Trump’s Disgraceful Endgame

jayem

Naturalist
Jun 24, 2003
15,262
6,943
72
St. Louis, MO.
✟371,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
From the National Review. Which is the most venerable conservative news magazine in the country. Founded by Wm. F. Buckley:

"Almost nothing that the Trump team has alleged has withstood the slightest scrutiny. In particular, it’s hard to find much that is remotely true in the president’s Twitter feed these days. It is full of already-debunked claims and crackpot conspiracy theories about Dominion voting systems. Over the weekend, he repeated the charge that 1.8 million mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania were mailed out, yet 2.6 million were ultimately tallied. In a rather elementary error, this compares the number of mail-ballots requested in the primary to the number of ballots counted in the general. A straight apples-to-apples comparison finds that 1.8 million mail-in ballots were requested in the primary and 1.5 million returned, while 3.1 million ballots were requested in the general and 2.6 million returned.

Flawed and dishonest assertions like this pollute the public discourse and mislead good people who make the mistake of believing things said by the President of the United States."

Trump Election Fraud Allegations Disgraceful Endgame to 2020 Reelection Effort | National Review
 

Hans Blaster

Rocket surgeon
Mar 11, 2017
14,647
11,691
54
USA
✟293,961.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Blade's post was a little heavier on technical detail, which I found made it a little more convincing.

That post is not relevant to the NR article's discussion of the "confusion" of primary and general election ballot request and ballot utilization totals.

"Blade"s post is from a repeatedly debunked "study" that fails to understand how votes are reported in large groups usually representing full groups of a particular vote total. One of the "anomalous" vote dumps in that article is literally all mail-in/absentee ballots for the whole city of Milwaukee. Not surprisingly that "dump" leaned heavy to the Democratic candidates.
 
Upvote 0

QvQ

Member
Aug 18, 2019
1,630
707
AZ
✟99,731.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Other areas dumped large amounts of ballots. The problem is the anomaly between the Biden/Trump totals. Those spikes are not attributed to normal division of vote totals in any other area of the country.

The National Review is the Jeb Bush wing of the Party. Never Trump. Just politics.
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Rocket surgeon
Mar 11, 2017
14,647
11,691
54
USA
✟293,961.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Other areas dumped large amounts of ballots. The problem is the anomaly between the Biden/Trump totals. Those spikes are not attributed to normal division of vote totals in any other area of the country.

The National Review is the Jeb Bush wing of the Party. Never Trump. Just politics.

But they are. There is nothing unusual about those large reportings of ballots. This is one of the biggest "nothing burgers" in the whole "conspiracy". It isn't odd at all and thinking it is nefarious is only possible through ignorance of vote counting procedures.
 
Upvote 0

nonaeroterraqueous

Nonexistent Member
Aug 16, 2014
2,915
2,724
✟188,987.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
"Blade"s post is from a repeatedly debunked "study" that fails to understand how votes are reported in large groups usually representing full groups of a particular vote total. One of the "anomalous" vote dumps in that article is literally all mail-in/absentee ballots for the whole city of Milwaukee. Not surprisingly that "dump" leaned heavy to the Democratic candidates.

Actually, it looks like the study debunked you. I would encourage everyone to read it and see why you're wrong.
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Rocket surgeon
Mar 11, 2017
14,647
11,691
54
USA
✟293,961.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Actually, it looks like the study debunked you. I would encourage everyone to read it and see why you're wrong.

The four mystery dumps late on election night. That notion? The one that fool "Dr" Rand Paul was going on about to day on the twitter machine? Guess again.
 
Upvote 0

nonaeroterraqueous

Nonexistent Member
Aug 16, 2014
2,915
2,724
✟188,987.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
The four mystery dumps late on election night. That notion? The one that fool "Dr" Rand Paul was going on about to day on the twitter machine? Guess again.
You didn't read it, apparently. Stop opining on things you don't understand.
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Rocket surgeon
Mar 11, 2017
14,647
11,691
54
USA
✟293,961.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
You didn't read it, apparently. Stop opining on things you don't understand.

I read quite a bit of it this time and more of it previously. The principle involved here is "GIGO". Garbage In. Garbage Out.

The garbage in here is a complete failure (or willful ignorance) on behalf of the "analyst" to understand the nature of vote reporting and the laws and policies related to said reporting. This includes intentional policies by the Legislatures of several states to prevent mail-in/absentee ballots from being counted before election day, thus insuring that they would be process in large batches *after* other votes were counted.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Sparagmos

Well-Known Member
Oct 19, 2018
8,632
7,319
52
Portland, Oregon
✟278,062.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Other areas dumped large amounts of ballots. The problem is the anomaly between the Biden/Trump totals. Those spikes are not attributed to normal division of vote totals in any other area of the country.

The National Review is the Jeb Bush wing of the Party. Never Trump. Just politics.
I didn’t read the whole article, but couldn’t t find any reference to mail in voting, which is a huge factor and the reason we saw late spikes for Biden. Trump told his followers not to vote by mail, and they didn’t.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
From the National Review. Which is the most venerable conservative news magazine in the country.

It once was that. But no more.

Today, NR is a favorite of the tiny crop of "NeverTrumpers" who spend all their time campaigning for the Democrats. And that's about all.
 
Upvote 0

Pommer

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic
Sep 13, 2008
16,348
10,241
Earth
✟137,488.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
It once was that. But no more.

Today, NR is a favorite of the tiny crop of "NeverTrumpers" who spend all their time campaigning for the Democrats. And that's about all.
No, the “Never-Trumpers” are specifically against Donald J Trump. They’re still conservatives, (maybe the only genuine conservatives left?), still mostly GOP, near as I can tell.
Besides the down-ticket races went swell except for Georgia.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
No, the “Never-Trumpers” are specifically against Donald J Trump. They’re still conservatives...
Well, there are all kinds of people claiming to be conservatives and there is certainly room for range of people.

However, the decline of National Review is common knowledge and that decline occurred mainly because the editors wanted the magazine to remain the mouthpiece of a kind of conservatism that intended to be seen as intellectual but at the cost of not being practical and also as the voice of elitists rather than ordinary people.

In short, time passed NR by along with its importance everywhere but on a magazine rack in a university library. If you go to a bookstore, you'll find the usual four copies there, and they are still there when next month's edition arrives.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Rocket surgeon
Mar 11, 2017
14,647
11,691
54
USA
✟293,961.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
No, the “Never-Trumpers” are specifically against Donald J Trump. They’re still conservatives, (maybe the only genuine conservatives left?), still mostly GOP, near as I can tell.
Besides the down-ticket races went swell except for Georgia.

Even more specifically (as indicated by their name) the "never-Trumpers" were conservatives who opposed the nomination and election of Trump dating back to 2015 when he started to run for President. There was one conservative magazine (the one Bill Kristol edited) that folded because it lost subscribers due to a never-Trump stance. I'm doubtful that the NR was fully never-Trump, but I don't read it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

variant

Happy Cat
Jun 14, 2005
23,625
6,387
✟293,730.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Well, there are all kinds of people claiming to be conservatives and there is certainly room for range of people.

However, the decline of National Review is common knowledge and that decline occurred mainly because the editors wanted the magazine to remain the mouthpiece of a kind of conservatism that intended to be seen as intellectual but at the cost of not being practical and also as the voice of elitists rather than ordinary people.

In short, time passed NR by along with its importance everywhere but on a magazine rack in a university library. If you go to a bookstore, you'll find the usual four copies there, and they are still there when next month's edition arrives.

You're entirely right in the idea that if you want to be seen as having intellectual integrity you have to refrain from being a firehose of propaganda and obvious lies.

NR is drawing the line at the obvious lies being told regularly by the president and other right wing sources.
 
Upvote 0

variant

Happy Cat
Jun 14, 2005
23,625
6,387
✟293,730.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
That's not even close to the explanation about why National Review lost out.

It's a good reason why you're expressing your irritation with them now.

It's telling that Trump style politics can't take criticism from any who might offer it, no matter how obvious it is that no one should stand up for or take part in spreading ham fisted paper thin lies.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Stranger in a Strange Land
Oct 17, 2011
32,824
36,122
Los Angeles Area
✟820,574.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
However, the decline of National Review is common knowledge and that decline occurred mainly because the editors wanted the magazine to remain the mouthpiece of a kind of conservatism that intended to be seen as intellectual but at the cost of not being practical and also as the voice of elitists rather than ordinary people.

Thank heavens Trump has provided a conservatism that is non-intellectual and gauche -- neither elite nor of the people.

this_trump_family_portrait_will_make_you_ponder2.jpg
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
It's a good reason why you're expressing your irritation with them now.
That's wrong. Any irritation on my part owes to the posts that are trying to make out that NR is something that it isn't. National Review itself is now so insignificant that it could hardly be the cause of any serious irritation. ;)
 
Upvote 0