Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
By popular demand from listeners, "Lucretia" takes over hosting duties this week and gives Steve another thrashing about election fraud issues. But along the way we review the extremely ominous first 72 hours of the the Harris-Biden Administration, and conclude that the Harris-Biden presidency is going to be several notches to the left of the Obama Administration.
On the never-ending question of the integrity of the November election, about which listeners weren't convinced by last week's episode with Henry Olsen, we discuss the statistical analysis of John Lott, whom Steve describes as a "level-six statistical regression ninja," along with a respectful critique from three well-qualified political scientists. The statistical fine points are difficult for a layperson to follow, leaving us . . . right where we started: circumstantial evidence is like a smoke from a gun floating in the air with no one around—we don't know who fired it, etc. Lucretia doesn't let Steve off the hook on a single point, causing still more liver damage.
Steve Hayward
"Lucretia"
Discussion (9)
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Great that some hosts (to be counted on one hand?) on Ricochet.com recognize the Totalitarian nature of what’s going on. The Right-Left/GOP-Dem interpretation of events is dead in the water.
Anyone thinking we are back to political business-as-usual has not assimilated the history of Totalitarianism.
History tells us that Totalitarians use deception, lies, infiltration, misdirection, and gaslighting, which means with Totalitarians you MUST assume conspiracy. To do otherwise is to miss the point of Totalitarianism.
The Democratic Party, Media, and Big Tech are blatantly announcing their Totalitarianism. So of course they are conspiring.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Lucretia's on it.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
That was really good.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
289k bad votes in the swing states?
I got 273,462 from the claims that have survived some level of critical scrutiny or fact-checking (before the -10% precaution I like to apply in case of overlap between different categories of shady votes).
289k bad votes in the swing states? Not at all improbable
ricochet.com
Open link
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Having now heard Steve and Lucretia discuss both Henry Olsen’s and John Lott’s analyses, Henry’s explanation is the more interesting, even if my sympathies are with Lott. But not the inferences from statistics—the Lysistrata explanation, instead. My short summary of what Henry said is that Reluctant Trump women voters voted for Trump in 2016, abandoning him in 2018 and 2020, while Reluctant Trump men stuck with Trump until 2020. That I can believe. Shades of Lucretia’s observation about the power of women to affect elections even before the 19th Amendment!
You're seeing five of nine comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.