10 INDISPUTABLE FACTS on the 2020 Election That Argue for Audits

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.

I am surprised that many people don't know what Johnson was like, I've said many times that Trump was nowhere near Johnson in brutish behaviour. Do any of those books by Caro mention Operation Cyanide by the way?

https://peterhounam.com/books/operation-cyanide/
 
I am surprised that many people don't know what Johnson was like, I've said many times that Trump was nowhere near Johnson in brutish behaviour. Do any of those books by Caro mention Operation Cyanide by the way?

https://peterhounam.com/books/operation-cyanide/

did he try to bribe countries to dig up dirt on his political foes? did he incite an insurrection? or did he pass medicare, the voting rights bill, the civil rights bill?

fuck you.
 
Well when your safeguards are solutions in search of a problem that doesn’t exist who in their fucking right mind wouldn’t?

stupid claim........you don't look and claim there is no need to since you've never seen anything.......if there were no highway patrolmen would you argue there is no evidence of speeding?......
 
I am surprised that many people don't know what Johnson was like, I've said many times that Trump was nowhere near Johnson in brutish behaviour. Do any of those books by Caro mention Operation Cyanide by the way?

https://peterhounam.com/books/operation-cyanide/

I can't remember exactly where the last book left off but it was sometime after he became President. This final book will cover much of his Presidency so it would likely be in this one.
 
I can't remember exactly where the last book left off but it was sometime after he became President. This final book will cover much of his Presidency so it would likely be in this one.

The book Operation Cyanide makes the claim that shortly after the attack on the USS Liberty, Johnson sent two F-4 bombers to Cairo from the USS Saratoga in the Mediterranean armed with nuclear weapons.
 
Last edited:
stupid claim........you don't look and claim there is no need to since you've never seen anything.......if there were no highway patrolmen would you argue there is no evidence of speeding?......

That is about the most idiotic analogy I ever heard. Even a traffic cop needs evidence. So show us your evidence that objectively and clearly refutes the overwhelming evidence that it is not a problem and not some BS a political ideologue pulled out of their ass or hasn’t already been debunked.

One things for sure. I ain’t going to hold my breath for you to do that.
 
Well when your safeguards are solutions in search of a problem that doesn’t exist who in their fucking right mind wouldn’t?

Heh, well said. Prediction: The (R) states will pass these new laws making voting more onerous. At least one (D) candidate will win over an (R) one in one of these states, at some point. Won't the laws make it hard for the loser to claim that the winner only won because election fraud?

It's straight out of the "Be careful what you wish for; you might get it" department.
 
That is about the most idiotic analogy I ever heard. Even a traffic cop needs evidence. So show us your evidence that objectively and clearly refutes the overwhelming evidence that it is not a problem and not some BS a political ideologue pulled out of their ass or hasn’t already been debunked.

lol.....as if we had voting cops looking for evidence, like we have traffic cops.......you people overlook the most obvious things.....if drivers didn't know there were traffic cops they would disregard speed limits......because demmycrats know there is no one checking ID they ignore voting laws.......
 
Heh, well said. Prediction: The (R) states will pass these new laws making voting more onerous. At least one (D) candidate will win over an (R) one in one of these states, at some point. Won't the laws make it hard for the loser to claim that the winner only won because election fraud?

It's straight out of the "Be careful what you wish for; you might get it" department.
Indeed it is. The potential of this backfiring on Republicans is significant. It may have the unintended consequences of highly motivating voters who oppose their agenda.

Don’t get me wrong, though indeed solutions in search of problems and obviously intended to suppress the oppositions vote their is a bit of over reaction to some of these intended actions, particularly redundant voter ID requirements as getting a photo ID is pretty darned easy and organizing drives to to obtain them would probably be easier than voter registration and get out the vote drives. Don’t get me wrong I get it. I understand the principles behind the opposition towards these obviously cynical attempts to repress voting by making voting an onerous chore particularly in urban areas.

Having said that the lack of Democratic counter strategy is appallingly bad. There are simple counter strategies that Democrats could employ to easily thwart these attempts. An example would be to relentlessly advocate that the national election date be a national holiday. Democrats have advocated this for decades yet their organization around this issue remains weak despite its broad appeal to the majority of the American public.

Another good strategy that Democrats definitely deserve harsh criticism of is their constant failure to reach out to exurban and rural voters. What has the Democratic Party done over the last two decades to do so? They’ve done Jack shit. I’ve attended Democratic Party meetings as a non participant but interested observer and have seen how dismissive of this strategy urban Democrats are. With the end result that Republicans have heavily out maneuvered Democrats at the local level and using that to isolate the Democrats vote to urban areas and as a result losing control of State Houses all over the country. This is particularly egregious in the Great Lakes region where Democrats hold a significant advantage in numbers. In the process this has allowed Republicans to consolidate power at the State House level where they have gerrymandered districts to an extent to where extremist Republican candidates who would normally be unelectable are easily elected for congress. Jim Jordan is a perfect example. His congressional district is so bizarrely convoluted that on a map it looks like a duck. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever geographically or representatively except that it doesn’t have a single urban area in the district in one of the most urbanized States in the country. Thus by gaining political control at the State level Republicans have made the election of extremist candidates by both parties possible (for example the congress lady from Cleveland is every bit as extreme as that moron Jordan).

Yet our State Democratic Party is still hostile to reaching out to moderate exurban and rural voters, particularly in policies that would benefit these regions. Why? Because they are afraid of losing the the post modernist progressive vote despite the fact that center left and moderate voters vastly outnumber them. As such this wing of the Democratic Party are some of the best allies Republicans have as they can constantly be counted on to say stupid shut to alienate voters. It’s an incredibly dumb strategy and Democrats have paid a serious price for it.

Democrats like to think of themselves as the big tent party when in reality they have become a coalition of the educated and diversity and in the process have been ceding the middle ground for two decades. From a political standpoint it’s just plain stupid political strategy.

Now don’t get me wrong. The GOP is far more in lock step with extremist politics than Democrats are and this is eminently exploitable, from a strategic standpoint, for Democrats who consistently fail to grasp this opportunity despite having a significant advantage of numbers and resources. Given this and Republicans success at local and State levels one can only objectively observe that Republicans are playing the game of politics better than Democrats.

Yet that sort of self analysis seems to be an anethma to Democratic Party leaders and thus we have our current situation where the Plutocracy and white working class alliance has been quite successful despite the Plutocracies resistance to do anything that would improve economically the lives of the working class Americans.

Instead Democrats are foolishly engaged in culture war battles in a war they have already fucking won. It’s quite maddening from where I sit watching Democrats just simply watching these opportunities pass on by the .
 
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.

I’ve been finding out that metrics are proving a better indicator of predicting a candidates success in getting elected/re-elected as President than statistics seem to be.

Had not COVID-19 pandemic and the social unrest over the Floyd killing occurred prior to the election or had Trump had better success in managing those situations (and to be fair some of that was beyond his control) I feel fairly confident he would have won re-election.
 
Last edited:
Indeed it is. The potential of this backfiring on Republicans is significant. It may have the unintended consequences of highly motivating voters who oppose their agenda.

Don’t get me wrong, though indeed solutions in search of problems and obviously intended to suppress the oppositions vote their is a bit of over reaction to some of these intended actions, particularly redundant voter ID requirements as getting a photo ID is pretty darned easy and organizing drives to to obtain them would probably be easier than voter registration and get out the vote drives. Don’t get me wrong I get it. I understand the principles behind the opposition towards these obviously cynical attempts to repress voting by making voting an onerous chore particularly in urban areas.

Having said that the lack of Democratic counter strategy is appallingly bad. There are simple counter strategies that Democrats could employ to easily thwart these attempts. An example would be to relentlessly advocate that the national election date be a national holiday. Democrats have advocated this for decades yet their organization around this issue remains weak despite its broad appeal to the majority of the American public.

Another good strategy that Democrats definitely deserve harsh criticism of is their constant failure to reach out to exurban and rural voters. What has the Democratic Party done over the last two decades to do so? They’ve done Jack shit. I’ve attended Democratic Party meetings as a non participant but interested observer and have seen how dismissive of this strategy urban Democrats are. With the end result that Republicans have heavily out maneuvered Democrats at the local level and using that to isolate the Democrats vote to urban areas and as a result losing control of State Houses all over the country. This is particularly egregious in the Great Lakes region where Democrats hold a significant advantage in numbers. In the process this has allowed Republicans to consolidate power at the State House level where they have gerrymandered districts to an extent to where extremist Republican candidates who would normally be unelectable are easily elected for congress. Jim Jordan is a perfect example. His congressional district is so bizarrely convoluted that on a map it looks like a duck. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever geographically or representatively except that it doesn’t have a single urban area in the district in one of the most urbanized States in the country. Thus by gaining political control at the State level Republicans have made the election of extremist candidates by both parties possible (for example the congress lady from Cleveland is every bit as extreme as that moron Jordan).

Yet our State Democratic Party is still hostile to reaching out to moderate exurban and rural voters, particularly in policies that would benefit these regions. Why? Because they are afraid of losing the the post modernist progressive vote despite the fact that center left and moderate voters vastly outnumber them. As such this wing of the Democratic Party are some of the best allies Republicans have as they can constantly be counted on to say stupid shut to alienate voters. It’s an incredibly dumb strategy and Democrats have paid a serious price for it.

Democrats like to think of themselves as the big tent party when in reality they have become a coalition of the educated and diversity and in the process have been ceding the middle ground for two decades. From a political standpoint it’s just plain stupid political strategy.

Now don’t get me wrong. The GOP is far more in lock step with extremist politics than Democrats are and this is eminently exploitable, from a strategic standpoint, for Democrats who consistently fail to grasp this opportunity despite having a significant advantage of numbers and resources. Given this and Republicans success at local and State levels one can only objectively observe that Republicans are playing the game of politics better than Democrats.

Yet that sort of self analysis seems to be an anethma to Democratic Party leaders and thus we have our current situation where the Plutocracy and white working class alliance has been quite successful despite the Plutocracies resistance to do anything that would improve economically the lives of the working class Americans.

Instead Democrats are foolishly engaged in culture war battles in a war they have already fucking won. It’s quite maddening from where I sit watching Democrats just simply watching these opportunities pass on by the .

Wrong board to be offering insight like this Mott. :)

I enjoyed reading that.
 
Wrong board to be offering insight like this Mott. :)

I enjoyed reading that.

LOL Thanks Wacko but where else would I post it? Almost all the political message boards have become the home of the ad hom logical fallacy where reasoned and civil intelligent discussion are replaced by poo flinging.
 
LOL Thanks Wacko but where else would I post it? Almost all the political message boards have become the home of the ad hom logical fallacy where reasoned and civil intelligent discussion are replaced by poo flinging.

It’s unfortunate and social media is not much different. It’s large majority hyper partisanship/tribalism and trolling. It’s too bad.
 
Indeed it is. The potential of this backfiring on Republicans is significant. It may have the unintended consequences of highly motivating voters who oppose their agenda.

Don’t get me wrong, though indeed solutions in search of problems and obviously intended to suppress the oppositions vote their is a bit of over reaction to some of these intended actions, particularly redundant voter ID requirements as getting a photo ID is pretty darned easy and organizing drives to to obtain them would probably be easier than voter registration and get out the vote drives. Don’t get me wrong I get it. I understand the principles behind the opposition towards these obviously cynical attempts to repress voting by making voting an onerous chore particularly in urban areas.

Having said that the lack of Democratic counter strategy is appallingly bad. There are simple counter strategies that Democrats could employ to easily thwart these attempts. An example would be to relentlessly advocate that the national election date be a national holiday. Democrats have advocated this for decades yet their organization around this issue remains weak despite its broad appeal to the majority of the American public.

Another good strategy that Democrats definitely deserve harsh criticism of is their constant failure to reach out to exurban and rural voters. What has the Democratic Party done over the last two decades to do so? They’ve done Jack shit. I’ve attended Democratic Party meetings as a non participant but interested observer and have seen how dismissive of this strategy urban Democrats are. With the end result that Republicans have heavily out maneuvered Democrats at the local level and using that to isolate the Democrats vote to urban areas and as a result losing control of State Houses all over the country. This is particularly egregious in the Great Lakes region where Democrats hold a significant advantage in numbers. In the process this has allowed Republicans to consolidate power at the State House level where they have gerrymandered districts to an extent to where extremist Republican candidates who would normally be unelectable are easily elected for congress. Jim Jordan is a perfect example. His congressional district is so bizarrely convoluted that on a map it looks like a duck. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever geographically or representatively except that it doesn’t have a single urban area in the district in one of the most urbanized States in the country. Thus by gaining political control at the State level Republicans have made the election of extremist candidates by both parties possible (for example the congress lady from Cleveland is every bit as extreme as that moron Jordan).

Yet our State Democratic Party is still hostile to reaching out to moderate exurban and rural voters, particularly in policies that would benefit these regions. Why? Because they are afraid of losing the the post modernist progressive vote despite the fact that center left and moderate voters vastly outnumber them. As such this wing of the Democratic Party are some of the best allies Republicans have as they can constantly be counted on to say stupid shut to alienate voters. It’s an incredibly dumb strategy and Democrats have paid a serious price for it.

Democrats like to think of themselves as the big tent party when in reality they have become a coalition of the educated and diversity and in the process have been ceding the middle ground for two decades. From a political standpoint it’s just plain stupid political strategy.

Now don’t get me wrong. The GOP is far more in lock step with extremist politics than Democrats are and this is eminently exploitable, from a strategic standpoint, for Democrats who consistently fail to grasp this opportunity despite having a significant advantage of numbers and resources. Given this and Republicans success at local and State levels one can only objectively observe that Republicans are playing the game of politics better than Democrats.

Yet that sort of self analysis seems to be an anethma to Democratic Party leaders and thus we have our current situation where the Plutocracy and white working class alliance has been quite successful despite the Plutocracies resistance to do anything that would improve economically the lives of the working class Americans.

Instead Democrats are foolishly engaged in culture war battles in a war they have already fucking won. It’s quite maddening from where I sit watching Democrats just simply watching these opportunities pass on by the .

What a thoughtful, intelligent, and spot-on post. From 1998-2009 I lived in a rural county NW of St. Louis. As you might imagine it was conservative and "churchy." Yet our state rep was a (D) and there was a small but thriving (D) party. You are absolutely right. Even though everyone in the local group lived in this rural county too, the state party was much more interested in finding candidates that represented non-rural issues and values. It was beyond frustrating because without state party backing, the funding to run just wasn't there. We ended up losing our (D) rep to an (R) one who much better represented the interests of the farmers who made up the majority of citizens at that time.
 
It’s unfortunate and social media is not much different. It’s large majority hyper partisanship/tribalism and trolling. It’s too bad.

Oh I don’t even discuss politics on social media. I think that’s dumb. Social media is supposed to be for networking and staying in touch with friends and family.

In reality it’s a swampland of people whining over politics and women having meltdowns in public.

FB even has me listed as a moderate politically, which I am, but that’s solely on the basis that I don’t discuss politics on FB and I my friends and family span the political spectrum.

Though I did recently get a warning from FB for advocating violence when I suggested that the Sackler family, who control Purdue Pharma, should be given a fair trial then hanged, like any other criminal drug lords, for their substantial role in the opiate crises. Hell…I thought that was just common sense.
 
LOL Thanks Wacko but where else would I post it? Almost all the political message boards have become the home of the ad hom logical fallacy where reasoned and civil intelligent discussion are replaced by poo flinging.

It was indeed a good post though. As an old fashioned Blue Dog I agreed with most of it. You did use some really big words. It was probably wasted on most. Oh well, in the immortal words of Barney Fife … “Kay, Sarah, Sarah.” ;)
 
Oh I don’t even discuss politics on social media. I think that’s dumb. Social media is supposed to be for networking and staying in touch with friends and family.

In reality it’s a swampland of people whining over politics and women having meltdowns in public.

FB even has me listed as a moderate politically, which I am, but that’s solely on the basis that I don’t discuss politics on FB and I my friends and family span the political spectrum.

Though I did recently get a warning from FB for advocating violence when I suggested that the Sackler family, who control Purdue Pharma, should be given a fair trial then hanged, like any other criminal drug lords, for their substantial role in the opiate crises. Hell…I thought that was just common sense.

I never discuss politics on Facebook. I might retweet a political meme or two that I find humorous. I am considered a moderate political person in places other than here.
 
Oh I don’t even discuss politics on social media. I think that’s dumb. Social media is supposed to be for networking and staying in touch with friends and family.

In reality it’s a swampland of people whining over politics and women having meltdowns in public.

FB even has me listed as a moderate politically, which I am, but that’s solely on the basis that I don’t discuss politics on FB and I my friends and family span the political spectrum.

Though I did recently get a warning from FB for advocating violence when I suggested that the Sackler family, who control Purdue Pharma, should be given a fair trial then hanged, like any other criminal drug lords, for their substantial role in the opiate crises. Hell…I thought that was just common sense.

I rarely post on social media, and never anything political. I just mean social media in general is so toxic. I understand the benefits but man there are a whole lot of negatives. (When even my Pastor was making gratuitous political attacks you knew something was amiss.)

I don’t pretend to have the answer and we know social media isn’t going away…
 
Back
Top