Advertisement

Texas still seeing red

November 21, 2020

Another big election story that didn’t pan out was “Texas turning blue.” At the link, “Beto” O’Rourke writes about what Democrats learned from this race and why Texans didn’t fall for what they were selling (my terminology.

As usual with liberals, he misses the point again and again. Whenever the left loses, it’s always because their “messaging” wasn’t effective enough. Having billions of dollars in both paid advertising and free friendly media to promote their economic and social policies just wasn’t enough to overcome the lies of the Republicans playing upon the fears of the poor, uneducated voters (quite a ringing endorsement for public schools, by the way.)

He cites as examples “lies” like “Biden will kill your oil and gas jobs” and “Biden will close down the economy” (two things Biden specifically said he would do, before looking at the polls and backtracking furiously.) He forgot, “Hell, yes,” the Democrats will take away your guns, which is what he famously said. I’m sure that played well in Texas.

He almost came close to getting it right when he said the national party had ignored Texas border districts and were shocked when Trump got such a high percentage of the vote there. But he misreads the reason. It’s not because the Democrats didn’t put in enough ads or outreach or canvassing. It’s because, as always, they assumed racial groups think monolithically, not as individuals. Latinos living along the border are on the front lines of suffering the negative effects of illegal immigration, including drugs and gang violence. Why would they vote for the “open borders/defund the police” party?

You’ve heard the saying, “When you ‘assume,’ you make an ‘ass’ of ‘u’ and ‘me’”? That was part of the Democrats’ problem in Texas. They assumed that all Latinos think alike and their votes belong to the Democrats by divine right. But in Texas, most Latinos are hard-working, God-fearing, law-abiding, church-going, patriotic, pro-family and pro-life. It’s not that they didn’t hear the Democrats’ message, they heard it loud and clear, found it terrifyingly radical, and rejected it. No amount of slick ads could put enough lipstick on the pig the Dems were trying to sell them.

And if you insist on putting people into categories, at least get the category right. Texas Latinos have their own proud heritage dating back to before Texas was a republic. It’s called Tejano, not Latino, and certainly not the annoying PC invention, “Latinx.” The Democrats’ leftist policies went over with them about as well as they did with Cubans in Florida.

One of my writers who lives in suburban Dallas provided a perfect example. He said the person he knows who is most adamantly opposed to illegal immigration is a lady who moved here with her husband from Mexico City. It infuriates her when illegal aliens come to them for jobs in their construction company, assuming she’ll hire them because she’s Mexican. She said she and her husband followed the laws, waited their turn, studied, took tests, paid fees and swore an oath to become Americans. She considers it an affront to her beloved adopted homeland for people to break its laws and demand the same rights they worked so hard to earn. What would the “one-size-fits-all” identity politics left make of her?

While it’s sadly true that the Democrats are making inroads in Texas, many Texans are seeing what allowing them to take over the big cities has led to and are recoiling in horror. Leftists have taken over Austin, and between the homelessness, trash, defunding the police and huge spike in violent crime, they’re turning the city’s motto from “Keep Austin Weird” to “Make Austin Unlivable.” The biggest problem Democrats have in selling their policies is not that their messaging isn’t effective enough; it’s that their policies are disastrous and anything they gain full control over, they destroy. Their biggest opponent isn't Republicans, it's reality.

“Beto” is right about one thing. He said: “People are smart. They smell a focus group-tested message, talking points derived from polls, a campaign driven by consultants, from a mile away.”

But their real problem is that there are also a lot of things about leftwing governance that people can smell from a mile away.

A sharp political divide

November 21, 2020

There’s seldom been a sharper divide in America over the views of an election. Trump’s people claim he really won in a landslide and was cheated by massive vote fraud. The Democrats and the media brush that off as crazy, unfounded conspiracy talk and irresponsible, un-American rhetoric that undermines faith in a free and fair election.

I’m deliberately not taking a side on issues that I don’t know the truth about. I made my view clear early on, and caught flak for it, in calling on Joe Biden and the Democrats to simply agree to work in a bipartisan fashion to audit the vote to reassure voters that they could trust the results. If there was nothing amiss, then they should be eager to prove it, dispel the suspicions and move on.

Instead, the accusations have devolved lower every day (“You’re crazy!”/”You’re a thief!”), and a new poll shows how corrosive this has already been. A recent Rasmussen survey found that 59% of Americans think mail-in ballots will lead to more voter fraud (that’s 86% of Republicans and even 36% of Democrats.) Now, a new Rasmussen survey of likely voters finds that 61% think Trump should concede to Biden. That includes 84% of Democrats, 59% of Independents and 37% of Republicans.

But here’s the weird part: even though 61% think Trump should concede, 47% think it’s likely Democrats stole votes or destroyed Trump ballots to win, while 50% disagree. That means that not only do nearly half of voters not trust the election results, but as many as 14% apparently believe or suspect the election was stolen, but Trump should concede anyway.

Democrats are rushing to blame this apparent loss of faith in elections on Trump refusing to concede and making wild accusations of fraud and conspiracy. But they’re conveniently overlooking their own part in preparing the ground by spending four years making wild, unsubstantiated claims that the 2016 election was rigged by Russia and that Trump is an “illegitimate” President. They even made a party leader and celebrity out of Stacy Abrams, who has yet to concede her loss in Georgia in 2018. She’s currently leading their drive to win Georgia’s two Senate seats, even as prominent Democrats openly call for liberals to move temporarily to Georgia and commit voter fraud by voting in the runoff.

It’s not healthy for this nation to have so many people start to believe – whether that belief is accurate or not – that they can’t trust our election process. It’s like ignoring a crack in your home’s foundation. Restoring their trust is going to take both parties working to pass bipartisan reform to make our elections more secure. One top priority should be an end to the push to simply mail ballots to every name on unvetted, out-of-date voter lists, which even 39% of Democrats see as an open door to vote fraud. That’s how we treat junk mail, and ballots are not junk.

Unfortunately, as Arizona Rep. Debbie Lesko points out, the House is already poised to do the exact opposite if the Democrats win the Senate. They will ram through HR 1, a bill that federalizes election laws to remove most safeguards, including banning voter ID laws and legalizing ballot harvesting. This is why it’s so vital that the Republicans win those Georgia seats so the Senate can put the brakes on incredibly irresponsible bills like these.

Now is the time to tighten election security and reassure Americans that the system works, not undermine their trust even more. Anyone who would fight even the most basic, common sense laws to insure that every vote is secure and legal is signaling a lack of concern for the disenfranchisement of legal voters and prioritizing the pursuit of their own power over the good of the nation.

The most striking thing about Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani’s press conference on Thursday is the immediate dismissal it got from most of the media.

Look at what they were alleging: wholesale election fraud, stealing a presidential election right under our noses in the world’s great democratic superpower, reducing the “shining beacon on a hill” to a mere penlight. There has been nothing like this in the history of our country. The media can’t risk looking at it; they instinctively know that, like looking straight at the sun, it would cause them permanent injury.

But if this is true, it explains a lot of very strange anomalies we’ve seen in the vote.

https://nationalfile.com/election-fraud-expert-michigans-election-results-are-physical-impossibility/

Russell Ramsland, co-owner of Allied Security Operations Group (ASOG), which specializes in election fraud detection, has looked at the Michigan vote and claims it’s a “physical impossibility.” According to a story in NationalFile.com, Ramsland served in the Reagan administration and has worked for both MIT and NASA. His must be one of the thousands of sworn affidavits Giuliani was referring to on Thursday. Ramsland swore he had determined --- no question --- that vote tampering took place in Michigan and that given "significant anomalies and red flags," the results could not possibly have happened otherwise.

He addressed the vulnerabilities of Dominion Voting Systems, saying that experts had already known about these and written about them extensively. He called the system logs essentially “unprotected,” meaning that any alterations to the tabulations would be undetectable. He said anyone with an elementary knowledge of computer systems could “arbitrarily add, modify or remove log entries, causing a log event to take place."

His colleague, Dr. Andrew Appel, described how a hack could easily be accomplished: creating a memory stick and then “7 minutes alone with [the machine] and a screwdriver.”

Here's one red flag: “There are a stunning 3,276 precincts where the presidential votes cast compared to the estimated voters...ranges from 84 percent to 350 percent...[revealing] 431,954 excess ballots.” This is one of the problems Giuliani was talking about. At least 19 townships/precincts have more votes than registered voters, some WAY more.

The biggest red flag is those “spikes” that Giuliani also mentioned. The spikes are “strongly indicative of a manual adjustment, either by the operator of the system...or by outside actors.” This is what convinced Ramsland that a crime did occur. “In the data are 4 spikes totaling 384,733 ballots allegedly processed in a combined interval of only 2 hours and 38 minutes. This is physically impossible given the available equipment at the 4 reference locations.”

However, other computer security experts have disputed Ramsland’s qualifications as an election systems expert and say he’s promoted vote fraud claims before without producing evidence. He has also claimed that vote tallies were uploaded to a database outside the US controlled by a company called Scytl. Both Scytl and Dominion denied that, with Dominion saying it would be illegal under US election law for Scytl to control votes cast and tabulated in the US.

Ramsland also allegedly made an error in an affidavit filed by Lin Wood in his Georgia case, confusing some districts in Minnesota for Michigan districts.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/11/do-trumps-lawyers-know-what-they-are-doing.php

These kinds of mistakes, disputes and conflicts can’t be in a legal filing when you’re asking a court or legislature to throw out thousands of votes. Just because something COULD have happened, or seemed to happen doesn’t, in itself, prove that it DID change the outcome of the election. Anecdotal or statistical anomalies aren’t enough; you need solid evidence.  Besides, how do you prove alterations were made by the thousands, perhaps millions, if the experts say they’re “undetectable”? The thought of making such a case, especially to people whose natural reactions range from dismissive to hostile to murderous, is daunting. Powell and her team have just a few days to build their case and have it heard, and it will have to be ironclad to get anyone to hear it.

Alan Dershowitz thinks the effort might be worth it in Pennsylvania.

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/alan-dershowitz-says-trump-has-chance-prevail-constitutional-legal

That’s why Tucker Carlson’s remarks about Powell not coming on his show Thursday evening might have been misplaced.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-rudy-giuliani-sidney-powell-election-fraud

He understandably wants to see the proof, we ALL NEED to see the proof, but the clock is ticking and she’s got work to do. Tucker said he would’ve given her the whole hour, even the whole week, but I’m thinking maybe she doesn’t have that kind of time. Just because she doesn’t show her hand doesn’t mean she doesn’t have a good one and is saving it for court. Keeping it close to the vest is likely her strategy.

Giuliani did go on HANNITY Thursday night for one segment, talking about coordination among ten Democrat-controlled cities. If that’s the case they’re planning to make in the next week or two, they’ve got their work cut out for them. That does sound like conspiracy theory if you don't have hard evidence. But John Solomon claims to have some, from prominent mathematician Steven Miller.

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/mathematics-prof-says-sworn-statement-many-56000-gop-ballots-pa-may-be

Those in media who reflexively say there’s “no evidence” need to look at some of that. (Force yourselves.) But for now, what we have is bits and pieces in multiple states, so we might feel like the blind men trying to describe an elephant.

The point is, we need to give Powell and her team a few precious days. Lack of time is the main challenge that legal expert Jonathan Turley says they have. What’s really critical is not what Powell says tonight on TV but the case she presents in a courtroom, before a judge --- or, it's hoped, a panel of justices.

If it turns out she was just blowing smoke –- which would be highly out of character for her –- THEN she deserves criticism from all sides. Goodness, her career and reputation will be ruined if she’s doing that, and she knows it.

Powell, Giuliani and their team are already enduring vicious criticism and threats of violence from Trump’s wacko adversaries. It got so bad for one Trump attorney in Philadelphia that she was placed under protection and allowed by the judge to withdraw from the case.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/lawyer-representing-trump-in-pennsylvania-placed-under-protection-after-threats-of-harm_3585988.html

Linda Kerns wrote on November 16 that she'd “been subjected to continuous harassment in the form of abusive emails, phone calls, physical and economic threats, and even accusations of treason --- all for representing the President of the United States’ campaign in this litigation.”

As we've reported, the anti-Trump group The Lincoln Project, which has hundreds of thousands of social media followers, has suggested that people target Trump attorneys, and to my knowledge neither Joe “the unifier” Biden nor any other Democrat leaders have denounced them. They bullied the law firm Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur into withdrawing from the Philly case. Kerns is the attorney who took over the case, and now SHE has withdrawn as well. This is an attempt to deprive Trump of legal representation.  It's also mob rule.

So let’s give Trump’s legal team some space while they put their case together, as is their right. They’ve got enough to deal with and an almost superhuman deadline. But when it's completed, it will have to be built as solid as a tank if they expect it to go anywhere.

Snopes.com does it again

November 19, 2020

This week, I discovered that the “fact-checking” site Snopes.com had done a piece on my Open Letter to Joe Biden. As usual with these pieces, it was filled with arguable leftwing talking points presented as indisputable facts, while it misrepresented what I wrote. But on the whole, it didn’t really attack my piece too much, because frankly, I don’t think there was anything to attack in it on a factual basis, and I stand by it. Their purported reason for running it was to verify that I actually did write it, since people were posting it on social media without links to the original site in my newsletter.

Here’s a piece of their introduction, with my corrections in parentheses, to show you how “objective” these so-called “fact-checkers” are:

“In the aftermath of the Nov. 3, 2020 U.S. election and Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s projected victory (only by the media, which has no authority to declare a winner), defeated incumbent U.S. President Donald Trump (the election has not been settled so calling Trump a “defeated incumbent” is inaccurate), along with some of his allies and his supporters, promoted unfounded and often easily-debunked allegations and conspiracy theories about electoral fraud playing a telling role in the outcome of the election (while some stories have proved incorrect, there are many such claims which have yet to be “debunked” or proven as “conspiracy theories,” and the jury is still out on whether there was sufficient fraud to have affected the election outcome), which they disputed more than a week after Biden was declared the winner (Biden has not been declared the winner, the stories began appearing as soon as the next day after the election, and Trump declared that he had actually won – also a disputed claim – on Thursday after the election, which is two days, not more than a week.)

Would you like me to drop by Snopes HQ and explain to your “fact-checkers” what a fact is?

Snopes also claimed that my letter included several “dubious,” later debunked claims of suspicious vote activity that I haven't changed. I made it clear there and in subsequent writings that I only report that these claims are being made, I don’t endorse their veracity. I’m not a leftist, so I’m not going to go back and rewrite old news stories. Besides, those claims have already been supplanted by countless others. But whether they eventually prove true or not, the salient “fact” to my article was that they did exist and need to be addressed because they affect the public's attitude toward their government.

The point of the letter was obviously not to endorse every claim of vote chicanery but to appeal to Biden (and by extension, his fellow Democrats) to join in calling for a full and transparent investigation to assure Americans that the vote was honest. Did they not just put us through a two-year, $40 million investigation of their claims of Russian collusion with the 2016 Trump campaign in the last election? And now we know for sure: there wasn’t any. I warned Biden in good faith that even if he prevailed, he would suffer the taint of suspicion by millions of Americans, just as Trump did, if the Democrats refuse to cooperate and keep putting up stonewalls and telling suspicious voters that they’re crazy and to shut up. That’s not good for him, and it’s not good for America as a whole.

There are certain things you learn from a decades-long career in politics that maybe a twentysomething Internet “fact-checker” doesn’t know. One is that once a politician loses the public trust, it’s very hard to win it back. Unlike Google, political leaders don’t have a monopoly. They can’t violate the public trust and sail blithely on, assuming there’s nobody else people can turn to.

And even if you have Google, most of the news media and all of social media on your side to censor any criticism or suspicion of you, you still can’t stop people from thinking it. Not even the most repressive communist regimes, where the government and military terrified people into voicing fake love for Dear Leader, could manage that.

Conservative humorist P.J. O’Rourke used to visit countries behind the Iron Curtain, and he wrote that the first thing oppressed people did when they discovered he was an American was to take him aside privately and tell him the latest jokes about what a corrupt, incompetent bunch of clowns their government masters were. If that’s what you want, then keep telling people they’re not allowed to question their leaders or voice their suspicions of wrongdoing by them

I’ll leave you with one more quote from Snopes that’s actually accurate:

“The main point of the letter appeared to be to ask Biden to ‘put partisanship and political ambition aside and join President Trump in demanding an impartial investigation into the very disturbing allegations of voter irregularities and fraud in Tuesday’s election.’”

Well, they got me there! I actually did call on a politician to put partisanship aside and work across the aisle to reassure voters that the election was honest. The HORROR!!!

Not going away

November 19, 2020

Our elite classes in government and media seem to believe that if they can only vanquish Trump, they will reign triumphant once again and cement themselves into power forevermore. First of all, even if he loses, Trump's not going away. Second, they have never seemed to grasp that Trump wasn’t the cause of their rejection by the public, he was a symptom of it. He even told Biden in the debates that if he and Obama hadn’t done such a terrible job, there’s no way he ever would have been elected President, and that’s probably true.

In this Twitter thread, Richard Fernandez tries once again to tell them that the people’s loss of faith in their leaders’ competence dated back well before the 2016 election. This isn’t news to me, since I wrote an entire book about how out of touch with America our coastal and DC elites were before Trump even entered politics:

Fernandez warns that more woke virtual signaling at the “deplorables” is not going to convince anyone that our self-proclaimed elites are competent again (based on Biden’s vow to reverse every Trump policy that led to a booming economy, record job creation, energy independence, cheap gas and peace in the Middle East, I think competence is the last thing a Biden Administration would be known for.)

Mark Judge at The Stream has a great suggestion for journalists: get a menial job. Take a few months to go work in a restaurant, hardware store, coal mine, factory, construction site, nursing home or anyplace where working class Americans put in a hard day, sweating for their paychecks.

Maybe if journalists actually meet some of the “flyover” people they constantly talk down to, they’ll learn a few things about them. Like that they’re not racists, they’re not obsessed with politics, and they love America and think it’s working just fine. They want to keep the money they earn instead of giving it to politicians in taxes to redistribute to their pet projects and people who won’t work. They hate bullies who try to tell them what they’re allowed to say and think, and they don’t want to be lectured about ridiculous things that defy common sense, like that a man can become a woman or that illegal immigration is not a problem. I would add that they’d also learn that working class people are not stupid or “low-information voters;” in fact, they are in many ways smarter and far more accomplished than most of the desk jockeys with useless college degrees who mock them.

Also, they might learn the most devastating realization of all: that many Americans view the elite journalist class as a bunch of over-privileged narcissists and “whiny, entitled, half-educated mediocrities.”

Some New York Sheriffs announced that they will not enforce Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s restrictions on family Thanksgiving dinners. They say it’s unconstitutional and wouldn’t stand up in court anyway. One said he doesn’t see how it’s in the public good to devote police resources to counting cars in people’s driveways and investigating how much turkey and dressing they bought. Personally, if I were ordered to be on the lookout for big turkeys, I’d head straight to the Governor’s Mansion.

And in a somewhat related story, the Washington Free Beacon reports that 644 New Yorkers have died of COVID-19 since the day Gov. Cuomo released his self-congratulatory book about how brilliantly he'd handled the crisis.

Overall, New York's latest COVID-19 death toll stands at 33,540, over twice as many as second-place Texas, which has nearly 10 million more people. Incidentally, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott also wrote a book, "Broken But Unbowed," but it's about both his battle to overcome an accident that left him paralyzed and restoring American greatness by bringing the government back to obeying the Constitution.

I think I'm starting to see why so many people are moving out of New York to go to Texas.