Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
RJ, I never implied “the Mormons did it”. You are conflating or confusing two of my posts.
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
Arizona was a well known swing state long before November, with most signs pointing to a Biden win. Biden also outspent Trump by twice as much during the campaign knowing it was ripe for the picking. Biden also spent more money in Phoenix than in any other market during the final six weeks.
As for the 2012 comparison Dick Morris makes, remember who was on the Republican ticket back then: Mitt Romney. Arizona had (and has) a large Mormon population. In 2008 they represented about 4% of the state, but 11% of the vote. I can’t find the stats for 2012, but I guarantee it was significantly higher with Romney on the ticket. In other words, they accounted for a very outsized proportion of the vote.
Meanwhile you have prominent Mormons like Romney and Jeff Flake (from Arizona) opposing Trump. In 2016 Mormons rejected Trump in unprecedented numbers. And one poll showed it was almost exactly the same in 2020. On top of that you had prominent Republican Cindy McCain (Arizona) also urging voters to reject Trump.
On top of all that, since 2012 Phoenix has been one of the fastest growing cities in country, largely from young tech types who tend to vote Democratic. So it was really no surprise that Phoenix and Maricopa county had a large change in voter demographics.
If you had been paying attention even long before the polls opened Maricopa county was often discussed as one of the biggest demographic shifts in the country away from Republicans and particularly from Trump.
Honestly, this wasn’t a surprise. It wasn’t ballot stuffing. Dick Morris can throw out some stats without any context and claim whatever he wants. But this was not some crazy thing out of left field that could only be “explained” by ballot stuffing. That’s just bunk.
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
I’m going to go out on a limb (sarcasm) and suggest that in the next four years we will not have open borders, gun confiscations, or closer ties with China.
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
Hi RJ,
No, Jeff Flake did not cause Trump’s loss. Please don’t twist what I said. I said people like him were the tip of an iceberg. It belied a much larger phenomenon that is unprecedented in any election in my lifetime. I’ve never heard of so many people who were well known figures and/or leaders of their party refusing to vote for their party’s candidate. For every Jeff Flake, McCain, Bush, Steele, John Kasich, etc. there were no doubt untold numbers of conservatives you’ve never heard of who refused to vote for Trump.
Here’s the link you asked for.
I have not ready every post on this board (I work crazy long hours and have many other responsibilities), so you’ll have to point me to the link you’re referring to. I did read many of Rocky’s posts and many of the links in his posts. But the “Morris” analysis doesn’t ring a bell. I tried googling it and only found an analysis that didn’t suggest fraud, so I assume it’s not the one you’re alluding to.Never mind. I found it and responded to Dick Morris’ “analysis”.I remember Rocky posted something about Wisconsin that I read but didn’t have time to respond to. It was something about a record turn-out of 90% (Rocky apparently rounded up; the actual claim was 89%). I did look into that and it was not surprisingly false. Wisconsin allows anyone over 18 to just show up and vote (same day registration). So historically they have counted voter turnout based on eligible voters. The election this year was high — for reasons I stated above, among others — but not the highest in recent history. It was basically in line with recent numbers and lower than the turnout just four elections ago:
2020 — 72.3%
2016 — 67.3%
2012 — 70.4%
2008 — 69.2%
2004 — 72.9%There were also claims making the rounds that the numbers in this election violated Benfords law. Not sure if Rocky posted on that, but that has been debunked as well.
-
This reply was modified 5 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
This reply was modified 5 years, 11 months ago by .
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
Trump did lose. I understand there were some “shy Trump voters”, but I think you underestimate the amount of conservatives who genuinely really can’t stand Trump: the so-called “deep state” type Republicans, never Trumpers, so-called RINOs, etc. There were an unprecedented number of such people. They voted down-ticket for Republicans, and thus Congressional and other races still had a strong Republican showing. But there were an unprecedented number of conservatives who refused to support Trump.
The ones we know about are just the tip of the iceberg: people like Lex, Carly Fiorina, Jeff Flake, Charlie Baker, John Bolton, Michael Steele, John Kasich, George Will, the Bush family, the McCain family, probably Romney, The Lincoln Project, etc. I have never seen anything like it.
And remember, Trump’s approval rating never got above the mid 40’s and was much lower most of the time. Trump literally has a cult following, so there are a lot of people who will fill up his rallies, drive pick-up trucks around with flags, wear MAGA hats, etc. They make a lot of noise, but that doesn’t mean Trump is a popular President.
Conversely, there was a lot of talk about “sleepy Joe”. I have a Trump loving friend who liked to compare Trump’s rallies to Biden’s and implied that was evidence that Biden couldn’t possibly win. But I assure you that there was a HUGE amount of energy and excitement on the Democratic side to defeat Trump. Even many of the Bernie supporters held their nose and voted for Biden.
Just look at the celebrations across the country on the Saturday after the election. There were unprecedented spontaneous partying in the streets in cities everywhere. This wasn’t some staged or planned thing like the Million MAGA March. These are the people in my circles. Their excitement and relief was real. It was all they talked about for years — voting out Trump. They didn’t care who was on the ticket. “Any functional adult” was a popular slogan. These people got out the vote like never before. They were lining up weeks before the election for early voting with lines stretching far and wide in unprecedented numbers.
I’m not surprised Trump lost. I’m only surprised it wasn’t a larger margin.
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
cardcrimson, I’m not so sure about the fraud claim regarding Covid. I understand the incentive and the reason for suspicion. But here’s a counter argument.
My takeaway is that there may be some grifting on the margins, but probably not a massive inflation of statistics.
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
It made the rounds on Facebook, Twitter, and other social media. Here are just a few of many examples:
The Twitter example has hundreds of thousands of views. According to AFR, one version of the video had more than a million views. Did Trump himself retweet it? I don’t think so. But it’s exactly the kind of thing that has gone viral in right wing circles. Just one of the examples above shows hundreds of “shares”. The Facebook example is to a group with 5,000 members. I could go down endless rabbit holes following all the retweets and shares.
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
Nope. I was against all the Middle East wars, among others, when you were still defending Bush.
I do not want open borders any more than you are ok with 650+ kids being orphaned at the border by the Trump administration’s separation policy.
I don’t want slavery reparations. I don’t know any mainstream liberal, Democrat, progressive, who does. I’m sure you can find a few examples, though.
I don’t necessarily want higher taxes. But I believe in paying for what you spend. In that sense I’m a tax and spend Democrat, as opposed to what I call the spend-and-spend conservatives. I have no doubt that about 30 seconds after Biden is sworn in (if that actually happens) conservatives will suddenly remember that deficits are a problem.
I don’t think one-party rule is healthy. That’s one reason why I was not in favor of Republicans controlling most of the governorships, the Senate, the White House, the Supreme Court, most of the lower court appointments, most state legislatures, and the Presidency. But I’m willing to guess that you voted for Republicans to expand their control over all these branches of government, and more.
I don’t support loss of individual freedom. Of course the devil is in the details. You are probably against certain freedoms I believe in and I’m against some that I suspect you’re in favor of (e.g., I don’t support the right to carry around fully-automatic weapons or hand-grenades, for that matter).
I have been against the CCP for decades. I lived in Taiwan and have been concerned about the rise of China long before Trump started manufacturing his MAGA hats and other paraphernalia there. To the extent that Trump has tried to be tough on China, though, I support what he’s done — though I think the results are far less successful than he’d have you believe. But good on him for trying.
Outsourcing of jobs is not a big issue of mine ne way or another. I think there should be limits on things like H1B visas, for example. I would only note that the free trade policies from the 90’s were originally championed by conservatives. When Clinton signed them it was viewed as him tacking to the right — away from the left.
I am opposed to voter fraud, like anyone else. If illegals are voting then we should lock them up. But if you check out the Heritage Foundation’s study on voter fraud you’ll find that actual cases are de minimis out of literally billions of votes cast in the last two or three decades in state, federal, and local elections across the country. And I’m willing to bet about half of those were done by Republicans.
On the other hand we do know that Republicans have gone to heroic efforts to throw out perfectly valid votes. The latest example was when the GOP tried to throw out 127,000 votes cast in Harris, Texas (heavily Democratic).
I do support centralized healthcare as a safety net — not as the only option. Among developed countries that is not a controversial idea, except in the USA. It doesn’t mean I’m a communist or a Marxist or even a socialist. I simply think you shouldn’t be at risk of going bankrupt if you get a serious illness (in most countries the very premise of Breaking Bad wouldn’t even make sense). I find it bizarre that my healthcare is dependent on my employer to such a degree. Does that make me a radical?
Three or more sexual designations? I really couldn’t care less about that issue to the extent it’s semantic. To your point about freedom, though, I do support gay rights and the freedom of people to identify has non-binary (though the excessive genders has bordered on ridiculous occasionally), and other freedoms that conservatives often frown upon.
Rocky, I know you can afford to live in Marin or wherever you like. I can too – though I do suspect you are richer than me. Good for you.
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
Some history on Montgomery.
Here’s a good summary on his latest claims.
In summary, conspiracy theories by a guy with a dubious history.
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
There are any number of articles debunking this. Take your pick.
Here’s what Dominion itself has to say.
From the Dept of Homeland Security
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
Trump’s chances at this point are virtually 100%. The fix is in. Republican’s and Trump have been touting the “fraud” narrative for years now. And now the disinformation campaign has gained traction with enough credulous people for it to matter. It will now seem “reasonable” to enough people when votes are cast in doubt and overturned in key states.
Republicans control the state legislatures in all the swing states. So the game will be to just contest every ballot in some key states that could swing the election, slow the counting down, and file endless lawsuits. Then after several weeks, shortly before the electoral votes will need to be cast, the state legislatures in a couple of key swing states will declare that they are “forced” to step in and resolve the chaos they created. They will of course then vote to give President Joffrey the electoral votes from their state.
It may not play out precisely like that. Since Republicans also control the courts they may just be able to throw out enough votes, as well, before it comes to that.
Trump is a mortal lock. He won’t win legitimately, but he will be sworn in on January 20th.
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
Don’t worry Rocky. Trump will win again.
Even if he’s down about 8 or 9% in the polls, like he currently is in the RealClearPolitics average, I don’t think the Democrats can overcome the built in advantage Republicans have in the electoral college, plus voter suppression, plus Trump’s new crony at the US Postal Service who undoubtedly will do his best to interfere with absentee voting, plus purges from the voter rolls, polling place reductions that always seem to affect working class minorities resulting in insanely long lines, and closing of DMVs in strict voter ID states, among other things.
Republicans control most of the election apparatus in the swing states and I have a bridge to sell you if you don’t think they will pull out every dirty trick. They’re already doing their damndest (e.g., the poll tax in Florida to thwart the constitutional amendment that passed with overwhelming majority to let ex felons vote).
I predict Trump will be down by some statistically significant margin in every poll, but when the smoke clears he will magically be victorious to everyone’s surprise, and Republicans will just claim the polls were wrong.
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
“Maybe a better discussion is this, Neo: what would be a better system? Are you arguing for direct democracy?”
Are you confusing me with Neodymium or Thomas Anderson from the Matrix?
A better system would be a parliamentary system like those that exist in most democracies. The two party system is too polarizing and seems to exacerbate some extreme views, IMHO.
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
You are arguing the rules (my bad for mentioning them), whereas your original question simply asked if it was fair if one state made the rules for the rest of the country if they had 99% of the population. I simply took your extreme example to its logical conclusion — from 99% to 99.9+%.
I thought it was “we the people”. I am sure the states argument was meant to protect the rights of the people in those states, not some soil and minerals. When the imbalance becomes so extreme those folks end up as oligarchs for all practical purposes. If they were all communists and the other 99% were Breitbart conservatives, I’m going to guess there would suddenly be some new interpretations of the meaning of “states rights”.
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
Even if they only had the Senate it seems absurd. The other 300M+ people effectively couldn’t pass any legislation, budgets, etc. without the consent of most of those 98 people. They could not appoint anyone to the courts either without the approval from the oligarchs.
When you understand "the deep state" simply refers to the rule of law, it makes much more sense.
-
This reply was modified 5 years, 11 months ago by
