Comments on: “Build Back Better” is dead (for now), but HR1 may be undead

By: y81

y81 — Sat, 18 Dec 2021 23:10:32 +0000

The first 63 years of my life have convinced me that right-of-center figures with fancy credentials (e.g., the people who write for the WSJ, the Claremont Review, etc.) are far and away the best guide to the beautiful and the good. I don’t expect to be disappointed in the final third. Of course, it is human nature to trust those who resemble us, so maybe I am deceived.

By: geoffb

geoffb — Sat, 18 Dec 2021 06:19:34 +0000

Y81 is likely younger than I. The world his way of handing issues leads to will not make his declining years a happy time. The people he trusts to tell him the truth will ensure that and also make the decline come sooner that it has been normally in this nation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1efDtT7XeU

By: neo

neo — Sat, 18 Dec 2021 05:22:32 +0000

y81: I have no problem with you believing there was no significant fraud. But you don't seem to understand my own position, which is that the way the election was set up in 2020 in many states (quite a few of them important swing states), the amount of fraud cannot be determined although the door was open to fraud. I realized that problem prior to the election, based on a fairly in-depth study of how voting is handled in other countries, particularly mail-in voting, which is known everywhere to be especially susceptible to fraud unless some very very stringent measures are in place (measures that were not in place in this country). Here is one post I wrote on the issue.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 18 Dec 2021 03:07:58 +0000

y81:

Put up or shut up.

By: Y81

Y81 — Sat, 18 Dec 2021 02:46:51 +0000

Busch is reviewing Hemingway’s book. She can write a rebuttal if she thinks his analysis and critique is unfair or inaccurate. So can anyone here. I’ll wait.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 18 Dec 2021 02:00:41 +0000

y81 sees nothing and you should too. He’s found the only truth (one dude from CRB, buttressed by his beloved WSJ, and of course OMB). Life is simple for him.

Funny that y81 ignores other well respected and much more credible (Mollie Hemmingway for example) analyses of the 2020 election or even the tell all from the progressives on how they “fortified” the election process to foil OMB.

Does y81 buy into The Atlantic’s warning about the coming 2024 Trump coup too? “Where is Task Force “y81″? The world wonders.”

By: Zaphod

Zaphod — Sat, 18 Dec 2021 01:31:20 +0000

@y81:

Ah… so the Jaffa-ites at Claremont have held convocation at midnight under a New Moon, consulted the holy texts and marginalia, and have determined that the story of electoral fraud does not fit in with the Eight-Dimensional Stratagems of their Cabalistic (sic) Mystery Cult?

Well there you are, Peasants! No Fraud! M’kay?

There will always be Arguments from Authority. Can’t run a world without ’em, you know. The question as always is WHICH authorities?

By: y81

y81 — Sat, 18 Dec 2021 01:21:50 +0000

There’s a good review by Andrew Busch in the issue of the Claremont Review, which pretty much destroys all Trump’s outlandish claims of fraud. Anyone who is smart enough is welcome to write a well-reasoned rebuttal and submit it. I’ll read it. Now maybe neo will say, “You shouldn’t rely on a book review, you should read all the books under review. In fact, even that isn’t enough, you should review all the author’s notes and cited sources. Really, you should recreate the author’s research ab initio. Otherwise you making the dreaded argument from authority.” I can only say, life is short, I have to make decisions about many issues that I don’t have time (or possibly ability) to research thoroughly, and trusting reliable publications or other sources is the only way to navigate most of life.

By: Paul in Boston

Paul in Boston — Fri, 17 Dec 2021 01:30:22 +0000

Y81: look at this video starting at 3:39:25. You can watch the same batch of ballots being counted multiple times. Is that clear enough evidence for vote fraud.?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5ZP_HpBKos

By: Frederick

Frederick — Fri, 17 Dec 2021 00:14:34 +0000

@neo:There is some question in my mind whether the GOP would do away with the whole thing if they could.

Well, Mitch McConnell arranged to remove the filibuster for the debt ceiling so that Chuck Schumer could spend the money while all the Republicans could vote “no”. If he had not done that, the debt ceiling would not have been raised and the spending could not happen.

He did not allow his party to get in the way of the spending, even though some of them wanted to, but he did get them cover to tell the voters back home they voted “no” but those darn Democrats, send the GOp money to elect more Senators… he just wanted the GOP to look like they tried to stop the spending, not actually stop it.

tl; dr version: Two weeks ago Mitch McConnell steamrolled his own (minority) party by promising Chuck Schumer he’d “nuke the filibuster” on the debt ceiling–and the media didn’t say “boo” or use the word “nuke”.

What does that tell you?

What that tells me is that the GOP keeps the filibuster around to avoid being accountable to GOP voters. The Dems probably do it for the same reason. I think the gap between GOP senators and their voters is probably larger than that between the Dem senators and THEIR voters in most years, and so it stays around, but it’s completely fake. Senators have more in common with each other than with their voters.

It’s just a question of how long voters will continue to be fooled by it.