Thursday, November 26, 2020

On Medium: An Omen of Joe Biden’s Timidity

Let's puzzle over the mystery of why Biden can’t even bring himself to say what Donald Trump is.


  1. Trump's biggest supporters.

  2. 1. Late on election night, with Trump comfortably ahead, many swing states stopped counting ballots. In most cases, observers were removed from the counting facilities. Counting generally continued without the observers

    2. Statistically abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed. They were unusually large in size (hundreds of thousands) and had an unusually high (90 percent and above) Biden-to-Trump ratio

    3. Late arriving ballots were counted. In Pennsylvania, 23,000 absentee ballots have impossible postal return dates and another 86,000 have such extraordinary return dates they raise serious questions

    4. The failure to match signatures on mail-in ballots. The destruction of mail in ballot envelopes, which must contain signatures

    5. Historically low absentee ballot rejection rates despite the massive expansion of mail voting. Such is Biden’s narrow margin that, as political analyst Robert Barnes observes, ‘If the states simply imposed the same absentee ballot rejection rate as recent cycles, then Trump wins the election’

    6. Missing votes. In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, 50,000 votes held on 47 USB cards are missing

    7. Non-resident voters. Matt Braynard’s Voter Integrity Project estimates that 20,312 people who no longer met residency requirements cast ballots in Georgia. Biden’s margin is 12,670 votes

    8. Serious ‘chain of custody’ breakdowns. Invalid residential addresses. Record numbers of dead people voting. Ballots in pristine condition without creases, that is, they had not been mailed in envelopes as required by law

    9. Statistical anomalies. In Georgia, Biden overtook Trump with 89 percent of the votes counted. For the next 53 batches of votes counted, Biden led Trump by the same exact 50.05 to 49.95 percent margin in every single batch. It is particularly perplexing that all statistical anomalies and tabulation abnormalities were in Biden’s favor. Clearly something peculiar happened.

    1. This is lifted word for word from a Spectator article. The author worked for the Cato Institute and is currently director of the Democracy Institute, a think tank that takes money from the tobacco industry for pro-tobacco causes.

      Who knows where these bogus numbers come from? The author provides no sources, just as the racist grapefruit here plagiarized the article with no hint as to the list's origin. This is not how responsible thinkers and writers operate. For all I know, the list comes from the troll Rudy Giuliani.

      What I do know is that the Spectator article's main point is idiotic. Basham, the author, says the election results are anomalous in terms of the amount and the type of support each candidate got; therefore, the article insinuates, the results can't be trusted and are likely fraudulent. Unprecedented, therefore fishy--that's the article's main inference.

      The reason this is idiotic is that Trump's entire "presidency" was strange and unprecedented. Does that mean Trump didn't happen? Was it all just a dream, just because nothing like it ever happened before? If only that were true! Alas, new things can occur in the universe. Trends can come to an end and new ones can begin.

      Obviously, new voters in new areas of the country came out to deal with the unprecedented nature of President Trump. So the strangeness didn't start with the 2020 election. It started with Trump's campaign in 2016, with the Obama birther trolling, and it just kept on rolling for four years straight.

      The only thing that's actually strange here is what a libertarian cook like Basham gets out of supporting Trump.

    2. Why are they racist?

    3. I was referring to Crazy Grapefruit who's unapologetically racist, as I recall from some of his earlier comments on my blog. See, for example, the links below:

    4. In my Dec 2, 7:56 AM comment, I referred to "a libertarian cook like Basham." I meant "libertarian kook," of course. I have nothing against cooks.

    5. In my Dec 2, 7:56 AM comment, I referred to "a libertarian cook like Basham." I meant "libertarian kook," of course. I have nothing against cooks.

      A libertarian cook sounds pretty dangerous to me. They'd probably insist on using all sorts of currently illegal food additives & questionable ingredients. And if you complain or later develop stomach cancer, the libertarian cook would just shrug & tell you you are free to eat at some other restaurant.

      I think God might be a libertarian.

    6. Certainly God is an American, so he's half-way to being a libertarian.

      You'd expect liberals to be better cooks than conservatives, because liberals are supposed to care about others, on humanistic grounds, but then postmmodernity came along and spoiled that rationale. Likewise, conservatives are supposed to respect everyone's God-given spirit, but that ends up being an excuse for rampant animalism and a theocratic degradation of the masses.

      What type of person makes for the best cook? Perhaps it's the misanthropic sadist, the kind of no-nonsense artist that runs his kitchen like a totalitarian sweatshop. The point is to create perfect food as an art object. Those who feed off of the art are after-thoughts.

  3. It appears you're correct about Grapefruit. The word racist gets thrown around so much these days I just tend to be a bit skeptical.

  4. "A libertarian cook sounds pretty dangerous to me." You obviously haven't tried Murray Rothbard's meatballs.