Tasty Tasty Pottage – A Blast From The Past from October 1, 2016

Posted on by accordingtohoyt

Note for those for you waking up now, that I have been screaming about this a long time.
Notice what’s going on, please: Once is happenstance, Twice is coincidence, Three times is enemy action.

Note none of this even TOUCHES on the fraud facilitation in COLORADO. Despite records in Colorado showing 180 year old people voting and worse shenanigans. Facilitated, of course, by registration on line and never having to prove you’re eligible to vote or even EXIST. If your country is vote-by-mail only or primarily, look for the same things happening there.


Biden doesn’t have campaign offices most places. That’s because they’re not in fact a political campaign. They’re a fraud machine.

On a personal note, I forgot I lost a cat in 2016, too. Our beloved Miranda, to pretty much the same ailment that took Greebo. (His was just faster) I don’t mind this year rhyming with 2016. I mind that it basically said “hold my beer and watch this.”

Tasty Tasty Pottage – A Blast From The Past from October 1, 2016

I am dry-eyed and awake in what feels like the wee hours in the morning.  It is not.  For me it is close to eight am and for you guys on the east coast most of the morning has passed.  I have a distracting tendency to keep east coast hours, which means going to bed with the chickens and getting up at first light.

Today is that special kind of hell that comes after a day like yesterday, where I manage to torture myself both ways: for not noticing how much she was suffering earlier; and for putting an end to her suffering.  I keep second guessing the diagnosis (she always had stomach trouble from a kitten) then remembering she was having issues before the last move, then going back again– don’t worry.  It will pass.  And it’s no bad thing for me to feel small and stupid and impotent.  It helps me appreciate the words of the act of contrition [I have sinned]… in what I’ve done and what I’ve failed to do. Sometimes there are no easy answers, and nothing you can do that doesn’t leave you feeling like you did something awful.

Among my minor awful acts, I spread fear and despondency on facebook.  I know.  If I were the only one to do so!

But this one truly was stupid and hinged on my bad eyesight as well as anything else.  I recently had to change my address so i could vote in the proper precinct.  I noticed a line saying “do you want to receive your ballot by email” and was shocked (and so blind, I failed to notice it was grayed out for me) that I looked at it three or four times, and then felt something snap and yelled on FB.

What I failed to notice is the option for email ballots is only available to military personnel.

I still don’t like the risk, but it’s not as though our military people don’t face incredible obstacles to voting in time. They want it by email, they can have it by email.

The amount of fraud possible from that move is very minor compared to the other… ah… temptations to fraud inherent in the system.

Technically, we have a warm body franchise.  You are breathing, a citizen of the United states and over 18 years of age, you can vote.

These pitifully easy guidelines, it would seem should be lax enough for everybody.  They are not.  Over the last almost a quarter century there has been a determined effort to abolish them.

Part of the reason I jumped on FB (even though it was stupid) is that I have been mad at the craziness in our voting for a long time.

Our voting is now wholly an “honor system.”  I.e. you can sign up to vote without being required to show either proof of your citizenship, or of your age, even.

When I was a young woman, twenty four years ago, I could see the trouble with “enroll them to vote when you enroll them to drive.”  No one else did.  I was told I was suspicious, insane and, of course, racist.  (Why is it that people who assume BY THEIR VERY ARGUMENT that anyone darker than them is too stupid to figure out how to register to vote if it’s not done automatically, or to vote if they’re required to show the same ID they’d have to show to receive even welfare, or even to register more than a day in advance of the election, are the ones who get to call others racists?  Do they lack a mirror or are their minds so limited they don’t see the rueful irony in that accusation?)

And yet there were signposts on the road to hell.  You know I have an accent.  I happen to know I have one too.  I’ve been a citizen since 1988, however I know many women in my circumstances, married to American men, who never change their citizenship.  And yet, when I changed my license to Colorado (took me a couple of years after moving as, at the time, I wasn’t driving) I was asked if I wanted to register to vote.  I had assumed this might come up and had brought with me my citizenship certificate.  It was never asked for.  This did not reassure me.

Apparently the goal of it is not to insult me by implying I have an accent, or perhaps that I can tan (since again, the question is apparently “racist” it never having occurred to the cracked heads who make that sort of decision that an accent is not a race, just an origin of having grown up abroad a long time; and also that pale blond people too can have accents, be foreign nationals and therefore not entitled to voting in the US.)  You can’t insult me by saying I have an accent.  I know I have one.  It would be like insulting me by saying I am not six feet tall.  Presumably I know that too.  As annoying as it gets when cashiers and strangers ask the fateful “Where are you from?” (Just up the road.  You?) I do know it’s there and I don’t think assuming I have a higher chance than someone who sounds like they grew up in Texas of being a foreign citizen is a horrible insult.  Yeah, in the event, I’m a national and someone with a Texas accent might not be.  So? The answer is not to remove the requirement to show proof of citizenship from those who might not sound as citizens, but to make everyone show ID.  That we went the other way is incredibly stupid or malicious or yes.

The next sign on the road to hell was when a Japanese journalist, on some kind of exchange program, found that he could register to vote in Colorado DESPITE HAVING PROVED HIS IDENTITY WITH A JAPANESE PASSPORT. He wrote about it in the Gazette.

I knew then we were in trouble, but I didn’t fully understand how BAD that trouble until I was changing my address.

Yes, sure, what I feared was the worst — the ability to receive your ballot by email — was not true.  But that would not be a signpost on the road to hell, that would be a sign we were already consumed to ash.

Not only can you now register entirely on line — which since voting in Colorado is NOW entirely by mail completely spares you the need to have… well, a physical body because you have to show no proof of nationality, age, or, well… anything.  You just click a box on a page — BUT you can register (says right there) at sixteen.  You are, however, sternly enjoined not to vote till you’re eighteen.

Why sixteen, you ask?  Who the hell knows?  What good does it do to register you to vote (which is all the page does) then tell you you’re not supposed to do it for two years?  I suspect this is the mutant child of Motor Voter, because you can register to drive (with parent approval) at 16.  And still I must ask, though, since the page has nothing to do with drivers’ licenses and is ONLY FOR VOTER REGISTRATION why register you at sixteen?

I have said before that when I was a poll judge in Colorado I found a great number of people, showing up to vote, were told they early voted or voted by mail, and COMPLETELY forgot about it.  Apparently the rate of dementia in Colorado Springs is about 1/3 and affects people of all ages.

There are other charming things, such as recent reports that apparently we have the same enthusiastic post-vital voter participation as Chicago (well, done, Colorado, you’re coming along.  I’m sure it’s what every civilized place wants to be: Chicago.  Next up, we can make our streets into battlefields.)

Then there are reports like this: The Washington Mall Shooter VOTED. Three times, despite not being a citizen.

Apparently Washington and Colorado are of one mind about the right to vote being a thing to entrust to the honor system, because even though voter fraud is so rarely investigated or persecuted as to make the risk of lying/cheating trivial, EVERYONE is an honest person when it comes to voting.

NO ONE would do this with payments, even government payments, but apparently it’s fine to do it with the right of the people to govern themselves.

At the heart of the fact we have a warm body system is the idea that any restriction of voting rights will adversely impact someone and cause an unequal application of laws. This is why we print ballots in Chinese and Spanish and more exotic languages and never ask, NOT ONCE how people who are so limited in their understanding of the predominant language of the country can participate in its self-governing.  (Yeah, I know they can be very well informed through foreign newspapers.  And if you haven’t yet realized the joke that is, you have never really read a foreign newspaper for foreigners. They make the bias in ours seem non-existent and also most of the time they’re so bad they’re not even wrong.  Just a different universe.)  This is why — because some idiots abused them once — you’re not allowed to give literacy tests, or even to have the person “voting” be of sound mind.  This is why the vote of people with dementia, a growing demographic, is not debarred.

And this is why, in an excess of making sure that EVERYONE can vote, no matter how strange their circumstances, we have early voting stretching for a month ahead, we have vote by mail and we have register and vote without ever showing you have the right to, or indeed that you exist and are alive.

We have in this process gone well beyond warm-body franchise to imaginary entity franchise.  Nothing in fact — except perhaps foolish honesty — can stop me registering and voting for each of the entities that live in my head.

We have also in this way rendered moot the right to a private vote.  In states like Colorado which (against the wishes of its people, btw, as expressed by referendum) vote exclusively by mail, there is no right to private voting.  Any ballots mailed to a family address are subjected to the whims of a domestic tyrant, and I’ve already heard the usual rumors of people whose mothers or fathers vote for them, requiring only they sign the ballot.  Impossible you say?  How?  How is that impossible in a tyrannical family?  And how do you even prove it happened afterwards?  I bet you it’s happening, throughout the land.

In Colorado, and in many states throughout this great land, you can vote if you’re too young, you can vote if you’re a foreign national, you can vote if you’re dead and you can vote if you never existed.

Every time someone points out this is ALL on the honor system and all these violations are possible, someone gets huffy and says that there is no proof of fraud.

How would there be proof of fraud?  Besides which they don’t mean dead people shown to have voted, or even names like Mickey Mouse or Bugs Bunny who are assiduous voters.  Proof of fraud means someone was persecuted and convicted.   And how do you even start to do that, when the whole system is designed to obscure the identity of anyone who might choose to do so?

So, you say, better someone not entitled to votes, than someone entitled to vote is turned away.

How do you figure?

Say Bob is entitled to vote and does.  Meanwhile, Minny Mouse, Doktor Frankenstein, Michael, here on vacation from Australia, Joe who is a legal resident from South Africa, John who is American but who is not verbal or indeed mentally competent to vote and whose mom voted for him, and Cindy, Trevor, and 30 of their best friends who are all sixteen also turned out to vote.  What is Bob’s vote worth when diluted by all of those.

Is it that bad?  Can you prove it’s not?

Let’s suppose that everyone are angels unborn, unable to cheat or lie.  Let’s suppose that despite incentives, like cheating yourself bread and circuses, no institution was likely to actually use its power to create fake votes.

In a government of the people for the people, the important thing is that it be KNOWN it’s of the people.  I.e. you have to make sure you’re not being governed by a tiny minority who (as with fake twitter accounts, say) multiply their numbers by fraud on an industrial level.

In that situation, one fake vote is enough to cast doubt.  One OBVIOUSLY exploitable flaw, like being able to register at sixteen, but being told to be a good boy/girl and not vote till eighteen, is enough to cast doubt.

Like Caesar’s wife, the franchise of the American people MUST be above suspicion.  Which means in practical fact, that you HAVE to require each would be voter to prove they’re American citizens and over eighteen.

If we don’t do that — as we haven’t — we have not only sold our rights for a mess of pottage, but we’ve sold our rights of redress and righting this.  Or do you think officers elected by this corrupt system will let you overthrow it.

I think this is foolish.  The left — and come on, if it weren’t mostly the left intending to dilute our right to vote, it wouldn’t be them arguing for ever laxer rules and Motor Voter wouldn’t be Bill Clinton’s baby — has a curious tendency to mistake the wrapping for the present.  I think they think if they can capture the FORMS of government that means they captured the country.

As we’ve seen again and again in fields they captured, it doesn’t.  It usually leads to what they captured being rendered obsolete and superseded.

I don’t know if that can be done in government, but I bet you in five to ten years, we’ll find out.

We did not trade our rights for a mess of pottage! Because this is not our pottage.  We’re not the ones who made the bargain.  And we want our rights back.

165 thoughts on “Tasty Tasty Pottage – A Blast From The Past from October 1, 2016”

      1. Though later they drew swords and tried to behead their opponents, since There Can Be Only ONE!

      1. No. Not how I read the comment. I translated it as: Voting registration & voting accountability is a mess …

        As there isn’t any …

        1. that’s how I read it, too.

          Of course, I suspect that the republic was lost many years ago. We’re just getting a peak under the blanket to see how bad the rot has set in corpse now.

      2. No, the pottage.

        When I request pottage I expect it to be on a nice serving plate, pleasingly presented with a suitable garnish. This is just a mal-ladled atrocity even Army mess lines would be embarrassed to claim.
        –

  3. Honestly, at this point, I think we’re boned.

    We’re boned both sides are fully expecting the other side to participate in massive voter fraud (the right expecting the left to do so based on the above evidence, the left expecting the right to do so because ORANGEMANBADISLITEREALLYHITLER!), so regardless of who wins, the other side will declare the election illegitimate and insist that their candidate is the true winner. And given that many on the left (Hillary said so publicly, I think others might have too) are telling Biden to refuse to concede under any circumstances, and that he’s pliant enough to go along with whatever they tell him to do (and the DNC should be investigated for elder abuse, but that’s another rant), and what we’re seeing in urban and now suburban areas across the country….

    Make sure your mags are loaded and your sights are zeroed. I’d say “buy ammo” but right now there’s barely any to be had.

    1. I think the Democrats are boned. Let me break it down;

      * Having learned NOTHING fro 2016 they have once again fielded a ticket with negative charisma, obvious serious health problems, and more baggage than a fully booked cruise ship.

      * Clear cases of Democrat vote fraud are emerging (surprise!) right at the end of September. The Democrats may think they got away with their 2016 frauds, but Trump didn’t need to tackle them then. He needed to prove that he could do the job he’d run for, and keep his promises. He’s done that. Now, if (as I suspect) he has chapter and verse on what the Democrats pulled in 2016, he can hammer them like cheap veal. I look for a steady drumbeat running up to the election, and if the Democrats claim they won, or drag out the count to ‘find’ more votes he can drop the sky on them.

      * while I don’t expect Trump to pull a huge number of formerly ‘safe’ Democrat votes, I do expect him to pull a lot more than the Democrats expect. The riots may play well to the Fully Fascist Left, but they weren’t going to vote for Trump no matter what. OTOH, I expect they’ve seriously PO’ed a lot of the minority urban poor whose neighborhoods and businesses have been destroyed. And a lot of suburban types whose commutes turned into nightmares or who are afraid the idiocy will spread.

      If Trump manages a convincing victory on Election night,,and moves to put down the resulting riots quickly and legally (and he has a lot of legal tools with which to do so), he will be in a strong position. From that position he will be well placed to hammer the Democrats’ on provable vote fraud (and they are nowhere near as clever as they think they are) and the attempted coup by Obama operatives.

      With luck and good planning, Trump can seriously hurt the Democrats, especially the power structure that has failed to bring him down, precipitating a civil war INSIDE the Democrat Party that could drag on for several election cycles, between the Old Guard, the Young Nuts, and whatever up and coming moderates feel,like misprint in.

      1. I think the DNC has managed to burn so much goodwill that they can’t fraud their way out of it anymore.

        Ginsburg croaking couldn’t possibly have come at a better time to remind everyone of Kavanaugh. And ramming through a new justice will demoralize them.

      2. The current Presidential ticket being run seems even more inept than 2016. But I’m not sure the Democratic Party is as inept as 2016. Killary isn’t running the show this time, and I would think they learned at least some things from 2016 and their laughable primary season. I could be wrong though.

      3. Whoever the hell it was Shrill One had as VP (so memorable, I ain’t gonna bother looking him up) was less obnoxious than Harris The Harpy Hoping Joe Kicks Off To The Great Yonder Two Days After The Second Year Of The First Term. Joe The Plagerising Wonder Veep has most of the unlikeability of Hillary but made up for it with a VP just as dislikeable as Hillary.

        I still worry about the margin of fraud though.

    2. The Left hasn’t accepted the result of any election they didn’t win in my entire adult life.

      …I actually just framed it this way BECAUSE I was trying to trace back to a time when they weren’t accusing the right of stealing an election, and stopped when I hit the “Hanging Chads.”

      1. I don’t think they’ve willingly accepted the results of any loosing election in my entire life, period, either (with the possible exception of Bush Sr. vs. Dukakis, but I’m too young to remember that one). They just haven’t been so virulently, militantly, and openly blatant about their intentions before.

        1. They were not enthused by Dukakis at all. Forget what was up there but the Dems really phoned that in, perhaps even worse than they had with Mondale and I’ve heard a few wonder just what the feck they were thinking, going with him.

          1. The Democratic Party regards their presidential candidate as a figurehead; a marionette who should be dancing to the Party’s tune. Which is why they always lowball their ballot with the weakest loser they think might be electable, because they don’t want a candidate too powerful or erratic to control.

            The Party don’t take its candidates seriously, which is why they keep getting blindsided when voters *do*.

            Their lines of communication, obligation, status, support… their whole world is wrapped up in the Party, like members of a cult. Their reality only impinges on that of the rest of the country at carefully-controlled points. So they move their phantom divisions around in their offices, unaware that the markers in the sandbox will do pretty much as they damned well please, not what the Party wants them to do.

      2. Around 1855 a number of prominent Democrats announced they’d never accept a Republican president. The Dems are following a long tradition.

      3. It’s rather interesting that I’ve finally realized every progressive I’ve known, over the decades I’ve known them, each and every one has been a sore loser. To the point I stopped playing games with them, because not only were they sore losers, they were very nasty rub-it-in-your-face insufferable winners.

        I used to put it up with this, because I *thought* they were my friends, and we put up with annoying problems, just as we expect our own peccadilloes to be forgiven. Boy, 2016 proved me wrong on that last one.

    4. “Ankh-Morpork had dallied with many forms of government and had ended up with that form of democracy known as One Man, One Vote. The Patrician was the Man; he had the Vote.”

      ― Terry Pratchett, Mort

    5. > ORANGEMANBADISLITEREALLYHITLER

      I was going to make a snarky comment about “Heil …” and looked up the German word for orange, which turns out to be… “orange.”

      That sucked all the snark out of it, somehow.

      1. Maybe “Orangeman”?

        ….It’s “Mann.”

        -.-

        Maybe “OrangeMensch”?

        Although that runs into the whole yiddish thing, which totally undercuts the intended effect.

      2. The thing that pisses me off most about “(Insert Latest inconvenient Republican politicians here) is Literally Hitler!” is that it makes The Despicable Austrian more respectable.

      3. There’s another golden moment Trump missed:

        “Do you remember all those hysterical predictions when I won that election a few years ago? I sure do. So, where are the concentration camps? Where is the martial law? Where are the tanks crushing protesters in the streets? They’re not in my America. Are they in yours?”

  5. I just want to know how to get it back. I can see it’s a broken system. Electing a fix seems like it would take a miracle. Can the judicial branch? Short of violence, where do we go?

    Thanks for a new link. I’m collecting links to show election dishonesty so I have a stock to show people that no, really this isn’t imaginary, there is fraud THAT CHANGES ELECTION OUTCOMES!

    Preferred system, national holiday to vote, in person only, purple finger, paper only (for now), in English only, one day only voting, counted at poll closing in public. And number of ballots out has to match number of signatures.

    We could make vote counting very public. Put the box on a table in the school gym. Put a camera on it from the time the empty box is supplied to the time the last ballot is removed and counted right there. Project that live on a screen where whoever wants to hang out in the bleachers and watch can see it.

    I think the trade of some people eligible to vote not voting under that system is worth the fraud prevention it gives. It would at least be a warm body, has an ID system. Add a decent voter registration/update system we’d be golden, right? Am I missing anything?

    But if the current system depends on vote fraud by mail, that’s a pipe dream. 😔

    1. we MUST repeal Motor Voter. Dump all registrations and start anew. Proof of fucking citizenship (birth certificate works) to register.
      Because no other country has this circus.

      1. So what, we write and meet with elected officials and say, do this one thing, just this one thing or else no vote for you?

          1. That’s what I’m asking! How can we fix it through voting, if they do need our votes? Is there anything we can do if we can’t vote it better? Not asking as despair or in sarcasm, but genuinely, because I would like to work to make it better, but don’t know where to start.

              1. Perhaps a class action suit, joined by Project Veritas, True the Vote, Judicial Watch and others, claiming that the absence of effective protections against vote fraud (see exhibits 1 through ∞) constitute a denial of voting rights for legal voters?
                –

                1. While I don’t know if ALL those groups have filed lawsuits like that, I know TrueTheVote has. The counterargument which has prevailed so far in many jurisdictions is that effective voter id suppresses the votes of actual protected classes (notably race, but also sex) as defined in the Civil Rights Act, whereas whites aren’t suppressed by “unproven” “uncommon” illegal voting. Note that the racial aspect is brought in by the Left and not the Right.

                2. We don’t trust the electoral system, so we move the problem to the courts, which we don’t trust either.

                  There’s something about that plan that doesn’t quite sound right…

                  1. It’s a question of how much damage there is. There is no single minded legislative body or judicial branch. Each is made up of individuals acting. Some maliciously some merely self-interestedly, and some honorably. Who is where and how many are malicious vs honerable are unknown to me, and what makes it possible to discuss whether we can use use the systems to clear up the systems.

      2. Afterwards can we please please please institute the proof-of-armament requirement?

        I’m not even in it for the headsplosions this time. I just want people to remember what voting is.

        1. I’ve suggested that part of votor registration be shooting a .22 at a ten yard target. Hitting it not required.

            1. It would be a very coarse filter. Presumably most could hit the target. But the point would be mindset, not marksmanship.

            2. Last time I was at the range, I noticed some of the employees hanging out at the observation window. Then the “airlock” (soundlock?) second door to the range opened and the first thing I saw was the white cane. This huge guy had the cane in one hand and was pulling a 2’x2’x2′ wheeled case with the other. He opened it up, and had about a dozen handguns in there, all with laser sights and suppressed! Speaking with him, he was legally blind, but could pick out green lasers as opposed to red, against the white of the targets. Then he let me shoot some of them, first time using a can! Wish they weren’t so expensive!

            1. No, otherwise the vote count won’t match the signature count. And grading the test would not likely be as honest due to incentives. It’s hard to screw up pass fail grading. And one person one vote seems more honest. If I were setting up an extra vote system, I would pick some other way to earn votes. But all the ways I have thought of have serious drawbacks which lead back to one person, one vote seeming best.

              Although since it’s a pipe dream anyway….puts on silly hat…. if you really really wanted to, you could have the test in an adjacent range, have people shoot right before they vote, and show the test on a screen with the score, on the screen next to the ballot screen, then one ballot and signature per vote earned. At least ballots and signatures would match. All voting facilities to have both bleachers and a range? Bit of a high bar there. Maybe we could move voting to the middle of summer right near the 4th of July. (Then we can have the range portion outdoors). A week long summer holiday season starting by celebrating Independence and ending by exercising the sacred privilege of voting complete with community picnics and BBQ. How’s that sound?

        2. Before our Governor went crazy and mandated face diapers, he signed off a number of changes in my state’s firearms laws.

          Polls were formerly GFZs. Now they are not. I will be armed when I go to the poll.

          If the face-diaper thing is still in effect, I’ll be wearing my Taliban do-rag and sunglasses, and they’ll have to match my “state-issued photo ID” to whatever skin they can see. Hey, I didn’t write that Executive Order. Call the Gov and complain about it.

      3. Sarah, you are going to have to tie that to the tax system and also to some variety of biometric. Because birth certificates aren’t that hard to forge. but explaining how you claimed taxable income from 4 states with 3 different photos may be more of a challenge.

        1. It would still MASSIVELY reduce fraud.
          I don’t think we can bring it to zero. Not with the size of our country, but to make it oh, 4 to 5% of the vote would be nice.
          And yes, I know that’s quite a lot. But not as much as now.

          1. I don’t think fraud in a representative system can be eliminated. You can make them work for it, though, and reduce the power of government so that it is less worth the effort.

            Still better than an Aristocracy.

            1. It’s like any human system, can’t make it perfect, but we can try to make it harder to fraud. And as you say, make the prize less attractive.

      4. In order to do that, you’re going to have to literally hammer the people who push for motor voter and mail in balloting. You have to politically and emotionally destroy them. I know it’s a tough thing for us to do, because we don’t think that way; but they do. The only other way to get rid of them is to shoot them, and everyone tends to frown on that.

        1. I don’t. I think that would, logistically, be the best solution.

          Unfortunately, I think God frowns on that, which means I have to, as well.

          1. Actually, God probably does not frown on that. As long as you at least tried to reason with them first. If the other group persists in stealing from you, enslaving you, then by all means march on them, kill them, drive them from the promised land. It is, after all, in defense of all you have.

            1. See, there’s the rub: I don’t want to wait. Pre-emptive strikes and hearing the lamentations as they are driven before you are what I want – not waiting to be struck first.

    2. > Can the judicial branch? Short of violence, where do we go?

      It’s a twin problem: the Supremes making law from the bench, and Congress making law out of ignorance and malice.

      We have waaaayyy too much law, and most of it is so convoluted and arbitary nobody even understands it.

      1. The Supremes have no way we can even theoretically bring them to heel. Since they have the right to interpret amendments.

        1. That is deliberate. Supreme Court Justice is a lifetime appointment precisely so that the Court can be independent, so that neither Congress nor the President can ‘bring them to heel’ and they can be, at least theoretically, above partisan politics. Sure as hell, nobody else is these days.

          It ain’t perfect, but it’s better than anything else a group of very smart people could come up with 240 years ago. The only controls on the Supreme Court are the American public, and the verdict of history.

          When Biden demands that ‘the American people have a voice’ in appointing a new Supreme Court Justice, Trump should say, “The American people elected me almost four years ago to BE their voice. I still am. They elected their Senators for the same purpose. We are all serving that purpose, as set forth in Article 2 of the United States Constitution. You should read it. If you HAVE read it, and are still saying these things, maybe you should have somebody explain it to you.”

          1. Justices can be “brought to heel” via impeachment. That’s almost as rare as impeaching a President.

          2. The Founding Fathers also thought it would be the weakest branch. They need to be brought to heel because they have usurped power.

          3. I concur. I wish the President had made that point last night – that the people *have* spoken through their most recent election(s).

            1. That might be deliberate. Keep in mind that in Britain the people spoke and were ignored…and the NEXT time they spoke they speech boiled down to “Do what we bloody well told you, you used;ess bloody wankers!”

              And that second vote had been preceded by years of tantrums, whining, and shifty political weaseling.

              Now, who does THAT sound like?

              Trump is not a big believer in interrupting an enemy who is making a mistake.

    3. Could you possibly share the links you’ve collected? (Realizing that the post would be in moderation due to multiple links for a while). It would be useful to have as I also get people telling me there’s no evidence and I’ve love to show evidence. I’ve only got one link so far myself.

      1. My link list is laughably short still. Just

        http://www.texastrashtalk.com/2020/04/vote-harvesting-in-harris-county-beyond.html?m=1

        And

        https://nypost.com/2020/08/29/political-insider-explains-voter-fraud-with-mail-in-ballots/?fbclid=IwAR3qeLKF29eLIP1UzrE9Zwkaw4eVh3EnbWmqnvgWogSRY9JYkJ-lPL8RIws

        There’s also a congressional linked retrospective report on the 2008 election that concluded that the presidential outcome was likely flipped by illegal votors, but being young and stupid, didn’t save the link/documents Not sure if my research skills can find it again.
        Sorry it’s not any more.

        1. Well, my list is rather more extensive. I’ve been working on the election issue for a while. And it’s why I know we’re not getting out of this via the ballot box absent a miracle.

          Democrats flipped NH with voting fraud in 2016:

          https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/7/voter-fraud-alert-over-5000-new-hampshire-presiden/

          And here’s the video showing one reason it wasn’t investigated:

          Along with the video showing Democrats describing how they did it and have been doing it:

          Ballot “harvesting” in CA, 2016:
          http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/03/voter-fraud-california-man-finds-dozens-ballots-stacked-outside-home.html

          Like I said, just a small sample.

          1. Also, I find it really interesting that a bunch of us have collected one or two links but those were all different. Sort of like how Sarah talks about that back in the day everyone felt isolated because we couldn’t find each other, I felt like the evidence was hard to find because I could only find one link on it, but all of us banding together can show we’re not alone and the evidence is more widespread than any of us (or at least I) thought.

      2. I posted a small sample of the links I’ve collected, and it’s in moderation.

        Like I said in that comment, voter fraud has been my issue for a while. Want to know why I think CW2 will be necessary and is unavoidable? That’s why.

    4. To echo Julaire’s comment and get you more evidence– why not write up a post for Sarah to guest post, and ask if folks have any that aren’t on the list?

      That gives Sarah a timely guest post, gives you more links, and she can farm it for Insty links.

    5. The one time I poll-watched: ballots came out of one box, got verified against the rolls, examined by one of several watchers for each side, recorded, the recording verified by the watchers, and then the ballot went into a locked box for safekeeping.

      Cameras can be spoofed; it needs actual eyes-on. But public venue like the school gym is a good place to do it.

      1. Yeah, I know cameras can be spoofed it’s just hard to see from a distance. The live camera would be for convenience. The safeguard is that people are sitting in the bleachers line of sight watching it.
        In my imagination, each party would supply official poll monitors, but if you’re the nasty suspicious sort, the system would let anyone participate unofficially.

        1. And the watchers don’t have to watch just the screens. Nothing wrong with folks using binoculars and such.

          Also, in this age, each Party can have its own camera drone keeping watch – live feed from ALL of them.

        2. When I poll-watched, we sat across the table from the ballot-counters, close enough to see everything. You really have to be close enough to read the poll book AND the ballot. And anyone can sign up to poll watch. Main criteria are being a suspicious bastard and able to stay alert until 4AM.

        1. I believe there are studies demonstrating that Republicans are highly process-oriented, while Democrats tend t be results-oriented. I think it was part of Haidt’s research.
          –

    7. Here’s one.

      https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/01/07/five_states_face_federal_lawsuit_over_inaccurate_voter_registrations__142089.html

      “In 378 U.S. counties, voter registration rates exceed 100% of the adult population, meaning there are more voter registrations on file than the total voting-age population, according to a new analysis by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch. “

      Also, from my recollection, anything over 60% of voting age actually casting a ballot is noteworthy, over 80% is flipping astounding, and 90% and up only happens in teeny tiny districts, fairy tales, and frauds. That is *also* nigh always found in major, contested presidential elections. Off years are a lot lower- compare and contrast turnout in 2018 to turnout in previous off years.

      1. Judicial Watch and True the Vote (both of which I support with cash and time) have all the evidence you could want.

        https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/categories/election-integrity/

        https://truethevote.org/

      2. Related to that, here’s this:
        https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/voter-participation.aspx

        Look at the presidential election chart participation rate, and guess when we went mail in ballot only.

        Oh, and shortly before Trump won the first time, the guy who was running for… I believe it was Senator… made a big point that we really needed to get out the vote on the dry side, because they average voting age population involvement in the 30s and 40s.

        And that they keep the voters who move away on the list for years.

      1. I wonder what would be the effect of a Federal law disqualifying, for Federal office, all votes from polities claiming voter registration in excess of 100% of adults (an unrealistically generous allowance, as I am confident that there are few instances of even 90% voting)?

        Nobody is being denied their right to vote, nor their right to be represented; this is merely to encourage political entities to maintain voter integrity so as to not dilute the votes of legitimate voters.

        Although I think it might be fun to enact a pro rata voting system, so that in an area with 125% registration each vote counts as only (100/125) … 80% of a vote.

        Or heck, just get a court to rule that failure to maintain accurate and reasonable registration is a crime punishable by, I dunno know, binge-watching The View?
        –

        1. portions of Milwaukee and Detroit have had over 100% turnout for elections. Milwaukee had around 110% for 0bama’s election (first term iirc, second term was the Detroit 100+% turnout)
          I’m betting it is a high fraud system surprised by a higher than usual real turnout bumping the fraud over the edge.

    9. > collecting links

      Save the pages to the Internet Archive and your local storage as well.

      And remember, if the Goog de-indexes the links, which it has been downright diligent about on some subjects, Yandex will likely keep them.

      If things get really bad, Yandex may be the best way to find out what’s going on. A situation eerily remindescent of Albert Speer listening to Allied radio broadcasts to find out what his own ministry was doing, since the reports that made it to his office were almost entirely fictitious…

  6. Article 1 – Section 4: Elections

    The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

    Congress could fix it. Electing Congresscritters who actually would is the problem at hand.

    1. So Congress could make such a regulation if we could elect a Congress that would. So how do we do that?

      1. I guess what I’m saying is that I would like to be part of fixing this, but it seems like angry posts on social media aren’t how to do that, and I’m not sure what would be.

      2. It’s not within the Constitutional powers of the Fed to do anything about it. It’s a state issue. Which is why the commies have been attacking it at the state level. There’s no Federal level for them to infiltrate.

        Interfering with the states’ rights to manage their own elections… that’s serious “you don’t want to open that box” territory. Well, maybe not in the converged states, but all it takes is one resister to lead the way.

          1. Motor Voter was a Federal law. The Federal government has the authority to set general guidelines slash minimum principles which states’ elections (or, at least, elections for Federal office, that is: President, Senator, Representative) must meet.

            Especially if they grant money for implementation.

            I vaguely recall the prior Pelosi House — the one that took over in 2006 — enacting some nonsense about computerized voting machines to ensure we never again had to suffer the anguish of dimpled chads. I can’t claim I care enough to look it up.
            –

            1. Further reflection reminds me that the Federal bodies — the House and Senate — have the right to refuse to recognize “members” sent from the states. Thus the House could refuse to seat David Duke should Louisiana’s 2nd District (whichever that might be this month) elect the odious [naughty word].

              Exercised broadly, that could be used to deny seating to any candidate winning election by other than Federally compliant voting procedures. There probably were (and may remain on the books) Reconstruction Era laws governing local election processes.

              There is undoubtedly a limit, else the Democrat-controlled House could refuse to seat any Republican racissssst Representatives.
              –

              1. You would have to have had something other than nadless cucks running the place. In 2016, McConnel should have refused to seat Mazie Hirono because of this incident:

                https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/7/voter-fraud-alert-over-5000-new-hampshire-presiden/

                And here’s the video showing one reason it wasn’t investigated:
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NantHZQ6kvo

                Along with the video showing Democrats describing how they did it and have been doing it:

                1. NY Post editorial (Emphasis added):

                  Growing signs that mass mail-in voting is going to be a disaster
                  Most of the media keep waving off any suggestion that mass-scale mail-in balloting could prove a disaster this November. But what if the bungling already seen here in deep-blue New York also happens in Florida, Pennsylvania or some other swing state?

                  Remember: It was Democratic officials who produced the infamous “butterfly ballot” in Florida in 2000 — turning normal, in-person voting into a confusing mess.

                  The snafu’d New York ballots that went out marked as “military absentee” rather than “military/absentee” are confusing many citizens — who may fail to vote as a result. And sending incorrectly addressed return envelopes may yet mess with the count, even if Board of Election officials get the right ones off.

                  Blaming vendors is all well and good — but these are huge red flags of serious quality-control issues. As Jiong Wang of Brooklyn Heights told The Post, “This is not stoking confidence in the election system.”

                  Like many other Brooklynites, Wang got a return envelope for his ballot with the name and address of a different Brooklyn voter filled in; his wife got his return envelope.

                  The Post has already tracked down a lot of those misaddressed-envelope mistakes — each of which could still wind up invalidating that vote. This is a rolling disaster.

                  And what of the errors that don’t get caught before people have already voted?

                  These glitches, ironically, come from bungled efforts to make vote-by-mail easier. Does anyone have much confidence that New York — or any other state run by Democrats who support universal absentee voting — is taking enough precautions against illegal “ballot harvesting”? That’s where third-parties intercept the ballots for naive voters and fill them in for their candidates.

                  And it’s not just President Trump and his allies questioning the process.

                  City Councilman Jimmy Van Bramer, a progressive Democrat, told The Post, “People were already not trusting this process, and they were already not trusting the Board of Elections to count the ballot right.”

                  Meanwhile, Democrats in Congress continue to hold up the next pandemic-relief bill, which includes funds for states to beef up election security, because they insist it include bailouts for near-bankrupt blue states like New York and Illinois.

                  New York City’s Board of Elections has screwed up time and again — sometimes with “help” from politicians who demand big changes without offering the funds to make things work well. But this is far from the only state where elections are overseen by bottom-rung political hacks who’ve been handed a patronage job.

                  If Congress — and state officials — doesn’t set realistic national standards soon, the nation’s at serious risk of uncertain results in multiple states.
                  –

              2. You would have to have had something other than nadless cucks running the place. In 2016, McConnell should have refused to seat Mazie Hirono because of this incident:

                https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/7/voter-fraud-alert-over-5000-new-hampshire-presiden/

                And here’s the video showing one reason it wasn’t investigated:
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NantHZQ6kvo

                Along with the video showing Democrats describing how they did it and have been doing it:
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDc8PVCvfKs

          2. We also have the 15th Amendment: ““The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”

            The 14th also has a voting clause.

        2. The federal judiciary have been interfering at the behest of the Justice Department for decades. The box has already been shredded. Given what has already come out about voter fraud operations this year, there should be enough to ban mail in elections altogether.

  7. Given the current crap, looks like a lot of people selling their birthrights for a pot of message.

  8. Nothing in fact — except perhaps foolish honesty — can stop me registering and voting for each of the entities that live in my head.

    There’s also the problem that if I were to do that, the entities in my head would force me to vote honestly for them, and I’m not sure that all of them share my political preferences. I think I have at least one Biden voter, possibly two, amongst the residents of my imaginary Colorado. It’s probably better to restrict the franchise to those who live in the real state.

    2. It gets worse if there are write ins.

      Pinochet, Genghis Khan, Cthulu, SMOD, Zombie Ronald Reagan (who already has more braaaains than Biden), and self write-ins *would* make an appearance should that be the case.

  9. Why sixteen, you ask? Who the hell knows? What good does it do to register you to vote (which is all the page does) then tell you you’re not supposed to do it for two years? I suspect this is the mutant child of Motor Voter, because you can register to drive (with parent approval) at 16.

    I’m going to guess that you’re right on the motor voter thing, and the idea was that if you didn’t do it when you first got your driver’s license, you would never get another chance. Just ignore the fact that the license they give you at 16 is a juvenile license, and you have to get another one when you turn 18, it’s not like they could register you to vote then.

    1. Depends on the state; back when I got mine in Washington, the switch was at 21. Went from horizontal to vertical or maybe the other way around.

      I’m not actually sure if they let you get a normal license at 16 anymore, last I heard they were pushing to copy California’s extended permit fiasco.

      1. Only difference between 16 & 21 on Oregon Driver’s license is the background coloring. Not sure how the 8 year renewal works for 16 year olds. Guessing they don’t have to renew at 21. Suspect most do.

        When son got his license at 16, they didn’t call it “extended” permit, but guess it kind of was. Didn’t have to have an over 21 adult with you to drive anymore, but you couldn’t have other under 18 youth in the car with you unless they were siblings … cousins didn’t count. My understanding this requirement either has been changed or is being thoroughly ignored. By the time my sister’s youngest two got their licenses at 16, rule no longer applied, less than 10 years after implementation.

        Our son is an only child, so he didn’t have any siblings to drive around. Golf club solved problem by using the under 18, had a car, to be golf bag club shuttles between the HS and the practice golf coarse and sometimes to matches locally. Including coach golf bags because the coach was using district vans to shuttle kids that didn’t have cars (no clubs allowed in district vans or on school buses). Though school rigs were avoided & only used when coach, or students 18+, vehicles didn’t have enough seat belts to take everyone. Non-local games a parent with a truck took the clubs, team traveled on district vans or buses.

  10. Looks like alleged Democratic candidate Joe Biden will be making one of his rare public appearances tonight. I’m sure his handlers will be working overtime to make sure he doesn’t start rambling on about lying dog-faced pony soldiers in front of the nation.

    Me? I’ll be watching Ghostbusters.

    1. My spouse says he wants to watch part of it. I don’t.
      Want to bet that Biden manages to not mess up, the media calls it a win, and his campaign then pulls out of the remaining debates?

      1. I wouldn’t be shocked if he did pull out. After all, his campaign called a lid on his public appearances 10 times in the last month.

      2. Seen of Twitter, paraphrased…

        Media demand of Trump: Proof of Relativity.

        Media demand of Biden: Show up.

        And that second one is likely giving media too much credit.

    2. I will watch, because I wish to hear with my own ears what Trump says, not have to depend on dragged-and-edited versions from the press.

    3. He’ll have a device in his ear telling him what to say, and the press is already writing articles about his trounding Trump. Since I would vote for Satan against Kamala Harris (Better the undisguised devil) I shall be editing.

      1. It’s painful. Cross talk, not a true classical debate, neither one looks especially good. Biden is glazed. Mostly lucid thus far, mostly, but glazed.

        1. Did note one point where Biden’s brain came online and he actually said his own words — when he defended his kids (well, at least he’s a loyal father… everyone needs ONE good trait). But the rest of the time he sounded like canned regurgitation. I do think his lack of substance was triggering Trump’s no-patience-with-unteachable-idiots.

          Probably didn’t change any minds on either side. Entertaining as a trainwreck.

        1. I’d love to see (alright, hear of) a debate done within a Faraday cage – with a live feed (cables…) of a few spectrum analyzers. Let’s ALL see “what’s in the air” shall we? Yeah, I know. But I can dream.

      3. I would vote for Cthulhu over Kamela Harris, because at least he wouldn’t be self-righteous about devouring your soul.

  12. I don’t know if that can be done in government, but I bet you in five to ten years, we’ll find out.

    Looking at the post’s original date, and the date today… I really hate how right you were.

  13. I’m told there’s no vote fraud, because after investigation, nobody–or almost nobody–ever gets convicted.

    Here in Wisconsin adultery is still a felony. Nobody ever seems to be convicted, so there must be no adultery here.

      2. Odd how some seem to both insist there is no such thing or very, very little of it… and also screams bloody murder when anyone goes and tries to check on that claim.

        1. Yes – in 2018, North Carolina’s 9th District.

          Bladen County political operative faces new perjury, obstruction of justice charges
          A Republican political operative who worked for former congressional candidate Mark Harris in rural Bladen County faces felony charges in connection with the 2018 general election, an indictment revealed Tuesday by the Wake County district attorney shows.

          Leslie McCrae Dowless was charged with two counts of felony obstruction of justice, perjury, solicitation to commit perjury, conspiracy to obstruct justice and possession of absentee ballot, the document showed.

          Dowless was previously indicted on charges related to an absentee ballot harvesting operation he allegedly ran in Bladen County in 2016 and during the 2018 primary. His earlier charges include three counts of felonious obstruction of justice, two counts of conspiracy to commit obstruction of justice and two counts of possession of an absentee ballot.

          Dowless remains free on a $30,000 bond and is expected to turn himself in for processing on the new charges.

          Six of Dowless’ associates were also indicted and are expected to turn themselves in. …
          –

    2. Heh.

      We’re never supposed to look, because there’s no fraud.

      We look, and find fraud– adn then we’re not supposed to look because we didn’t find “enough” for them.

  14. Got a Republican Committee meeting tomorrow. Hopefully they’ll have a date for briefing/training for registration challengers. I plan on spending election day going from the parking lot into the registration area and back on all the out of state plates. Hopefully I have enough challenge forms to fill out.

  15. I just watched the debate and, sorry, I just have to say it:

    Trump was an asshole.

    I am disappointed. He managed to make Biden look good, and that’s not easy. He pissed off the moderator, and probably most of the audience.

    There were so many, many points he could have raised on every issue, but was too busy harping on Hunter Biden’s indiscretions to make time for them.

    Why did he not mention the Democrat D.A.s letting rioters out of jail? The SAME rioters, repeatedly! Why did he not point out that China, Russia and India NEVER signed the ‘Paris climate accord’ rendering it nothing more than toothless virtue signaling?

    When Biden claimed that he failed to investigate the outbreak in China, why did he not point out that the Chinese Communist Party was actively suppressing all information about it, throwing doctors in jail and ‘disappearing’ people who got too inquisitive?

    Why did he not ask Biden exactly what he would have done better and point out that he was taking ACTION instead of inciting panic? Would Biden have:

    * Shut down travel from China in January
    * Shut down travel from Europe in February
    * Invoked Defense Emergency Appropriations Act in February
    * Deployed hospital ships Mercy and Hope to New York and Los Angeles
    * Ordered the U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers to set up emergency field hospitals outside New York and Seattle

    When Biden challenged him to denounce ‘right-wing extremists’ and ‘white supremacists’ WHY did he not say:

    “I condemn everybody that takes to our streets intending to initiate violence against innocent people. I don’t care if they’re right-wing, left-wing, up, down or sideways; NO ONE should be occupying our streets, rioting, looting, burning, threatening and assaulting innocent people, and attacking the police whose job it is to protect those innocent people from mob violence. I don’t care who they are, or what variety of political extremism they claim to represent, all of them deserve to be arrested, prosecuted and sentenced to rot in jail.”

    I hope his campaign staff holds him down so Melania can beat some sense into him before the next debate.

      2. When has the moderator ever not been a third debater and/or imbecile?

        But it serves Trump right for inventing and unleashing the tornado, which never existed before him!

      3. He didn’t denounce. He blamed it all on the left wing — mostly true, but not germane to the challenge he’d been presented — and was cut off when he clearly wasn’t moving towards the point. Why couldn’t he just make the unequivocal statement: “Yes! I condemn all violence perpetrated against innocent people!”

        I could have done a much better job than Trump in that debate. I spent half the time screaming at Trump in my head, “Shut up, shut up, for the love of all we stand to lose, SHUT YER FLIPPIN’ PIE-HOLE!!!”

        But he didn’t.

        When Biden asked about Trump supporters ‘taking to the streets’ WHY didn’t he say:

        “Nobody should be ‘taking to the streets’ because they are disappointed with the outcome of an election. This is America, not some third world People’s State that holds civil wars twice a decade. We count the votes, openly and in public, and if we uncover fraud we correct it. We follow the law as it is written, not as some irresponsible parties wish it to be.”

        On racism? “I was elected to represent the interests of all Americans, without reference to their skin color.” Then trot out his support for historically black colleges, businesses in the inner cities, and the historically low black unemployment rate before March.

        Why didn’t he point out that he and the Republicans have been trying to push out a second economic relief bill since June, but MaligNancy and the Democrats aren’t speaking to them?

        Biden was well rehearsed for this. He probably spent all those mystery hours repeatedly reciting those speeches in front of a mirror. Trump decided to wing it, and wasted far too much of his (and our) time making personal attacks on a couple of Bidens instead of presenting clear statements of support for our country, our Constitution and the American people.

        Why couldn’t he say, “I represent the left, too, whether they like it or not. Hell, whether I like it or not! They are all still Americans. I just wish they’d act like it.”

        Trump blundered, badly and repeatedly. It does us no good to pretend he didn’t. If I see it that way, knowing what an apocalyptic disaster a Harris/Biden (cause WE know who’s wearing the pants) administration would become, what will the swing voters think?

        1. This is why I don’t watch debates. I know I am not a typical voter and I do not watch a debate like a typical voter. I get annoyed at the obvious codswallop the opponent is able to dish out and frustrated that my candidate doesn’t give stronger (and obvious) responses.

          But you know what? It just doesn’t matter. Because I am not typical (for which I thank my Creator nightly) and thus do not react like the typical viewer. I can name eight of the nine Justices off the top of my head, I can identify at least half a dozen cabinet secretaries without blinking, I recognize at least half of the senators (it used to be more but I was getting disturbed) and a goodly number of members of the House (it used to be more but ditto). I have at least some understanding of many issues-slash-bills before Congress and can expound on the flaws in the Affordable Care Act, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, “Racial Sensitivity Training” and a number of other BS programs.

          I say this as not a brag but admission — ne sane person in a well-functioning republic ought be wasting brain space on this. The people who have yet to make up their minds as to who’ll get their vote sure as hell don’t. So, as with My Little Pony I am NOT the target audience.

          OTOH, several reported flash polls claim Trump won the debate by approximately two-to-one. So, don’t know who watched nor what they thought they were watching, nor even if they could pick Trump or Biden from a police line-up.

          Shucks, they might even have just been funnin’ them pollsters.
          –

        2. I’ve noticed that Trump sometimes fails to take full advantage of his opponents blunders. He gets handed golden opportunities and doesn’t use them.

          1. Trump has been dealing from a position of overwhelming power for most of his life. He *tells* people what he wants, he doesn’t try to persuade them. He probably doesn’t even recognize his opponents’ blunders, not down at the debate level.

            It’s a common thing with wealthy people who are active in business. They’re not operating in the same reality most of us are. It’s not necessarily bad, but you have to take it into account when trying to figure out what the voices in their head are telling them.

      4. Oh, and about Obama/Biden inheriting a recession in 2008, WHY didn’t Trump bring up Clinton’s ‘Community Reinvestment Act’ as the primary cause?

        On taxes? “I obeyed the tax laws as they are written. Now if you want to complain that the tax laws are screwed up, you’ll get no argument from me, but I had nothing to do with it. The tax laws were screwed up for fifty years before I ever got the notion to run for President!”

        1. In taxes? Joe, I donated more each quarter than you paid all year.

          Fact Check: The Bidens paid approx. $300K taxes; Trump donated his $400K quarterly salary.
          –

        2. Addendum:

          “If you believed the tax laws were unfair, why didn’t you do something about it, or at least TRY to do something about it, during the 44 years you were in Congress and Vice-President? I’m leaving out the last three and a half years you’ve been unemployed. If you didn’t believe they were unfair, why do you now? Your rich cronies have benefited from those tax laws at least as much as I have; why are they suddenly unfair when they benefit me?”

    2. Agreed, but neither did the questions have any substance that could be addressed. Not as openly gotcha as I’d expected, but derived from The Narrative. And in this format, given the questions encouraged poor or no answers, it was way too easy to go off into the weeds.

      But Trump does listen and learn; much as he quickly dumped rally points that got a poor response, hopefully he’ll dump what didn’t work here (which was most of it).

    3. Can’t say I disagree with you. Trump’s a lot like my wife, he doesn’t wait well. And that comes off as rude during a debate. IIRC (it has been over 40 years after all) interrupting your opponent during his time would also cost you debate points in high school. He really needs a notepad and a pen to jot those things down during the debate.

      1. Disagree. Trump came off well, his aggressiveness came across as sincerity, and his willingness to say the unsayable carried him over any deficiencies. Biden was like an uncanny valley.

        1. I’ve seen a couple Twitter feeds that highlight what might, just might, have been evidence that Biden was getting a radio assist (ear-piece or similar.) However, those could also be medical device leads, like for some pumps and pacemakers. Or pure coincidence that people are grabbing as evidence of someone feeding Biden material.

          I agree on his affect. Biden seemed to go blank, then recover a little, then look totally different again. As if he were listening, but not to the POTUS, or if he was just mentally not there at all. Then he’d “come back” a little. It seemed to get stronger and stronger as the event went on.

          1. “Biden seemed to go blank, then recover a little, then look totally different again.”

            Sounds like the basis for a super-cut campaign ad. Or just Tweet it.
            –

      2. Interrupting his opponent has been Biden’s debate trademark; no wonder he was irritated by Trump.
        –

    4. Given that he was debating both Biden and Chris Wallace, he did exactly what he should have. Wallace didn’t call Biden out on a single lie.

      1. Before anyone attempts to apply the debating rules that worked in the civilized environment of your debating club in high school or college, riddle me this:

        Would there have been any debate at all with officials / moderators who had a track record of playing for one of the teams?

        1. I looked up Chris Wallace. He’s been a registered Democrat for years, and then he said, “Oh, but that’s the only way I could participate in the political process around DC.” So he doesn’t even have the courage of his convictions.

          His family is a hot mess. His real name is Wallik, but his dad Mike Wallace changed his name to get away from his Russian Jew roots. MW apparently claimed not to be Jewish except ethnically, but not to be either atheist or a member of any other religion. His parents divorced when he was young, and his mom married the president of CBS News, who was his stepdad his whole life, and seems to have been his biggest influence; they raised him Jewish. His dad remarried to his radio cohost, and then married a couple more times. His brother died in a mountain-climbing accident, and Chris Wallace cut his teeth on reporting during student riots at Harvard.

          And so on. It’s just more of this anointment of people’s kids in big jobs, coupled with being rootless in important ways.

          Also, I realize there’s practicality; but why the heck would you take the last name professionally of your father who was never there, instead of either reverting the name to Wallik/Wallick or using your stepdad’s name? Chris Wallick or Chris Leonard both sound fine.

          1. > Jewish

            So what? His ethnicity and religion, and practice thereof, are his own personal business.

            > last name

            A casual web search says “Wallace” is his birth name. He didn’t get any say in the matter until he was 18, and at that point, why bother?

    5. Trump is a brawler, by instinct. And being a brawler is what this situation called for, unless Trump could channel Reagan’s gentle humor and make it work under the circumstances (a long shot).

      Trump would have been justified in not coming to a ‘debate’ , the way the debates have been run for the last several decades, but it probably would have been a tactical mistake. He would have been justified in backing out of the debate when Grandpa Grope refused to allow a check for earpieces. Again, probably a tactical mistake. The Democrats were always going to claim Biden won; by turning up Trump at least showed anyone who actually watched that they lie.

      Being nice and polite DOESN’T WORK against the Democrats, who regularly assert that Republican opponents aren’t, regardless of the truth.

      1. Reagan’s moderators were less confrontational.
        The other option was to be Pierre Delecto and stand there and take it. They’d never let him tell the truth. They interrupt and talk over.

        1. I watched the debate. I sat through the whole damn thing. Trump did most of the interrupting.

          I am disappointed with his performance, and worried that some voters will turn to Biden just because Trump was such an overbearing asshole.

          There are ways to fight back without being an asshole. Trump does not appear to be familiar with them. I guess being an asshole to his enemies has worked for him, but last night it was the wrong approach. You are not debating to defeat the enemy on points, but to win the audience. Being a bombastic asshole does not win over the audience. I was put off, and I was on his side!

  17. > moves to put down the resulting riots quickly and legally (and he has a lot of legal tools with which to do so)

    Why would he want to? Why wrestle that tar baby?

    Why do anything?

    Various states have condoned and supported rioting, given the rioters financial support, and their police and courts are giving the rioters free rein. Those are the duly-elected governments, representing the will of their people. They want riots? Fine, not a Federal problem.

    *If* the Fed decides Something Must Be Done, Congress has the authority to take any action needed. If the President – whoever we get – does anything, half the country is going to chimp out over it, and Congress and the courts are going to oppose it. So, why bother? Put your feet on the coffee table, have an aide roll in the 72″ 4K TV, and watch the idiots burn down their own cities while you sip chardonnay. “Not My Problem.”

    1. Why wrestle that tar baby? Because if he gets votes from the areas where the riots have happened, or areas that fear them, that will be something he was elected to do. Furthermore, if he exercises the law properly he can break the Democrats’ Sturmabteilung and hang the metaphorical corpse around the Democrats’ necks. With luck and effort he could break a lot of the Democrats’ rotting local power structures.

      1. > Because if he gets votes from the areas where the riots have happened, or areas that fear them,

        And those areas are… Minneapolis, Seattle, Portland, Chicago, NYC, San Francisco, and the like. Who elected the mayors and governors who are supporting the riots.

        Nope, I’m not seeing enough Trump votes there to make them worth his time.

    2. Because the riots /combined/ with the insistence on mass mailing election fraud could be understood as a state of rebellion.

      Look at ACW and Reconstruction era precedents. Democrats who maintain a state of rebellion do not necessarily have to be represented, and can be barred from running in later elections. (Or rather, being seated even if they win.)

      Okay, this option right now does not look like the right strategic or tactical choice, and would have huge long term costs. One could still theorize scenarios where all of the other options are worse.

  18. Trump scared the shit out of me last night. Literally! I spent ten minutes on the throne after that debate. (actually, I think it was just a touch of indigestion, but still…quite a coincidence)

    I’ve slept on it — for certain values of ‘sleep’, anyway — and I’m still scared this morning. Trump came off very badly. He could flush this election straight down the crapper without any help from Democrat vote fraud.

    Biden didn’t come off badly. Biden must have LISTENED to the handlers, and practiced those slick monologues from the best speech-writers money could buy, and it paid off.

    There were answers, GREAT answers, that Trump could have given, but he was so fixated on Hunter Biden he wasted most of his time pounding on the wrong table. It was painful to watch. I’m sure MaligNancy was cackling through the whole thing.

    If Trump loses this election, it will be mostly his own damn fault.

    1. We know who won the debate. Because we know which side’s pundits are claiming they won while talking about how there shouldn’t be any more debates.

    2. So… you think his performance in the debate is going to make some people switch their vote from Trump to Biden?

      Or are you invoking the mythical “undecided voters” who aren’t sure who they’re going to vote for, and is going to cast their vote by ‘deciding on the issues’? Those same voters who have made it through four years of Trump without being polarized one way or the other, and to hell with “the issues”?

      We don’t even *have* any issues in this election; the economy, crime, illegal immigration, national defense, gas prices, education, home ownership, balancing the budget, foreign policy, the latest war… none of the staples are part of this election. Neither party has bothered. It’s not even Trump vs. Biden; it’s down to Trump(hell yes!) or Trump(hell no!).

      Reading back, it comes across as confrontational, but I don’t know any other way to put it. You’re buying into the MSM idea that Biden has some part in this election other than as a sock puppet. The election isn’t going to be decided by anything either candidate does or says; that train left the station so long ago the tracks are rusty.

      1. Yeah, the issues are Trump versus mass lynching and terrorism by would be mass murderers.

        There were reasons to watch the debate beyond having one’s head under a rock, but if the debate swings you against Trump, you have your head under a rock, and will still have your head under a rock come the election.

Comments are closed.