgia! This runoff is absolutely key to maintaining Republican control of the Senate, and I’m really excited to see what slogans you have come up with that will excite and not confuse everyone in the party as Election Day gets closer! The president’s legacy is on the line here, so it’s important that we get his followers excited, too! We need everybody!

One slight hiccup: I noticed that a slogan Sen. Perdue has been using is “Totally Exonerated." This seems like a bad slogan to me. The first thing that slogan makes me think is, “Of what?” You know? If someone’s campaign slogan is “Don’t worry, they found the real killer!” I get worried. I start having a lot of questions I didn’t have before. “This man didn’t do any of the crimes that people say he did!” I feel like you’re doing the opponent’s work for him. Has he done anything positive for the people of Georgia that you could highlight instead? Maybe he helped one Georgian make a lot of money!

Can’t wait for those slogans!

Winifred

***

Dave,

Got the slogans. Some questions.

“Be Sure To Vote In The Rigged, Fraudulent Election!” I have to say, I don’t love this. I understand that we can’t say that the president is completely off base in insisting that the election is fraudulent, but this feels like it’s pointing in the wrong direction.

“Don’t Not Vote In The Rigged, Fraudulent Election.” Same thing with this one. The double negative makes it worse, somehow.

“They Rigged* The Previous Election But This One We’re Pretty Sure Won’t Be Rigged! Vote In It And Let’s Find Out Together! *No evidence of this, but we’re not saying the president is wrong!" This is also bad. I do see the gap you’re trying to bridge here. Not sure our printer supports italics.

“Hey, Please Don’t Not Vote In The Election Because You Keep Hearing The President Say The Election Was Rigged! The President Is Not Wrong When He Says There Was A Lot of Fraud, But So Far It All Seems To Have Been Imaginary! But There Sure Was A Lot of Imaginary Fraud And We’re Very Mad About It, Too! The President Is Our Favorite! That Being Said, Please Stop Threatening Local Election Officials! This Is Bad For Our Democracy! Also, Vote! We Do Need You To Vote! We Don’t Think There’s Any Fraud, Actually, But Of Course The President Is A Good, Smart Man! Do Vote!" The energy of this one feels very fragile. I should have started this email by asking whether you were okay and how you were holding up during these trying times. I regret not doing so. I think this is just too much text.

“Stop The Steal! By Voting?" No.

“Hold The Line.” I thought this was fine, but people don’t seem to like it!

Dave, I know that you’re really biting off a lot here! But ideally we need something a little catchier that will still be memorable! Give it one more shot? It sounds like you’re under a lot of stress; have you considered investing in a weighted blanket?

All best,

Winifred

***

Dave,

First, let me say, I really think you should take some time off. Take care of yourself.

Second, as for “Fine, Don’t Vote In This Illegitimate, Fraudulent Election! And Then Wonder, Afterwards, Why Your Opponents Got More Votes Than You Did! Has To Be Fraud, Can’t Be That You Literally Told People Not To Vote Because The Election Would Be Rigged. Yup, Probably Fraud. You’re A Bunch Of Clowns.” — yes, I think we can work with this.

Best,

Winifred

 
Last edited by a moderator:
sho nuff said:
Do you think the video proves statistically significant fraud?
Click to expand...


sho nuff said:
At a first glance...it looks like statistically significant fraud? 
Click to expand...


https://www.vice.com/en/article/gqmz4m/how-criminals-justify-crimes-psychology-gangsters-uk

"These "techniques of neutralization" form the basis of a concept known as "neutralization theory," which was posited by sociologists David Matza and Gresham Sykes in the 1950s. The theory holds that criminals are able to neutralize values that would otherwise prohibit them from carrying out certain acts by using one or up to five methods of justification: "denial of responsibility," "denial of injury," "denial of the victim," "condemnation of the condemners," and "appealing to higher loyalties."

"Denial of responsibility" is when an offender proposes that he or she was forced by the circumstances they were in to commit a crime; "denial of injury" means insisting that the crime was harmless; "denial of the victim" involves the belief that the person on the receiving end was asking for it; and "condemnation of the condemners" is when the criminal claims that those criticizing or dishing out punishment are doing so out of spite or to shift the blame from themselves. The final method, "appealing to higher loyalties," involves the perpetrator believing that the law needs to be broken for the good of a smaller section of society—for example, a gang or a group of friends."

 
Before and shortly after the election, I was part of the tiny little sliver of the electorate that wanted to see a Biden victory with the GOP retaining control of the senate.  Basically a return to normalcy/gridlock.  Since election day, I've swung around pretty hard to wanting Democrats to take the senate.  This isn't so much because I want Biden to enact some huge, expansive policy agenda -- that's not going to happen regardless of how these GA races go -- but because the Republican party deserves to be burned to the ground on account of how they've handled the transition period.  

So for the next couple of weeks, I'm on Trump's side if he wants to childishly sabotage these races.  It serves his party right.

 
IvanKaramazov said:
Before and shortly after the election, I was part of the tiny little sliver of the electorate that wanted to see a Biden victory with the GOP retaining control of the senate.  Basically a return to normalcy/gridlock.  Since election day, I've swung around pretty hard to wanting Democrats to take the senate.  This isn't so much because I want Biden to enact some huge, expansive policy agenda -- that's not going to happen regardless of how these GA races go -- but because the Republican party deserves to be burned to the ground on account of how they've handled the transition period.  

So for the next couple of weeks, I'm on Trump's side if he wants to childishly sabotage these races.  It serves his party right.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the party, pal!

 
IvanKaramazov said:
This isn't so much because I want Biden to enact some huge, expansive policy agenda -- that's not going to happen regardless of how these GA races go -- 
Click to expand...
I’m glad you recognize this. It’s amazing the number of very bright people I run into who assume that when one political party takes power in President, Senate and Congress at the same time it means they will push all of their big agenda items through. It almost never happens; it hasn’t happened since 1933. What we see instead is timidity; people are afraid to rock the boat. So during Obama’s first two years all we got was a very watered down health care bill, and during Trump’s first two years all we got was a tax cut. None of the other stuff they promised as candidates went anywhere. 

 
timschochet said:
I’m glad you recognize this. It’s amazing the number of very bright people I run into who assume that when one political party takes power in President, Senate and Congress at the same time it means they will push all of their big agenda items through. It almost never happens; it hasn’t happened since 1933. What we see instead is timidity; people are afraid to rock the boat. So during Obama’s first two years all we got was a very watered down health care bill, and during Trump’s first two years all we got was a tax cut. None of the other stuff they promised as candidates went anywhere. 
Click to expand...
Obama also got the stimulus bill and Dodd-Frank passed in the first couple of years.

 
IvanKaramazov said:
Since election day, I've swung around pretty hard to wanting Democrats to take the senate.  This isn't so much because I want Biden to enact some huge, expansive policy agenda -- that's not going to happen regardless of how these GA races go -- but because the Republican party deserves to be burned to the ground on account of how they've handled the transition period.  
Click to expand...
I'm sort of here but for a different reason. I'm so sick of hearing about Mitch I'd like to see that excuse removed.

 
NorvilleBarnes said:
I'm hearing a lot of people downplaying expectations from Biden "because Mitch" so yeah. If you disagree that's great - you can expect more from Biden regardless.
Click to expand...
Again, you think it's an excuse or do you think it's a warranted viewpoint given Mitch's obstructionist history?

 
NorvilleBarnes said:
I'm hearing a lot of people downplaying expectations from Biden "because Mitch" so yeah. If you disagree that's great - you can expect more from Biden regardless.
Click to expand...
Well yeah.....i can expect my 3 year old to have the next break through in quantum mechanics or my 13 year olds baseball team to win the world series....we can expect whatever we want. Doesnt make it logical just because i can do it. Doesnt make it rational or valid either.

We have no meaningful evidence presented us to suggest mitch is going to change is approach :shrug:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish said:
Well yeah.....i can expect my 3 year old to have the next break through in quantum mechanics or my 13 year olds baseball team to win the world series....we can expect whatever we want. Doesnt make it logical just because i can do it. Doesnt make it rational or valid either.

We have no meaningful evidence presented us to suggest mitch is going to change is approach :shrug:
Click to expand...
Thank you for providing a perfect example of what I was talking about.

 
NorvilleBarnes said:
Thank you for providing a perfect example of what I was talking about.
Click to expand...
Oh...that's what you meant by "excuse"?  Word's doing some heavy lifting for you then.  I am merely pointing out McConnell's documented and established history/behavior as Majority Leader of the Senate.  His position has always been 1/3 of the equation in terms of getting things "done".  It'd probably be helpful that people realize that when politicians are making promises and pontificating over what they WILL get accomplished and adjust expectations accordingly.  I see this EVERY single election cycle and it's baffling to me.  People actually vote on which wishlist they like better.  I don't get it.

What I provided you was not an attempt to lessen blame.  It wasn't an attempt to give anyone a pass nor I wasn't attempting to justify a fault.  I was merely pointing out how things actually work in our current form of government.  If that's what you meant by "excuse" then cool.  Thanks for clearing that up, but that's a terrible words choice IMO.  :shrug:  

 
What is the latest thinking on how these races will go? 

I was talking to a friend of mine yesterday who is very conservative and he felt pretty sure both seats would be won by the Democrats. We didn't have time to get into more or why but I thought it was interesting as I thought it was supposed to be much closer (by definition, close enough for a runoff).

 
Joe Bryant said:
What is the latest thinking on how these races will go? 

I was talking to a friend of mine yesterday who is very conservative and he felt pretty sure both seats would be won by the Democrats. We didn't have time to get into more or why but I thought it was interesting as I thought it was supposed to be much closer (by definition, close enough for a runoff).
Click to expand...
:shrug:

Anyone that says they know for sure is...  lying to themselves.  Both races were incredibly close in November, and since then, it's been more questions than answers.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Thanks. So best estimate now is still 50-50 for both races?
Click to expand...
I'd say that's reasonable, with the clarification that it's not one coin flip plus another separate coin flip.  That is, it's not 25% "R wins both", 25% "D wins both", and 50% "split".  The two races are highly correlated.

 
Joe Bryant said:
What is the latest thinking on how these races will go? 

I was talking to a friend of mine yesterday who is very conservative and he felt pretty sure both seats would be won by the Democrats. We didn't have time to get into more or why but I thought it was interesting as I thought it was supposed to be much closer (by definition, close enough for a runoff).
Click to expand...
Nobody knows how many of the base Republicans will show up. If they stay at home because they’re pissed off about election fraud, the Democrats win. But will they? 

I don’t think Perdue helped himself by refusing to show up for the debate. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
(Media Optics Analysis) Georgia Senate Debate - Raphael Warnock Vs Herschel Walker (10/16/22 17:07 PST)
Replies
4
Views
366
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
OP/ED: Biden Will Be Impeached After The Mid Terms & WWYD (5/17/22 19:42 PST)
2 3
Replies
128
Views
3K
quick-hands
quick-hands
squistion
*****Official 2022 Senate Elections Thread*****
10 11 12
Replies
591
Views
16K
Phil Elliott
Phil Elliott

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top