HorsesAss.Org

  • Home
  • About HA
  • Advertise
  • Archives
  • Donate

Open Thread: Rubberneckin’ Florida

by Darryl — Tuesday, 1/31/12, 3:56 pm

It’s a clusterfuck down there. But somehow you just can’t help but gawk at the carnage.

Yep…we’re talking Florida, where Mitt Romney is prepared to slam Newt Gingrich to the matt—revenge for South Carolina.

I’m at the Montlake Alehouse, and maybe Lee and Carl will show up and partake of the live-gawking.

Have at it in the comment threads.

5:00: CNN just called it for Mitt Romney, 48% to Gingrich’s 31%, Santorum’s 13%, and Paul’s 7%. 56% of the vote is in, so that pretty much seals the deal. No Iowa repeat here, folks.

5:01: That was fast.

5:04: Is the race over? Is Romney the nominee? My inclination is to say, “yes”. I’ve been saying that for awhile. But then some ground truth emerges….

5:05: New polls released today:

  • Missouri Primary poll: Gingrich 30, Santorum 28, Romney 24, Paul 11. Missouri hates Romney!!!
  • Ohio Primary poll:Gingrich 26, Romney 25, Santorum 22, Paul 11. Ohio likes Gingrich a little better than Romney.
  • National GOP Primary poll:Gingrich 28, Romney 27, Santorum 17, Paul 13. America seems to prefer Gingrich a little over Romeny

It ain’t over yet!

5:11: Don’t forget about the Oregon special election tonight. We’ll be anxiously awaiting those results.

5:22: Okay…so Lee is here and he started a competing thread to liveblog the results. This has now become an HA primary contest. Who will get the most comments? Just to be a good sport, I put his post on top. See what a great guy and good sport I am? Please leave a comment HERE if you agree.

5:32: Lee writes, “Finally at the Ale House only to find out that Darryl fucked up the Live blog plan.” Oh, man, after all Lee and I have been through. I feel just like Dominic.

5:35: As long as we are engaging in negative campaigning here, I though I would point out that in 2004, Lee voted for Dino Rossi. But voted for Gregoire in 2008. What a flip-flopper!

5:59: The next primary event is the Nevada caucus. Most of last year, Romney has led Gingrich by double digits in Nevada. That was through last October. The only more recent poll is this poll taken in mid-December. That poll has Romney leading Gingrich by +4%. Nevada may end up being more interesting than Florida!

6:04: As my opponent (Lee) mentions, the sound is off on CNN here at the Montlake Alehouse. We just had about 30 minutes of Santorum on the screen. What the fuck, CNN? That’s just disgusting!

6:06: Even though I am watching CNN, I am listening to NPR. Reporter in Florida just points out what a big win this is, “It’s the first state where [Romney] doesn’t have a house in the state or where he governed the neighboring state.”

6:08: Lee responds to the previous comment: “He doesn’t have a house in Florida?!?

6:10: Newt takes the stage, but more importantly, I see three comments on this thread and two on Lee’s thread. You LIKE ME! You REALLY LIKE ME!!!

6:11: There are two great things about Newt being in the race. First, he is one nasty motherfucker. Second, he has tons of baggage. When Newt first started boasting about running (in Dec 2010), I wrote:

But mostly it [a Gingrich run] would be fun for the memories: Contract with America, government shutdown, impeachment over a blow job. And there is, of course, that scarcely explored aspect of Newt life: his marriages:

Gingrich has been married three times. In 1962, he married Jackie Battley, his former high school geometry teacher, when he was 19 years old and she was 26. They had two daughters. In the spring of 1980, Gingrich left Battley after having an affair with Marianne Ginther. According to Battley, Gingrich visited her while she was in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery to discuss the details of their divorce. Six months after it was final, Gingrich wed Ginther in 1981.

In the mid-1990s, Gingrich began an affair with House of Representatives staffer Callista Bisek, who is 23 years his junior; they continued their affair during the Lewinsky scandal. In 2000, Gingrich married Bisek shortly after his divorce from second wife Ginther.

The blogosphere really hasn’t had the opportunity to explore this side of Gingrich’s life. It’s fucking gold!

6:31: What I REALLY want to know is what Roger Rabbit thinks of tonight’s events. And yesterday’s. And maybe the entire week before. Roger?

6:34: Carl Ballard is here. He notices that at the Ron Paul speech there are three guys on stage…one with a bow tie, one with a regular tie, and one with no tie whatsoever. And they say there is no diversity amongst Republicans.

6:38: At least Ron Paul isn’t wearing a fucking sweater vest. (Carl is.)

6:46: The TeeVee tells me that “there are eight Santorum delegates.” Word to the wise: Be careful if you use the words “eight Santorum” in a conversation.

7:08: Damn! Lee is kicking my ass. But somehow his post got pushed back…. Clearly WE’VE BEEN HACKED!

7:12: Let’s see…we have me, Lee, N In Seattle, Carl Ballard, and Will showed up recently…Goldy is supposed to show up soon. The Montlake Alehouse has become a freakin’ HA class reunion!

7:18: Carl here. I’m not endorsing in this thread, but I’m opposed to typing on Darryl’s tiny computer. I guess I won’t get my passport stamped “Moon” any time soon.

7:24: Carl still. Rick Santorum is on CNN, and like Ron Paul, he’s also not wearing a tie. What the fuck? You’re on TV guys!

7:46: Darryl here…I’ve wrestled my computer (with its tiny little keyboard) back from Carl Ballard. Right now Seattle Jew is pontificating about Mormon church ownership of The Media. I notice that he speaks with as many typos as he writes with.

7:51: Goldy finally arrives. I guess the folks at The Stranger are done wringing whatever use they can get out him tonight to increase their page views.

8:15: Oregon Special Election: OR-1:

  • Rob Cornilles (R) 53,215 37.52%
  • Suzanne Bonamici (D) 79,386 55.97%

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Drinking Liberally — Seattle

by Darryl — Tuesday, 1/31/12, 3:00 pm

DLBottlePlease join us Tuesday for another evening of Politics under the influence at the Seattle Chapter of Drinking liberally.

This Tuesday we’ll be rubbernecking the G.O.P. Florida presidential primary clusterfuck returns—I’ll be helping to live blog the mayhem.

The other election of interest is the special election in OR-1, the seat formerly held by Rep. David Wu (D). Former state Sen. Suzanne Bonamici (D) is likely to defeat her Republican opponent Rob Cornilles.

DL meets every Tuesday at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Our normal starting time is 8:00 pm, but this week some of us will be there early for the Florida presidential primary polls results that should begin at 5:00 pm.

Can’t make it to Seattle? There’s also a meeting Tuesday night of the Tri-Cities chapter of Drinking Liberally. The Tacoma chapter meets this Thursday. And next Monday, there are meetings of the Olympia chapter, the Yakima chapter, and the South Bellevue chapter.

With 225 chapters of Living Liberally, including twelve in Washington state and six more in Oregon, chances are excellent there’s one near you.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Open Thread 1/31

by Carl Ballard — Tuesday, 1/31/12, 8:01 am

– The Florida Primary is today, and in an effort to continuously provide a counterweight to the insightful political prognostication on this website, here’s my prediction:

Mittenz: 39
Ging-rich: 35
Ricky S 14

These are pretty much just pulled outa my ass.

– The most shocking thing to me is the Starbucks.

– accommodating and promoting bicycling isn’t an urban or rural thing, an eastside or westside thing, a red state or blue state thing

– HA alum Goldy truth needles the Truth Needle

– Obama fist bumps.

– General Sherman

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Assessing the generic Congressional poll

by Darryl — Monday, 1/30/12, 10:55 pm

In case you haven’t noticed, I love collecting and analyzing polls—they tell me the score in the game of politics. Like I did in 2008, this year I’ll collect polls and do analyses for the presidential races, the Senate races, and the gubernatorial races.

What I won’t do (with a few exceptions) is analyze races from the House of Representatives.

Why ignore House polls? Because there are too damn many House races and too few polls released for them. That’s why.

Seriously, this is a hobby, and I can hardly keep track of the relatively small number of Senate and gubernatorial races without having to keep track of an additional 435 House races. Instead, I follow a few races of interest, mostly from Washington state. And I follow the “generic congressional polls.”

Generic congressional polls ask something like, “If the election for the U.S. House was today, would you vote for the Republican candidate or the Democratic candidate.”

Empirically, subtle swings in the results of these polls seem to be amplified into larger electoral swings. They somehow capture the mood of the electorate.

For the past year there have been over 80 generic congressional polls taken on a national sample. Here is what they look like in aggregate over the past year:

GenericCongress30Dec11-30Jan12Congress

The trend is encouraging for Democrats, who have gone from a deep deficit in late 2010 to what looks like a tie in early 2012.

Notice anything funny about the graph?

Yeah…it’s pretty obvious, isn’t it. The “green” pollster seems to have a (roughly) 5% bias in favor of Republicans.

Wanna guess who that pollster is? If you guessed Rasmussen, you’re right. Here are the Rasmussen polls shown alone:

GenericCongress30Dec11-30Jan12CongressOnlyRasmussen

If you are a Republican, perhaps this is the only pollster you watch. If so, then things looked okay until today, when Rasmussen reported for the first time in a year a net advantage for the generic Democratic candidate. But don’t panic, my Republican friend…I mean, it could just be a fluke.

Or not. Here are all the other pollsters except Rasmussen:GenericCongress30Dec11-30Jan12Congress-Rasmussen

If we are to take the collective findings of eight other pollsters over Rasmussen, the generic Democratic House candidate has led the generic Republican House candidate since sometime in August 2011.

In fact, you might say that, without the Rasmussen results, Republicans might have been in a state of panic for the past six months—instead of just the past 12 hours.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Not a Reason

by Carl Ballard — Monday, 1/30/12, 7:14 pm

I’m not sure if this editorial in the Yakima Herald is pro or anti gay marriage. But the editorial is pro-having Reagan Dunn talk about the issue. Um, fine, I guess. That’s a pretty bold stance that candidates be allowed to express their opinion. But what the hell, this intro?

Reagan Dunn is a Republican trueblood. His first name comes directly from the president whose legacy still dominates the GOP almost a quarter-century after he left office. His mother, the late Jennifer Dunn, was a state party chair in the 1980s and in the 1990s represented the eastern Seattle suburbs as 8th District congresswoman.

Dunn, a King County councilman, would seem the natural party nominee in his bid to succeed fellow Republican Rob McKenna as state attorney general.

Why do things his mother did (including naming him!) count as political bona fides? The only thing that they mention about his time in office is his vote, eventually, for a pro-gay marriage resolution. A non binding resolution. Not the actual policies he’s advanced on the King County Council that might make him a worthwhile potential nominee. Not how he might shape the AG’s office if he got elected. His mother. Wow.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Open Thread 1/30

by Carl Ballard — Monday, 1/30/12, 8:32 am

– I honestly don’t know what’s stranger, that this was written at all, or that it was written in late January.

– I’m not sure I’m comfortable calling this the Backpage.com bill since it’s hopefully aimed at them and at anyone else who might pop up.

– For people who think life is a gift from the heavens, though, they’re surprisingly cavalier with the lives of people providing reproductive health services

– An Immorality Tale in Three Acts

– OMG, Indiana.

– OMG Jan Brewer

– Damn you Hollywood values.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Bird’s Eye View Contest

by Lee — Sunday, 1/29/12, 12:00 pm

Last week’s contest was won by Liberal Scientist. It was the Costa Concordia docked in Palermo, Italy.

This week’s contest is a random location somewhere on earth. Good luck!

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

HA Bible Study

by Goldy — Sunday, 1/29/12, 7:00 am

1 Chronicles 1:25
Eber, Peleg, Reu,

Discuss.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Poll Analysis: Obama moves into a “significant” lead over Romney

by Darryl — Saturday, 1/28/12, 11:11 pm

[Update: An analysis using some newer polls can be found here.]

Since the previous analysis in this race, five new state head-to-head polls representing four states have been released.

start end sample % % %
st poll date date size MOE O R diff
FL Mason-Dixon 24-Jan 26-Jan 800 3.5 44 48 R+4
FL Quinnipiac 19-Jan 23-Jan 1518 2.5 45 45 tie
MI EPIC/MRA 21-Jan 25-Jan 600 4.0 48 40 O+8
MN PPP 21-Jan 22-Jan 1236 2.8 51 41 O+10
PA Keystone Poll 17-Jan 22-Jan 614 4.0 41 30 O+11

Two new polls come from Florida, where the media markets are currently flooded with Republican primary ads. The newest poll from Mason-Dixon gives Romney a small +4% lead over Obama. The slightly older Quinnipiac poll has the race all tied up at 45% a piece.

In Pennsylvania, Obama leads Romney by an impressive +11%. That’s even better than Michigan, where Obama leads Romney by +8% in the new poll. The Pennsylvania poll is more favorable to Obama than the newest Minnesota poll that has Obama up by +10%

In the previous analysis, Obama would have won with a 71.9% probability, and his average electoral vote total was 284 to Romney’s 254.

Now, a Monte Carlo analysis using 100,000 simulated elections gives Obama an expected electoral vote total of 306 to Romney’s 232 for an election held now. Obama is at a 95.1% probability of winning that hypothetical election to Romney’s 4.9%. By traditional statistical inference, we would say Obama’s lead is “significant”—that is, it’s unlikely to be due to sampling error.

Obama Romney
95.1% probability of winning 4.9% probability of winning
Mean of 306 electoral votes Mean of 232 electoral votes

Electoral College Map

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Lousiana Maine Maryland Massachusettes Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Electoral College Map

Georgia Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Connecticut Florida Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

[Read more…]

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

A Speedy Recovery

by Carl Ballard — Saturday, 1/28/12, 8:48 pm

Here at HA, we’ve been pretty (and deservedly) tough on Rick Santorum. But there’s no animus, no political disagreement, no division that can bring any thing but sadness from this story (h/t).

The three-year-old daughter of Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum has been admitted to Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and the candidate has cancelled his Sunday morning campaign events to be at her side.

Santorum campaign spokesman Hogan Gidley said Saturday night that the former Pennsylvania senator and his wife, Karen, were with Bella at CHOP. Gidley said Santorum planned to return to campaigning as soon as possible in Florida, where the Republican primary is Tuesday.

Bella Santorum has Trisomy 18, a genetic condition in which a child has a third copy of material from chromosome 18, instead of the usual two, causing a wide array of physical and mental problems.

Bella was not expected to survive until her first birthday – half of infants with Trisomy 18 do not survive their first week, according the National Institutes of Health. Some children have lived to their teenage years, but with significant medical and developmental issues.

I can’t imagine how difficult this is for his family. Here’s hoping Bella gets well enough soon enough that we can go back to making fun of her father’s horrible political positions shortly.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza!

by Darryl — Friday, 1/27/12, 11:58 pm

Young Turks: Barney Frank to marry his partner.

Darcy Burner: Never Give Up:

Young Turks: Conservative’s more likely low IQ and racist.

White House: West Wing Week.

Countdown with Dan Savage: Same-sex marriage equality.

The GOP Gladiatorial Games:
[Read more…]

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Poll Analysis: Obama v. Gingrich

by Darryl — Friday, 1/27/12, 9:10 pm

UPDATE: An analysis using newer polls can be found here.

As promised, here is my first analysis of a 2012 match-up, using state head-to-head polls, between Pres. Barack Obama (D) and former congressman Newt Gingrich (R).

The Monte Carlo analysis gives Obama an average of 416 electoral votes to Gingrich’s 122. Obama won all 100,000 of the simulated elections, suggesting he would certainly win an election held now.

Now you can see why the Republican Establishment cannot let Newt get the nomination. He loses badly against Obama.

Obama Gingrich
100.0% probability of winning 0.0% probability of winning
Mean of 416 electoral votes Mean of 122 electoral votes

Electoral College Map

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Lousiana Maine Maryland Massachusettes Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Electoral College Map

Georgia Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Connecticut Florida Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Here is the distribution of electoral votes [FAQ] from the simulations:
[Read more…]

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

First forum in the First

by N in Seattle — Friday, 1/27/12, 4:34 pm

Last night, the Bertha Knight Landes Room in Seattle’s City Hall was the venue for the first big forum of candidates for Washington’s open First Congressional District. It may seem odd that the event was held in a location that is not within WA-01’s new boundaries (in fact, none of Seattle is in the reconfigured CD). The reason is that the forum was sponsored by the Metropolitan Democratic Club of Seattle, which does have some influence beyond the city and the county.

The great majority of the numerous candidates for the House seat attended the confab. In alphabetical order, the participants were:

  • Darcy Burner (D, Ames Lake), the 2006 and 2008 candidate in WA-08, former head of ProgressiveCongress.org, and a director of the Netroots Foundation
  • Suzan DelBene (D, Medina), the 2010 candidate in WA-08, former Microsoft exec, recent head of the state’s Department of Revenue
  • Roger Goodman (D, Kirkland), three-term State Representative in LD-45, environmental lawyer, former Congressional staffer
  • Darshan Rauniyar (D, Bothell), engineer, entrepreneur, immigrant from Nepal
  • Laura Ruderman (D, Kirkland), nonprofit executive, former three-term State Rep from LD-45, 2004 candidate for Secretary of State
  • James Watkins (R, Redmond), 2010 candidate in WA-01, businessman, former FDIC staffer

Yes, that’s right … a Republican spoke before the MDC in bluer-than-blue Seattle!

The other three candidates were absent. One Democrat (Steve Hobbs, Lake Stevens, State Senator from LD-44) cancelled at the last minute. Neither Republican John Koster (Arlington, candidate in WA-02 in 2000 and 2010, former State Rep from LD-39, Snohomish County Councilmember) nor Republican-turned-independent Larry Ishmael (Issaquah, 2006 and 2008 candidate in WA-01, environmental economist) ever intended to attend the forum. I would characterize those three individuals as, respectively, Conservadem, Teahadist, and Inconsequential.

Former Governor and Congressman Mike Lowry was the moderator. Each candidate got to respond to six questions, as well as make closing remarks. From the audience, I took notes on the event, which are displayed below (I’m being kind to those who don’t care about this stuff, hiding the rest behind that “more” link). For the record, I took no photos during the event (my cellphone doesn’t sport a camera). Also, I didn’t start detailed notes until nearly the end of answers to Question 1.
[Read more…]

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Rob McKenna still against same-sex marriage

by Darryl — Friday, 1/27/12, 12:37 pm

One of the things we “learned” this week is that gubernatorial hopeful Rob McKenna is against same-sex marriage.

On Wednesday, McKenna told KCPQ-TV (3:47):

I will vote to maintain the current law and the current definition of marriage.

I guess he has given up on the line, “I hold the same views as President Obama.”

Goldy wrote about this under the headline, “McKenna Finally Admits He Opposes Gay Marriage”. But is McKenna only now admitting he opposes same-sex marriage?

I mentioned last June that McKenna has previously taken a stand on the subject:

In 2004, King County Superior Court Judge William Downing issued a controversial ruling that same-sex couples could marry. The Seattle Times, sprung to action to find out where candidates in state-wide races stood:

…King County Councilman Rob McKenna, criticized the ruling’s wording as too broad and said its argument that there is no compelling state interest to deny marriage to two people in a committed relationship could leave marriage open to blood relatives or those practicing polygamy.

“It threatens to destroy all standards we apply to the right of marriage,” he said.

One might argue that McKenna was only criticizing the wording of a ruling, rather than the effect of legalizing same-sex marriage.

Closer scrutiny reveals that as bullshit. I encourage you to read the ruling for yourself—it’s well-written, and includes some amusing word play. Judge Downing:

…concludes that the exclusion of same-sex partners from civil marriage and the privileges attendant thereto is not rationally related to any legitimate or compelling state interest and is certainly not narrowly tailored toward such an interest.

The ruling doesn’t “open up” incestuous or polygamous marriages. To do so, it would have addressed an additional set of state laws that are narrowly targeted to toward protecting compelling state interests in prohibition of incestuous or polygamous marriages. It didn’t touch on those at all.

No…what McKenna was doing was using a bullshit “legal-like” argument to express his opposition to same-sex marriage, while not quite saying so.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Sweater Vests

by Carl Ballard — Friday, 1/27/12, 8:00 am

So, I know this is old news, but Rick Santorum is trying to ruin sweater vests. Oh sure, he’d say he’s just wearing them, sometimes. I’m sure he thinks he’s conveying a certain downhomieness, and campaigning in Iowa and New Hampshire in winter, it makes sense to wear them. And who knows, he may genuinely like wearing them. But since they’re still fairly uncommon, if he goes far in the presidential nominating process, sweater vests may be associated with him. And that’s pretty terrible for those of us who wear them but don’t share his dipshit politics.

I am wearing one right now. I wear either a sweater vest or a sweater to work for most of the winter here in Seattle. Whoever the GOP nominates will be horrible on policy, but hopefully whoever they nominate doesn’t do to the sweater vest what Tucker Carlson did to bow ties.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print
  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 373
  • 374
  • 375
  • 376
  • 377
  • …
  • 1038
  • Next Page »

Recent HA Brilliance…

  • Friday! Friday, 6/20/25
  • Wednesday! Wednesday, 6/18/25
  • Drinking Liberally — Seattle Tuesday, 6/17/25
  • Monday Open Thread Monday, 6/16/25
  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Friday, 6/13/25
  • Friday Open Thread Friday, 6/13/25
  • Wednesday Open Thread Wednesday, 6/11/25
  • Drinking Liberally — Seattle Tuesday, 6/10/25
  • Monday Open Thread Monday, 6/9/25
  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Friday, 6/6/25

Tweets from @GoldyHA

I no longer use Twitter because, you know, Elon is a fascist. But I do post occasionally to BlueSky @goldyha.bsky.social

From the Cesspool…

  • lmao on Friday!
  • lmao on Friday!
  • lmao on Friday!
  • lmao on Wednesday!
  • G on Friday!
  • G on Friday!
  • Vicious Troll on Wednesday!
  • Elijah Dominic McDotcom on Wednesday!
  • RedReformed on Wednesday!
  • RedReformed on Wednesday!

Please Donate

Currency:

Amount:

Archives

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

[iire_social_icons]

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.

© 2004–2025, All rights reserved worldwide. Except for the comment threads. Because fuck those guys. So there.