Do you see it? They’re going to pretend to investigate the vote fraud allegations, and then, after they conduct their fake investigation, they’re going to say, “Well, we found some voter fraud, but nowhere near enough to change the election’s outcome.”
And of course that will mean that Joe Biden is the most legitimate President in US history. So shut your damn mouth, you stupid, annoying-ass right-wing conspiracy theorists!
I don’t know why so many people on the right trust William Barr. The guy was George H.W. Bush’s Attorney General from 1991-1993. That’s not inherently disqualifying in and of itself, but it means he’s got serious Establishment Ties going back decades. Plus, in the 26-year gap between his two stints as Attorney General, he was on the boards of lots of major multinational corporations.
But the biggest thing about Barr: his much-hyped investigations of the Swamp haven’t yielded any results. And if he’s not able to expose the vote fraud in the 2020 election, all of his much-hyped investigations of the Swamp will vanish into thin air.
I am still not sold on this guy at all. If he does nothing about the 2020 election fraud, then he will leave office in less than two months having done nothing about the corrupt Swamp. He’ll go down as one of the biggest fraud ever.
However, the AP headline was, predictably, misleading.
If you go and read the AP article on the matter, even though it’s biased towards Biden to an almost comical degree, the actual quote from Barr paints a different picture than the headline indicates:
Barr told the AP that U.S. attorneys and FBI agents have been working to follow up specific complaints and information they’ve received, but “to date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election.”
The AP headline–“Disputing Trump, Barr says no widespread election fraud“–makes it seem like Barr has finished his investigation and found minimal amounts of fraud.
But he did not say his investigation was complete.
The funniest part here is that the AP takes a quote from Barr that his investigation has not yet found “fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election” and spins that as proof that Trump’s allegations of vote fraud are completely baseless.
The guy literally said they found vote fraud.
Shouldn’t that be the story? That there was voter fraud actually found?
We’ve been lectured for years that there is NEVER any vote fraud ANYWHERE EVER. But the US Attorney General just said on the record that they found voter fraud.
I love how the media acts as if the DoJ finding some vote fraud is the same as the DoJ finding no vote fraud.
Does the AP not understand that even one single fraudulent vote means the entire election is compromised?
Why would anyone commit a small amount of vote fraud that won’t change the outcome of an election? Just for the hell of it? Because it’s fun? Because some people just like to live dangerously?
No, you commit vote fraud to swing the result of an election. Otherwise, why the hell would you take the risk and commit a federal crime if it’s not actually going to make a difference in the election? It makes no sense at all.
If you conduct an investigation and find “some vote fraud, but not enough to change the election,” all that means is that you haven’t found all of the vote fraud.
Using the NYTimes‘ election results maps for both 2016 and 2020, I went through and made a table comparing Biden’s results in 2020 to Hillary’s results in 2016 in America’s largest cities. Here’s the table, first for the cities where Biden improved on Hillary’s 2016 margin, sorted by largest to smallest Biden net gain:
And here are the cities (or counties where the major cities are located) where Biden did worse than Hillary, sorted by smallest to largest net losses for Biden:
This is all in terms of vote percentages. Given that turnout was significantly higher for 2020, it made no sense to do it in terms of raw vote totals.
We can see that the cities where Biden gained the most over Hillary were Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Denver, Nashville, Charlotte and Atlanta.
The places where Biden lost support from what Hillary got: Miami Dade County FL (a whopping -22.1 points worse than Hillary), Bronx NYC (-11.4), Queens NYC (-8.4), Brooklyn NYC (-7.2) and LA County (-5.3).
By now it’s conventional wisdom that Miami Dade swung so hard to Trump because of Cuban and Venezuelan immigrants, but we can see a (smaller) minority shift to Trump in NYC and LA.
Also, Biden actually did 3.5 points worse in Philadelphia than Hillary did, yet he was able to flip Pennsylvania. As I went over in a post last month, the real shift in PA was in the Philly suburbs, which got bluer from 2016 to 2020.
It’s important to note that some of the results for 2020 might not be 100% reported, but all of them are well over 80% reported minimum. So while the 2020 figures could change, they won’t change by that much. Once the ink dries on the election results, I’ll update this with a new post to reflect the final totals.
I wanted to make this as a fact sheet/reference because there’s a lot of people out there saying things that aren’t true about how America’s major cities shifted from 2016 to 2020. These are the real numbers. There are some cities where Biden improved on Hillary’s numbers, and there are cities where Biden did worse than Hillary. Not all the places where Biden improved on Hillary’s numbers were in swing states.
My thoughts are as follows: I am deeply skeptical that Biden got 80 million votes. I am also deeply skeptical that Biden won Georgia and Arizona, as well as Michigan, Wisconsin and PA. I believe voter fraud occurred on a potentially massive scale (in the millions, possibly even tens of millions).
However, I do think Republicans are underestimating the white suburban shift towards Biden. There are a lot of news-watching suburban women who are chiefly concerned with virtue signaling. A lot of Americans saw Joe Biden as a way to return to “normalcy,” i.e. pre-Trump America when politics wasn’t such a big deal all the time. They would rather hand power back to the Establishment if it means all the psychological abuse (lockdowns, race riots) ends.
And, as I wrote in the notes column in the charts above, sometimes there are logical explanations for why Biden improved in a give place. For instance, Minneapolis he probably improved because of George Floyd and that whole situation. And in Nashville, where Biden improved by over 6 points over Hillary, a lot of that probably has to do with the fact that Nashville has been attracting tons of out-of-state transplants over the past several years. It’s one of the top destinations for people moving to a new city, especially from places like Chicago. Transplants to Nashville are turning it bluer, as they tend to be younger and college-educated. It’s the same thing that happened to Virginia and has now apparently happened to Colorado, and likely will happen to Texas. I don’t know if they’ll be able to turn Tennessee blue, but it’s possible.
But the most puzzling thing about this election was that Trump improved on his 2016 vote total by 11 million, while Biden improved on Hillary’s total by 15 million. It’s not like the shift from 2008 to 2012, where you could plainly see the shift from Obama to Romney. Obama got fewer votes in 2012 than he got in 2008, and Romney got more votes in 2012 than McCain did in 2008. It was pretty clear what happened; Obama lost some support from ’08, but kept enough of it to hang on for re-election.
In 2020, though, we don’t see any clean shifts like that. So where did Biden find 15 million more votes than Hillary got in 2016? It’s not like they all switched over from Trump, because Trump got 11 million more votes than he did in 2016!
We are told that Biden won more votes nationally than any presidential candidate in history. But he won a record low of 17 percent of counties; he only won 524 counties, as opposed to the 873 counties Obama won in 2008. Yet, Biden somehow outdid Obama in total votes.
Outdid him by almost 11 million votes.
He also supposedly received nearly 15 million more votes than Hillary did in 2016.
Readers of this site know I go to great efforts to try to present the opposing side’s arguments as honestly and accurately as possible. I prefer spirited and challenging debate to knocking down flimsy strawmen.
I go out of my way to expose myself to Democrat talking points and arguments, because how can we know our side is right if we don’t even really know what the other side is truly saying?
But even the left’s strongest arguments on why it’s perfectly believable that Joe Biden got 80 million votes do not pass the smell test. Suburban backlash to Trump? Not that much. Trump voter regret? If that’s the case then why did Trump get 10 million more votes than he got in 2016?
Only in media world could they believe that Trump was such a mortal threat to mankind that his unique awfulness compelled 15 million people who didn’t vote against him in 2016 to vote against him in 2020. In pushing these narratives that anti-Trump energy is far stronger in 2020 than it was in 2016, the media acts like these people didn’t know who Trump was in 2016. Do these media “journalists” not remember 2016? They were already at DEFCON-1 over Trump in 2016. They could not have been much more alarmist about him and biased against him than they were in 2016. They were already calling him a white supremacist and Literally Hitler and a mortal threat to mankind in 2016. They have had the hyperbole and hysteria over Trump cranked to 11 since basically the day he announced he was running for President.
For someone to believe that the anti-Trump movement only began in the past year or so, they’d have to believe that the media treated Trump in 2016 basically the same as it treated Mitt Romney and John McCain–which is to say, badly and unfairly, but merely due to partisan differences, and not because he was a Literal Genocidal Megalomaniac. But that’s not true at all: the media was far more hysterical about Trump in 2016 than they were Romney and McCain. And that’s no small feat.
The media’s anti-Trump hysteria was already pretty much maxed-out in 2016. If the media’s coverage of him in the 2016 campaign didn’t make you hate him, it’s likely that nothing since then really would or could. There are very, very few people who supported Trump in 2016 but turned on him in 2020. You can’t un-redpill someone.
Voting for Trump in 2016 was basically a last resort for tens of millions of Americans. It was an acknowledgement that the whole system in this country was deeply, overwhelmingly, thoroughly and hopelessly corrupt beyond all recognition, and that the only way to fix it would be to elect a complete outsider who would take a wrecking ball to the whole thing.
People who voted for Trump in 2016 were basically saying, “Look, I’m at the end of my rope here. We’ve gone from Democrat to Republican back to Democrat again and nothing ever changes, nothing ever gets better. The political class clearly could not possibly give any less of a fuck about us regular Americans. We have been sold-out and left behind. We have no voice. The system is completely broken and needs to be completely burned to the ground.”
You don’t just do a complete 180 on that position, even over a span of four years. Again, one cannot be un-redpilled. Once your eyes have been opened to the way things truly are in this country–the corruption, the cronyism, the fakeness of politics; the incestuousness of Washington, the media and all our major power centers; the complete lack of accountability for the elites–you cannot just go back to being blissfully unaware of it all and thinking things don’t need to change.
When you truly understand why someone would vote for Trump in 2016, it just doesn’t make sense that any meaningful number of 2016 Trump voters would say in 2020, “You know what? I’m voting for Biden. What we really need right now is the Establishment back in power. We need a man who’s been in Washington for 50 years.”
I’m not denying that there were some people out there who voted for Trump in 2016 but voted Biden in 2020. There are certainly a number of those people out there. But I’m confident it was a very small number, and that it was completely dwarfed by the number of people who got red-pilled after Trump became President. I would be willing to bet that the number of people who weren’t Trump supporters in 2016 but voted for him in 2020 is far, far greater than the number of people who voted for Trump in 2016 but abandoned him in 2020.
Again, Trump got 10 million more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. That, to me, is way more believable than Joe Biden getting 15 million more votes than HIllary Clinton got in 2016.
You can say the media brainwashed a lot of people to hate Trump. And that’s true. But those people were already brainwashed in 2016. It did not happen after the 2016 election.
And, once again, Trump got 10 million more votes than he did in 2016.
You mean to tell me that 15 million people who sat out 2016–who on election day four years ago thought to themselves, “Yeah, I can’t really be bothered to vote”–were somehow motivated by Trump’s sheer Hitler-ness and awfulness and Fascist-ness to say, “I must vote this man out of office if it’s the last thing I do”?
I mean, there is a case to be made for this if you go by the ratings between 2016-2020:
But if your argument is that CNN and MSNBC have seen their primetime ratings more than double since 2016, the same can be said about Fox News (at least prior to Election Night, when Fox basically doused itself in gasoline and set itself on fire by pissing off its core audience). Throughout 2020, Fox was pulling in a larger primetime audience than both CNN and MSNBC combined. For the whole month of October in the run-up to the election Tucker Carlson was routinely pulling in over 5 million viewers a night. Those numbers are unheard of. He broke cable news records and became the highest-rated cable news show ever.
If CNN and MSNBC really did brainwash millions of people into hating Trump, then over the past four years we would expect to see their ratings to have shot higher while Fox’s ratings cratered.
If you didn’t already believe Trump was a mortal threat to mankind before the 2016 election, it’s unlikely you’d come to believe that since he took office. Most of the media’s negative coverage of him during his first term centered on the completely discredited Russian Collusion nonsense, and then the phony impeachment that most people knew was a political stunt.
Could Covid have turned people against Trump? I guess it’s possible, but as I wrote yesterday, there’s little real world evidence of and impact from Covid. Most Americans probably don’t even know a single person that has been hospitalized due to Covid, much less died from it. If anything, the Average American is more pissed about the lockdowns, which have had far more of an impact on his life than the virus itself has had. These people would be more likely to support Trump, not Biden, as Trump was the candidate against the lockdowns. The only people who voted based on Covid Fear are the people who sit in front of the TV all day mainlining fear porn and obsessing over the fake Covid death numbers–which is to say, brainwashed libs who have hated Trump since 2015.
George Floyd and BLM? I doubt that, too. There were plenty of race riots and civil unrest during Obama’s second term, and the end result of that was Trump winning. Plus, only the hardest-core of the hardcore Trump haters could do the mental gymnastics necessary to convince themselves that Donald Trump is the reason black people are killed by the police. That has been going on for decades now. Nobody in their right mind believes it’s Trump’s fault that George Floyd and Breonna Taylor were killed by the police.
And, if anything, the rioting and chaos turned more people into Trump supporters and against the Democrats.
I’m just not seeing how this surge of Biden support materialized. Even if we grant that Covid and George Floyd caused a lot of it, the opposite sides of those issues (anti-lockdowns and anti-riots) probably created as many Trump supporters as they created Biden supporters.
There’s just nothing that has happened over the past 4 years that you can point to and convince me that it was the reason Biden got 15 million more votes than Hillary did in 2016.
And all the things libs could point to have had equal (or greater) opposite reactions that pushed people to Trump:
Fear of Covid pushing people towards Biden? Hatred of the lockdowns pushes others to Trump.
Social unrest in the name of racial equality pushes people to Biden? Desire for law and order pushes others to Trump.
Media brainwashing turns people in to Trump haters? Observing blatant and obvious media bias and lying turns others into Trump supporters.
Covid-induced economic recession turns people against Trump? Others realize it wasn’t a Covid-caused recession but instead a lockdown-caused recession, and they resolve to vote against the party of the lockdowns.
See? Just about anything they can point to as an explanation for why Trump lost support, there’s another side of the coin that caused Trump to gain support.
Now, the final argument for why Biden’s 80 million vote total is legit is one we haven’t covered in this post yet: mass mail-in voting caused a massive spike in voter turnout.
The one argument I can actually believe is that Biden’s 15 million vote surge over Hillary came from low-engagement voters who normally don’t turn out to vote in normal election years, but given the ease and convenience of mail-in ballots enabling them to vote without even leaving the house, they voted this year and broke heavily for Biden.
But this also undermines the idea that Biden won support based on the issues. Low-engagement voters don’t really know or care about the issues. It’s why they don’t vote in the first place: they’re not politically engaged. I’m not going to say the statements “Biden won based off the issues,” and “Biden won because a lot of low-engagement voters voted this year due to the ease and convenience of mail-in balloting” are completely mutually exclusive, but they’re close to it.
Did these people vote because of the issues, or because they just happened to get a ballot in the mail which made voting easy and convenient? In my view it’s one or the other. If you can only be bothered to vote when it doesn’t require any real effort on your part, then you don’t really care about the issues all that much, do you? If you really did care about the issues, then nothing would stop you from voting.
So basically the argument is that Biden got 15 million more votes than Hillary did due to an unprecedented surge of the least politically engaged and low-motivation voters in the country, enabled by mass mail-in voting–which also happens to be the method of voting most vulnerable to vote fraud, but I’m sure that’s just a coincidence.
The one point I keep going back to is this: they say that Trump lost because of a tidal wave of anti-Trump outrage.
But if that’s the case, then how did he get 10 million more votes than he got in 2016?
This election was stolen. The only question is whether Trump can prove it.
If not for media coverage, would you even know there was a global pandemic going on?
That is to say, have you seen any real-world evidence in your daily life that there is global pandemic going on?
Have you seen the carnage and devastation in your community? Have you seen the bodies pile up and watched as tons of people you know fell deeply ill?
Outside of the masks–which I’m now becoming convinced are required mainly to continually remind us that there is a DEADLY PANDEMIC–and the restrictions, have you see any evidence in your life that there is a pandemic?
Do you know lots of people that have gotten extremely sick and/or died due to Covid?
Imagine if there was no media, and you only got your news by word of mouth, would you know Covid existed?
I seriously doubt it.
I have had Covid–I tested positive and everything–and even I wouldn’t have known there was a unique “novel coronavirus” going around. I got it in September right as the weather started to change where I live, and if I didn’t know Covid existed would’ve just assumed it was a seasonal cold/flu. The only thing that I would’ve found unusual was losing my sense of smell and taste for about a week. But I probably would’ve just assumed it was part of the seasonal cold/flu.
Radio technology existed during the 1918 Flu Pandemic, but it was not widely available. All they had back then was telegraphs and newspapers. And yet everyone knew there was a global Flu Pandemic.
There was no media during the Black Plague of the 14th century, and yet everyone knew there was a Plague.
The point is, the proof of these past pandemics was self-evident. People back in those times didn’t need The Media to tell them there was a pandemic going on.
They saw the bodies piling up with their own eyes. They knew plenty of people who got seriously ill, and probably knew people who died.
The same is not true with Covid-19. If we were not constantly bombarded with media fear porn and propaganda, most people wouldn’t even know there was a novel virus going around.
…then governors like Cuomo and Newsom wouldn’t even have to ban Thanksgiving gatherings.
They wouldn’t have to force us to wear masks, force us to stay home, force restaurants to close down, force bars to close down, and force offices to close down.
Because if the virus was really that bad, we’d all be doing that stuff by choice.
If perfectly healthy young people were dropping like flies from coronavirus, then other perfectly healthy young people would hear about it and be scared shitless, and lock themselves down willingly.
All living creatures are naturally inclined towards self-preservation. We hear a loud bang, we jump and look around. We flinch when we think someone is going to punch us. When we’re thirsty, we seek water.
We take notice of our surroundings and instinctively react to any potential threats. If people truly perceived coronavirus as a mortal threat, they would react accordingly without any government coercion. Their survival mechanisms would’ve kicked in by now.
The fact that governments are ordering people to wear masks and stay home “for their own good” is on-its-face ridiculous. They claim they’re protecting us from ourselves, but most people are smart enough to realize that the coronavirus is not a major threat to them.
The very fact that they have to force us to wear masks and submit to “restrictions” is enough proof that the virus is not that dangerous.
NY Governor Andrew Cuomo has been awarded an Emmy:
Rememeber that Andrew Cuomo is in charge of the state with the second-highest COVID death rate and the most overall COVID deaths in the country:
Florida, on the other hand, which has been ridiculed by the media and portrayed as an example of Republican failure to address COVID, has a larger population than New York yet half the deaths of New York.
Not only does New York have the second-highest COVID death-rate in the country, it has the second-highest COVID death rate in the whole world. Remember, 1,757 per million.
If New York State was its own country, it would have the 14th-most COVID deaths in the world (34,186):
But Cuomo went on the TV and held press conferences so give the man an award.
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Wisconsin Elections Commission issued an order Thursday to recount more than 800,000 ballots cast in two heavily liberal counties at President Donald Trump’s request.
The order, required by law after Trump paid $3 million for the recount, was agreed to after rancorous debate for more than five hours Wednesday night that foreshadows the partisan battle ahead.
The recounts in Milwaukee and Dane counties, where Joe Biden outpolled Trump by a more than 2-to-1 margin, will begin Friday and must be completed by Dec. 1. Milwaukee County officials said they plan to finish the recount by Wednesday. Dane County Clerk Scott McDonell has not provided an estimated completion date.
That should have been the story. That’s really all the “news” the story contains.
But instead AP wanted to add in a bunch of commentary from Democrats, because Democrats are Trusted and Reputable Sources Without a Whiff of Partisan Bias. I’ll quote the article just so you can see how heavily skewed it is toward the Democratic side:
“It’s just remarkable the six of us in a civilized fashion can’t agree to this stuff,” Democratic commissioner Mark Thomsen said hours into the debate. The commission is split 3-3 between Democrats and Republicans.
First quote of the article goes to a Democrat. No surprise there, but note that the commission is split down the middle.
The article continues:
Biden won statewide by 20,608 votes. Trump’s campaign has cited “irregularities” in the counties, although no evidence of illegal activity has been presented.
No EVIDENCE of any Russian Collusion was ever “presented” but the media still pretended it was 100% for four years.
“We understand the eyes of the world will be on these Wisconsin counties over the next few weeks,” Meagan Wolfe, Wisconsin’s top elections official, said Thursday. “We look forward to again demonstrating the strength, security, integrity and transparency of our election systems in Wisconsin.”
AP didn’t include any information on Wolfe’s partisan affiliation, and I couldn’t find anything on her leanings after doing a brief search. But the fact that she used a Sorkinesque phrase like “the eyes of the world will be on these Wisconsin counties” indicates she’s a lib. That’s such a lib thing to say. “The right side of history,” “the world will be watching,” etc. etc. Plus the fact that she pre-emptively declared the Wisconsin election system as one of “integrity” and “transparency” only adds to the evidence that she’s a Dem and eager to declare that the SCIENCE IS SETTLED, so shut up.
The commission argued over changes to its manual that provides guidance to local elections officials over how to conduct recounts. Ultimately, they decided not to reference the manual in the order, but they did update some parts to reflect accommodations for the coronavirus pandemic.
The commissioners deadlocked on making changes to the manual that Democrats and elections commission staff said would bring the guidance into line with current state law. Republicans balked, saying the guidelines should not be changed after Trump filed for the recount.
The commission deadlocked on making changes to the manual that DEMOCRATS said would be the guidance into line with current state law.
Again, you’re only getting one side of the story: the Democrats’. To AP, that’s all that matters. Democrats are right and just and perfect and honorable.
Wonder what the Republicans thought about the matter? AP doesn’t think you need to know.
Their inability to agree leaves in place guidance that says absentee ballot applications must be approved as part of the recount, even though commission staff said that’s not required under the law.
Democratic commissioners said they were certain the recount was headed to court even though Trump’s claims were without merit.
More one-sided “reporting.” So because DEMOCRATS say Trump’s claims have no merit, that’s good enough for AP?
Hey, if a DEMOCRAT says it, that’s good enough for me. That settles it. Let’s move along here and get this thing wrapped up.
Board Chair Ann Jacobs, a Democrat, said Trump’s allegation that election clerks mailed thousands of absentee ballots to voters who hadn’t requested them was “absurd,” “factually bizarre” and a “vague, paranoid conspiracy.”
“What we ought not be doing is watering that plant of baloney,” she said.
Another quote from a DEMOCRAT.
Ah, here we go. 13 paragraphs in and we finally get a quote from a Republican:
Republican commissioners Dean Knudson and Bob Spindell questioned whether election observers would be treated fairly by Democratic county clerks in Milwaukee and Madison. At one point, Knudson even appeared to question whether absentee ballots requested through the elections commission’s state website were invalid because of how the requests are recorded.
“I hope we haven’t created a system at WEC that entices people to request a ballot that actually isn’t in keeping with the law,” he said.
One sentence for the Republicans, and even that the AP tried to frame as grossly unreasonable. WHAT? That Republican really just tried to say absentee ballots requested through the elections commission’s state website are invalid?!?!!?
Knudson, a former state lawmaker, has been on the commission since 2017 and like many office holders in Wisconsin encouraged voters to sign up for absentee ballots on the website. In August, he tweeted a link to the site along with the exhortation to “request absentee ballot now.”
Democrats dismissed Knudson’s concerns as outlandish, noting that the system has been in place unchallenged for years.
Yes, let’s hear more from DEMOCRATS. We haven’t heard enough from them in this article.
So basically the format goes like this:
Unchallenged claim by a Democrat
Another unchallenged claim by a Democrat
Yet another unchallenged claim by a Democrat
Misrepresented claim by a Republican
Democratic rebuke of the Republican claim
By this point it’s clear which side AP considers the “good guys” and which side they consider the “bad guys.” Because everything must be presented to their target audience with the Manichean simplicity of a Disney movie.
The article continues:
Thomsen said Trump was challenging the validity of the election only because he lost, but he had no problem with Wisconsin’s election rules in 2016 when he won by fewer than 23,000 votes.
Oh, look at that: another quote from a Democrat, which is 100% opinion, yet treated as more credible and unassailable than the Gospel of Luke.
No shit Trump is only challenging the results because he lost. Why would a candidate that won challenge the results?
They’re leaving out the reason Trump “lost”: rampant voter fraud. If he thinks that’s why he lost, then he has every right to challenge that and present his case.
If you thought that was it, here comes the best part, which no mainstream media article in 2020 could omit: an accusation of RAAAAAAAAACISM.
Milwaukee County is the state’s largest, home to the city of Milwaukee, and Black people make up about 27% of the population, more than any other county.
Dane County is home to the liberal capital city of Madison and the flagship University of Wisconsin campus.
How dare those dastardly Republicans try to invalidate the votes of such an esteemed institute of higher learning!
The disputes at the commission had echoes of what happened in Michigan on Tuesday. Republicans on a canvassing board for the county that includes Detroit temporarily stopped certification of the vote after claiming that poll books in certain parts of the majority-Black city were out of balance. The deadlock brought claims of racism from Democrats before the board later voted unanimously to certify the results. The Republicans said they want to change their stance again, but officials said certification of the vote will stand.
Republican officials tried to do the same thing in Michigan, but Democrats quickly shut that down because REPUBLICANS ARE RACIST!
Thank God for Democrats. They’re truly angels living among us.
And that’s the whole article.
That’s the American mainstream media for you, right there.
Now do you see how and why there are so many brainwashed people in this country? Imagine if you didn’t have any critical thinking skills and you trusted the media, and you read that article.
Wouldn’t you probably be a Democrat, too?
The pro-Democrat bias in this country is relentless and pervasive. They never, ever stop. And they’re completely shameless about it, too.
I guess the “Pro Science Crowd” would say it’s because the lockdowns prevent the virus from spreading too quickly which in turn prevents hospitals from being overrun.
They’d probably also add that virus cases are only spiking again because we eased up on the lockdown restrictions.
But the whole idea behind lockdowns, at least here in the US, is based on nonsense.
We got the lockdown idea first from China. They were the first country to get hit by the virus, and they responded by imposing a lockdown on the Hubei Province.
The virus then migrated to Europe, specifically Italy, where they responded by locking down basically the whole northern half of the country.
So when the virus came to America, we just copied everyone else’s response: lockdown.
Except now we’re going on 8 months of lockdown, which has of course varied in severity over those 8 months and from state to state.
But it was never supposed to be an indefinite lockdown. At first it was “15 days to slow the spread,” but that was on March 16.
Though we seemingly copied China’s strategy of locking down, we did not impose anywhere near as stringent of rules on our lockdown as China did with theirs. I went over this in a post the other day.
For instance, we allowed “essential businesses” to remain open. We did not ban interstate travel. We did not ban people from leaving their homes.
All that happened was the government issued “guidance” on how we should behave during this viral pandemic. No large gatherings. Only leave your home if you really have to. Work from home where possible. Promise you’ll quarantine for 14 days if you travel.
But we did not shut down all foreign travel. We should’ve done that the moment China imposed its first lockdown orders on Hubei Province. We should’ve done a full and complete shutdown on international travel immediately. No warnings. If you were an American overseas, sorry. Hunker down where you are until we figure out how to get you back safely. We should have not allowed a single boat or plane to enter the US back in January. Literally shut down all international travel to and from the US.
After we ensured we were completely cut off from the rest of the world, we could’ve come up with a plan to allow Americans traveling abroad to come home. It would require all travelers coming back to the States to be quarantined for 14 days and tested. You don’t get to leave quarantine until you’re confirmed to be non-contagious and healthy once again. Like the scene in Godfather II when Vito Corleone arrives at Ellis Island and has to be quarantined for three months because he has smallpox. You get off your plane and you go straight to a hospital to be tested and quarantined. No one can even come to visit you.
None of it would’ve been convenient. Not in the slightest. It would’ve sucked mightily. But tough shit. It’s all being done out of necessity. It’s for the greater good.
Because we failed to do that, the virus arrived on American soil. At first it started in New York City. What we should’ve done then was quarantine the whole New York City area. No one allowed in or our. Set up a military perimeter and contain the virus there.
But again, this would’ve been inconvenient and people would’ve gotten upset, so we didn’t do it.
Once the virus started spreading nationwide, we should have done a full-scale lockdown for three weeks. Nobody allowed to leave their home, unless they are either: a police officer, a firefighter, EMS/first responder, medical, active-duty military, a restaurant, a delivery driver, a trucker or a farmer. These would be “essential personnel.”
Three weeks allows everyone who has the virus at the time to recover from it. By the time the three weeks is up, it should be safe to allow things to go back to normal. Viruses can only survive by spreading from person to person.
“But how would we have gotten food!?”
The government could’ve nationalized Uber and turned it into a full-time, round-the-clock food delivery service. Uber drivers would be given extra pay for their services. Grocery delivery services like Amazon and Instacart and Blue Apron would be ramped up massively. Food would have to be rationed out and all ordering would be done via app.
“Rationing!? That’s communism!”
Take it easy. We did it during World War II. There are literally millions of Americans still alive today who lived through WWII and the rationing.
“But how would you enforce it all?”
Martial law. Full-blown police state. Military and national guard deployed to patrol the streets 24/7 to make sure people are not leaving their homes. If you’re caught outside your home in violation of the rules, you’re taken to a jail/quarantine center for 14 days and slapped with a fine.
“But that would be a complete clusterf*ck!”
Yeah, I know. But there’s really no other way.
“But how would people get money!?”
Stimulus checks. We already did that. The government would also institute a total and complete freeze on all mortgage and rent payments until the lockdown ended.
“But none of that is realistic at all!”
And that’s my point. A real lockdown would’ve encompassed all of the above. It would’ve been a full-scale, all-hands on deck, every-last-man-woman-and-child-in-this-country effort. It would have meant major inconvenience and sacrifice for virtually everyone.
And it would’ve sucked.
That’s why it could never have happened in this country. People are too selfish and soft. The moment they are inconvenienced once, they freak the hell out. Ask us to sacrifice for the good of the country, and you’ll never hear the end of it. It’s not like the complaints would be unfounded, either.
And then, to top it all off, if the government doesn’t institute a full totalitarian lockdown, we’ll complain because the government hasn’t stopped the virus.
This is why lockdowns only work in collectivist cultures with centralized, authoritarian governments. America does not have that: we are an individualist culture with a decentralized government that is only authoritarian in the worst ways (in that our government only unleashes its full wrath on peaceful, patriotic citizens while allowing the criminals and deviants to run free and terrorize the normal people. I.e. anarcho-tyranny).
Implementing a Covid response policy that could’ve actually worked was never a realistic option in America.
So instead we did a half-assed pseudo lockdown based on “guidelines” and the honor system. People are working from home, wearing masks when they go out, and living under all kinds of various “restrictions,” but it’s not a real lockdown. It’s a shitty-ass fake lockdown that has given us the worst of both worlds: it hasn’t stopped the virus at all (we have by far the most cases and deaths in the world) and it has made life miserable.
You literally could not devise a worse virus policy if you tried.
And because the virus still spreads, politicians believe the only solution is to keep us under half-ass, fake-ass lockdown until the virus stops spreading.
After 8 months of our half-ass, fake-ass lockdown not working, the politicians are either stupid or evil for continuing the policy. It been a clear, resounding and undeniable failure.
The first two policy ideas (complete and total international travel shutdown, and, failing that, a complete military containment of NYC and any “ground zero” areas for the virus) could’ve worked. The third (complete and total nationwide lockdown) was never a viable option.
An alternative and possibly more viable option would be a partial lockdown strategy that applied only to the elderly and the unhealthy. They could’ve released a set of rules saying that if you’re over the age of 75 and/or you meet the criteria for being high-risk of dying of the virus, then you must be under full quarantine with no exceptions. If you meet the criteria and you’re not yet retired, you’re exempt from work and get a check from the government every week until the government says the lockdown is over.
Everyone else gets to go on living normally, and basically the virus would be treated like we treated Swine Flu (aka we don’t do jack-shit about it). This would have built up herd immunity among the younger and healthy population, and it probably would’ve happened months ago. As I went over in a post earlier this year, the herd immunity threshold is likely between 15-25% of the population, not 50-60% as conventional wisdom claims.
Instead our half-ass lockdown policy has caused the virus to spread slowly and disrupted the natural herd immunity process from playing out. You can only have herd immunity if everyone gets the virus around the same time. But if the virus spreads slowly over the course of months, then the earliest people to get it will lose immunity while it’s still spreading, and run the risk of being reinfected.
“But herd immunity is inhumane and evil!”
No, it’s our species’ evolved defense mechanism against viral plagues.
Ultimately, herd immunity is the only way to get through a new virus. Because if you lock down, then once you lift the restrictions, the majority of the population is still going to be vulnerable to the new viral strain. Let’s say we did the full nationwide lockdown, everyone who had the virus recovered, and daily new cases went to zero. We then lift all the restrictions on travel and go fully back to normal. If someone from another country who is infected comes into America, the virus will just start spreading again.
Because we never built up herd immunity to it.
There’s no way around herd immunity, other than maybe a vaccine. But with Covid, we’re dealing with a virus that has a >99% survival rate. Most people don’t need the vaccine.
Look, nobody wants to hear it but there are no good options when it comes to viral pandemics. When a new strain of virus starts spreading, it’s inevitable that a lot of people are going to get it and some of those people are going to die. It’s unavoidable.
It is the height of childishness and government-worship to believe a man living in a big white mansion in Washington D.C. has the power to protect all 330 million Americans from a virus. Maybe in Communist China, where the government has virtually unchecked power, it’s possible for the government to take on a virus and win. But it comes at an immense price: your freedom. And even in China lots of people got the virus and died–many times more than the government’s official figures claim.
Again, after a virus first emerges, there are no good options for governments to choose from.
We went over a few different policy options our government could’ve taken once they found out about the virus. None of them were convenient or appealing for anyone.
Our government (meaning the 50 individual states and the federal government itself) happened to chose the one that was by far the worst of all. At least for us normal people.
Fortunately, though, some states, like Florida, have already realized that the half-assed lockdown approach was idiotic and have gone largely back to normal. You can see here Florida’s Based Chad Governor Ron DeSantis holding up a sign to remind people just how non-deadly Covid truly is as he announced his state would “never lockdown again”:
It’s time for the rest of the country to follow Florida’s lead.