10 INDISPUTABLE FACTS on the 2020 Election That Argue for Audits

cawacko said:
As political junkies those books are all must read to me. Johnson was so interesting as an individual and Caro is just an exceptional writer in how he gives insight into power.

And you think about a board like this where we scream at each other day after day and assign such positive and negative traits to political party’s based on whether we like them or not, then you read Caro’s book and see what real power is all about and it’s eye opening.
Click to expand...

I never knew what a sleazebag Johnson was until I read the book, lol. His racism, misogyny, crookedness and arrogance were shocking to read about. I know this is judging the man by present-day standards but it makes you wonder, were most politicians like this or was LBJ a special case? Guess the next two books will explain him further but he didn't seem like a civil rights activist and a Great Society guy back in the 30s and 40s. To balance those good things (to me, anyway) was his major contribution to the Vietnam debacle. At least he did the right thing in the end by not running for a second full term in 1968.

This has got me interested in starting the second book now. I recall people saying the 2nd was the least important and you didn't miss much if you just skipped ahead to the third. What's your take on this?
 
cawacko said:
He’s been working on the final book for a handful of years now. Caro is no spring chicken and COVID lockdowns interrupted his ability to travel and research for the book. God willing his health holds out until completion because with all the work he’s done I really hope he’s able to complete the series.
Click to expand...

I didn't realize until just now that there was a fourth book out in 2012. I hope he gets to complete the series, too; the fifth book sounds really interesting. It's going to cover what I'm most familiar with.
 
christiefan915 said:
I never knew what a sleazebag Johnson was until I read the book, lol. His racism, misogyny, crookedness and arrogance were shocking to read about. I know this is judging the man by present-day standards but it makes you wonder, were most politicians like this or was LBJ a special case? Guess the next two books will explain him further but he didn't seem like a civil rights activist and a Great Society guy back in the 30s and 40s. To balance those good things (to me, anyway) was his major contribution to the Vietnam debacle. At least he did the right thing in the end by not running for a second full term in 1968.

This has got me interested in starting the second book now. I recall people saying the 2nd was the least important and you didn't miss much if you just skipped ahead to the third. What's your take on this?
Click to expand...

The best way I’ve heard him described is as ‘complicated’. On one hand he’s a product of his time and environment. It’s hard not to judge history from a present day mindset but you really have to put yourself into that time period when reading it.

In a perfect world I’d say read all of them. The first couple of books might be a little slower but understanding that history really helps to explain his later actions. You understand his mindset which explains why he did the things he did. But if you can only read one or two then the later books would probably be more appealing because it’s when he’s in the Senate and VP.
 
cawacko said:
That’s right. Did you read Caro’s book by chance? Crazy story how he stole it. “Landslide Lyndon”

There are a million what if scenarios in history. This is one of them. No chance he becomes VP and ultimately President if he lost that election. Would his replacement have had the same attitude towards Vietnam for instance?
Click to expand...

South Texas is well known for election irregularities--usually for county level positions where jobs are dependent on keeping the incumbent. In recent years a lady was arrested for buying votes for drugs and alcohol.

I didn't read Caro's book but I am familiar with it.
 
Nordberg said:
Then you should have accepted it by now. The recounts and court cases gave Trump underserved and extensive accommodation. He lost them all. I am not afraid of all those results. Are you?
Click to expand...

You obviously have no understanding of the word forensic, but that's par for the course with you.
 
Primavera said:
You obviously have no understanding of the word forensic, but that's par for the course with you.
Click to expand...

You are being foolish. Trump got more recounts than any loser ever. They lost 68 zip when he tried to fight in court ,.Those are real authorities in elections and law. Are you saying the Cyber Ninjas are a trusted source. How? What is their experience and expertise, other than they are Trumpys. They are working with only Trumpys, in secret. That is not how you settle election disputes. But then, there are no disputes. Trump lost and every Republican who was in charge of state elections verified it.
There is no such thing as election forensics.
You are being a child . Totally slanted, unqualified right wing companies do not provide forensics. From what I read, with all that dishonesty working, they still cannot find a way to cheat for trump to win.
Election forensics is a statistical tool. Biden won.
 
Last edited:
cawacko said:
The best way I’ve heard him described is as ‘complicated’. On one hand he’s a product of his time and environment. It’s hard not to judge history from a present day mindset but you really have to put yourself into that time period when reading it.

In a perfect world I’d say read all of them. The first couple of books might be a little slower but understanding that history really helps to explain his later actions. You understand his mindset which explains why he did the things he did. But if you can only read one or two then the later books would probably be more appealing because it’s when he’s in the Senate and VP.
Click to expand...
forget him. last thing I want to read is a scared POTUS who escalated the war
just so he wasn't going to be the first president to lose a war
https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/educational-resources/johnson-transition
"I am not going to lose Vietnam," he told the ambassador to South Vietnam, Henry Cabot Lodge Jr., two days after assuming office
 
dukkha said:
forget him. last thing I want to read is a scared POTUS who escalated the war
just so he wasn't going to be the first president to lose a war
https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/educational-resources/johnson-transition
"I am not going to lose Vietnam," he told the ambassador to South Vietnam, Henry Cabot Lodge Jr., two days after assuming office
Click to expand...

The books are about Johnson but the overarching theme is about power. What people do to get it and what people do with it. Robert Caro has a story telling gift and what drove Johnson is far from unique to him. (And the in depth look at the history of the Senate along with how Johnson changed the Senate is fascinating stuff to any political junkie imo.)
 
Diesel said:
My life would have been substantially easier, by the standards of weak pussies like you, had I been straight.

As it turns out, being a minority in race and in sexuality actually made me a better person than 99% of straight, white, degenerate, ancient Americans. Shitty Americans like you.

So I'm good. We peacefully fought for our freedom and won it. We rejected the patriarchy and racism of your kind.
Click to expand...
Yeah sure you are. You are one of the most foul maladjusted people on this site. And that says a lot. Bye sissy boy.:laugh:
 
Nordberg said:
You are being foolish. Trump got more recounts than any loser ever. They lost 68 zip when he tried to fight in court ,.Those are real authorities in elections and law. Are you saying the Cyber Ninjas are a trusted source. How? What is their experience and expertise, other than they are Trumpys. They are working with only Trumpys, in secret. That is not how you settle election disputes. But then, there are no disputes. Trump lost and every Republican who was in charge of state elections verified it.
There is no such thing as election forensics.
You are being a child . Totally slanted, unqualified right wing companies do not provide forensics. From what I read, with all that dishonesty working, they still cannot find a way to cheat for trump to win.
Election forensics is a statistical tool. Biden won.
Click to expand...

You're an imbecile, fuck off!
 
ExpressLane said:
Yeah sure you are. You are one of the most foul maladjusted people on this site. And that says a lot. Bye sissy boy.:laugh:
Click to expand...

:laugh: You know that isn't true. If you're going to speak in hyperbole, try to make it believable. Shit, you're incompetent at every part of human existence.
 
1. Bellwether counties: In 2020, former President Donald J. Trump carried 18 of 19 “bellwether” counties (losing only Clallam County, Washington state). The term “bellwether” in the political arena refers to a county or state that aligns itself with the ultimate winner of an election.

Political realignments (gerrymandering of districts for instance) can cause some counties or states to lose “bellwether” status over time. From 1980 to 2016, 19 counties, most of them industrial counties in the northern and midwestern United States, voted for the winner of all 10 presidential elections. Additionally, since 1936, a key bellwether county, Luzerne County of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, has gone to the winner of Pennsylvania, regardless of party.

In 2016 and 2020, Trump won that county handily. Any Republican winning Luzerne County in that time frame (since 1936) has also never failed to carry the state of Michigan.
 
2. Bellwether states: In 2020, Trump carried four vital bellwether states (Ohio, Iowa, North Carolina and Florida). These states represent a strong base consisting of urban, suburban, rural, union and ethnic minority voters. Additionally, these states have been won by the same candidate 13 times since 1896, and every single time, that candidate won either the presidency or their re-election.

Bellwether states also come in and out of existence with demographic realignments. For instance, in 2000, George W. Bush became the first Republican to win the presidency without carrying Vermont or Illinois. On all but two occasions since 1896, Ohio’s electoral votes went to the ultimate winner of the presidency. Trump overwhelmingly won Ohio in 2020.
 
ExpressLane said:
1. Bellwether counties: In 2020, former President Donald J. Trump carried 18 of 19 “bellwether” counties (losing only Clallam County, Washington state). The term “bellwether” in the political arena refers to a county or state that aligns itself with the ultimate winner of an election.

Political realignments (gerrymandering of districts for instance) can cause some counties or states to lose “bellwether” status over time. From 1980 to 2016, 19 counties, most of them industrial counties in the northern and midwestern United States, voted for the winner of all 10 presidential elections. Additionally, since 1936, a key bellwether county, Luzerne County of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, has gone to the winner of Pennsylvania, regardless of party.

In 2016 and 2020, Trump won that county handily. Any Republican winning Luzerne County in that time frame (since 1936) has also never failed to carry the state of Michigan.
Click to expand...

Since 1936 no candidate named Trump has ever won a Michigan election 2 elections in a row. Because of that it would be impossible for Trump to have won Michigan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top