…pace yourselves…don’t panic…all that sort of thing…there’s ways today could conceivably go that would make a lot of the stress seem like it was wasted…& vindicate the feeling that it was fucking insane to think that america would take a second bite of a rotten apple after seeing half a worm protruding from the thing the first time…but…people aren’t out there saying “watch this whole map turn blue”…in fact most of them are saying “ask me again about this time next week”…which is a whole other spread to cover…but…today’s the day, folks

America braced as two stark visions collide on election day [BBC]

…well…let’s be honest

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/nov/03/if-trump-wins-the-election-these-11-issues-will-be-under-threat

…it’s not just america

The Future of the Planet Hangs on This Vote [NYT]

…whether that’s by way of a spectator sport

[…] As the head of news and current affairs at Channel 4, Compton has the difficult task of making the weirder aspects of the U.S. election process legible to a British audience. On the day we met for lunch, exactly one week before Election Day, she had been preparing for the channel’s marathon Election Night coverage. “We’ve got eight hours to fill, but I think it’ll fly by,” she told me.

Any American expat hoping to avoid discussion of the former President’s chances of reëlection will be disappointed. Last week, at Heathrow, a British Airways flight was delayed after two women got into an altercation reportedly over a maga cap. (“Enquiries are ongoing,” the Metropolitan Police told me, by e-mail.) I have been asked about gerrymandering and the Electoral College in London pubs and Greek tavernas. Everyone wants to know what’s going on. “A lot of our job will be explaining it clearly,” Compton said, over a cup of strong black builder’s tea. “For Brits, it’s mad that a country of three hundred and fifty million people is going to come down to, potentially, a couple of hundred thousand votes in a few swing states.”

…the way I hear it…that’s not just the brits…but…there’s that “special relationship”…divided by a common language or not…the two are like estranged members of a family…& nobody loves it when those come over all self-destructive…or…maybe it’s more like a parent worrying about a teen that moved out a while ago but already went off the rails once before…& everybody knows you have to worry about “the youth of today”

In the past, Channel 4’s election coverage has leaned into the broadcaster’s reputation for eclecticism. (Part of the channel’s remit is to provide alternative programming that appeals to young people.) During the U.K.’s general election in 2019, for instance, the channel set up an “Alternative News Desk” on a show co-hosted by the comedian Katherine Ryan. Ahead of this year’s U.K. election, Compton wanted to try something new. “We thought, We’re going to try and do something completely different. We’re going to be serious,” she told me.

They invited Alastair Campbell and Rory Stewart, the co-hosts of the popular podcast “The Rest Is Politics,” on as guests. The coverage’s tone was informed, but conversational, and it yielded results. The network doubled its audience share from the previous election, and tripled its share of young viewers. Compton told me she has “always felt really angry when people would say young people don’t care about news.” “I genuinely think this generation of young people are more engaged in news than any other generation,” she said. “It comes to them all the time, it’s at their fingertips, and they’re chatting to the world. They’re much more engaged, they just want news presented in a different way. A less formal way.”

https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-the-uk/watching-an-american-election-from-across-the-pond

…some might say that’s pandering…but…there might be something to it…feels like after a bit there’d be complaints that if all the formalities remain formal & you only teach people the casual version you might be unfairly advantaging the ones who still speak formality…who…whichever way you pick ’em based on whichever criteria seems to be relevant…obstinately insist on being the same crop of over-represented privileged minority “elites”…but…in a self-selecting sort of a way…if that’s the only version a lot of people will fuck with…& you need those people to fuck with it…how’s it go…we hold these truths to be self-evident, I think it starts?

Five years ago, during a civics lesson at my Chicago high school, a teacher introduced my class to a new local independent voter guide. “Girl, I Guess” isn’t a publication, exactly; it’s a low-tech Google doc that analyzes elections on the Cook County ballot, from the presidency on down. Editions are some 70 pages long — and are extremely popular. Established in 2018, the guide surpassed 100,000 readers in its first year.
[…]
Stephanie Skora: “Girl, I Guess” is the nation’s largest independent voter guide. The political philosophy is two things: One, an informed voter is a progressive voter. And two: People should talk about politics and writing the same way they would talk about it with their friends at a bar.
[…]
I am impressed that “Girl, I Guess” basically has no funding and so many people read it. It’s almost a slap in the face to newspapers and other publications that spend so much money trying to connect with people and are not doing it nearly as well as you are. What do you think makes “Girl, I Guess” stand out?

One of the reasons that “Girl, I Guess” exists is because we realized political coverage came from two places: really dry analytics, which are thorough and informative, but not an easy read. I think a lot of political coverage, elections coverage in particular, isn’t accessible. The rest is social media, where you don’t know what’s true and [what isn’t].

“Girl, I Guess” is humorous and takes a colloquial tone. We also have very specific criteria on which we evaluate candidates. We put that right in our methodology section. We are always telling you exactly how we are making our decisions. And then we write about it as though we were talking to each other over a drink or over dinner about these candidates.
[…]
If someone from another city or state or county wanted to make an independent voter guide and mimic your methodology, how would they do that?

There’s three kinds of voter guides, right? One is just straight-up recommendations from a person that you trust. My issue with those is we don’t know why these decisions are being made. The other kind almost does the reverse of that. They’ll do a really deep dive into every single candidate, but they won’t draw a conclusion as to which person is best. This is very common in nonprofit news sources; they’re not allowed to make a recommendation or an endorsement. And voters really want both.

I would encourage them to reach out. I get people reaching out every year saying, “Hey, I want to do a ‘Girl, I Guess’ for my city, for my state” but don’t wind up doing them because it’s a lot of work, especially the first few times that you do it. I have found that it gets easier every time. I would encourage people to put together a team.
[…]
Is there value to making it shorter? For a newspaper like us, to make something like “Girl, I Guess” — short, but still informative and valuable.

I think the value for “Girl, I Guess” is that it’s independent. We’re able to be very up front about our values and stick to that. It would be really hard for something like The Washington Post to replicate that because there would need to be a lot of editorial independence to make those value commitments and stick to them.

The other problem is it would come off as phony. I think The Washington Post could sponsor an independent journalist to do something like this, but if I read a voter guide that called a member of Congress an a—— and a war criminal, I’ll trust that more than I would [something] sponsored by The Washington Post.
[…]
I think the political reporting and the investigative journalism that major news outlets do is an integral part of the media ecosystem. I would not be able to write “Girl, I Guess” to the quality that I do if it weren’t for all of the newsrooms in Chicago. That kind of investigative journalism is really important. And people read it, but not enough people.

The larger players in the media ecosystem have to decide what their role is. Do they [only] produce the research that informs this independent writing? Or do they try and replicate it, whether or not that’s going to be successful?

The low-tech genius of the voter guide ‘Girl, I Guess’ [WaPo]

…maybe you already know about this…but…if not…it…sounds a bit like this

Dear reader, we really didn’t want to do this. Much, much ink has been spilled physically and digitally about this election, including Steph doing a five–part series on Instagram about Kamala’s candidacy from Day 1 which shares a name with this section. 

Ultimately, however, we’ve ended up right back where we started, just like so many elections before. Donald Trump is a fascist nutjob who is mentally degrading before our eyes, bandies in conspiracy theories even more insane than usual, and whose Vice Presidential pick couldn’t be more of an incel stereotype if he wore a fedora. And of course by now we’ve all heard about Project 2025.

…but…local context matters

As Raeghn discussed in the Primary, most of y’all, dear readers, are voters of conscience and substance. Girl, I Guess will always stand with Palestine and we cannot condone a vote for Kamala Harris before she at the bare minimum commits to an arms embargo on Israel if they do not immediately accept a permanent ceasefire deal. Since this Guide primarily covers deep-Blue Cook County in deep-Blue Illinois, we know that no matter how we vote for President, our votes effectively do not make a difference in the Presidential election. As long as the Electoral College is in place, voters in Illinois are more or less disenfranchised, because our votes for President are extremely unlikely to ever count. Every single one of y’all who read this Guide could refrain from voting for either Trump or Kamala and while we may send a message, we will almost certainly not change the outcome. That is why we are encouraging Chicagoans, suburbanites, and any Illinoisians reading Girl, I Guess to abstain from voting in the Presidential election, or to write in “Free Palestine” in order to make a statement of refusal to support Kamala Harris, a candidate who is fully committed to genocide in Gaza. If you live in a swing state, we encourage you to vote in accordance with both your values, and your calculus. We admit that if we lived in a swing state, our voting recommendation would likely be different, even if our values would remain unchanged. But as we live in a Safe Democratic State, we encourage voters to show up to the polls with their conscience in mind, rather than their fears.

…& that kind of thing loses a lot…like…potentially all the fucking marbles…rather than just mine…if you apply it in the wrong fucking place

To be clear, it is the official stance of Girl, I Guess that Donald Trump is worse than Kamala Harris on every single issue, including Gaza and Palestine more broadly. In the face of the question “what is worse than genocide?” we would answer “faster genocide,” which would certainly be the reality in Gaza under Trump. However, just because Kamala’s opponent is worse than her on every issue does not mean that she can adopt unacceptably bad positions on the things that this Guide cares about the most.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE CURRENT EDITION OF “GIRL, I GUESS”

…&…look…I’m not saying I can’t see their point…in context…where that context is first & foremost…a district in which that is conceivably not the same as handing the thing to the orange menace…&…if I’m honest…it’s…an actual argument…one that begins from a start of standing on actual principles I can both comprehend & respect…& finds the good insufficiently perfect to give it the bonus of an endorsement over the bad…WHEN IT WON’T GIVE THE WHOLE THING TO THE FUCKING WORST

…but…the dude I heard quoting bible verses to profess that the only ticket in accordance with his deeply held christian conviction required him to vote for the convicted over the one who used to convict for a living…on the other hand…fuck that guy…with something suitably un-fucking-comfortable…if he gonna judge…he gonna get judged…that’s how they tell me that shit works…& the shit that guy has for brains clearly fucking don’t…so…anyone else remember the bill hicks bit about why the death of a moron was cause for celebration because the world just got smarter on average?

Tucker Carlson Says Abortions Cause Hurricanes in Election Eve Broadcast [NYT]

…not sure we’d notice, to be honest

A handful of companies, including Kalshi and Interactive Brokers, have been allowing users to tap their way to wagering on Donald Trump or Kamala Harris to win the election. Just days before the election, even stock-trading platform Robinhood jumped in on the party, offering a betting market of its own. The companies set their own betting limits, with Kalshi letting users wager as much as $100 million.

“We believe event contracts give people a tool to engage in real-time decision-making, unlocking a new asset class that democratizes access to events as they unfold,” Robinhood said in a statement Monday.

Election bets were approved legally just weeks ago, as the 2024 race headed into its home sprint. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates financial contracts that bet on events, has consistently blocked applications to open up bets on elections under Republican and Democratic administrations alike.

But that changed last month when a U.S. district court sided with Kalshi in a lawsuit the company filed against the CFTC, arguing that it should be allowed to offer the contracts. The ruling cleared the way for Kalshi to open betting markets on the election while the CFTC appeals. The ongoing legal wrangling could still lead to a shutdown of U.S. election betting markets, but not until after the 2024 vote.

In the meantime, “it pulls us, the CFTC, into the responsibilities of being an election cop,” Chairman Rostin Behnam said last week, maintaining that the agency would respect the court decision while election bettors place their wagers. Millions of dollars have since flooded the markets. Kalshi said bets on the general election hit $30 million within its first three weeks, surging to $139 million by Friday.

…it’s one thing to “have a flutter”…it’s another altogether to bet the fucking house on an outcome that could not just give you heart palpitations but probably induce arrhythmia all on its own…& this shit…in aggregate…is fucking pathological

Overseas, where bets on American elections are nothing new, billions of dollars have been circulating.

Crypto-based betting platform Polymarket is hosting over $2 billion in bets, likely from foreign traders. It’s technically banned to users in the U.S., where the CFTC slapped the company with a $1.4 million fine in January 2022 for taking election bets as an unregistered platform, issuing a cease and desist that effectively barred it from the domestic market. But with private, encrypted internet networks readily available, industry watchers say Americans may still be able to access foreign platforms.

PredictIt, a project from Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand, offers contracts of its own. The platform is available to Americans, but with a betting limit of $850. Founder John Aristotle Phillips says having “skin in the game” forces users to remove the “spin and emotion” from their expectations of election outcomes.

But Phillips says the public should interpret prediction markets carefully when it comes to politics.

“A market will give you the odds of an event happening,” he said. “It has nothing to do, and can’t give you insight, in terms of what the margin of victory or loss is going to be, which is what a poll is intended to show.”

Wagers have been flooding in for weeks after a ruling opened the door to U.S. users placing bets on ballot outcomes, blurring the lines between elections and sports as court wrangling continues. [NBC]

…ok…but…fuck a poll…how about a survey?

NBC News analyzed more than 700 of Musk’s election-related posts since July collected by the NBC News Decision Desk and found that, in the cases in which he expressed suspicion about voting, sometimes pushing conspiracy theories, he received significantly more engagement — as measured by likes, comments and reposts on X — than he did when he posted on other election topics.

The difference in reach was vast: 5.2 times more likes, 4.2 times more comments and 9.1 times more reposts, when comparing the median election-doubting post to the median election post that didn’t cast doubt on the process.

That’s despite many of Musk’s claims — like alleged noncitizen voting — being false.

The analysis is a window into what’s been popular in a major corner of the X app during the final four months of the presidential election campaign. It’s also a window into what the incentives are like for Musk and potentially others as they decide what to post about.
[…]
In addition to owning X, Musk is its biggest account, with more than 202 million followers, according to the app’s tally of his following. X has developed a clear tilt in favor of far-right users and posts since Musk bought it two years ago, according to researchers.
[…]
Many of Musk’s election-doubting posts include conspiracy theories that have repeatedly been debunked by fact-checkers, including the unfounded claim that Democrats are trying to “import” voters into the U.S. through increased levels of undocumented immigrants. Only citizens can vote, and to become a citizen someone must be one of the following: a lawful resident of at least five years, a spouse of a U.S. citizen, a U.S. military service member or a child of a U.S. citizen.

In a typical election-doubting post, Musk posted Oct. 5 that in the future, unless Trump wins, “your vote won’t matter, so this is therefore the last real election.” That post received 15.4 million views, 173,000 likes, 12,000 comments and 57,000 reposts, according to the publicly available data on the app.

Data compiled by the NBC News Decision Desk shows that Musk’s election conspiracy theories and doubts have vastly outperformed his other posts about the election. [NBC]

…what could possibly explain that little statistical miracle?

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said that a video purporting to show Haitians claiming that they illegally voted for Kamala Harris is fake.

In a post Thursday on the social media site X, Raffensperger said that the video is likely a production of Russian troll farms designed to interfere in the U.S. election.

“As Americans we can’t let our enemies use lies to divide us and undermine faith in our institutions — or each other,” he wrote.
[…]
After getting a call from the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency about the video, Raffensperger’s office looked up the driver’s license of one of the alleged voters and determined it to be fake, his office said.

In a statement late Thursday, Raffensperger urged Elon Musk, the owner of X and a major supporter of Donald Trump, and the “leadership of other social media platforms to take it down.”

A video of Haitians saying they illegally voted for Kamala Harris is fake, Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said, and likely a product of Russian troll farms.U.S. intelligence officials have warned that Russia’s efforts to influence the 2024 presidential election are more sophisticated than in previous elections. Moscow is targeting U.S. swing states such as Georgia and using artificial intelligence to more quickly and convincingly create fake content to sway the outcome in favor of Trump, the Republican nominee.

A video of Haitians saying they illegally voted for Kamala Harris is fake, Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said, and likely a product of Russian troll farms. [WaPo]

…so

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/nov/04/chinese-americans-election-misinformation

…I don’t want to jinx anything

If Harris Wins, Here’s Why [NYT]

…no shortage of people to do that for me, after all

If Trump Wins, Here’s Why [NYT]

…so…if this shit is getting to you

It’s also palpably true that the things liberals believe should be costing Mr. Trump support — the events before and around Jan. 6, the rollback of abortion rights, his tendency to ramble incoherently — have, in fact, hurt him. If Republicans win this week, they won’t be in any mood for self-scrutiny. But if they lose, it may strike them that they blundered away what should have been an astoundingly winnable election.
[…]
It should not have been hard for an opposition candidate, no matter what his other flaws, to put together some kind of inflation-busting or cost-cutting (or both) policy platform in an election season when voters around the world are demanding help with costs.

But Mr. Trump, for whatever reasons, stuck to budget busting and what he called “the most beautiful word in the dictionary”: tariffs, which would almost certainly raise prices rather than lower them. And for better or worse, that’s why the election is close.

Why Isn’t Trump Running Away With This? [NYT]

…eh…if you’re going to ask a manifestly asinine question…might as well ask the horse’s ass…so…yes…the NYT did get matt yglesias to “grace” their pages with his latest verbal up-chuck…today of all days…while also putting this up, front & center

VOTE TO END THE TRUMP ERA

You already know Donald Trump. He is unfit to lead. Watch him. Listen to those who know him best. He tried to subvert an election and remains a threat to democracy. He helped overturn Roe, with terrible consequences. Mr. Trump’s corruption and lawlessness go beyond elections: It’s his whole ethos. He lies without limit. If he’s re-elected, the G.O.P. won’t restrain him. Mr. Trump will use the government to go after opponents. He will pursue a cruel policy of mass deportations. He will wreak havoc on the poor, the middle class and employers. Another Trump term will damage the climate, shatter alliances and strengthen autocrats. Americans should demand better. Vote.

…so…yeah

Is the ‘50-50-ish Race’ Driving You Crazy? You Are Not Alone. [NYT]

…uh huh

Into the Abyss [NYT]

…feel free to dip out

Jon Stewart Looks Back With Sanity and/or Fear [NYT]

…after all

Five US election officials on what they’re expecting: ‘There’s a conspiracy theory for everything’ [Guardian]

…you can’t help anyone if you’re a hyperventilating mess

A much more sinister explanation must be taken seriously. We still assume that we are witnessing two campaigns for the presidency. But what if we are witnessing one campaign and one slow-motion coup, whose organizers need to go through the motion of campaigning for the plan to work? Since winning at the ballot box does not matter, taking a break to listen to Pavarotti isn’t a problem; conversely, a festival of racism and conspiracy theories, as at Madison Square Garden, is not about convincing any undecided voter, but motivating committed Trumpists to go along with another coup attempt.

To be sure, this can also sound like conspiracy theory. The point is not prediction, but to call for preparedness. After all, there is an overwhelming number of reasons why, should Trump lose, he will once more try to take power anyway. His followers have long been primed to assume that evil Democrats will steal the election. The unchecked racism fits into a logic of far-right populism more generally: far-right populists claim that they, and they alone, represent what they call “the silent majority” or “the real people” (the very expression Trump used on January 6 to address his supporters).
[…]
Here analogies with other far-right populists are again illuminating: it is doubtful that all followers of the far-right Law and Justice Party (PiS) in Poland truly believe that relatively liberal prime minister Donald Tusk had colluded with Russians to have the country’s president, a member of PiS, killed in a plane crash in Smolensk in 2010. But professing the Smolensk conspiracy theory was not about making an empirical statement; it became a means to signal membership of a political tribe.

In theory, Republicans could seize the chance at last to break with Trump, who, after all, has only delivered defeats to the party. He has stated that he will not run again (though it would of course be naive to take any of his promises at face value). Yet there were already plenty of incentives to get rid of Trump in early 2021, and still Republicans did not disown, let alone impeach, him.

Most worryingly, Maga members have been primed to resort to violence. Trump and his allies – including the world’s richest man, who just happens to be a rightwing extremist – have framed the election as an apocalyptic battle. If Democrats win, Musk has claimed, there will not be any proper elections ever after; they will bring in more foreigners to secure a permanent majority. It is already half forgotten that Trump held his first major rally this election cycle in Waco, Texas.

Who knows whether Trump can really mobilize large numbers of people on the streets; it might be enough to prolong a sense of chaos. Vance has claimed that the 2020 election was problematic, because so many citizens had doubts about its “integrity” and Democrats prevented a “debate” which the country needed to have (never mind that Republicans had created the doubts in the first place). How long a debate would Vance like, exactly? Incidents like the infamous Brooks Brothers riot, where rightwingers in fancy suits stopped a recount in Florida in 2000, might accompany this debate. After all, as Jack Smith has claimed, Trump campaign operatives in 2020 already issued the order: “Make them riot.”

The hope may well be that, if decisions are kicked to the correct court, things could still go Republicans’ way. Trumpists know from the US supreme court’s decisions about ballot access and immunity earlier that some parts of the judiciary have given up on any conventional legal logic; they are likely simply to deliver whatever benefits Trump. The conservative justices’ decision this past week allowing the removal of voters from the rolls in Virginia so close to the election – a clear break with precedent – might well have been a preview of what a court captured by Trumpists is willing to do.

What if Trump’s campaign is cover for a slow-motion coup? [Guardian]

…speaking for myself…I…may start drinking early

Groups backing former President Donald J. Trump recently sent messages to organize poll watchers to be ready to dispute votes in Democratic areas. Some posted images of armed men standing up for their rights to recruit for their cause. Others spread conspiracy theories that anything less than a Trump victory on Tuesday would be a miscarriage of justice worthy of revolt.
[…]
The messages were all posted on Telegram, the lightly moderated social media platform with nearly one billion users, which has become a harbinger of the potential actions and chaos that could unfold on Election Day and after. More so than other social apps, Telegram is a prime organizing tool for extremists, who have a tendency to turn digital coordination into real-world action.

A New York Times analysis of more than one million messages across nearly 50 Telegram channels with over 500,000 members found a sprawling and interconnected movement intended to question the credibility of the presidential election, interfere with the voting process and potentially dispute the outcome. Nearly every channel reviewed by The Times was created after the 2020 election, highlighting the growth and increased sophistication of the election denialism movement.

The Times reviewed messages from “election integrity” groups across a dozen states, including battlegrounds like Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, North Carolina and Michigan. Their posts overwhelmingly spewed disinformation and conspiracy theories and featured violent imagery.

More than 4,000 of their posts went further by encouraging members to act by attending local election meetings, joining protest rallies and making financial donations, the analysis found. Posts from other right-wing groups reviewed by The Times urged followers to be prepared for violence. These calls to action extended the right-wing language typically found on other major social media sites into the physical world.
[…]
One channel focused on election auditing in New York featured recruitment ads from United Sovereign Americans, which calls itself a national “election validity” advocacy group. One of its lawyers is a former solicitor general of Pennsylvania who defended Mr. Trump during his second impeachment in 2021 after Jan. 6.

Under an image of Uncle Sam and a bold red “WE NEED YOU!” banner, the group recently claimed, without any credible evidence, that 2022 voter records showed “millions of ‘irregularities’ which, when ignored, are election fraud.” Many claims about voter fraud have been debunked. The group did not respond to a request for comment.
[…]
Another Telegram channel run by a group called the People’s Audit posted a video that offered a “hypothetical situation that is totally possible,” in which the Department of Homeland Security used the driver’s licenses of undocumented immigrants to cast votes en masse for the Democratic presidential nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris. The video floated the scenario even though it is illegal and rare for noncitizens to vote in federal elections.

“Yes, they would be engaging in ID theft, election interference and treason, which is punishable by death,” the video concluded.

Kris Jurski, who posted the video, said on Telegram that it had been taken down from X. He said he was grateful that the video had remained on Telegram, which he used later to advertise a webinar teaching people how to secure voter rolls and deter fraud. He did not respond to a request for comment.
[…]
“When you look at the postings, even if it’s not actually calling for violence or even if it’s not saying we need to get whoever, there’s a very ugly tone to it,” said Wendy Via, a founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, which tracked a 317 percent spike in election denialism on Telegram in October. There was no significant left-wing movement like this, she said.

In recent months, many Telegram channels run by chapters of the Proud Boys have celebrated a return to relevance, including perceived attention from Mr. Trump and his allies. Several accounts pointed to the black-and-yellow ties and hats — which are Proud Boys colors — worn by Mr. Trump in the days before, and the former Fox News host Tucker Carlson during, a recent rally at Madison Square Garden in New York.
[…]
Asked whether Mr. Trump had intended to send a signal, a spokeswoman for his campaign responded, “Lol. No.” Mr. Carlson did not respond to a request for comment but posted on X that The Times “knows a Proud Boys necktie when they see one.”
[…]
Recruitment messages on the public Telegram accounts of various Proud Boys chapters have sought to capitalize on the perils of election fraud, often implying a need for violence. One popular image showed an armed man wearing a balaclava.

“Free men do not obey public servants,” it read.

On Telegram, a Violent Preview of What May Unfold on Election Day and After [NYT]

…free men, huh?

…how free we talking…”boys”?

…don’t know about you…but…that always makes me feel a little better about the existence of free men?