McCauliffe Affirms School Signs

 

Ballot boxThe Virginia gubernatorial race will be over, plus or minus the stuffed ballot boxes, Tuesday, November 2. In the closing week, it appeared the electorate was shifting towards the Republican candidate, Glenn Youngkin. To the extent the shift was real, it was driven by the veteran Democrat hack Terry McAuliffe saying the quiet part out loud on education. His statement, in a late September debate, hurt him in the polls, but he has doubled down in the closing days of the election. Contrast this with his shift away from trying to make the election about President Trump. Is this a sign his campaign is confident the fix is in, that they have secured the margin of cheating?

In the September 28 debate, McAuliffe addressed school curricula and parental voice, a hot issue:

“I’m not going to let parents come into schools and actually take books out and make their own decision,” McAuliffe said. “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.”

Youngkin jumped all over this political fumble and has made the race all about education. He has been helped by the outrageous conduct of one or more Virginia school boards and the Stasification of federal law enforcement by Attorney Gruppenführer Garland. In the closing weeks of the election, with early voting/cheating already underway, curious yard signs cropped up, reading  “Keep Parents Out of Classrooms, Vote McAuliffe, Keep Virginia Blue.” While both campaigns have denied any part in the signs, McAuliffe effectively embraced the signs’ message in his last big media appearance before Election Day.

Terry McAuliffe appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press, where Chuck Todd tried to help him:

Todd said, “Governor, what about that that you feel as if you were taken out of context? Do you feel as if anything you said there should reassure parents that they have some say in their kid’s schooling?”

McAuliffe said, “Listen, that was about a bill I vetoed which people were very happy that I vetoed the bill, that literally parents could take books out of the curriculum. I love Billy and Jack McAuliffe, my parents, but they should not have been picking my math or science book. We have experts who actually do that.

So, yes. a vote for McAuliffe is a vote to keep parents out of classrooms. A vote for McAuliffe is a vote for the woke educrats. Contrast this defiant declaration with his sudden new claim the Virginia race is not about Trump. This came after months of saying the opposite:

Glenn Youngkin’s team put together these clips of Terry McAuliffe trying to identify Younkin with Trump, then put out another compilation of McAuliffe praising and associating himself with Donald Trump a few years back.

Why, after the tiki torch trick burned the Democrats, would McAuliffe double down on state control over children and parents? Does he believe the Democratic vote manufacturing machine has the election fixed already? Consider the Federalist story on Fairfax County officials’ flagrant flaunting of voting laws:

Earlier this month, Fairfax County, Virginia — a locale that broke 70-30 for President Joe Biden and Democrat Sen. Mark Warner in 2020 — previewed the attacks on election integrity likely planned for the midterm cycle of 2022 and beyond. There, election officials in the deep-blue county approved absentee and mail-in ballot applications lacking the statutorily mandated last four digits of the voter’s Social Security number, then promptly mailed these unauthenticated individuals ballots for next Tuesday’s election.

While last week the Virginia Institute for Public Policy (VIPP), a public policy organization dedicated to election integrity, filed suit against the county registrar and the three members of the Fairfax County Electoral Board responsible for flouting state election law, a hearing on the case is not scheduled until Friday. By then, the election will be only days away and a court is unlikely to order ballots returned by the deadline discarded.

Virginians will have to vote hard, turning out beyond the margin of cheating. As Hugh Hewitt wrote in 2004, If It’s Not Close, They Can’t Cheat.” More precisely, if real voters are determined, they will bury the cheaters, canceling the cancelers. They are who we thought they were; will Virginians let them win anyway?

Published in Elections
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 60 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Sadly, the Virginia election is now inside the literal margin of cheating on the AG and Lt. Gov  races. The Democrats have 88,000 “mail-in” ballots to play with as November 2 starts. 153 precincts have still not reported, so even the governor’s race is at significant risk (90,000 vote lead).

     

    • #31
  2. genferei Member
    genferei
    @genferei

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    We had ample time, and a Justice Department in a Republican administration, to attempt to prevent the irregularities of 2020. We waited way too long, and then acted in a grossly incompetent (in my opinion) manner…. I’ll let the Republicans take the blame for that, but they’ll share it with the administration specifically.

    This is a very flexible use of “we”.  It has become clear that the chief problem with the Trump administration is that it was too GOP and insufficiently Trump. Since “we” were and are being obstructed and hunted by the DoJ regardless of electoral outcome, something other than electing the same old folks in the same old way is desperately needed. 

    • #32
  3. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    genferei (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    We had ample time, and a Justice Department in a Republican administration, to attempt to prevent the irregularities of 2020. We waited way too long, and then acted in a grossly incompetent (in my opinion) manner…. I’ll let the Republicans take the blame for that, but they’ll share it with the administration specifically.

    This is a very flexible use of “we”. It has become clear that the chief problem with the Trump administration is that it was too GOP and insufficiently Trump. Since “we” were and are being obstructed and hunted by the DoJ regardless of electoral outcome, something other than electing the same old folks in the same old way is desperately needed.

    I’m with you about not electing the same old folks. We should get bolder and more conservative people every chance we get. My point is that, realistically, the only way to do that is by nominating them during Republican primaries. Beyond that, go for it.

    I don’t like picking on President Trump because, as I’ve said many times before, he was picked on far more than he deserved, hounded and vilified by a grotesquely dishonest press and Democratic leadership. I don’t want to pile on. But he was President, and he could have chosen anyone he wanted to pursue election irregularities, and done so earlier than he did. We ended up with Giuliani — another guy I don’t want to bash because I think he was once pretty great — and the kraken lady, and a real fiasco.

    I think Trump did a good job as President. But a President is in charge, and I think the buck really does stop there, so far as administration activity goes. I voted for Trump. I’ll vote for him again if he runs again. I hope he doesn’t. 


    Tonight looks to be a very good night. Virginia is looking fantastic. The Braves won the World Series — take that, MLB and your anti-Georgia wokeness!

    And this is local but important:

    In New York State, with about 50% of the districts reporting, the three ballot initiatives that would have undermine electoral integrity are losing by two-to-one margins. I don’t know how that will hold, but it’s impressive. Of the five state initiatives, the two relatively trivial ones are both winning by that margin; the other three, which would make voting less secure, are all losing.

    That says something interesting, in a state that is as deep, deep blue as New York.

    • #33
  4. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    I don’t like picking on President Trump because, as I’ve said many times before, he was picked on far more than he deserved, hounded and vilified by a grotesquely dishonest press and Democratic leadership. I don’t want to pile on. But he was President, and he could have chosen anyone he wanted to pursue election irregularities, and done so earlier than he did. We ended up with Giuliani — another guy I don’t want to bash because I think he was once pretty great — and the kraken lady, and a real fiasco.

    I think Trump did a good job as President. But a President is in charge, and I think the buck really does stop there, so far as administration activity goes. I voted for Trump. I’ll vote for him again if he runs again. I hope he doesn’t.

    He did put someone in charge of pursuing election irregularities.  Per Patrick Byrne who says he was present at the meeting, Trump did appoint Sydney Powell as special investigator, but when she came to the White House the next morning the White House staff wouldn’t let her in.  This is the kind of stuff that Trump had to put up with for four years.  Betrayal within his own office.  This is why they got Flynn fired four years earlier.  Because Flynn knew the underworld processes and could have guided Trump through them and defeated them.

    • #34
  5. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    I don’t like picking on President Trump because, as I’ve said many times before, he was picked on far more than he deserved, hounded and vilified by a grotesquely dishonest press and Democratic leadership. I don’t want to pile on. But he was President, and he could have chosen anyone he wanted to pursue election irregularities, and done so earlier than he did. We ended up with Giuliani — another guy I don’t want to bash because I think he was once pretty great — and the kraken lady, and a real fiasco.

    I think Trump did a good job as President. But a President is in charge, and I think the buck really does stop there, so far as administration activity goes. I voted for Trump. I’ll vote for him again if he runs again. I hope he doesn’t.

    He did put someone in charge of pursuing election irregularities. Per Patrick Byrne who says he was present at the meeting, Trump did appoint Sydney Powell as special investigator, but when she came to the White House the next morning the White House staff wouldn’t let her in. This is the kind of stuff that Trump had to put up with for four years. Betrayal within his own office. This is why they got Flynn fired four years earlier. Because Flynn knew the underworld processes and could have guided Trump through them and defeated them.

    Flick, I’m not going to make excuses for the most powerful man in the world. Again, I think he did a good job as President. But I don’t think he handled re-election well, in two or three ways.

    I hope he’s more successfully strategic moving forward. I hope he supports other Republicans, focuses on the big picture, and continues making a real contribution to conservatism.

    • #35
  6. genferei Member
    genferei
    @genferei

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    I hope he’s more successfully strategic moving forward. I hope he supports other Republicans, focuses on the big picture, and continues making a real contribution to conservatism.

    Which is it, though – support the existing and phenomenally ineffective Republican apparatus or make a real contribution to conservatism? Note that the real counterfactual is not “no GOP” but “a better GOP.

    I’m sure there are dozens of well-intentioned and competent Republican apparatchiki in the system somewhere, and keeping the Republican brand is probably a net positive. But the GOP needs a Luther (or Council of Trent) moment, not just waiting and hoping that those with an iron grip on the institutions suddenly care about the people. 

    • #36
  7. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    genferei (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    I hope he’s more successfully strategic moving forward. I hope he supports other Republicans, focuses on the big picture, and continues making a real contribution to conservatism.

    Which is it, though – support the existing and phenomenally ineffective Republican apparatus or make a real contribution to conservatism? Note that the real counterfactual is not “no GOP” but “a better GOP.

    I think that’s begging the question. I don’t accept that the Republican Party is “phenomenally ineffective.” I’d ask: In what respects, and compared to what?

    Considering how Democrats vote in Congress and govern in the states, compared to how Republicans vote in Congress and govern in the states, I’d have to say that Republicans are pretty effective at not being Democrats. They block legislation and govern states more responsibly.

    But the GOP needs a Luther (or Council of Trent) moment, not just waiting and hoping that those with an iron grip on the institutions suddenly care about the people.

    It’s our jobs (that is, the job of those of us who are Republicans) to direct the party. We do that by nominating more conservative people, and, for some, being involved in the party. I don’t want us merely “waiting and hoping.”

     

    • #37
  8. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    think that’s begging the question. I don’t accept that the Republican Party is “phenomenally ineffective.” I’d ask: In what respects, and compared to what?

    The Democrats 

    • #38
  9. genferei Member
    genferei
    @genferei

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    think that’s begging the question. I don’t accept that the Republican Party is “phenomenally ineffective.” I’d ask: In what respects, and compared to what?

    The Democrats

    Indeed. In a generation we’ve gone from “perhaps it would be a good idea to decriminalize consensual sodomy” to “complaining about your daughter being raped by a boy in a dress is domestic terrorism”. I don’t for a moment think that most Democrat voters really believe the latter – but they are mobilized to fund and vote for it. The billions of dollars and millions of votes flowing to the Republican Party achieves… an undermining of the Tea Party and the Great America agenda, fickle judges and a whole lot of hot air. Oh, and a more competently managed national decline and unsupportable welfare state. And somehow, despite Republicans taking their turns at the controls, the great institutions of the state – even unto the military and intelligence apparatus – have been perverted to actively despise conservative Americans and thwart their democratically expressed desires. 

    • #39
  10. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    genferei (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    think that’s begging the question. I don’t accept that the Republican Party is “phenomenally ineffective.” I’d ask: In what respects, and compared to what?

    The Democrats

    Indeed. In a generation we’ve gone from “perhaps it would be a good idea to decriminalize consensual sodomy” to “complaining about your daughter being raped by a boy in a dress is domestic terrorism”. I don’t for a moment think that most Democrat voters really believe the latter – but they are mobilized to fund and vote for it. The billions of dollars and millions of votes flowing to the Republican Party achieves… an undermining of the Tea Party and the Great America agenda, fickle judges and a whole lot of hot air. Oh, and a more competently managed national decline and unsupportable welfare state. And somehow, despite Republicans taking their turns at the controls, the great institutions of the state – even unto the military and intelligence apparatus – have been perverted to actively despise conservative Americans and thwart their democratically expressed desires.

    Henry offers no good alternatives other than “Vote for more of the same”. 

    I am going to be honest: He makes things even more bleak. 

    • #40
  11. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    I don’t like picking on President Trump because, as I’ve said many times before, he was picked on far more than he deserved, hounded and vilified by a grotesquely dishonest press and Democratic leadership. I don’t want to pile on. But he was President, and he could have chosen anyone he wanted to pursue election irregularities, and done so earlier than he did. We ended up with Giuliani — another guy I don’t want to bash because I think he was once pretty great — and the kraken lady, and a real fiasco.

    I think Trump did a good job as President. But a President is in charge, and I think the buck really does stop there, so far as administration activity goes. I voted for Trump. I’ll vote for him again if he runs again. I hope he doesn’t.

    He did put someone in charge of pursuing election irregularities. Per Patrick Byrne who says he was present at the meeting, Trump did appoint Sydney Powell as special investigator, but when she came to the White House the next morning the White House staff wouldn’t let her in. This is the kind of stuff that Trump had to put up with for four years. Betrayal within his own office. This is why they got Flynn fired four years earlier. Because Flynn knew the underworld processes and could have guided Trump through them and defeated them.

    Flick, I’m not going to make excuses for the most powerful man in the world. Again, I think he did a good job as President. But I don’t think he handled re-election well, in two or three ways.

    I hope he’s more successfully strategic moving forward. I hope he supports other Republicans, focuses on the big picture, and continues making a real contribution to conservatism.

    Is every man who occupies the presidency the most powerful man in the world?  Or does he live and die by the staff he assembles, or is assembled for him?  Look at Joe Biden: his presidential administration could get along just as well without him.  I’m just saying that he assembled the best he could get, and they too were disloyal to the man and the office, though they probably would say that they were loyal to a higher principle or something.

    • #41
  12. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    genferei (View Comment):
    Indeed. In a generation we’ve gone from “perhaps it would be a good idea to decriminalize consensual sodomy” to “complaining about your daughter being raped by a boy in a dress is domestic terrorism”.

    Yes, that’s a good chain of thought.  It started with legalization of homosexuality and the DSM removing it from being an illness (I’m not sure which came first).  Then it went from it’s not illegal to we shouldn’t discriminate against it.  To we shouldn’t stigmatize it.  Then to it’s a choice.  To it’s a right.  To we should celebrate it.  To elevating it to equality with marriage.  To all choices are a right.  To sex itself is a choice rather than biology.  To sex doesn’t exist, it’s “gender”.  To “gender” being an identity.  To your choice of “gender” is a right.  To your choice of bathrooms is a right.  To we shouldn’t stigmatize your choice of apparel. To high school young men wearing dresses, and going into girls’ bathrooms.  It is after all their right.  To young men with dresses going into girls’ bathrooms at school and forcing sex acts upon them.

    This is where it breaks down.  Forced sex is a choice.  And a right.

    • #42
  13. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    think that’s begging the question. I don’t accept that the Republican Party is “phenomenally ineffective.” I’d ask: In what respects, and compared to what?

    The Democrats

    Chuckle.

    But no, that’s not really an answer to the question I was asking. I’m asking, compared to what other political party or process is the Republican Party ineffective at getting alternatives to Democrats elected and at opposing Democratic attempts to mess up the country?

    Who else is doing it? Who else can do it?

    Given that the nation is 300+ million people, not all of whom agree with each other, it’s reasonable to assume that we aren’t going to completely defeat and keep defeated every ambition of the Democratic Party. What fraction of its attempts to undermine the country have to be stymied in order to say that the Republican Party is no longer “phenomenally ineffective” — is perhaps just “ineffective,” or maybe “not particularly great,” or even “actually doing a fair job?”

    I can cherry pick wins and losses just like everyone else. Those who act like everything is just horrible are cherry picking losses. Those who act like there are no serious problems and everything is fine are cherry picking wins. Reality is somewhere in between: we have real problems. Some of them threaten the fabric of the nation: debt, the death of civic education, speech restrictions, electoral shenanigans, creeping authoritarianism, woke racism. Most of them could be worse; all of them would be worse if Republicans weren’t standing in the way of Democrats.

    We can all trot out our lists of things gone wrong. I’m waiting for someone, anyone to come up with a realistic alternative to the Republican Party as a vehicle for preventing more things from going wrong and eventually righting some of the ones that have. So far I’ve heard an Article Five convention suggestion. That’s something, and not entirely crazy. It’s a long shot and somewhat dangerous, and it sets a precedent that will probably come back and bite us when the other side manages to do it, but it’s something. Good luck getting one organized.

    In the meantime, we have to keep the Democrats from spending the next $5T and federalizing elections. How are we going to do that?

    David French and Bill Kristol seem to think a third party is the answer. Fancy that.

    • #43
  14. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    think that’s begging the question. I don’t accept that the Republican Party is “phenomenally ineffective.” I’d ask: In what respects, and compared to what?

    The Democrats

    Chuckle.

    But no, that’s not really an answer to the question I was asking. I’m asking, compared to what other political party or process is the Republican Party ineffective at getting alternatives to Democrats elected and at opposing Democratic attempts to mess up the country?

    Who else is doing it? Who else can do it?

    Given that the nation is 300+ million people, not all of whom agree with each other, it’s reasonable to assume that we aren’t going to completely defeat and keep defeated every ambition of the Democratic Party. What fraction of its attempts to undermine the country have to be stymied in order to say that the Republican Party is no longer “phenomenally ineffective” — is perhaps just “ineffective,” or maybe “not particularly great,” or even “actually doing a fair job?”

    I can cherry pick wins and losses just like everyone else. Those who act like everything is just horrible are cherry picking losses. Those who act like there are no serious problems and everything is fine are cherry picking wins. Reality is somewhere in between: we have real problems. Some of them threaten the fabric of the nation: debt, the death of civic education, speech restrictions, electoral shenanigans, creeping authoritarianism, woke racism. Most of them could be worse; all of them would be worse if Republicans weren’t standing in the way of Democrats.

    We can all trot out our lists of things gone wrong. I’m waiting for someone, anyone to come up with a realistic alternative to the Republican Party as a vehicle for preventing more things from going wrong and eventually righting some of the ones that have. So far I’ve heard an Article Five convention suggestion. That’s something, and not entirely crazy. It’s a long shot and somewhat dangerous, and it sets a precedent that will probably come back and bite us when the other side manages to do it, but it’s something. Good luck getting one organized.

    In the meantime, we have to keep the Democrats from spending the next $5T and federalizing elections. How are we going to do that?

    David French and Bill Kristol seem to think a third party is the answer. Fancy that.

    You keep pushing against an argument that is not being made. No one here is saying they won’t vote. Indeed, the pro Trump crowd are the binary outcome crowd.

    And we don’t trust the GOP. And we are going to bash it every time it lets us down and we are going to expect it to do so because that it what usually happens. 

    Stina has already called you on this. Are you just incapable of understanding? We want the GOP to be better. We have little faith it will be. We want to win, but we don’t expect too do so.

    That does not mean we are not fighting. If anyone is the give up type is is you, Sir. You are the one trying to talk us out of speaking reality because you don’t like the message and you personally find it demoralizing. We don’t. We find it clarifying. 

    But you just cannot understand it. 

     

    • #44
  15. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    We want to win, but we don’t expect to do so.

    Fair enough. With that rousing message, I’m sure we’ll build a bigger and stronger party and attract lots of other people who also figure it’s probably a lost cause.

    • #45
  16. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    We want to win, but we don’t expect to do so.

    Fair enough. With that rousing message, I’m sure we’ll build a bigger and stronger party and attract lots of other people who also figure it’s probably a lost cause.

    Do you think our discussions, or venting, or shared fears here are our message to others? 

    What is wrong with you, Hank? You seem otherwise intelligent man, yet you persist in this scolding of us for not being cheerful 100% of the time. 

    All I can think is that your internal narrative that Hank is the rational, logical one is so important that it blinds you to what the rest of us think. Further, you have it so right, you find it both reasonable and rational to try to scold us or guilt us into shutting up. Nothing we say here at Ricochet is going to hurt your cause of supporting the GOP, but you have to act as if it will. I suggest that you take a look at what is driving that. 

    You are the one not selling yourself well, not us. We are being open and honest about our concerns here, not engaged in a recruiting ad. Every time you speak on the subject, you are driving us further from you. 

    • #46
  17. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Bringing the thread back on OP topic, it was true both that Democrats committed blatant fraud, mailing out ballots in at least one county without required verification of identity, and that voters turned out and voted beyond the margin of cheating. Additionally, Republicans volunteered and covered polling and vote counting places around the state, unlike 2020, according to Ken Cuccinelli.

    All three top offices are now called and conceded, one day after Election Day.

    McAuliffe proudly carried the Democrats true position on education, Youngkin effectively took the side of parents, and that seemed to make the difference.

    • #47
  18. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Do you think our discussions, or venting, or shared fears here are our message to others? 

    What is wrong with you, Hank? You seem otherwise intelligent man, yet you persist in this scolding of us for not being cheerful 100% of the time. 

    Of course I think our conversations on Ricochet reach and affect others. I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t.

    And I’m not asking anyone to be cheerful 100% of the time. I’m just suggesting that frequent hopelessness drags down others and makes winning harder. There’s a pretty big gap between “cheerful 100% of the time” and the Eeyore action that is, in my opinion, way too common here.

    • #48
  19. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Do you think our discussions, or venting, or shared fears here are our message to others?

    What is wrong with you, Hank? You seem otherwise intelligent man, yet you persist in this scolding of us for not being cheerful 100% of the time.

    Of course I think our conversations on Ricochet reach and affect others. I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t.

    And I’m not asking anyone to be cheerful 100% of the time. I’m just suggesting that frequent hopelessness drags down others and makes winning harder. There’s a pretty big gap between “cheerful 100% of the time” and the Eeyore action that is, in my opinion, way too common here.

    In order to call people a name, you sure work hard to totally ignore when they celebrate the good. Lately, either you weigh in on threads to scold people for doubt, or make up whole posts that scold people for pessimism. 

    The GOP has let us down again and again. To not acknowledge that, or to acknowledge that and say this time it will be different ™ is the hallmark of ignoring reality. Your goal, Hank, it so scold and same us into shutting up because you think it makes it harder to win. 

    Your opinion is simply wrong, and your attitude as of late has been that of a school marm, which is to say, cheerless. 

    • #49
  20. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    Being Optimistic vs Pessimistic is completely outside being idealistic vs realistic.

    I am an optimist. But I’m also a realist. And being an optimistic idealist is one of the more grating things you can come across when you are staring forced vaccinations or potential for your kids being taught that they are evil for being white.

    I am hopeful because it seems more people are waking up to the reality and (wait for it… war analogy incoming) are willing to FIGHT against it.

    Your proscriptions are not based in reality so your optimism is useless.

    • #50
  21. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Stina (View Comment):

    Being Optimistic vs Pessimistic is completely outside being idealistic vs realistic.

    I am an optimist. But I’m also a realist. And being an optimistic idealist is one of the more grating things you can come across when you are staring forced vaccinations or potential for your kids being taught that they are evil for being white.

    I am hopeful because it seems more people are waking up to the reality and (wait for it… war analogy incoming) are willing to FIGHT against it.

    Your proscriptions are not based in reality so your optimism is useless.

    And saying that, Sinta, is going to cause us to lose because it will put people off, people right here at Ricochet, who were on the edge but have given up. Hank says so. 

    • #51
  22. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Do you think our discussions, or venting, or shared fears here are our message to others?

    What is wrong with you, Hank? You seem otherwise intelligent man, yet you persist in this scolding of us for not being cheerful 100% of the time.

    Of course I think our conversations on Ricochet reach and affect others. I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t.

    And I’m not asking anyone to be cheerful 100% of the time. I’m just suggesting that frequent hopelessness drags down others and makes winning harder. There’s a pretty big gap between “cheerful 100% of the time” and the Eeyore action that is, in my opinion, way too common here.

    By the way, your premise that people who are paying to comment and talk are so on the edge in their passions about the future of the nation that they will read the facts and give up is totally absurd. Paying members are engaged, Hank. 

    • #52
  23. KCVolunteer Lincoln
    KCVolunteer
    @KCVolunteer

    Clifford A. Brown Bringing the thread back on OP topic, it was true both that Democrats committed blatant fraud, mailing out ballots in at least one county without required verification of identity, and that voters turned out and voted beyond the margin of cheating.

    Fairfax County officials’ flagrant flaunting of voting laws:

    Earlier this month, Fairfax County, Virginia election officials in the deep-blue county approved absentee and mail-in ballot applications lacking the statutorily mandated last four digits of the voter’s Social Security number, then promptly mailed these unauthenticated individuals ballots for next Tuesday’s election.

    While last week the Virginia Institute for Public Policy (VIPP), a public policy organization dedicated to election integrity, filed suit against the county registrar and the three members of the Fairfax County Electoral Board responsible for flouting state election law, a hearing on the case is not scheduled until Friday. By then, the election will be only days away and a court is unlikely to order ballots returned by the deadline discarded.

    Where is the state on this? If local officials can nullify state laws, then we are no longer a country of laws. Shame on Virginia for not shutting this down immediately.

    Perhaps the new AG will have something to say about this lawlessness. The election officials responsible should be arrested and fined and/or jailed. Unless of course breaking election law is a non-prosecutable offence.

    • #53
  24. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    The GOP has let us down again and again. To not acknowledge that, or to acknowledge that and say this time it will be different ™ is the hallmark of ignoring reality. Your goal, Hank, it to scold and shame us into shutting up because you think it makes it harder to win. 

    No, that isn’t my goal. My goal is to convince people that we need the Republican Party, that we need it to be strong, and that we need to present an optimistic and hopeful message to people in order to rally them to our side. That’s really it. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t criticize the party. But that criticism should be balanced. I can find lots of people here to tell me that the party is “useless,” that the base hates it, that it’s no better than the Democrats. Some days, that message seems to dominate. There’s a place for criticism, but at some point criticism becomes destructive rather than constructive. My impression — and it’s subjective, so I could be wrong — is that destructive criticism has come to dominate here of late, and I’d like to encourage that to change.

    • #54
  25. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    The GOP has let us down again and again. To not acknowledge that, or to acknowledge that and say this time it will be different ™ is the hallmark of ignoring reality. Your goal, Hank, it to scold and shame us into shutting up because you think it makes it harder to win.

    No, that isn’t my goal. My goal is to convince people that we need the Republican Party, that we need it to be strong, and that we need to present an optimistic and hopeful message to people in order to rally them to our side. That’s really it. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t criticize the party. But that criticism should be balanced. I can find lots of people here to tell me that the party is “useless,” that the base hates it, that it’s no better than the Democrats. Some days, that message seems to dominate. There’s a place for criticism, but at some point criticism becomes destructive rather than constructive. My impression — and it’s subjective, so I could be wrong — is that destructive criticism has come to dominate here of late, and I’d like to encourage that to change.

    Again, you are not encouraging us to change, but lecturing us to change. And, here is the really funny part: Across multiple threads you have encourage us to complain more about how useless the party is. So, you claim what you want it less bashing of the GOP, but your actual behavior is increasing it. 

    • #55
  26. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    Again, you are not encouraging us to change, but lecturing us to change. And, here is the really funny part: Across multiple threads you have encourage us to complain more about how useless the party is. So, you claim what you want it less bashing of the GOP, but your actual behavior is increasing it. 

    The one who is going to be more effective is the person who is having more fun while doing it. So who is having more fun, Bryan or Henry?

    • #56
  27. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    Again, you are not encouraging us to change, but lecturing us to change. And, here is the really funny part: Across multiple threads you have encourage us to complain more about how useless the party is. So, you claim what you want it less bashing of the GOP, but your actual behavior is increasing it.

    The one who is going to be more effective is the person who is having more fun while doing it. So who is having more fun, Bryan or Henry?

    Anytime I can puncture a balloon I am happy

    • #57
  28. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Stina (View Comment):

    Being Optimistic vs Pessimistic is completely outside being idealistic vs realistic.

    I am an optimist. But I’m also a realist. And being an optimistic idealist is one of the more grating things you can come across when you are staring forced vaccinations or potential for your kids being taught that they are evil for being white.

    I am hopeful because it seems more people are waking up to the reality and (wait for it… war analogy incoming) are willing to FIGHT against it.

    Your proscriptions are not based in reality so your optimism is useless.

    I am a pessimist I guess (I’m hopeful but I generally expect bad things).  You are an optimist.  Yet I basically agree with you on pretty much everything.  Maybe the optimism and pessimism are not fundamentally different but just two perspectives on looking at the same reality.

    • #58
  29. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    Again, you are not encouraging us to change, but lecturing us to change. And, here is the really funny part: Across multiple threads you have encourage us to complain more about how useless the party is. So, you claim what you want it less bashing of the GOP, but your actual behavior is increasing it.

    The one who is going to be more effective is the person who is having more fun while doing it. So who is having more fun, Bryan or Henry?

    Well….

    I don’t know who’s having more fun, but I know I have a tendency to not take other people’s opinions and feelings as seriously as I probably should. That occasionally leads to unintended rudeness on my part, and must sometimes work against whatever message I’m trying to deliver.

    I’d invoke the “old dog” defense, but the truth is that I can be more thoughtful if I take the time to be a little empathetic before I respond. For what it’s worth, I’m a lot better than I was ten years ago.

    • #59
  30. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    Again, you are not encouraging us to change, but lecturing us to change. And, here is the really funny part: Across multiple threads you have encourage us to complain more about how useless the party is. So, you claim what you want it less bashing of the GOP, but your actual behavior is increasing it.

    The one who is going to be more effective is the person who is having more fun while doing it. So who is having more fun, Bryan or Henry?

    Well….

    I don’t know who’s having more fun, but I know I have a tendency to not take other people’s opinions and feelings as seriously as I probably should. That occasionally leads to unintended rudeness on my part, and must sometimes work against whatever message I’m trying to deliver.

    I’d invoke the “old dog” defense, but the truth is that I can be more thoughtful if I take the time to be a little empathetic before I respond. For what it’s worth, I’m a lot better than I was ten years ago.

    I am too.

     

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.