Voter Fraud (2016 Discussion)

Donald Trump Voter Fraud Warning: He’s Right & Media Are Wrong to Dismiss It | National Review: 

Not a very long read, but a very worthy one. Voter fraud is WELL documented in A LOT of places, if it looks like a Democrat is going to lose, or if they DO lose, we even hear quite a lot about it all of a sudden. Remember Diebold?

Pretty much everyone else in the world that votes requires an ID to vote. Democrats are well on the way to making that unconstitutional here. This isn't really a very hard position to understand if you care to. The author of the column, John Fund, wrote a good book on the subject a good while back "Stealing Elections" ... you really don't want to look into it if you agree with BO that Trump is crazy to suggest such a thing. 

Obama Stopped Testing For H1N (Oct 2009)

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/swine-flu-cases-overestimated/

The headline is interesting -- OVERestimated when the testing was stopped? 

"In late July [2009], the CDC abruptly advised states to stop testing for H1N1 flu, and stopped counting individual cases. The rationale given for the CDC guidance to forego testing and tracking individual cases was: why waste resources testing for H1N1 flu when the government has already confirmed there's an epidemic?

Some public health officials privately disagreed with the decision to stop testing and counting, telling CBS News that continued tracking of this new and possibly changing virus was important because H1N1 has a different epidemiology, affects younger people more than seasonal flu and has been shown to have a higher case fatality rate than other flu virus strains."

I'll leave it up to go off to the article and explore the fact that even though they were "certain" they had an epidemic, and therefore could stop testng?, their testing wasn't going as expected -- way too many negative tests!

While we waited for CDC to provide the data, which it eventually did, we asked all 50 states for their statistics on state lab-confirmed H1N1 prior to the halt of individual testing and counting in July. The results reveal a pattern that surprised a number of health care professionals we consulted. The vast majority of cases were negative for H1N1 as well as seasonal flu, despite the fact that many states were specifically testing patients deemed to be most likely to have H1N1 flu, based on symptoms and risk factors, such as travel to Mexico.

Also interesting is the guidance to keep on vaccinating for H1N1 even when it is clear there are significant uncertainties -- and how many are infected is very clearly in doubt given that we are "sure it is an epidemic", AND a lot of our tests are negative.

However, the CDC recommendation for those who had "probable" or "presumed" H1N1 flu to go ahead and get vaccinated anyway means the relatively small proportion of those who actually did have H1N1 flu will be getting the vaccine unnecessarily. This exposes them to rare but significant side effects, such as paralysis from Guillain-Barre syndrome.

It also uses up vaccine, which is said to be in short supply. The CDC was hoping to have shipped 40 million doses by the end of October, but only about 30 million doses will be available this month.

The CDC did not respond to questions from CBS News for this report.

Ah, good old Guillain-Barre syndrome -- an apparition from my Swine Flu college youth! 

We aren't too certain of what is going on here, but let's go ahead  and use an experimental vaccine on 40 million people anyway. Hey, what could go wrong? 

Mask Effectiveness, Statistical Manipulation, Covid Hype

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/08/covid-confusion-is-largely-intentional.php

Go read it ... short answer: 

•  Lots of evidence that masks don't work, but we are being manipulated. by statistical malpractice to think they do.
• You are being lied to! Intentionally, at all levels if government / media. 

Why? Because government at all levels screwed up massively, and ALL the "elite" worldwide want you to be biased in favor of "trust in me"! The Deep State is "universal" ... the "One True State (religion).

Following the news on a daily basis, it is hard to escape the conclusion that governments at all levels, along with more or less the entire journalism industry, are intentionally trying to convey an inflated impression of the impact of the Wuhan virus. Further, there is a growing body of empirical evidence, both nationally and internationally, that strongly suggests the cataclysmic shutdowns that have been imposed by governments both here and abroad have been more or less useless. Our governments have made mistakes that have resulted in the devastation of many millions of lives, and our reporters and editors want to keep that fact quiet. This isn’t surprising, of course: we all know what side they are on.

Covid19, Causality, "Real Numbers"

 https://www.vox.com/2020/9/1/21410352/cdc-6-percent-covid-19-deaths-comorbidities

The linked is from Vox, and biased left, however if you read it with glasses not so tinted, it does provide some useful info on cognitive issues like "motivated reasoning".

The CDC recently updated some of their stats to show that only 6% of the deaths listed as being "caused" by Covid19, was Covid19 the ONLY potential causal mechanism present. Determining "cause of death" is more art than science. 

Trump and others have jumped to the conclusion that those were the only deaths caused by Covid19, and most of the media left wing government complex says that is COMPLETELY WRONG ... the commonly reported big number is "right"! (or maybe even low!) 

My guess is that the likely answer is something less than that -- say "40-60K" ... this post is the reasoning that leads to that number. 

Reading the linked article will give you at least a bit more information that the right answer is almost certainly "in between" ... however since the folks writing that article are not immune from all the cognitive  problems described they fall into them and assume that all of the folks reporting the big numbers are correct! Hey, our tribe MUST be right!  We ALL ... readers, statisticians, media people, docs, scientists, Vox article writers, etc have A LOT of biases! What is a Moose to do? 

What I ATTEMPT to do (imperfectly) is to assume that if something completely agrees with my biases, it is nearly certainly "mostly false". The world is nearly never black and white, and it takes EFFORT to get to something approaching truth -- and none of us really "likes" effort, although we will make it if we are motivated by something  -- like if the information challenges our deeply held beliefs, indicates we may be "wrong", "stupid", or such. 

One of the ways we can learn is by paying attention to history, even RECENT history like H1N1 in 2009, when Obama stopped testing as the numbers got too high! There is fairly good evidence that H1N1 was more serious problem than Covid19 -- it killed the young. 

Last year, I had a seizure 4 days after I drove my motorcycle from Rochester to our place in IA. Had I seized on the bike, crashed and died, they would not have done an autopsy. Looking at the chart, they would have likely selected "unintentional injury". Autopsies are not commonly done on people over "60" unless the cause of death is "suspicious" -- or, they are looking for something (like Covid). 

If you go look at the CDC instructions for filling out cause of death, the most interesting relative to this discussion may be the following. 

The elderly decedent should have a clear and distinct etiological sequence for cause of death, if possible. Terms such as senescence, infirmity, old age, and advanced age have little value for public health or medical research. Age is recorded elsewhere on the certificate. When a number of conditions resulted in death, the physician should choose the single sequence that, in his or her opinion, best describes the process leading to death, and place any other pertinent conditions in Part II. If after careful consideration the physician cannot determine a sequence that ends in death, then the medical examiner or coroner should be consulted about conducting an investigation or providing assistance in completing the cause of death

Clearly, this guidance is going to lead to "motivated reasoning"  (discussed in link). At least in Minnesota, the docs got a 6 page memo to help motivate them toward Covid19. At one time it was possible to follow links and actually read the memo, which I did. As someone who worked in a bureaucracy for 34 years (IBM) the memo was CLEAR ... "when in ANY doubt, it's Covid!" So, given the chart above and all of our well known proclivities to "take the easy way", "follow the crowd", and others covered in the link above, it seems extremely and conservatively reasonable to assume that the "reported deaths" can at LEAST be cut in half. My guess is that the likely answer is something significantly less than that -- say "40-60K". 

While we are on "motivated reasoning", one of the common ideas proffered for Covid mortality is: " Covid MUST be CAUSING more death since there are "excess deaths" "!  This is discussed in this post. The simple answer is "correlation is NOT CAUSATION"! Drowning deaths correlate with ice cream sales, but that does not make ice cream a cause of drowning! 

Elderly people are vulnerable to lots of things ... their routine being disrupted, being scared, being cut off from their loved ones, having procedures delayed (even for just "weeks"), etc, etc. We are regularly told -- and to some degree I believe,  that "life events" are a significant causal factor in death -- older people die after "something traumatic" -- death of a loved one, a move, a change in health status, etc. 

The way we have responded to Covid was going to "cause" (be a factor) in more death among vulnerable populations like the elderly, mentally ill, etc. There was GOING to be a "bump" in deaths given isolation, delayed procedures, scare factor, etc. This is why the past response to things like Covid as been "first do no/minimal harm" -- amputation will always "cure" an infection in a limb, but reasonable docs don't go there first. So why did we respond so differently to Corona? If you follow the link, that topic is discussed more deeply, but I think the simple answer (as it is for EVERYTHING in 2020) is TRUMP! 

In my view, the greatest tragedy of this is that it appears that not many people are learning from this event -- they have retreated to their tribal bunkers and other than firing some Social Media pot shots at their perceived "enemies" on the "other side", they are dug in like WWI trench warriors. Ideology kills at least learning -- and typically, people as well! 

Naturally, I think I'm the exceptional "reasonable person" -- don't we all? 

Can we all agree that these are not "reasonable times"? Mass and social media compete for "clicks". The sensational gets "reported",  the reasonable does not. Our "tribes" increasingly attempt to filter what we even see ... and to the extent we become more tribal, or unwilling to even look at the news at all, we become comfortable in our tribal ignorance. 

Masks may or not be effective relative to Covid19, but they certainly ARE effective in increasing government control of the population and in dividing the population politically! 

Yes, I know this is the age of "Identity" -- which often makes the purity of the Pilgrims seem liberal by comparison. We are where we are -- we need to realize that neither the current upper or lower bound is reported is likely to be correct, and neither are any of our assessments -- but if we THINK, we can likely get closer to reality than the extremes. 

Humility and thought would seem far more beneficial than  retreat to opposite incorrect conclusions.

Lincoln, Trump, Mob Rule

 https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/09/01/a_timely_message_on_mob_rule_from_our_16th_president_144114.html

Not very long, just read it! 

Today, the same toxic mix again threatens the survival of our political institutions, and more broadly, our American way of life. But the two situations are largely reversed, with Black Lives Matter (along with their white “antifa” allies) pillaging and destroying some of America’s great cities and threatening to bring their violence to a town or suburb near you. As Attorney General William Barr observed while testifying before the House Judiciary Committee, not one Democratic member of the committee was prepared to denounce what Lincoln called “the mobocratic spirit,” despite the graphic nine-minute video he showed at the opening of his testimony. The mainstream media has largely covered up the violence and lawlessness, while liberal politicians have doubled down on the problem by supporting proposals to defund the police.

Lincoln's lyceum address.   

Wokeness, Critical Theory

https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/the-roots-of-wokeness

Well worth just skipping my excerpts and just reading the relatively short article that describes a key foundation of why I continue to assert we need to "man the barricades" or "Western Civilization" is just "history" ... and really not even that, because such things as supposed "actual history" will be destroyed ... just like pulling down statues.

What the book helps the layperson to understand is the evolution of postmodern thought since the 1960s until it became the doctrine of Social Justice today. Beginning as a critique of all grand theories of meaning—from Christianity to Marxism—postmodernism is a project to subvert the intellectual foundations of western culture. The entire concept of reason—whether the Enlightenment version or even the ancient Socratic understanding—is a myth designed to serve the interests of those in power, and therefore deserves to be undermined and “problematized” whenever possible. Postmodern theory does so mischievously and irreverently—even as it leaves nothing in reason’s place. The idea of objective truth—even if it is viewed as always somewhat beyond our reach—is abandoned. All we have are narratives, stories, whose meaning is entirely provisional, and can in turn be subverted or problematized.

Notice how today it is ALL about "the narrative"!

Just as this theory denies the individual, it also denies the universal. There are no universal truths, no objective reality, just narratives that are expressed in discourses and language that reflect one group’s power over another. There is no distinction between objective truth and subjective experience, because the former is an illusion created by the latter. So instead of an argument, you merely have an identity showdown, in which the more oppressed always wins, because that subverts the hierarchy. These discourses of power, moreover, never end; there is no progress as such, no incremental inclusion of more and more identities into a pluralist, liberal unified project; there is the permanent reality of the oppressors and the oppressed. And all that we can do is constantly expose and eternally resist these power-structures on behalf of the oppressed.

Why don't we just talk this over? 

There is no such thing as persuasion in this paradigm, because persuasion assumes an equal relationship between two people based on reason. And there is no reason and no equality. There is only power. This is the point of telling students, for example, to “check their privilege” before opening their mouths on campus. You have to measure the power dynamic between you and the other person first of all; you do this by quickly noting your interlocutor’s place in the system of oppression, and your own, before any dialogue can occur. And if your interlocutor is lower down in the matrix of identity, your job is to defer and to listen. That’s partly why diversity at the New York Times, say, has nothing to do with a diversity of ideas. Within critical theory, the very concept of a “diversity of ideas” is a function of oppression. What matters is a diversity of identities that can all express the same idea: that liberalism is a con-job. Which is why almost every NYT op-ed now and almost every left-leaning magazine reads exactly alike.

The book he references is on my rather extensive "books to read" list!

I sadly scratched this scab back in 2017 ... it is a painful one! 

Are Events "Real"?

https://www.sciencealert.com/a-new-quantum-paradox-throws-the-foundations-of-observed-reality-into-questiona

Anyone that keeps some tabs on what is happening in phyiics knows that questions like "what is reality"? "When is reality"? "What is an event"?, etc appear to be far less certain than we thought.

I'm pretty much a "Many Worlds" guy ... if you see something happening, it DID happen FOR YOU, and it was and is always happening for YOU ... and as this article talks of, that can be true for some number of observers that share that "time/event slice" ...

We have found a new paradox in quantum mechanics – one of our two most fundamental scientific theories, together with Einstein's theory of relativity – that throws doubt on some common-sense ideas about physical reality.

Take a look at these three statements:

1. When someone observes an event happening, it really happened.

2. It is possible to make free choices, or at least, statistically random choices.

3. A choice made in one place can't instantly affect a distant event. (Physicists call this "locality".)

These are all intuitive ideas, and widely believed even by physicists. But our research, published in Nature Physics, shows they cannot all be true – or quantum mechanics itself must break down at some level. 

This is the strongest result yet in a long series of discoveries in quantum mechanics that have upended our ideas about reality. To understand why it's so important, let's look at this history.

I read about it ... I'm not saying I understand it!!

Defender In Chief, John Yoo

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/donald-trump-defends-presidential-power-john-yoo/

A book that many will see as "Defending Trump". when in fact it is defending the Presidency and Rule of Law (with law being the Constitution).

Our Founders thought the three branches of government would each hold jealousy of their power as a higher consideration than than party loyalty -- especially in the case of the SCOTUS (since they have neither the power of the purse nor the bullet). It would have been hard for a John Marshall to hold petty party division /ideology over "free contraceptives" to be even in the same universe honoring the Constitution, as RGB and her ilk do today.

In today's essentially one party system, where the media, elite, universities, and entire Administrative State are Democrat, the pre-Trump situation was simple. if the President is a D, he is a king, he is an R, he is barely a weak Prime Minister.

Yoo covers the reason that the impeachment farce was totally a farce if anyone cared about the Constitution anymore,  p56.

"An intelligence officer cannot file a whistle-blower complaint against Trump, because Trump is not a member of the intelligence community, and his phone calls with foreign leaders do not qualify as intelligence ops."

Under the Constitution, the President is THE organ of foreign policy for the US government-- the State Department, CIA, NSA, etc REPORT TO HIM ... not vice versa.

Trump’s presidency may signal a similar seismic shift in government, one that extends far beyond his own personal political interests or his low polling. Today’s federal government can trace its lineage directly to the New Deal. Large, expert federal bureaucracies exercising broad powers delegated by Congress continue to govern an economy and society that have evolved far from the world of the 1930s–1960s. Even as America races into a post-industrial society, where information has become the foundation of the most valuable goods and services, it continues to govern itself with forms suited for continent-spanning GMs and IBMs and their matching labor unions. A more spartan government, controlled by a Constitution of limited powers, may well prove more nimble and effective in the new 21st-century world than the government of the New Deal. Even while he recalls America to the society of the past, Trump may have shaken up the political system enough to allow it to adapt to the new economy of social media, networks, and AI. Presidential power provides the critical leverage to spark such significant government change, and it may be Trump’s most unlikely legacy to have preserved the constitutional authorities of his office that make such reform possible. 

Yoo is WAY more optimistic than me here. Likely less than 20% of Americans today have the attention span to read through this blog post -- let alone the book!

Sadly, to return to being a Constitutional Republic, over 50% of the voting public will need that level of comprehension at a MINIMUM!

A Major Milestone In Media Malfeasance

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2004/09/007699.php

Back in the days of "Uncle Walter", "the truth" was whatever he said it was. "And that's the way it is".

That started to sound sketchy to me about the time that Jimmuh Carter started telling us that the world was flat out of oil.

My "trust in media" dial hit empty when Gungda Dan Rather was exposed as a total fraud and Democrat partisan tool by Power Line in the linked. 

It turns out that "Uncle Walter" was not nearly as trustworthy as we thought he was, however the fact that a "big majority" of the country believed him helped unite the country in the same way as most people being practicing Christians with values like "God, family, community, work ethic, etc" being shared by like 80% of the population, was much less dividing than "you have to follow your own truth". 

Thou Shall Have No God But Government

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/08/god-whos-that.php

This kind of thing doesn’t happen randomly. Rather, it is an expression of deeply-held ideological conviction. There are a number of ways to describe the epic disaster of socialism, but perhaps the most basic is that socialism turns the state into an all-powerful god. In order to do that, all competing–i.e., arguably real–Gods must be extinguished. That is what we are seeing from today’s Democratic Party.