The Midterm ‘Red Wave: Too Good to Be True?

 

The GOP will lose the midterm elections. No way, you say? Read on.

The so-called conventional wisdom (an oxymoron if there ever was one) in the political scene these days is illustrated by just this morning’s small selection of headlines:

Mike Bloomberg says Democrats are heading for a ‘wipeout’ in the midterms if they don’t ‘correct course’ and admit schools were closed for too long during COVID

Democrats Are Making Life Too Easy for Republicans

Bloomberg Says Dems ‘headed for a wipeout’ in Mid-term Elections

There is an old reliable truism that goes something like this: “When something looks too good to be true, it usually is.” It was definitely a standby phrase in our law practice and I could not count the times we invoked that saying when considering amazingly positive developments in our cases, almost all of which proved to be illusory or downright false.

I was prompted to set down these thoughts by a note I received from a very good friend, Mike Walker, one of the finest and most professional attorneys ever to practice in Louisiana and one whose intellect and incisive analytical skills I greatly respect. Mike, who likes to use the nom de plume “Winston Smith”, a most appropriate one considering the surreal times we are living in, wrote the following, which I am quoting verbatim:

The recent action of New York City in allowing illegals to vote should worry every conservative, moderate, Republican or anyone who depends on the rule of law in this country.  I am coming to believe that the Dems intend to place illegal aliens from the southern border in states whose electoral votes usually determine the outcome of national elections (Pa., Ariz., N.M., Mich., Ga., etc.).  Those states’ democratic legislatures will enact, as NYC did,  new laws right before the midterm elections, to allow illegal aliens or anyone else to vote without identification.  Voila’, no more GOP presidential victories ever.  While Biden’s attempt to enact legislation nationally to remove voter i.d. requirements has for the present failed, it is the states, not the national government, which currently regulate election law.  There are many states currently under the control of liberal democrat governors and legislatures which would slavishly hew to the dictates of the national democratic party.  The result is achievable in time for the midterms.  I believe this will be attempted and is likely to succeed unless moderates and conservatives wake up and enact state laws requiring that only legal citizens with legal identification be allowed to vote.   Remember, the entire 2020 election swung on 42,000 votes in 3 states.  Getting that number of illegals in the right places is probably already a done deal.  If due to last-minute changes to the states’ election laws they are allowed to vote (as happened in the last election), there’s no way a Republican ever gets elected again.

Tragically, it’s not likely that there enough Americans who are remotely aware of this or who give a damn.

Just sayin’,

Winston Smith

He added the following thought-provoking postscript:

Just coming to realize that the Dems want us to think that the elections are going to be a landslide for the GOP.  What am I missing here?

A little far-fetched for your taste? Really? Was the election outcome in 2020 just a tad far-fetched? Would you have ever in your wildest dreams expected the widespread destruction wreaked on the great and stable America left by President Trump by this group of left-wing lunatics, lead by a dementia-stricken “President” and a “Vice-President” bereft of even normal intelligence? The blatantly unconstitutional imprisonment without trial of American citizens in that jurisprudential cesspool known as the District of Columbia, some of whom committed the “crime” of walking into what they thought was their Capitol Building? One of the worst and most disgraceful retreats in American history in Afghanistan? The literal disappearance of the Southern Border by virtue of this President’s abject violation of his oath to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”?

Admittedly, this is a tip-of-the-iceberg list, but we are all painfully familiar with the indignities inflicted on our beloved Nation by this Socialist/Marxist cabal, and Mike’s note brought into sharp focus a concern I have been experiencing for some time and one which is being noted more and more lately as doubts begin to show about all the celebratory euphoria with regard to the coming “landslide.” Such a concern is clearly evident in a piece by the estimable Victor Davis Hanson in a piece entitled “How America Became La La Land”, here, as follows:

What explains an America that suddenly no longer works?

First, all of these problems are self-induced. They did not exist until Biden birthed them for ideological or political reasons. Apparently, his administration wanted a changing, more favorable electorate and demography at any cost.

Just like all Americans who are thoroughly disgusted and ashamed by the actions of this worst-Administration-in-American History, I am thrilled by all these wonderful polls coming out showing how we are absolutely, positively guaranteed to flip the House and that we have a fair to good chance of taking the Senate and how we really, really this time have the Loons on the run. It’s all so wonderful to hear.

But….

Is it too good to be true?

Published in General
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 113 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    kedavis (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    GlennAmurgis (View Comment):

    Inflation is hitting people hard – I don’t see how this is going to stop the election – this will be the biggest issue

    Don’t underestimate the ability of lots of people to Amber Heard (i.e., poop) their own bed. I’ve mentioned before, I had neighbors in Phoenix and still do have family members, whose attitude comes down to “Wow, the Democrats have really made a mess! We have to elect more Democrats to fix it!” And they will almost certainly vote Democrat again this year.

    Oh, the Democrats will have millions of people voting for them this November. Even Jimmy Carter had millions of people voting for him in 1980.

    It’s just that those votes will be overwhelmed by votes for Republicans in most areas of the country.

    Put it this way: Did anyone here predict that the San Fransisco school board would get successfully recalled? I sure didn’t. Did anyone here predict that an ex-cop would win the mayor’s race in New York city? I sure didn’t.

    That new New York mayor isn’t working out quite as well as I’d hoped.

    No s—.

    But I guess we can’t expect another Giuliani in one go.

    Yes. But with the San Fransisco school board and the New York City mayor’s race, we are talking about ultra-deep blue areas of the country and even they are showing signs of discontent with the hard-left bs.

    It ain’t looking good for the Donks right now.

    Even during times of peace and prosperity, the party that holds the White House usually gets kicked in the teeth by the voters during a mid-term election. But what with inflation as high as it has been since the 1970s and with crime as high as it has been in almost that long, the Democrats are very likely to get booted out of power.

    Then all eyes will be on the 2024 Republican candidates for president. It’s not clear if Trump is a lock to be the GOP nominee in 2024 or if someone new, like Ron DeSantis, is going to win the nomination.

    You mean, the GOP primary choice might be between Literally Hitler and Literally Hitler?

    Decisions, decisions…

    I want Ron. Younger & more vigorous. I also think Trump blew the 2020 election — if he had had some discipline, he would have won beyond the margin of fraud.

    I don’t know, 81 million “votes” is a pretty big margin of fraud.

    Up from what really was probably only 68 million votes for Biden.

    • #61
  2. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):
    I want Ron. Younger & more vigorous. I also think Trump blew the 2020 election — if he had had some discipline, he would have won beyond the margin of fraud.

    I’m for DeSantis too. One quibble – while I do hold PDT responsible for losing, I don’t think it was possible to beat the margin of fraud in that election. Look how closely they trimmed the late night dumps – Biden carried GA by 11,000 iirc.

    But he should have seen the theft coming and not been blindsided. We know the left are thieves and liars, and that they’ll steal and lie to the limit that’s available. We hired a brash loudmouthed not-a-politician because the left are liars and thieves. He wasn’t up to it.

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    I seem to recall that Trump people tried to stop at least some of the fraud, before November 2020, but they were dismissed because they had no “standing.” i.e., “too early,” because no “damage” had yet occurred. Then after the damage was done, they were dismissed as “moot.” i.e., “too late.”

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    We don’t have the option to leave and go elsewhere. If success wasn’t possible within the constraints that faced PDT, then we have to try someone else.

    Why do you think the constraints would have been different for someone else?

    EDIT: BTW, they found someone after Tom and after that. The project never succeeded.

    • #62
  3. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):
    I want Ron. Younger & more vigorous. I also think Trump blew the 2020 election — if he had had some discipline, he would have won beyond the margin of fraud.

    I’m for DeSantis too. One quibble – while I do hold PDT responsible for losing, I don’t think it was possible to beat the margin of fraud in that election. Look how closely they trimmed the late night dumps – Biden carried GA by 11,000 iirc.

    But he should have seen the theft coming and not been blindsided. We know the left are thieves and liars, and that they’ll steal and lie to the limit that’s available. We hired a brash loudmouthed not-a-politician because the left are liars and thieves. He wasn’t up to it.

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    I seem to recall that Trump people tried to stop at least some of the fraud, before November 2020, but they were dismissed because they had no “standing.” i.e., “too early,” because no “damage” had yet occurred. Then after the damage was done, they were dismissed as “moot.” i.e., “too late.”

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    It’s always easier to see success when you’re not the one having to accomplish it.

    • #63
  4. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):
    I want Ron. Younger & more vigorous. I also think Trump blew the 2020 election — if he had had some discipline, he would have won beyond the margin of fraud.

    I’m for DeSantis too. One quibble – while I do hold PDT responsible for losing, I don’t think it was possible to beat the margin of fraud in that election. Look how closely they trimmed the late night dumps – Biden carried GA by 11,000 iirc.

    But he should have seen the theft coming and not been blindsided. We know the left are thieves and liars, and that they’ll steal and lie to the limit that’s available. We hired a brash loudmouthed not-a-politician because the left are liars and thieves. He wasn’t up to it.

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    I seem to recall that Trump people tried to stop at least some of the fraud, before November 2020, but they were dismissed because they had no “standing.” i.e., “too early,” because no “damage” had yet occurred. Then after the damage was done, they were dismissed as “moot.” i.e., “too late.”

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    It’s always easier to see success when you’re not the one having to accomplish it.

    Sometimes it can be funny. Back in 1993 the organization I was with then had a meeting — Powerpoint charts galore — and listed the seven goals for the year. I had the privilege of working with and learning from the only true genius I ever knew, and he immediately asked, “Did you guys notice that two and five are mutually exclusive?” 

    • #64
  5. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Django (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):
    I want Ron. Younger & more vigorous. I also think Trump blew the 2020 election — if he had had some discipline, he would have won beyond the margin of fraud.

    I’m for DeSantis too. One quibble – while I do hold PDT responsible for losing, I don’t think it was possible to beat the margin of fraud in that election. Look how closely they trimmed the late night dumps – Biden carried GA by 11,000 iirc.

    But he should have seen the theft coming and not been blindsided. We know the left are thieves and liars, and that they’ll steal and lie to the limit that’s available. We hired a brash loudmouthed not-a-politician because the left are liars and thieves. He wasn’t up to it.

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    I seem to recall that Trump people tried to stop at least some of the fraud, before November 2020, but they were dismissed because they had no “standing.” i.e., “too early,” because no “damage” had yet occurred. Then after the damage was done, they were dismissed as “moot.” i.e., “too late.”

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    It’s always easier to see success when you’re not the one having to accomplish it.

    Sometimes it can be funny. Back in 1993 the organization I was with then had a meeting — Powerpoint charts galore — and listed the seven goals for the year. I had the privilege of working with and learning from the only true genius I ever knew, and he immediately asked, “Did you guys notice that two and five are mutually exclusive?”

    Sounds like “we want better education, and we want people to vote Democrat.”

     

    • #65
  6. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Django (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    I’m for DeSantis too. One quibble – while I do hold PDT responsible for losing, I don’t think it was possible to beat the margin of fraud in that election. Look how closely they trimmed the late night dumps – Biden carried GA by 11,000 iirc.

    But he should have seen the theft coming and not been blindsided. We know the left are thieves and liars, and that they’ll steal and lie to the limit that’s available. We hired a brash loudmouthed not-a-politician because the left are liars and thieves. He wasn’t up to it.

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    I seem to recall that Trump people tried to stop at least some of the fraud, before November 2020, but they were dismissed because they had no “standing.” i.e., “too early,” because no “damage” had yet occurred. Then after the damage was done, they were dismissed as “moot.” i.e., “too late.”

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    It’s always easier to see success when you’re not the one having to accomplish it.

    Sometimes it can be funny. Back in 1993 the organization I was with then had a meeting — Powerpoint charts galore — and listed the seven goals for the year. I had the privilege of working with and learning from the only true genius I ever knew, and he immediately asked, “Did you guys notice that two and five are mutually exclusive?”

    That’s sounds like the moto for the Biden administration.  I loved his warnings to Russia of sanctions before the invasion, and when he declared a unified front for shutting off Russian gas exports, Germany said What??!  And Biden said, Well, in that case we’ll cut ourselves off from Russian exports then.

    • #66
  7. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):
    I want Ron. Younger & more vigorous. I also think Trump blew the 2020 election — if he had had some discipline, he would have won beyond the margin of fraud.

    I’m for DeSantis too. One quibble – while I do hold PDT responsible for losing, I don’t think it was possible to beat the margin of fraud in that election. Look how closely they trimmed the late night dumps – Biden carried GA by 11,000 iirc.

    But he should have seen the theft coming and not been blindsided. We know the left are thieves and liars, and that they’ll steal and lie to the limit that’s available. We hired a brash loudmouthed not-a-politician because the left are liars and thieves. He wasn’t up to it.

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    States run elections in their states. What were the republicans doing in their states?

    • #67
  8. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    EHerring (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):
    I want Ron. Younger & more vigorous. I also think Trump blew the 2020 election — if he had had some discipline, he would have won beyond the margin of fraud.

    I’m for DeSantis too. One quibble – while I do hold PDT responsible for losing, I don’t think it was possible to beat the margin of fraud in that election. Look how closely they trimmed the late night dumps – Biden carried GA by 11,000 iirc.

    But he should have seen the theft coming and not been blindsided. We know the left are thieves and liars, and that they’ll steal and lie to the limit that’s available. We hired a brash loudmouthed not-a-politician because the left are liars and thieves. He wasn’t up to it.

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    States run elections in their states. What were the republicans doing in their states?

    As little as possible?

    • #68
  9. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    People talk about the Democrat fraud machine as if it is invincible.  Okay.  But how did the Republicans take control over the US Senate in 2014 (just in time to prevent Obama from filling the Scalia seat on the US Supreme Court with Merrick Garland) if the Democrat fraud machine is as invincible as we are told it is?

    How did Ron DeSantis win his 2018 race for Governor of Florida if the Democrat fraud machine is omnipotent?

    So, every Republican who won his race for US Senate in 2020 was capable of beating the Democrat fraud machine, including people like Mitch McConnell, Tom Cotton, Tom Tillis, John Cornyn, Lindsey Graham, etc.  But Trump wasn’t able to beat the Democrat fraud machine?

    As Biden was winning the state of Maine against Trump, Susan Collins was beating her Democrat opponent in the state of Maine and got reelected to the US Senate.

    It seems like this Democrat fraud machine is entirely defeasible, not omnipotent.

    • #69
  10. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    People talk about the Democrat fraud machine as if it is invincible. Okay. But how did the Republicans take control over the US Senate in 2014 (just in time to prevent Obama from filling the Scalia seat on the US Supreme Court with Merrick Garland) if the Democrat fraud machine is as invincible as we are told it is?

    How did Ron DeSantis win his 2018 race for Governor of Florida if the Democrat fraud machine is omnipotent?

    So, every Republican who won his race for US Senate in 2020 was capable of beating the Democrat fraud machine, including people like Mitch McConnell, Tom Cotton, Tom Tillis, John Cornyn, Lindsey Graham, etc. But Trump wasn’t able to beat the Democrat fraud machine?

    As Biden was winning the state of Maine against Trump, Susan Collins was beating her Democrat opponent in the state of Maine and got reelected to the US Senate.

    It seems like this Democrat fraud machine is entirely defeasible, not omnipotent.

    I think it’s probably more difficult to use the fraud machine on elections concerning smaller areas such as House districts.  Those involve different ballots for each relatively-small House district, which would be more difficult to forge than just marking Biden (or whoever) on millions of them.  Plus, those elections you refer to happened mostly before 2020, and in 2020 many states – but not all – went all-in for vote-by-mail and other illegal (since they were not Constitutionally authorized by the state legislatures) procedures that allowed for supercharged cheating: ballot-harvesting on a scale never seen before, etc.

    So in November we may yet see Republican victories for the House especially, if they still can’t do such widespread cheating on those – and that could be one reason why they seem concerned – but especially if those newly-won House and Senate seats continue to let election cheating slide, that might be the last time Republicans win much of anything.  And it could easily doom the 2024 election.

    • #70
  11. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    People talk about the Democrat fraud machine as if it is invincible. Okay. But how did the Republicans take control over the US Senate in 2014 (just in time to prevent Obama from filling the Scalia seat on the US Supreme Court with Merrick Garland) if the Democrat fraud machine is as invincible as we are told it is?

    How did Ron DeSantis win his 2018 race for Governor of Florida if the Democrat fraud machine is omnipotent?

    So, every Republican who won his race for US Senate in 2020 was capable of beating the Democrat fraud machine, including people like Mitch McConnell, Tom Cotton, Tom Tillis, John Cornyn, Lindsey Graham, etc. But Trump wasn’t able to beat the Democrat fraud machine?

    As Biden was winning the state of Maine against Trump, Susan Collins was beating her Democrat opponent in the state of Maine and got reelected to the US Senate.

    It seems like this Democrat fraud machine is entirely defeasible, not omnipotent.

    I think it’s probably more difficult to use the fraud machine on elections concerning smaller areas such as House districts. Those involve different ballots for each relatively-small House district, which would be more difficult to forge than just marking Biden (or whoever) on millions of them. Plus, those elections you refer to happened mostly before 2020, and in 2020 many states – but not all – went all-in for vote-by-mail and other illegal (since they were not Constitutionally authorized by the state legislatures) procedures that allowed for supercharged cheating: ballot-harvesting on a scale never seen before, etc.

    So in November we may yet see Republican victories for the House especially, if they still can’t do such widespread cheating on those – and that could be one reason why they seem concerned – but especially if those newly-won House and Senate seats continue to let election cheating slide, that might be the last time Republicans win much of anything. And it could easily doom the 2024 election.

    But in 2014, Obama was President and Eric Holder was Attorney General.  

    Are we to believe that the 2014 mid-term election, in which the Republicans trounced the Democrats and took over the United States Senate, was free and fair, while Obama and Holder were in charge, but in 2020 when Trump was President, the electoral process was hopelessly rigged?  

    Democrats were in favor of squeaky clean elections in 2014 and even 2018 (when Ron DeSantis won his Governor’s race in Florida) but in 2020 the Democrats had a change of heart, yet decided not to give those other Republicans (Mitch McConnell, Tom Cotton, John Cornyn, Lindsey Graham) the boot?  

    Even if voter fraud is significant, how do we explain all of these GOP victories, not just in US House races but in races for Governor and US Senator?

    • #71
  12. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    People talk about the Democrat fraud machine as if it is invincible. Okay. But how did the Republicans take control over the US Senate in 2014 (just in time to prevent Obama from filling the Scalia seat on the US Supreme Court with Merrick Garland) if the Democrat fraud machine is as invincible as we are told it is?

    How did Ron DeSantis win his 2018 race for Governor of Florida if the Democrat fraud machine is omnipotent?

    So, every Republican who won his race for US Senate in 2020 was capable of beating the Democrat fraud machine, including people like Mitch McConnell, Tom Cotton, Tom Tillis, John Cornyn, Lindsey Graham, etc. But Trump wasn’t able to beat the Democrat fraud machine?

    As Biden was winning the state of Maine against Trump, Susan Collins was beating her Democrat opponent in the state of Maine and got reelected to the US Senate.

    It seems like this Democrat fraud machine is entirely defeasible, not omnipotent.

    I think it’s probably more difficult to use the fraud machine on elections concerning smaller areas such as House districts. Those involve different ballots for each relatively-small House district, which would be more difficult to forge than just marking Biden (or whoever) on millions of them. Plus, those elections you refer to happened mostly before 2020, and in 2020 many states – but not all – went all-in for vote-by-mail and other illegal (since they were not Constitutionally authorized by the state legislatures) procedures that allowed for supercharged cheating: ballot-harvesting on a scale never seen before, etc.

    So in November we may yet see Republican victories for the House especially, if they still can’t do such widespread cheating on those – and that could be one reason why they seem concerned – but especially if those newly-won House and Senate seats continue to let election cheating slide, that might be the last time Republicans win much of anything. And it could easily doom the 2024 election.

    But in 2014, Obama was President and Eric Holder was Attorney General.

    Are we to believe that the 2014 mid-term election, in which the Republicans trounced the Democrats and took over the United States Senate, was free and fair, while Obama and Holder were in charge, but in 2020 when Trump was President, the electoral process was hopelessly rigged?

    Democrats were in favor of squeaky clean elections in 2014 and even 2018 (when Ron DeSantis won his Governor’s race in Florida) but in 2020 the Democrats had a change of heart, yet decided not to give those other Republicans (Mitch McConnell, Tom Cotton, John Cornyn, Lindsey Graham) the boot?

    Even if voter fraud is significant, how do we explain all of these GOP victories, not just in US House races but in races for Governor and US Senator?

    The Democrats are in favor of “squeaky clean” elections that they win.

    • #72
  13. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    People talk about the Democrat fraud machine as if it is invincible. Okay. But how did the Republicans take control over the US Senate in 2014 (just in time to prevent Obama from filling the Scalia seat on the US Supreme Court with Merrick Garland) if the Democrat fraud machine is as invincible as we are told it is?

    How did Ron DeSantis win his 2018 race for Governor of Florida if the Democrat fraud machine is omnipotent?

    So, every Republican who won his race for US Senate in 2020 was capable of beating the Democrat fraud machine, including people like Mitch McConnell, Tom Cotton, Tom Tillis, John Cornyn, Lindsey Graham, etc. But Trump wasn’t able to beat the Democrat fraud machine?

    As Biden was winning the state of Maine against Trump, Susan Collins was beating her Democrat opponent in the state of Maine and got reelected to the US Senate.

    It seems like this Democrat fraud machine is entirely defeasible, not omnipotent.

    I think it’s probably more difficult to use the fraud machine on elections concerning smaller areas such as House districts. Those involve different ballots for each relatively-small House district, which would be more difficult to forge than just marking Biden (or whoever) on millions of them. Plus, those elections you refer to happened mostly before 2020, and in 2020 many states – but not all – went all-in for vote-by-mail and other illegal (since they were not Constitutionally authorized by the state legislatures) procedures that allowed for supercharged cheating: ballot-harvesting on a scale never seen before, etc.

    So in November we may yet see Republican victories for the House especially, if they still can’t do such widespread cheating on those – and that could be one reason why they seem concerned – but especially if those newly-won House and Senate seats continue to let election cheating slide, that might be the last time Republicans win much of anything. And it could easily doom the 2024 election.

    But in 2014, Obama was President and Eric Holder was Attorney General.

    Are we to believe that the 2014 mid-term election, in which the Republicans trounced the Democrats and took over the United States Senate, was free and fair, while Obama and Holder were in charge, but in 2020 when Trump was President, the electoral process was hopelessly rigged?

    Democrats were in favor of squeaky clean elections in 2014 and even 2018 (when Ron DeSantis won his Governor’s race in Florida) but in 2020 the Democrats had a change of heart, yet decided not to give those other Republicans (Mitch McConnell, Tom Cotton, John Cornyn, Lindsey Graham) the boot?

    Even if voter fraud is significant, how do we explain all of these GOP victories, not just in US House races but in races for Governor and US Senator?

    The Democrats are in favor of “squeaky clean” elections that they win.

    Even if voter fraud is widespread, it doesn’t explain why Ron DeSantis won the Florida Governor’s race in 2018, why Republicans took over the US Senate in 2014 (just in time to block Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to replace Antonin Scalia on the US Supreme Court) and why Republicans like Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, Tom Cotton, Lindsey Graham and Susan Collins were able to win their statewide races in 2020.

    Unless, those Republicans like DeSantis, McConnell, Cornyn, etc were able to overcome the “margin of fraud” while Trump was unable to do so.

    • #73
  14. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    People talk about the Democrat fraud machine as if it is invincible. Okay. But how did the Republicans take control over the US Senate in 2014 (just in time to prevent Obama from filling the Scalia seat on the US Supreme Court with Merrick Garland) if the Democrat fraud machine is as invincible as we are told it is?

    How did Ron DeSantis win his 2018 race for Governor of Florida if the Democrat fraud machine is omnipotent?

    So, every Republican who won his race for US Senate in 2020 was capable of beating the Democrat fraud machine, including people like Mitch McConnell, Tom Cotton, Tom Tillis, John Cornyn, Lindsey Graham, etc. But Trump wasn’t able to beat the Democrat fraud machine?

    As Biden was winning the state of Maine against Trump, Susan Collins was beating her Democrat opponent in the state of Maine and got reelected to the US Senate.

    It seems like this Democrat fraud machine is entirely defeasible, not omnipotent.

    We have Republicans who sometimes prefer the Democrats win. When it comes to pushing back against cultural Marxism, they are useless carp-ies.

    • #74
  15. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

     

    I think it’s probably more difficult to use the fraud machine on elections concerning smaller areas such as House districts. Those involve different ballots for each relatively-small House district, which would be more difficult to forge than just marking Biden (or whoever) on millions of them. Plus, those elections you refer to happened mostly before 2020, and in 2020 many states – but not all – went all-in for vote-by-mail and other illegal (since they were not Constitutionally authorized by the state legislatures) procedures that allowed for supercharged cheating: ballot-harvesting on a scale never seen before, etc.

    So in November we may yet see Republican victories for the House especially, if they still can’t do such widespread cheating on those – and that could be one reason why they seem concerned – but especially if those newly-won House and Senate seats continue to let election cheating slide, that might be the last time Republicans win much of anything. And it could easily doom the 2024 election.

    But in 2014, Obama was President and Eric Holder was Attorney General.

    Are we to believe that the 2014 mid-term election, in which the Republicans trounced the Democrats and took over the United States Senate, was free and fair, while Obama and Holder were in charge, but in 2020 when Trump was President, the electoral process was hopelessly rigged?

    Democrats were in favor of squeaky clean elections in 2014 and even 2018 (when Ron DeSantis won his Governor’s race in Florida) but in 2020 the Democrats had a change of heart, yet decided not to give those other Republicans (Mitch McConnell, Tom Cotton, John Cornyn, Lindsey Graham) the boot?

    Even if voter fraud is significant, how do we explain all of these GOP victories, not just in US House races but in races for Governor and US Senator?

    The Democrats are in favor of “squeaky clean” elections that they win.

    Even if voter fraud is widespread, it doesn’t explain why Ron DeSantis won the Florida Governor’s race in 2018, why Republicans took over the US Senate in 2014 (just in time to block Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to replace Antonin l Scalia on the US Supreme Court) and why Republicans like Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, Tom Cotton, Lindsey Graham and Susan Collins were able to win their statewide races in 2020.

    Unless, those Republicans like DeSantis, McConnell, Cornyn, etc were able to overcome the “margin of fraud” while Trump was unable to do so.

    Perhaps our anger is misplaced and we need to aim more of it at NTs and fickle Republican voters.

    • #75
  16. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

     

    Democrat fraud machine?

    As Biden was winning the state of Maine against Trump, Susan Collins was beating her Democrat opponent in the state of Maine and got reelected to the US Senate.

    It seems like this Democrat fraud machine is entirely defeasible, not omnipotent.

    I think it’s probably more difficult to use the fraud machine on elections concerning smaller areas such as House districts. Those involve different ballots for each relatively-small House district, which would be more difficult to forge than just marking Biden (or whoever) on millions of them. Plus, those elections you refer to happened mostly before 2020, and in 2020 many states – but not all – went all-in for vote-by-mail and other illegal (since they were not Constitutionally authorized by the state legislatures) procedures that allowed for supercharged cheating: ballot-harvesting on a scale never seen before, etc.

    So in November we may yet see Republican victories for the House especially, if they still can’t do such widespread cheating on those – and that could be one reason why they seem concerned – but especially if those newly-won House and Senate seats continue to let election cheating slide, that might be the last time Republicans win much of anything. And it could easily doom the 2024 election.

    But in 2014, Obama was President and Eric Holder was Attorney General.

    Are we to believe that the 2014 mid-term election, in which the Republicans trounced the Democrats and took over the United States Senate, was free and fair, while Obama and Holder were in charge, but in 2020 when Trump was President, the electoral process was hopelessly rigged?

    Democrats were in favor of squeaky clean elections in 2014 and even 2018 (when Ron DeSantis won his Governor’s race in Florida) but in 2020 the Democrats had a change of heart, yet decided not to give those other Republicans (Mitch McConnell, Tom Cotton, John Cornyn, Lindsey Graham) the boot?

    Even if voter fraud is significant, how do we explain all of these GOP victories, not just in US House races but in races for Governor and US Senator?

    Here’s the deal – cheating for congress involves widespread cheating.

    Cheating for president only requires massive cheating in only a few locations.

    Senators are easier to cheat, but you still have to have operations in many locations.

    To flip the house by cheating, you need operations in every district you want to flip.

    The electoral college tries to get proportional representation, but it simplifies cheating. You only need to reach a popular majority in a few states to get a handful of electors. To flip majorities, you just need operations in one or two disorganized locations per state you want to flip.

    Cheating congress requires WIDESPREAD fraud. Cheating the presidency does not.

    There was cheating in FL for Governor. We overcame it largely due to Rick Scott and it was totally quashed by DeSantis.

    • #76
  17. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    You can see it happening in real time, especially Florida in past elections. Deep blue Miami/Broward is in eastern time zone while bright red panhandle is in central time.

    The ALWAYS reported their numbers AFTER the panhandle reported, even though they closed polls an hour earlier.

    Its so easy to dismiss minority-majority Broward with disorganization – that’s the point – but they managed to scare up enough votes to overcome the panhandle in a couple elections. The DeSantis election was the first I’d seen anything like the president elections for a state office. But that’s what criminals do – they escalate when they get away with it.

    • #77
  18. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Stina (View Comment):

    You can see it happening in real time, especially Florida in past elections. Deep blue Miami/Broward is in eastern time zone while bright red panhandle is in central time.

    The ALWAYS reported their numbers AFTER the panhandle reported, even though they closed polls an hour earlier.

    Its so easy to dismiss minority-majority Broward with disorganization – that’s the point – but they managed to scare up enough votes to overcome the panhandle in a couple elections. The DeSantis election was the first I’d seen anything like the president elections for a state office. But that’s what criminals do – they escalate when they get away with it.

    I still like the proposal I saw somewhere, that nobody reports any results until every voting location has announced the number of votes cast.

    • #78
  19. Barfly Member
    Barfly
    @Barfly

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):
    I want Ron. Younger & more vigorous. I also think Trump blew the 2020 election — if he had had some discipline, he would have won beyond the margin of fraud.

    I’m for DeSantis too. One quibble – while I do hold PDT responsible for losing, I don’t think it was possible to beat the margin of fraud in that election. Look how closely they trimmed the late night dumps – Biden carried GA by 11,000 iirc.

    But he should have seen the theft coming and not been blindsided. We know the left are thieves and liars, and that they’ll steal and lie to the limit that’s available. We hired a brash loudmouthed not-a-politician because the left are liars and thieves. He wasn’t up to it.

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    I seem to recall that Trump people tried to stop at least some of the fraud, before November 2020, but they were dismissed because they had no “standing.” i.e., “too early,” because no “damage” had yet occurred. Then after the damage was done, they were dismissed as “moot.” i.e., “too late.”

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    We don’t have the option to leave and go elsewhere. If success wasn’t possible within the constraints that faced PDT, then we have to try someone else.

    Why do you think the constraints would have been different for someone else?

    EDIT: BTW, they found someone after Tom and after that. The project never succeeded.

    Sigh. I don’t. I’m pointing out the distinction between our situation and Tom’s. And that Tom’s situation can’t be compared to ours, because Tom can still have a life without the job and we can’t have one without the nation.  Tom’s best choice was to walk away. Where do you think we can go?

    • #79
  20. Barfly Member
    Barfly
    @Barfly

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):
    I want Ron. Younger & more vigorous. I also think Trump blew the 2020 election — if he had had some discipline, he would have won beyond the margin of fraud.

    I’m for DeSantis too. One quibble – while I do hold PDT responsible for losing, I don’t think it was possible to beat the margin of fraud in that election. Look how closely they trimmed the late night dumps – Biden carried GA by 11,000 iirc.

    But he should have seen the theft coming and not been blindsided. We know the left are thieves and liars, and that they’ll steal and lie to the limit that’s available. We hired a brash loudmouthed not-a-politician because the left are liars and thieves. He wasn’t up to it.

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    I seem to recall that Trump people tried to stop at least some of the fraud, before November 2020, but they were dismissed because they had no “standing.” i.e., “too early,” because no “damage” had yet occurred. Then after the damage was done, they were dismissed as “moot.” i.e., “too late.”

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    It’s always easier to see success when you’re not the one having to accomplish it.

    Aww. It’s unfair to require success at the really hard things?

    • #80
  21. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):
    I want Ron. Younger & more vigorous. I also think Trump blew the 2020 election — if he had had some discipline, he would have won beyond the margin of fraud.

    I’m for DeSantis too. One quibble – while I do hold PDT responsible for losing, I don’t think it was possible to beat the margin of fraud in that election. Look how closely they trimmed the late night dumps – Biden carried GA by 11,000 iirc.

    But he should have seen the theft coming and not been blindsided. We know the left are thieves and liars, and that they’ll steal and lie to the limit that’s available. We hired a brash loudmouthed not-a-politician because the left are liars and thieves. He wasn’t up to it.

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    I seem to recall that Trump people tried to stop at least some of the fraud, before November 2020, but they were dismissed because they had no “standing.” i.e., “too early,” because no “damage” had yet occurred. Then after the damage was done, they were dismissed as “moot.” i.e., “too late.”

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    It’s always easier to see success when you’re not the one having to accomplish it.

    Aww. It’s unfair to require success at the really hard things?

    Really hard things?  Former called getting you six ways from Sunday.

    • #81
  22. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):
    I want Ron. Younger & more vigorous. I also think Trump blew the 2020 election — if he had had some discipline, he would have won beyond the margin of fraud.

    I’m for DeSantis too. One quibble – while I do hold PDT responsible for losing, I don’t think it was possible to beat the margin of fraud in that election. Look how closely they trimmed the late night dumps – Biden carried GA by 11,000 iirc.

    But he should have seen the theft coming and not been blindsided. We know the left are thieves and liars, and that they’ll steal and lie to the limit that’s available. We hired a brash loudmouthed not-a-politician because the left are liars and thieves. He wasn’t up to it.

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    I seem to recall that Trump people tried to stop at least some of the fraud, before November 2020, but they were dismissed because they had no “standing.” i.e., “too early,” because no “damage” had yet occurred. Then after the damage was done, they were dismissed as “moot.” i.e., “too late.”

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    It’s always easier to see success when you’re not the one having to accomplish it.

    Aww. It’s unfair to require success at the really hard things?

    Really hard things? Former called getting you six ways from Sunday.

    If Trump couldn’t overcome the Democrat Fraud Machine in 2020, why should we think Trump can overcome the Democrat Fraud Machine in 2024?  

    • #82
  23. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    I’m for DeSantis too. One quibble – while I do hold PDT responsible for losing, I don’t think it was possible to beat the margin of fraud in that election. Look how closely they trimmed the late night dumps – Biden carried GA by 11,000 iirc.

    But he should have seen the theft coming and not been blindsided. We know the left are thieves and liars, and that they’ll steal and lie to the limit that’s available. We hired a brash loudmouthed not-a-politician because the left are liars and thieves. He wasn’t up to it.

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    I seem to recall that Trump people tried to stop at least some of the fraud, before November 2020, but they were dismissed because they had no “standing.” i.e., “too early,” because no “damage” had yet occurred. Then after the damage was done, they were dismissed as “moot.” i.e., “too late.”

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    It’s always easier to see success when you’re not the one having to accomplish it.

    Aww. It’s unfair to require success at the really hard things?

    Really hard things? Former called getting you six ways from Sunday.

    If Trump couldn’t overcome the Democrat Fraud Machine in 2020, why should we think Trump can overcome the Democrat Fraud Machine in 2024?

    That’s what a number of these arguments are about… that if fraud exists, “voting harder” is stupid. The onus to “vote beyond the margin of fraud” is equally as ridiculous, because they both passively accept fraud as part of the system while simultaneously claiming fraud doesn’t exist.

    If fraud exists, we shouldn’t be passively accepting of it.

    • #83
  24. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Stina (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    I’m for DeSantis too. One quibble – while I do hold PDT responsible for losing, I don’t think it was possible to beat the margin of fraud in that election. Look how closely they trimmed the late night dumps – Biden carried GA by 11,000 iirc.

    But he should have seen the theft coming and not been blindsided. We know the left are thieves and liars, and that they’ll steal and lie to the limit that’s available. We hired a brash loudmouthed not-a-politician because the left are liars and thieves. He wasn’t up to it.

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    I seem to recall that Trump people tried to stop at least some of the fraud, before November 2020, but they were dismissed because they had no “standing.” i.e., “too early,” because no “damage” had yet occurred. Then after the damage was done, they were dismissed as “moot.” i.e., “too late.”

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    It’s always easier to see success when you’re not the one having to accomplish it.

    Aww. It’s unfair to require success at the really hard things?

    Really hard things? Former called getting you six ways from Sunday.

    If Trump couldn’t overcome the Democrat Fraud Machine in 2020, why should we think Trump can overcome the Democrat Fraud Machine in 2024?

    That’s what a number of these arguments are about… that if fraud exists, “voting harder” is stupid. The onus to “vote beyond the margin of fraud” is equally as ridiculous, because they both passively accept fraud as part of the system while simultaneously claiming fraud doesn’t exist.

    If fraud exists, we shouldn’t be passively accepting of it.

    You wrote a few comments up that there was fraud in Florida, but DeSantis won anyway.  

    So my question is this: If candidate A loses due to the workings of the Democrat Fraud Machine and candidate B is confronted by the Democrat Fraud Machine but prevails over it, isn’t candidate B the superior candidate?  

    • #84
  25. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

     

     

    I’m not saying it was an easy job, but that’s the job. DJT can’t do it. Next candidate, please.

    I seem to recall that Trump people tried to stop at least some of the fraud, before November 2020, but they were dismissed because they had no “standing.” i.e., “too early,” because no “damage” had yet occurred. Then after the damage was done, they were dismissed as “moot.” i.e., “too late.”

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    It’s always easier to see success when you’re not the one having to accomplish it.

    Aww. It’s unfair to require success at the really hard things?

    Really hard things? Former called getting you six ways from Sunday.

    If Trump couldn’t overcome the Democrat Fraud Machine in 2020, why should we think Trump can overcome the Democrat Fraud Machine in 2024?

    That’s what a number of these arguments are about… that if fraud exists, “voting harder” is stupid. The onus to “vote beyond the margin of fraud” is equally as ridiculous, because they both passively accept fraud as part of the system while simultaneously claiming fraud doesn’t exist.

    If fraud exists, we shouldn’t be passively accepting of it.

    You wrote a few comments up that there was fraud in Florida, but DeSantis won anyway.

    So my question is this: If candidate A loses due to the workings of the Democrat Fraud Machine and candidate B is confronted by the Democrat Fraud Machine but prevails over it, isn’t candidate B the superior candidate?

    So ignore fraud?

    And DeSantis overcame it by Rick Scott confronting it while it happened and DeSantis following through on cleaning up the fraud zone after.

    There was no passivity in that election by the governor or the next one.

    But you sound like you think fraud is fine to live with and we shouldn’t do anything about it.

    • #85
  26. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    Overcoming is more about luck and the fraud underestimating. Not quality of the candidates.

    But sure, if you want me to accept your premise, damn straight Trump was better than Romney.

    And the very fact the Dems felt it was necessary to manufacture votes up to EIGHTY MILLION is also proof Trump is a far superior candidate than anything NT has to put forth.

    • #86
  27. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    I seem to recall that Trump people tried to stop at least some of the fraud, before November 2020, but they were dismissed because they had no “standing.” i.e., “too early,” because no “damage” had yet occurred. Then after the damage was done, they were dismissed as “moot.” i.e., “too late.”

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    We don’t have the option to leave and go elsewhere. If success wasn’t possible within the constraints that faced PDT, then we have to try someone else.

    Why do you think the constraints would have been different for someone else?

    EDIT: BTW, they found someone after Tom and after that. The project never succeeded.

    Sigh. I don’t. I’m pointing out the distinction between our situation and Tom’s. And that Tom’s situation can’t be compared to ours, because Tom can still have a life without the job and we can’t have one without the nation. Tom’s best choice was to walk away. Where do you think we can go?

    You missed the point I was trying to make. In my attempted analogy, Tom is the equivalent of DJT. The project is the equivalent of the nation. Tom walked away from the project. DJT could have walked away from the nation. He didn’t. The constraints on Tom kept him from succeeding with the project. The constraints on DJT kept him from succeeding with the nation. I think the same constraints would have kept DJT’s successor from succeeding also. The project continued for some time after, and the nation is still here. Eventually the project failed. The jury is still out on the nation. 

    You, I believe, are correct in saying that we have nowhere else to go, but that doesn’t in itself guarantee success. 

    • #87
  28. Barfly Member
    Barfly
    @Barfly

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    [snip for word count]

    They tried. That’s nice. When a person takes an executive job, he has a mission to execute. That’s what the word means. A line worker might be able to get by, if they do all the right things and the production line still fouls up. But if the Chief Executive can’t get it done, no matter why not, then we need a new one.

    Sometimes reality creeps in. I remember turning down a project management job on the grounds that, given the operational constraints, no one could succeed. Some time later I was told that “Tom” had taken on the job that I was afraid to take. All I could say was, “I wish him success.”

    Two months later I asked the same source how it was going and he said, “Well, Tom left.” Why? The answer was, “Tom said, ‘Given the operational constraints, success was not possible.’”

    We don’t have the option to leave and go elsewhere. If success wasn’t possible within the constraints that faced PDT, then we have to try someone else.

    Why do you think the constraints would have been different for someone else?

    EDIT: BTW, they found someone after Tom and after that. The project never succeeded.

    Sigh. I don’t. I’m pointing out the distinction between our situation and Tom’s. And that Tom’s situation can’t be compared to ours, because Tom can still have a life without the job and we can’t have one without the nation. Tom’s best choice was to walk away. Where do you think we can go?

    You missed the point I was trying to make. In my attempted analogy, Tom is the equivalent of DJT. The project is the equivalent of the nation. Tom walked away from the project. DJT could have walked away from the nation. He didn’t. The constraints on Tom kept him from succeeding with the project. The constraints on DJT kept him from succeeding with the nation. I think the same constraints would have kept DJT’s successor from succeeding also. The project continued for some time after, and the nation is still here. Eventually the project failed. The jury is still out on the nation.

     

    No, I got it. It’s your conflation of Tom’s job and that of the Presidency I argue with. The difference is that Tom can walk away and we can’t. You keep trying to compare them, and it makes no sense.

    You, I believe, are correct in saying that we have nowhere else to go, but that doesn’t in itself guarantee success.

    That I can agree with. There’s no guarantee of success. There is also no alternative to continuing to try.

     

    • #88
  29. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Barfly (View Comment):

    [snip for word count]

     

    We don’t have the option to leave and go elsewhere. If success wasn’t possible within the constraints that faced PDT, then we have to try someone else.

    Why do you think the constraints would have been different for someone else?

    EDIT: BTW, they found someone after Tom and after that. The project never succeeded.

    Sigh. I don’t. I’m pointing out the distinction between our situation and Tom’s. And that Tom’s situation can’t be compared to ours, because Tom can still have a life without the job and we can’t have one without the nation. Tom’s best choice was to walk away. Where do you think we can go?

    You missed the point I was trying to make. In my attempted analogy, Tom is the equivalent of DJT. The project is the equivalent of the nation. Tom walked away from the project. DJT could have walked away from the nation. He didn’t. The constraints on Tom kept him from succeeding with the project. The constraints on DJT kept him from succeeding with the nation. I think the same constraints would have kept DJT’s successor from succeeding also. The project continued for some time after, and the nation is still here. Eventually the project failed. The jury is still out on the nation.

    You, I believe, are correct in saying that we have nowhere else to go, but that doesn’t in itself guarantee success.

    No, I got it. It’s your conflation of Tom’s job and that of the Presidency I argue with. The difference is that Tom can walk away and we can’t. You keep trying to compare them, and it makes no sense.

    No, you still don’t get it and maybe never will. Once more: Tom was in charge of the project. DJT was nominally in charge of the executive branch of the government. That much should be clear, but it apparently isn’t for some reason.

    Why you keep bringing “we” into the analogy is something I don’t understand. If I extended the analogy, “we” would have been the management who hired Tom because it was “we” the voters who hired DJT. While “we” can’t walk away, Tom did and the option was available to DJT, but DJT didn’t exercise it. 

     

    • #89
  30. Barfly Member
    Barfly
    @Barfly

    Enough of the copying. Yes, I put “we” and “DJT” together, since he was our avatar in that position. But the difference remains, that the Presidency is not much (or anything really) at all like Tom’s job. It’s ok for Tom to walk away. It would not have been acceptable for PDT to walk away. I say there’s nothing to be learned about DJT or the Presidency from Tom. That’s all.

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.