|
Post by kungfuzu on Nov 21, 2020 21:29:19 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Nov 21, 2020 21:39:39 GMT -8
We had a choice between Trump and IngSoc, with its revolutionary violence by street mobs and its desire to subject the people to elitist control fantasies. And Goldberg's (whose comments I heard yesterday as part of a panel on Fox News) sides with them. Anyone who could do that was never a conservative.
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Nov 21, 2020 22:17:53 GMT -8
Anyone who could do that was never a conservative. I always thought of Goldberg as one of the wishy conservatives more interested in going along to get along and damn the ethics and moral issues. He and others like George Will truly never were/are conservative. The betrayal of the republic has been going on for 150 years and these are the conservatives who will sell the rope to the communists.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Nov 21, 2020 22:29:45 GMT -8
These types were always looking for book and TV deals as well as the occasional think-tank position. They saw a gap on the conservative "intellectual" side and decided to make a meal of it. They are similar to politicians who are actually DBs, but live in Republican districts. They decide to put an R after their name in order to have any chance to be elected. Once in office, they are called RINOs.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Nov 21, 2020 22:43:13 GMT -8
Nothing to see here. Keep on moving.
Fraud? What fraud?
I know, we should just ignore it. I mean 78,000 ghost votes are unimportant in light of Biden's margin of 33,600 votes.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Nov 21, 2020 23:18:50 GMT -8
I wonder what this will produce?
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Nov 22, 2020 7:05:18 GMT -8
If those are the official numbers in Nevada, then they certainly have a great case for a careful audit. Unfortunately, the county numbers were too small to see where the discrepancies were. If they were mostly in Clark County, then that would be presumptive evidence that Trump carried the state. It's only 5 electoral votes, but even one state would shut up extreme croakers such as the Demagogues, the synoptic media, and TDS-afflicted RINOs.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,062
Member is Online
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 22, 2020 9:28:14 GMT -8
Regarding Goldberg, I don’t think Trump is trying to steal the election. It’s just Trump being Trump. The world for him is winners and losers and he has nothing left in the tank other than blame-shifting if defeat is staring him in the face. Had he lost in the primaries to Ted Cruz, does anyone imagine this man-child would be acting any differently?
And in regards to the idea of asking state legislatures to just select electors who will vote for Trump, this is what you might call trying to steal an election. This is a wacko idea and one that is clearly illegal and unconstitutional. The Constitution leaves the method for electing the electors to the state legislatures — who have all already done so. So what the Trump team is floating is basically telling the state legislatures to ignore the laws already on the books. If this isn’t an avenue to stealing (if it were tried), I don’t know what would be.
That’s an interesting theory by Goldberg which is as plausible as anything else I’m reading these days. And I think Trump’s PR campaign is working amongst his base. The top commenter to the Goldberg article wrote:
I didn’t sign on for this kind of mass boot-licking. Let the evidence be presented. If proven within reason, I’m all for Trump barricading himself inside the White House if necessary. But what I think we’re seeing is pure Trumpian politics. And the man’s natural eccentricities are being stretched into what I think are pathological proportions.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,062
Member is Online
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 22, 2020 9:34:46 GMT -8
Yes, I wish one of Trump's legal team would sit down with Tucker Carlson and carefully explain that. Is this unique? Are there other reasons that might explain it other than fraud? If it is fraud, how do you prove it? Were such techniques that led to this type of alleged fraud known by the Republican Party? If so, did they ever attempt to correct the problem?
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,062
Member is Online
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 22, 2020 9:47:39 GMT -8
Andy McCarthy has an article about Trump’s lawsuit in Pennsylvania being tossed out. One commenter, with a sense of humor, wrote And, absent clear evidence of massive voter fraud, I agree with this comment:
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Nov 22, 2020 10:36:50 GMT -8
As is usual in this whole discussion, much of the required information is missing.
One of the Trump team's possible routes to victory is to prove so much clear fraud and have so many votes shown to be invalid that a state legislature is unable to certify the vote. Should this happen in enough states, the contest would be thrown to the U.S. House, where the Republicans control a majority of the State delegations. Each State would be given one vote and, the theory is that since the Republicans control 26 or 27 delegations, Trump would receive the majority of the votes. I don't know if this would actually be the case, but that's the theory.
There is nothing illegal about this. It has happened twice in our history. I believe the last time was in 1876.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,062
Member is Online
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 22, 2020 10:37:30 GMT -8
Here’s a great comment by a fellow at RedState (and, to my mind, showing why snubbing Tucker Carlson was such a big blunder, assuming the Trump team has the goods):
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,062
Member is Online
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 22, 2020 10:40:45 GMT -8
Okay. Too bad you're not on the Trump team calmly explaining this. But how many states are left that haven't certified? I don't know that this is a real option now.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Nov 22, 2020 10:56:33 GMT -8
I agree. Some have told me I have a talent for quickly absorbing and analyzing large amounts of info and editing this into smaller, easily understandable units. The Trump team should contact me immediately! My services are available for a nominal fee.
One of the fundamental problems the Trump team has is what I have been telling my friends overseas for many years.
American politics is extremely complicated. It is so complicated that even your average American has very little idea of what actually goes on. They also don't care so much. This is one reason I disagree with your take on going on Tucker Carlson and laying out a detailed program of what is happening. People's eyes would glaze over in about 30 seconds and most wouldn't understand in any case. More importantly, the final argument in such complex cases will be made in court, not on TV.
As to Tucker Carlson, I don't know who died and made him god. Millions, such as myself, have cut Fox News completely and couldn't give a tinker's damn about him or Fox. I am at the point now that I would much rather have Powell working to get her case out than spend time on Tucker Carlson Tonight.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,062
Member is Online
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 22, 2020 11:04:15 GMT -8
A court victory without preparing the public with a solid argument is going to look like a coup. I don’t think the Trump legal team has much. We’ll see. But without some positive public relations aspect to this other than just getting on a show and ranting, there can be no winning in this unless Trump defines winning as just dragging things out. And no court is likely to rule out-of-the-blue in a way that changes hundreds of thousands of votes unless there is some ground laid out there in the public’s mind.
But all we have laid now is a very solid and blind paranoia.
A lot of people watch him and it was a good opportunity for the Trump team to make some kind of case. Although on Rush’s show a few weeks back, Trump did admit something like “even Tucker Carlson was positive.” My guess tough is that Tucker Carlson is one of hated people by Trump. Unlike, say, Sean Hannity, he doesn’t have his nose halfway up Trump’s butt and would likely ask real-world questions instead of just fawning all over whatever the Trump lawyer was saying.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Nov 22, 2020 11:13:10 GMT -8
Nothing new or unusual about that. For decades now, Americans have been accepting court victories as revelations from God. Who exactly gave us queer marriage if not our gods on the court?
I am quite sure that we would accept the courts dictates again, with the exception of some who strongly disagree. This is the way things go these days. One of our big problems.
In any case, the Trump people are going all over the media with this case. That is, they are going on the media that will broadcast them. When Mark Steyn interviewed Powell on Rush's program, she probably reached ten times the number of people she would on Carlson. She has been on numerous other programs.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Nov 22, 2020 11:19:54 GMT -8
Listen to what the Speaker of the Michigan House of Representatives says about the situation. The important part is the final half.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,062
Member is Online
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 22, 2020 11:47:32 GMT -8
This is true. Good point. And certainly courts needn’t (in theory) worry about public opinion. But it’s my belief that a lack of good communication with the public is a sign of a weak case by the Trump team — or having different motives than winning a court battle.
If the Trump team has the evidence and convinces (presumably) the Supreme Court to throw out the election results in several states and hold new elections, fine. And I do think new elections would be needed because from what I understand, there’s little chance now of going through ballets and declaring some good and some bad, beyond some individual cases.
And if new elections are held in those states, well, won’t that be interesting. But for these kinds of things to happen, Trump’s legal team has to be extraordinary, not just good at invective and making accusations. And with the clusterfuck they appear to be (at least if I’m half understanding what Andy McCarthy is writing regarding Pennsylvania), this does not seem to be a sort of Apollo 13 team that can save the ship because they are so damn perfect and clever.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,062
Member is Online
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 22, 2020 11:56:22 GMT -8
I think the House Speaker did a good job in his remarks. The one point I would make is this: After any contest a candidate could declare, “I think there was some cheating. Just to be safe, let’s delay certifying the election until there is an investigation.”
It would seem you need some threshold of evidence in order to do this. But certainly if you had credible evidence of significant fraud, then halting the certification of an election (or doing a recount, or whatever) seems reasonable if not also necessary.
I don’t have the evidence in hand. In fact, they're not presenting any evidence, just some narratives. So I’m left to choose between “These guys are just blowing smoke” and “There was real and widespread fraud.” Really, from a public perception point of view, we need less talk and more “beef” as in “Where’s the beef?”
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Nov 22, 2020 11:59:41 GMT -8
There's a lot here to keep track of. For one thing, Powell and Giuliani seem to be eager to split the Georgia GOP, likely leading to disaster January 5. Already some Trump supporters are talking about boycotting the run-off election. Whatever one thinks of Loeffler and Perdue (note that Powell is claiming that Dominion stole the seat from Collins, who ended up well behind Loeffler), they're far superior to Ossoff and Warnock.
Of course, a garden slug would be superior to them. It wouldn't do the harm they'd do.
Trump did support the shutdowns initially, but he always wanted to end them as soon as possible, and has generally been on the side since about mid-April of those opposed to shutdowns and quarantines. He also accepted the mask mandate verbally, but the really dedicated maskers (who was that masked man?) are angry with him for wearing one is little as necessary. It may well be that this cost him the presidency.
As for virus sizes, etc. Viruses were originally known as filtrable viruses because they could go through filters designed to stop bacteria. (I remember this from my high-school biology course.) However, the droplets that often carry them can be stopped, so masks have at least some value. But then, the droplets with the virus get on the surface of the mask, where people who touch them for whatever reason (they're advised not to, but everyone because it's almost impossible to avoid) likely ending up touching their face and thus spreading them that way.
I'm not sure what that all adds up to. This may be why masks in theory do some good (I have no doubt the doctors are right about this), but in practice they don't seem to end up making much distance.
KFZ is undoubtedly right that Powell reached more people on Rush (even with Mark Steyn guest-hosting than she would on Tucker Carlson, especially after the Fox News ratings plummet following their election coverage and other unforced errors. He and Hannity haven't fallen as badly as some other shows have, though, and Carlson probably still has more viewers than some of the shows she went on.
As for me, I can imagine how all these frauds could be committed, but that doesn't prove they did. I agree with Brad that the longer Powell and Giuliani wait to bring up their claims in court, the more skeptical they'll find the public. If Dominion software were a problem everywhere, it would have been discovered in Georgia, so at most there are some (probably just a few) places with a problem. Unless they want to claim that the entire Republican Party in Georgia is against Trump. An argument based on that assumption is unlikely to go anywhere.
|
|