Friday Talking Points -- Democrats Should Lean In To Biden's New Pandemic Mandates

[ Posted Friday, September 10th, 2021 – 17:04 UTC ]

This week, President Joe Biden picked a political fight. Or, more accurately, he got up off the sidelines and engaged in a political fight that had already begun, by strongly opposing Republican politicians fighting against basic public health safety measures under the fake guise of "freedom." Biden stood squarely for science and safety, while Republicans are left to fight for recklessness and death. That is precisely how the matter should be framed politically, and so far it looks like Biden is doing a fairly good job of presenting this dichotomy to the public. He's even taking the fight directly to all the GOP governors who are sounding increasingly unhinged about the basic concepts of public health and safety.

Biden gave a speech yesterday where he laid down some new rules (which have yet to take effect). The ones with the biggest impact are vaccine mandates for all federal employees and contractors, all workers at healthcare facilities that take Medicare and Medicaid money (most of them, in other words), and all federally-paid schoolteachers (think: Head Start). Furthermore, private businesses which have 100 employees or more must require either vaccinations or weekly testing for all workers -- or face a $14,000 fine for each individual violation.

To some of those frustrated by the intransigence of the unvaccinated among us, this didn't go nearly far enough. The new workplace-safety rule is not an actual mandate -- the weekly testing option will still be there for those who refuse to get their shots. This rule will, however, cover 80 million workers, or two-thirds of America's workforce. The one thing Biden didn't do, however, was to mandate vaccinations for passengers on airplanes, trains, and buses. Perhaps if this phase of ramping up the pressure on the unvaccinated goes down well politically, Biden might take this step later. It would be significant indeed if he did decide to do this right before both the Thanksgiving and winter holidays.

For now, though, Biden's moves have to be seen as pretty bold. Politically, they should also be seen as a lot less risky than some might now imagine. In actuality, a solid majority of the public -- even in battleground states like Michigan and Georgia -- supports mandates for both masks and vaccination. Bear in mind that nationwide 75 percent of eligible adults have now gotten at least their first shot. Only 25 percent are still resisting.

Up until this point, the Biden administration has largely been trying to coax and wheedle the holdouts to get vaccinated. That changed this week. Instead of begging, now life is going to get tougher for those who still refuse their shots. Those who work for places covered by the new mandate will have to either get vaccinated tout de suite or else find a new place of employment. There will, of course, be exceptions for valid medical reasons why an employee cannot get vaccinated and for valid religious reasons, as always. But even so, a lot of people are going to be faced with a tough choice: get the shots or lose your job. Those working for medium-to-large private employers will also have the option of weekly testing, but even that will add some degree of hassle for the unvaccinated.

Biden has a very strong political case to make, on the subject. Essentially, it can be boiled down to: "freedom isn't free." You have to pay a price for it. In this case, the price for the freedom to refuse vaccination could be losing a job or making it harder to get a new job. As for all of the Republicans screaming "un-American!" (or worse), George Washington himself ordered a mandate for all his troops to be inoculated against smallpox in 1777, during the American Revolution. It's pretty hard to make the "un-American" case when the so-called "Father Of Our Country" is squarely on the other side of the issue (to put it mildly).

Biden's got other political cases to make, too. Such as: "It's the economy, stupid." He can plausibly argue that these measures are necessary to prevent the economy from stalling or even slipping backwards again. That is language that Republicans usually respond to, so it is an especially potent argument.

Biden's basic case is that he is responsible for ending the COVID-19 pandemic once and for all and he tried persuading people without resorting to mandates, but while that worked to a certain degree, it just wasn't enough in the end. The politicization of basic public health measures has meant too large a percentage of the population has still not gotten vaccinated -- which now requires much more drastic action to change.

The best political benefit Biden will reap, however, is that Republicans have already painted themselves into a corner on this one. Republican governors are actually trying to outdo each other on how stupid and destructive a position they can take. Draconian doesn't even come close to the laws and rules they've been enacting in places like Florida and Texas. They are banning local governments from instituting safety measures in the middle of a pandemic -- right in the midst of an enormous spike in deaths. Republicans have staked out the "pro-death" position -- and that's an astoundingly easy thing to counter.

In short, Biden looks like a sane adult. He has reached the end of his patience and has now acted. And just like clockwork, all the Republicans who have already pushed pro-death policies immediately took the bait. Lawsuits have been threatened by governors, other GOP politicians, and even the national party itself. In all of these lawsuits (none of which has any legal chance of success, unless the Supreme Court has also become heavily pro-death), the Republicans will be arguing for the most irresponsible and reckless position imaginable. The more they rant and rave about it, the stronger and saner Biden's position is going to look. Even most of the business community is relieved over Biden's new rules, since it means they won't have to take any political heat for doing what they already wanted to do anyway: institute vaccine mandates.

Today, Biden responded to the Republican pushback with a simple challenge: "Have at it." He then provided a preview as to how this fight will be fought in the court of public opinion: "I am so disappointed, particularly that some of the Republican governors have been so cavalier with the health of these kids, so cavalier with the health of their communities."

That's the basic case. Biden is fighting for sanity, safety, and the end of the pandemic. Republicans are fighting for more children to die, more adults to die, and to extend the pandemic as far into the future as possible. Which of those political positions sounds like a winner to you? Again, please remember that over three-fourths of adults have been vaccinated.

Republicans, meanwhile, aren't even making sense anymore (indeed, if they ever did). Much more on this later, in our talking points section, but for now: a while back, Kevin McCarthy sued the House in an effort to stop the emergency proxy voting rules that Nancy Pelosi instituted early on in the pandemic. But unfortunately for him, in the time from when he originally filed this suit (which is now under consideration at the Supreme Court) until now, nearly 100 Republicans have used proxy voting to their advantage. This even included non-pandemic (and purely political) reasons. Here's the basic story:

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) is asking the Supreme Court to review and overturn the House's proxy voting rules, which were adopted last year to allow lawmakers to cast votes remotely as a pandemic precaution.

In a statement Thursday, McCarthy blasted proxy voting as a "power grab" and "a raw abuse of power" by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who along with many Democrats pushed for the historic rule change at the beginning of the pandemic. The House adopted the new protocols in May 2020 in a 217-189 vote along party lines.

"Although the Constitution allows Congress to write its own rules, those rules cannot violate the Constitution itself, including the requirement to actually assemble in person," McCarthy said. "Since its adoption 14 months ago, proxy voting has shattered 231 years of legislative precedent and shielded the majority from substantive policy debates and questions, effectively silencing the voices of millions of Americans."

Left unmentioned was that lawmakers from both parties, including nearly 100 GOP members of the House, have since taken advantage of the ability to cast votes remotely -- and not always for reasons directly related to COVID.

In February, several Republican lawmakers skipped House floor votes, instead asking proxies to vote on their behalf, citing the "ongoing public health emergency" in proxy letters filed with the House clerk. However, those members of Congress were actually spotted at or expected to attend the Conservative Political Action Conference in Orlando.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who opposed the vote to allow proxy voting in the House, defended his designation of a proxy for the week of CPAC.

"I am O.G. pro-remote voting," Gaetz said then. "I wrote an essay in the Washington Examiner about it. Remote voting is a great thing for the country, and we should do it more."

So while some Republicans are gung-ho about proxy voting, McCarthy will argue before the Supreme Court that proxy voting somehow (he doesn't specify how, of course, since the idea is pure codswallop) "silenc[es] the voices of millions of Americans." They can't even get their crazy stories straight, these days, it seems.

The other big legal news this week was the announcement by the attorney general that the Department of Justice will be suing Texas for their new law which strips women of their constitutional right to an abortion. This announcement comes roughly a week late, but better late than never, we suppose.

The negotiations over the budget reconciliation bill began in earnest this week, as the House returned to business yesterday. Look for some epic battles to be fought next week, as this process gets more intense.

Also teed up is a voting rights bill that has been rewritten specifically for Senator Joe Manchin, who is still under the delusion that he can convince 10 Republican senators to vote for it. So that should prove interesting (when he is proven wrong).

What else? Kellyanne Conway and Sean Spicer and 16 other Trump toadies were unceremoniously fired from cushy sinecures on advisory boards to the military academies this week. We offer up a hearty: "Good riddance!" to them all....

Donald Trump praised Robert E. Lee (because of course he did) as the statue of the leader of the treasonous and seditionist Confederate army was removed from the former capital of the Confederacy, in Richmond, Virginia.

In other disrespecting-America news, Trump will be memorializing 9/11 this year by selling his own pay-per-view commentary on a boxing match for $49.99 on the day the planes hit the buildings 20 years ago. Just for one tiny second, imagine what Republicans would say if a Democrat dared do something that crass and disrespectful.

And finally, we end with a headline (and subhead) that pretty much took the cake in the "hilarious headlines we never thought we'd see" department. It's so funny we aren't even going to provide any further information... just a link (for those interested in further details):

Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton Denies Setting Zebras Free In D.C. Suburbs

"My alibi is solid," said the Democratic lawmaker. "I hope the owners find the zebras and that all involved live long, full lives."

We do too, of course. Because we simply can't sanction the idea of Prince George's County, Maryland becoming an open-air nature preserve.


Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week

This one may be premature. That's a good way of saying we might wind up with egg on our face. But we're betting this won't be the case.

President Biden was a strong contender for the big award this week for taking such a strong political stand on the pandemic. But he really owes his political boldness in large degree to two other Democrats.

Which is why we're giving this week's Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award to California Governor Gavin Newsom and Virginia's former governor and current gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe.

McAuliffe probably deserves more credit than Newsom, but the way the political schedule is going to happen means that Newsom will be the first to prove the point that leaning in to COVID-19 safety restrictions is really an excellent political move for Democratic candidates and officeholders to make.

The reason we give McAuliffe more credit than Newsom is he was really the first to get out in front of the issue. Two states (New Jersey and Virginia) always are heavily scrutinized the year after a presidential election, because that is when they elect their governors. Virginia is odd because it has a law that says that governors cannot serve two consecutive terms, so McAuliffe had to wait for his chance to run again (while the current Democratic governor of Virginia won't be eligible to run until next time around).

McAuliffe started in early by painting a stark contrast between himself and the Republican frontrunners. He framed the issue around safety and pandemic restrictions. It's a simple case to make: if the Republican were to win, it would set Virginia back. Keeping a Democrat in control meant not just safety, but an earlier end to the pandemic itself -- meaning a faster return to true normalcy. He was making this case even before the Delta surge, because he saw it as a political winner.

Newsom is a little late to this game, but he did make a timely pivot. His campaign against the recall in California started with him highlighting different subjects, but roughly a month ago he decided it would be a better idea to paint his likely Republican opponent as an extremist who would end all mask mandates and take California in the same direction as Florida and Texas. Newsom's ads have not exactly been subtle about making this point, either.

But as we said, Newsom will likely prove the point sooner. The recall votes will be counted next Tuesday, and Newsom is now heavily favored to beat the recall effort. We've been predicting at least a double-digit margin of victory for him for over a month now, because unlike the national punditry we simply didn't believe the one bad poll in July which showed Newsom neck-and-neck in the "likely voters" category. We wrote about this at length earlier in the week, if anyone's interested.

But because all the national pundits did freak out over that one outlier poll, they now have a storyline that goes something like this: "Gavin Newsom was in trouble two months ago, but then he changed his campaign tactics to focus on his strong pandemic response and how all the safety measures he has instituted will disappear if he is recalled -- and this tactic worked brilliantly." We don't really believe this is true -- we think the fact that this will only be the second universal mail-in ballot election in California's history has a lot more to do with it, in fact. But that will indeed become the national narrative after Newsom's victory.

And this is a good thing, in the end. Especially if McAuliffe wins another resounding victory in November. Taken together, this should convince a whole lot more Democrats (both in office and those running for office) to be a lot more bold in standing up for mandates and safety, and painting Republicans as reckless and irresponsible. Joe Biden is now a convert to this way of thinking, in fact. And as we have already said, we think this is a winning issue for Democrats.

So this week, even before the recall results are in, we are going to go out on a limb and hand the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award to Terry McAuliffe and Gavin Newsom, for pioneering the tactic of standing up strongly for safety measures and ending the pandemic as early as possible. It showed leadership on both their parts, which is why they have both earned this week's MIDOTW.

[Congratulate Governor Gavin Newsom on his official contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts. Terry McAuliffe, however, is a private citizen and we do not as a rule link to campaign websites, so you'll have to look his contact information up yourselves, sorry.]


Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week

File this in the "with friends like these..." category.

This week, President Biden was forced to withdraw his nominee to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (usually just referred to as "A.T.F."). This was made a Senate-confirmable position a while back, and since then it has proven almost impossible to get anyone confirmed to the job.

This week showed that Biden's choice will also not become the head of the agency. But this development wasn't due to Republican resistance (although all Republican senators seem to be lined up against him), but rather by two Democrats and an independent. Since he's not a Democrat, Maine's Angus King is ineligible for the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week, but that doesn't stop us from handing it to the other two: Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Jon Tester of Montana.

Here's a pretty good take on the story:

The White House has reportedly decided to withdraw the nomination of David Chipman to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Chipman had run into resistance in the Senate that apparently made his confirmation impossible. Was it a scandal in his past? A lack of qualifications? A bizarre and disturbing ideology?

No, what got Chipman into trouble in his nomination to run the agency in charge of enforcing federal gun laws and stopping illegal gun trafficking is that Chipman was seen as insufficiently pro-gun.

The agency's mission is to investigate "armed violent offenders and career criminals, narcotics traffickers, narco-terrorists, violent gangs, and domestic and international arms traffickers." And being insufficiently pro-gun is a disqualification?

Consider that for a moment. What if I expressed reservations about the nominee for attorney general because he is anti-crime and that could lead him to pursue some kind of weird anti-crime agenda at the Department of Justice? Or if I said the next administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency had better not be too opposed to pollution?

. . .

Chipman is a former A.T.F. official who spent 25 years at the agency; there wasn't any suggestion that he was unqualified. The problem was that he had acted as an advisor to Giffords, the organization founded by former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, which advocates for stricter gun laws.

This led to him being labeled by Republicans as an extremist who might take his crazy anti-gun ideas to A.T.F. But what killed his nomination in the end was a lack of support from conservative Democrats in the Senate, including Angus King (I-Me.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), and of course, Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.). While they've expressed vague concerns about his nomination, none seems to have said anything specific -- and they've been targeted by lobbying from pro-gun groups in their states to reject Chipman's nomination.

As we said, with friends like these...

[Contact Senator Joe Manchin on his Senate contact page, and Senator Jon Tester on his Senate contact page, to let them know what you think of their actions.]


Friday Talking Points

Volume 634 (9/10/21)

Oh, before we begin today, we have a program note for regular readers. Next Friday, we are taking a vacation day. So there will be no new Friday Talking Points column next week. We might come to regret this, as it could prove to be a pivotal week for the budget negotiations in Congress, but we will be writing new columns from Monday through Thursday, so there's that, at least. Fair warning to everyone....

OK, since this is the start of the professional football season, we are going to deploy a football metaphor which describes this week's talking points: we are punting.

It's not exactly "fourth and long," but this week we are providing a do-it-yourself worksheet for Democrats to create their own talking points. And even using "we" in that previous sentence isn't really accurate. Today's talking points segment consists of an overview of a memo from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (the House political committee tasked with electing more Democrats in the midterms), and then the full text of the memo itself. We rarely punt to just copying and pasting like this, so we hope everyone will forgive us, but as we've said throughout today's column we really think this is a winning issue for Democrats, and will become even more potent the more Republican governors try to defend their anti-science and anti-safety stances, both in courts of law and in the court of public opinion.

Most of the memo itself is just an extensive list of all the idiotic and dangerous things Republican members of Congress have been saying, of late (the online PDF version of the memo has links to back up each and every one of the bullet points). These positions are all undeniably extreme, and the more the public hears about them the more it paints the entire Republican Party as being dangerously (and recklessly) out of touch with reality. Which is why we found we simply could not pick and choose only seven of them for this week's talking points.

We agree fully agree with the overview article -- this is a winning issue for Democrats:

Here's a midterm message for you: Judging by the GOP's continuing slide into extremist and destructive behavior in the face of a surging COVID-19, electing more Republicans to positions of responsibility right now would likely mean more economic malaise, sickness, misery and death.

This is what Democrats come very close to saying in a new memo about the 2022 elections that their House campaign arm is now distributing. The memo is an important marker: It suggests Democrats are finally leaning into prosecuting the case against Republicans for actively impairing the nation's response to the COVID-19 resurgence.

. . .

The memo from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee directly ties GOP extremism on COVID to the health of the country -- and, importantly, to our prospects for economic recovery and a return to normalcy.

"House Republicans have lied about its impact" and "dangerously rejected medical guidance to wear masks and social distance," the memo says, adding that "extremist Republicans" have "even encouraged Americans to consume horse and cattle dewormer."

House Republicans and GOP candidates have spread disinformation about the virus, have staged epic fake-outrage fests about mask mandates, have demagogued about vaccines in ridiculous, hallucinogenic and obscenely wretched ways, and have pushed the rankest of absurdities to undermine confidence in federal health officials.

Critically, the memo notes that if Republicans continue impeding our COVID response, that will stand in the way of "getting Americans back to work." And it's true that the backsliding on COVID is showing serious signs of harming the economic recovery.

That's how easy it is to turn this memo into even-more-potent political rhetoric. The talking points truly just write themselves, folks. So without further ado, here is what the Democratic Party has provided for this week's talking points (emphasis in original):

Interested Parties Memo: House Democrats Ring The Alarm, House Republicans' Deadly, Dangerous, and Divisive COVID-19 Lies Threaten America's Health and Economic Progress
TO: Interested Parties
FR: Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee
DT: 09.09.2021


Since COVID-19 began threatening the health and safety of the American people and taken the lives of over 650,000 Americans including 425 children, House Republicans have lied about its impact, dangerously rejected medical guidance to wear masks and social distance, and extremist Republicans like Reps. Louie Gohmert and Yvette Herell (NM-02) have even encouraged Americans to consume horse and cattle dewormer in lieu of the proven COVID-19 vaccine.

President Biden and House Democrats have rushed to get Americans back to work and crush the COVID-19 virus and rebuild our economy with the American Rescue Plan. We've added 4.5 million new jobs since January 2021, returning the nation's economy to pre-pandemic levels and put more than 374 million shots in arms. But House Republicans are threatening our economic progress by doubling down on their deadly lies. With the rising Delta variant, COVID cases are back up around 100,000 per day and schoolchildren are filling up ICU beds. Still, extremist House Republicans like Reps. Majorie [sic] Taylor Greene and Madison Cawthorn have taken to social media and blanketed the airwaves of conservative media outlets where they are welcome to spread lies and misinformation that is endangering the health and safety of the American people.

Despite their abysmal failure at handling COVID-19, House Republicans' Extremist Ringleaders Kevin McCarthy and Tom Emmer have a moronic proposal for the American people; hand them control of Congress next November and usher in their clan of dangerous extremists. McCarthy and Emmer's band of extremist hopefuls are lusting for a starring role in the dangerous circus that's threatening American lives:

  • Rep. Yvette Herrell (NM-02) has repeatedly promoted the use of the animal dewormer (Ivermectin) and sponsored legislation to ban vaccine mandates for airlines and universities
  • Anna Paulina Luna (FL-13) was not vaccinated, pushed hydroxychloroquine as an alternative to vaccination, and compared vaccine requirements to racial segregation and Nazi Germany
  • Rep. Mike Garcia (CA-25) spent the past few months opposing mask and vaccine mandates, calling it "dangerous" and an infringement upon people's constitutional rights if canvassers went door-to-door to encourage vaccination
  • Even amid a deadly surge in COVID-19, Rep. Carlos Gimenez (FL-26) said that social media companies should be prohibited from censoring COVID-19 misinformation and disinformation
  • Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (GA-14) was even suspended from using her Twitter account for spreading lies that suggested COVID-19 wasn't deadly for certain groups deemed vulnerable by health experts
  • Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (IA-02) falsely claimed children could not transmit COVID-19 to adults or to other children and criticized social media companies for taking down COVID misinformation
  • Rep. Jeff Van Drew (NJ-02) cosponsored legislation to ban vaccine passports, an effort that could make air travel less safe
  • Rep. Madison Cawthorn (NC-11) took to Right-wing media suggesting President Biden's door-knocking effort to ensure Americans could get vaccinated infringed on people's rights and that next "They could then go door to door to take your Bibles,"
  • Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (NY-11) even led a lawsuit seeking to block New York City's vaccine mandate, calling it an "unacceptable overreach"
  • Rep. Claudia Tenney (NY-22) opposed vaccination requirements and falsely claimed that people who already had COVID-19 did not need to get vaccinated
  • Rich McCormick (GA-07), a practicing emergency room doctor, despite his medical background downplayed the danger of the Delta variant as hospitalizations were on the rise in Georgia and falsely claimed that "the spike in cases has been overblown." McCormick also discouraged vaccinations, claiming it "makes no sense" to "[vaccinate] people to protect other people who are unvaccinated" and said "who really cares" if children get vaccinated,
  • Karoline Leavitt (NH-01) called Americans who protected themselves and their community from COVID-19 by becoming vaccinated were "guinea pigs," and wrongly claimed Dr. Fauci was a "fraud" who was "in on [the COVID-19 virus] from the beginning,"
  • Alek Skarlatos (OR-04) spoke at an event with anti-vaccine protesters and opposed COVID-19 safety measures like vaccine and mask mandates.
  • Teddy Daniels (PA-08) claimed liberals wanted to kill people who refused COVID vaccines
  • Rep. Scott Perry (PA-10) spread lies about vaccines, hydroxychloroquine, and ivermectin, sponsored legislation to prohibit mandating vaccines, wouldn't encourage his constituents to get vaccinated, and mocked Biden for saying people who weren't vaccinated could die from COVID-19
  • Monica De La Cruz-Hernandez (TX-15) failed an Associated Press fact check for falsely claiming that bringing COVID-19 vaccination information door-to-door would violate HIPAA,
  • Derrick Van Orden (WI-03) mocked efforts to increase vaccination rates, calling programs to promote vaccination "absolutely bizarre" and compared virus contact tracing to what the "KGB used to do in the Soviet Union and the Stasi used to do in East Germany"
  • Jarome Bell (VA-02) made numerous inflammatory statements opposing COVID-19 vaccines, even invoking Americans living with AIDS

BOTTOM LINE: House Republicans have made clear that the health and safety of the American people comes second to their politics. If we lose progress in our fight against this virus and getting Americans back to work there will be no wonder about who is to blame. The American people simply can't afford to give extremist House Republicans control of Congress. The health and well-being of our people and our economy simply cannot afford it.

-- Chris Weigant


Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground


74 Comments on “Friday Talking Points -- Democrats Should Lean In To Biden's New Pandemic Mandates”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    No FTP column next week but, there will indeed be a CW Sunday Night Music Festival and Dance Party. Just because. :)

    Have fun on your vacation day ... and, on Sunday Night!

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'll play something by the Dead, okay?

  3. [3] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    We can forgive you, CW, for "punting." It's true, there is a goldmine of FTPs in there.

    K, Elizabeth. I have a couple ideas for Sunday Night Canadian* Music Appreciation Festival and Dance Party.
    *and other countries

    I love rock operas (e.g. Tommy, Jesus Crist Superstar) so whaddaya think about "fave songs from rock operas?"

    Or, British Invasion -- with no 'Murican nor Canuck songs, period. You can do this, Elizabeth!

  4. [4] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Grateful Dead?


  5. [5] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Singer songwriter?

    Hearts and Bones.

    The Late Great Johnny Ace a tribute to John Lennon.


  6. [6] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    What have you got against Canadian music?

  7. [7] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Both ideas are good - let's do it!

  8. [8] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    What day is this?

  9. [9] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Biden got up off the sidelines and joined a political fight that had already begun?

    More like Biden joined one of the tiny skits in the show.

    The best the Deathocrats can hope to get from painting the Republikillers as pro-death is only to paint them as more pro-death than the Deathocrats.

    Both CMPs work for the big money interests which is killing millions of people at home and around the world on a regular basis.

    While people here remember how terrible 9-11 was there are many around the world that thanks in part to the U.S. don't have a terrible memory from twenty years ago to remember. For them it's just Tuesday.

    It's time you got off the sidelines and joined a real political fight that has been waged by one side for decades- big money infecting and corrupting our political process.

    We need to make it "mandatory" for candidates to run small donor only campaigns by refusing to vote for candidates that take big money.

    As the candidates can't win elections without votes it is the best option available to achieve the goal.

    Your promoting the death show vacation is over.

    Take the vaccine and get to work.

  10. [10] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    So don, does that political horse paste you're peddling come in apple flavor?

  11. [11] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    I would have thought that today some Weigantian might editorialize on the subject "What are the takeaways to be gleaned from the 9-11-01 experience?

    One that occurs to me would be that thanks to that experience, we should realize that under the proper circumstances, things that we Americans once considered incomprehensible are now totally comprehensible.

    For instance, who among us would ever have even imagined, much less believed, that young men living in a polygamous society could ever get so sex-starved horny as to buy into the promise by some bearded Imam that those who are willing to commit mass murder of innocent civilians followed by committing suicide would be rewarded in an afterlife with six dozen virgins???

  12. [12] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:


    That the CIA has forgotten that a pawn becomes much more powerful when it reaches the end of the board...

  13. [13] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    you'd choose apple don over apple pie? what's this world coming to! you're just buying into the big cake show, when pie would clearly be so much better.

  14. [14] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    and in response to your question, caddy [fpc], "whaddup" is that pie is a simple solution to every complex problem. unlike other such solutions, pie generally tastes quite good and rarely does any harm.

  15. [15] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


    What have you got against Canadian music?


    Both ideas are good - let's do it!

    What day is this?

    I don't have a damned thing against Canuck music, nor Murican music. I greatly like Weigantia's kind spirited BOARD MOTHER, and I want to plumb her favorite non- North American music.

    IF it's a little scary not getting to indoctrinate us in the untold wonders of all things Canadia, think of it as a personal growth opportunity. A gift from a Yankee who will someday sip Coffee with Ellisville Miller at an outdoor Cafe that has a fab view, in Vancouver. Bring your SigOth if'n you have one!

    Signed --

    Decidedly NOT hitting on Elizabeth-- just want to meet the face behind the words. Any excuse to visit Vancouver for the first time, in other words.

    You wanna do BOTH ideas this Sunday?

    Um, for once I'm feeling like today is Saturday -- and I'm right!

    When one lives in the "socialist dystopia" that Countri-Cali is purported to be, one lives in blissful sloth (with world class weed to boot) barely knowing what day of the week it is.

  16. [16] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    See, I even know the name of your SigOth, Ellisville Miller!

    I'm not kidding. The force is strong in me, Elizabeth!

  17. [17] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    So pie is like O'Douls... tastes good but doesn't get one in trouble?

    What's not to like?

  18. [18] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    [11] C. R. Stucki wrote:

    I would have thought that today some Weigantian might editorialize on the subject "What are the takeaways to be gleaned from the 9-11-01 experience?

    One that occurs to me would be...

    AND one that would occur to me is that our reaction to 9-11 fits with the interning of our fellow citizen Japanese-Americans after Peatl Harbor and blacklisting/career busting in the McCarthy days.

    BOTTOM LINE IS that America is perfectly willing to act unconstitutionally against perceived threats once something scares them enough.

  19. [19] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    For instance, who among us would ever have even imagined, much less believed, that young men living in a polygamous society could ever get so sex-starved horny as to buy into the promise by some bearded Imam that those who are willing to commit mass murder of innocent civilians followed by committing suicide would be rewarded in an afterlife with six dozen virgins.

    First off, we don't know that these jihadists ain't getting any. I think ideology rather than "incel" status is the main motivator.

    Second, from the Virgins? What Virgins? POLITICO article,

    First, there is no mention anywhere in the Koran of the actual number of virgins available in paradise, and second, the dark-eyed damsels are available for all Muslims, not just martyrs.

  20. [20] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Hey, Weigantia!

    Since our Blogmaster is giving himself next Friday off why don't WE do our own FTPs?

  21. [21] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    As for me, I'm working on a "Every thing you need to know about post-occupation Afghanistan/What will the Taliban do?" Primer. The Middle East and Central Asia are of great interest to me and I'd like to share what I've learned.

  22. [22] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    As the candidates can't win elections without votes it is the best option available to achieve the goal.

    Never have more incorrect and uninformed words polluted the pixels of the comments section.

    Don Qui no matter how many times you want the reality of elections to be different they will not change.

    You can have an election with 5,000,002 votes and have 5,000,000 of the voters following the One Dumbman sham of writing themselves in and one guy gets two votes guess what? They guy who received two valid votes wins. It is how elections work.

    While you try to think of a way around the reality of elections, perhaps you can regale us with real details about how you are going to get all of those invalid ballots "counted" for One Dumbman. You know things like who exactly are you going to FOIA, what information you are going to ask for, what you are going to do with that personal information once you get it (if they will give it to you in the first place). We want the kind of details that the devil likes.

  23. [23] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Yippee -- man's best friend:

    Yesterday, Rachel Maddow revealed that dogs are being deployed at Miami International Airport to detect Covid in incoming passengers. They can even be trained to detect specific variants of Covid (e.g. the Delta variant, the Mu varient.)

    Fast forward to 14:00 and it lasts 6 minutes.

  24. [24] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Guys and Gals, could we get a little Weigantia "audience participation" on a Saturday afternoon? Or am I the only one who needs to get a life haha?

  25. [25] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Signed --

    Damned mic crapped out in SoCal once again.

  26. [26] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    Another quote from this same article. FYI Islam is very much aga

    Modern apologists of Islam try to downplay the evident materialism and sexual implications of such descriptions, but, as the Encyclopaedia of Islam says, even orthodox Muslim theologians such as al Ghazali (died 1111 CE) and Al-Ash'ari (died 935 CE) have "admitted sensual pleasures into paradise". The sensual pleasures are graphically elaborated by Al-Suyuti (died 1505 ), Koranic commentator and polymath. He wrote: "Each time we sleep with a houri we find her virgin. Besides, the penis of the Elected never softens. The erection is eternal; the sensation that you feel each time you make love is utterly delicious and out of this world and were you to experience it in this world you would faint. Each chosen one [ie Muslim] will marry seventy [sic] houris, besides the women he married on earth, and all will have appetising vaginas."

  27. [27] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I worked all day today and I'm tired.

  28. [28] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    Another quote from this same article.

    Modern apologists of Islam try to downplay the evident materialism and sexual implications of such descriptions, but, as the Encyclopaedia of Islam says, even orthodox Muslim theologians such as al Ghazali (died 1111 CE) and Al-Ash'ari (died 935 CE) have "admitted sensual pleasures into paradise". The sensual pleasures are graphically elaborated by Al-Suyuti (died 1505 ), Koranic commentator and polymath. He wrote: "Each time we sleep with a houri we find her virgin. Besides, the penis of the Elected never softens. The erection is eternal; the sensation that you feel each time you make love is utterly delicious and out of this world and were you to experience it in this world you would faint. Each chosen one [ie Muslim] will marry seventy [sic] houris, besides the women he married on earth, and all will have appetising vaginas."

    For the record, Islam is very much against suicide. What's also interesting is how Christianity is far more uptight about sensuality in heaven.

  29. [29] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    But, now you know how I feel most Sunday nights around here.

    We need new blood, I tell you!

    I've only invited one person ever to this blog and he hasn't showed up ... yet. But, I know he'd be lots of fun on Sunday nights ... if he wasn't singing somewhere ...

  30. [30] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    In that case, to quote John Blutarsky,

    My advice to you is to
    Start drinking heavily.

  31. [31] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Yeah, Elizabeth, I feel you. Trouble is, sometimes when Sunday night rolls around I'm either distractejust not in the mood. But I sooner or later listen to the songs. And I've definitely learned about some killer new music (Canadian, and not) that is CAF.

  32. [32] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    So let us "drive on" as they say in the U.S Army, in which I served for 2 years 5 months and a wakeup.

    I really appreciate that you chose to post ur songs with the title. It wasn't THAT bad and it helps me to build my library.

  33. [33] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Tell you what, my Dear Elizabeth...

    You agree to British Invasion no Canuck nor Murican music and the next Sunday we do all Canadian Artists.

    This way I'll get turned on to some of your British faves and thence flesh out my Canuck Hall of Fame library.

    Win-win, Baby

  34. [34] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    And since we're on the subject of Canadian music, is there a Canuck Jazz scene? A metal scene? What about reggae?

  35. [35] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You mean, you don't want me to use the fancy links??

  36. [36] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I played some metal last week and we have the Metal Queen, you know.

    I'll play some more.

    And, I posted a few weeks ago the full concert at the Montreux Jazz Festival, featuring Canada's own Powder Blues Band.

    So, tell me, what is the difference between jazz and the blues?

  37. [37] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Don't know a lot about the current scene of things with respect to Jazz, metal or reggae ... but, I intend to find out first hand when this pandemic thing is over.

  38. [38] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Don't know about Reggae but, probably ...

    Our own Colin James is doing a big show tonight, as we speak, at the Big Blues Bender in Las Vegas!

  39. [39] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    K, lemme start with the Blues. It originated in the Murican South and features a "1-4-5-1" musical sequence, with variations sometimes added for fun. Yep, music theory. Yet you and I instantly recognize a "Blues based song."

    Rock n Roll is based on this so called "Blues Progression." For example, the Rolling Stones started out as a bunch of British blokes packed in a flat and stone in love with the Blues. Likewise Led Zeppelin is Blues based.

    Jazz is way more complicated than Rock. My late Mother was a classical music snob and I regrettably never got her far enough into the Progressive Rock/Jazz scene to "represent," to show her that you don't need to rely upon dead white men to hear good music.

    Best that I can tell ya is that Jazz is halfway between pop music and musically super complicated classical muaic.

  40. [40] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Yep, metal is good. Neil Young and Paul Simon are good. So are Tupac and Eminem, as is Bluegrass and Jewish Klezmer music. Just depends on my mood.

  41. [41] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Me, too.

  42. [42] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Only two kinds of music, I always say ... :)

  43. [43] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Well, I'm gonna post Tom Lavin (origianl PRiSM bass guitarist) and the legendary Powder Blues band and their fabulous performance at the Montreux Jazz Festival in Switzerland again, one of these Sunday nights - Tom and the boys are just so much fun!

  44. [44] 
    nypoet22 wrote:


    how very modern of them! i mean, what the heck would anybody think heaven would be like? :D


  45. [45] 
    nypoet22 wrote:
  46. [46] 
    nypoet22 wrote:


    is tom lavin related to folk singer christine lavin?

  47. [47] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Elections will not change?

    Since WHEN?

    But elections don't have to change for One Demand to work in changing elections.

    Your theory is flawed and inconsistent.

    If your theory that only voting for a candidate that can win the current election is the only purpose for voting, then anyone living in a district gerrymandered for Deathocrats that votes for a Republikiller or in a district gerrymandered for Republikillers that votes for a Deathocrat is voting for no valid reason.

    What purpose could there be for those people to be voting for a candidate that can't win?

    They have to count the number of votes cast. They have to count the total of those votes for candidates.

    The total number of votes cast for candidates subtracted from the total votes cast provides the number of votes not counted which gives a count of the write in votes not counted which serves the purpose of the write in vote which was not to elect a candidate in this election.

    It is unlikely that in an election with 5,000,000 people participating in One Demand and polls showing what would be a statistically zero support for non-small donor candidates that the 5,000,000 would have to write in a vote. There would be small donor candidates to choose from.

    And even if they did have to in the current election it would be even less likely that there would not be small donor candidates to vote for in the NEXT election.

    Freedom of Information requests go the agencies that have the information that the people seeking the information want. Vote totals are not personal information.

    You are the one trolling by spreading disinformation.

    Grow up.

  48. [48] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    On the "bright" side, my patience is wearing thin just like Biden.

    So I have decided to "join" those here that tell other commenters to go away and call for yellow cards to be issued. You should be proud that you have converted me!

    On this thread, Bashi. Nypoet and GT go away.

    CW give these trolls a yellow card.

  49. [49] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Hey, everyone!

    Has anyone been following what happened surrounding the last strike by the US military in Afghanistan on August 29, killing a supposed ISIS facilitator in which this man and many children were killed?

    The New York Times and Washington Post forensic investigations have revealed that this drone strike was a tragic mistake, coming as the US military ends its presence there.

    What do you all think about this? What do we know about the US military drone program and does it finally need more congressional oversight?

  50. [50] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


    Not sure about that Lavin relationship but, it is possible. Because, Tom is from Chicago but moved to Vancouver early in his career.

  51. [51] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Vancouver in the sixties through eighties was THE musical place to be!

  52. [52] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:


    Going for the word salad defense?

    Anyway, what goode trickle is trying to get through your thick skull, evidently unsuccessfully, is that voting mechanics and the cost of recounts (or FOIA requests for manually counting ballots which would likely be the same) is heavily not in your favor. First off, states that don't allow write in candidates might not even have a place to even fake a write in. A touch screen voting system might only have the option for candidate A, Candidate B, Candidate C and Next. A scantron like ballot may only have fill in dots or punch spots for real candidates. How do you write in votes? How would you count them if the computer only differentiates between a vote for a candidate, no vote or multiple vote? The other problem is the cost. For Trump to recount Wisconsin it would have cost him $3 million if the result was not changed. Does OD have $3 mil per state ready for the next election? Ya, thought not...

    The number of votes vs invalid votes does not support you either. How do you differentiate between the OD candidate and Jo Bob who wrote in his dog? Back to the $3 Million per state to figure that out manually...

  53. [53] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    Don Qui 47...

    The total number of votes cast for candidates subtracted from the total votes cast provides the number of votes not counted which gives a count of the write in votes not counted which serves the purpose of the write in vote which was not to elect a candidate in this election.

    No matter how many times you keep saying this it is still incorrect. One would think that the "leader" of a "movement" would know these things. Unfortunately for you Don Qui not everyone reports election results like they do in New Jersey,(in a statistically significant 84 percent of the country) most states/counties/ precincts simply present registered voters, ballots cast and who the ballots were cast for. In more information free and transparent states they will also report over and under votes. They simply do not count write in ballots that are cast for non-registered write in candidates.

    While you may think that I am just making it up, unfortunately it is the law of what constitutes a valid ballot that is eligible to be counted in 34 states ( again a statistically significant number, not "some").

    Freedom of Information requests go the agencies that have the information that the people seeking the information want. Vote totals are not personal information.

    Thank you for the lesson Pointdexter... I had no idea.

    Let's try this again... in a previous alternate reality you had stated that YOU were going to get the uncounted ballots counted for One Dumbman even if you had to FOIA them to get the ballots so you could get them "counted" for the purpose for which they were cast. Again your words not mine.

    Considering that states do not track why a ballot is invalid to be counted nor do they have a statistic on rejected ballots (like they do in NJ) presumably the physical ballots would have to be FOIA'd to enable you to "count" them.

    Since I am the one spreading "disinformation" one would think you would jump at the chance to enlighten us with your superior knowledge of election law.

    So again I am asking what exactly the process is going to be to get the ballots? Who are you going to FOIA? What then are you going to do with said information? How are you going to keep it safe? How then does all of this translate into "counted" votes exactly? You know the kind of things a "leader" of a serious election advocacy group has planned out.

  54. [54] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:


    I'm totally ignorant of the teachings of the Muslim holy writ (Koran or whatever), also of any theological interpretations of respected scriptorians of the faith, but I definitely have heard on multiple occasions that the 15 hijackers were promised by somebody whose opinions they valued, the benefits of martyrdom, in the form of specifically, "six dozen virgins" in the hereafter.

    Doesnn't matter if the Imam was lying, matters only that the 15 hijackers believed it enough to kill themselves.

  55. [55] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    You betcha, Stuck.

    It's kind of like all the criminal defendants in the January 6th Insurrection believed that the only way that Trump didn't win reelection was because the election was "rigged."

    Ignorance, like Covid, knows no national borders.

  56. [56] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Welcome, everyone, to the CW Sunday Night Music Festival and Dance Party where we put politics aside for a few hours. Though, our songs may be as political as we wish - just no political commentary to go along with them. Ahem.

    Caddy made a couple of great recommendations for us to focus on for our little shindig tonight - songs from rock operas and the British invasion. I say we can handle both!

    Who shall go first?

  57. [57] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Right, I'll go first! Heh.

    Well, this is one of my all-time favourites from a rock opera ...

    The Who - Pinball Wizard

  58. [58] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Of course, I love Elton John's version, too! I might even like this one better ...

    Elton John - Pinball Wizard

  59. [59] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    When Ed Sullivan introduced the Beatles on the evening of February 9, 1964 I can imagine that many future North American rock stars were immediately inspired.

    Rocket Norton of PRiSM fame went from accordian to drums shortly thereafter and one day ran into Ringo Starr! He tells this story among many others in his book, Rocket Norton: Lost In Space ("Despite the booze and the drugs and the sex, or possibly because of them, this is a great true-life rock and roll story.") Indeed it is ALL of that!

    The Beatles - I Want To Hold Your Hand

  60. [60] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Don't everyone chime in at once, eh!?

  61. [61] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Here are a couple that go out especially to our Kick, whom we miss a lot, these Sunday nights ...

    Queen - Bohemian Rhapsody

    Queeen, the Movie along side the real deal

    I shall be going to see Queen: It's A Kind Of Magic at Kitchener's Centre in the Square next May, postponed from last April. Can't wait!

  62. [62] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    If that doesn't send shivers up your spine, then nothing will, my friends.

    I got more but, it just ain't no fun doin' this all alone.

  63. [63] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Before I go, more Queen

  64. [64] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I tell y'all what ... you're more fun than a barrel of monkeys. Ahem.

    But, you don't care for music, do ya ... :(

  65. [65] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Once again you are purposely just making stuff up.

    It starts in places where people can use a write in vote- including places like California where the state constitution guarantees the right to cast a write in vote.

    This can lead to changing the laws in the few states that do not allow them at all.

    The votes that you claim are not counted for a candidate are still counted as a vote cast.

    All that is needed is show the votes were cast and not counted as a vote for a candidate.

    If the number of votes cast but not counted for candidates is in the vaccinity of the number of people registered on the website that this is how they intend to vote it verifies why the vast majority of those votes were cast.

    Quit trolling or go away.

    CW, it's time to yellow card Bashi.

    If you do not stop the trolling and harrassment then you must allow me fight back- including calling them cunts or assholes when they act like cunts or assholes.

    The direction this goes is up to you, CW.

    Your failure to address this in a timely manner will make anything that I do to fight back your fault.

    It does not require getting the actual ballots or any kind of recount.

  66. [66] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Once again you are changing what I said to something else and arguing against that.(see 65 where it is explained again)

    You are purposely doing this and that makes it trolling. Go away.

    CW it is time to give the troll GT a yellow card
    (see comment 65 and apply this to GT).

  67. [67] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:


    Once again you are purposely just making stuff up.

    Then it should be easy for you to point out what I made up. Or were you just talking out your ass?

    It starts in places where people can use a write in vote- including places like California where the state constitution guarantees the right to cast a write in vote.

    California does have write-in votes, but like many write-in states it has a certification process that requires paperwork and a certain amount of signatures to qualify. You can't just write in anyone and have them be counted.

    If the number of votes cast but not counted for candidates is in the vaccinity of the number of people registered on the website that this is how they intend to vote it verifies why the vast majority of those votes were cast.

    Oh, we remembered we have a website now. Convenient how that goes in and out of importance...

    As to the rest: fishing for your red card? All I can say is Bravo. Keep up the good work. Don't let the man keep you down...

  68. [68] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    Don Qui-66

    Once again you are changing what I said to something else and arguing against that.(see 65 where it is explained again)

    If I am changing YOUR words then it should be easy for you to point out what exactly I am changing. ( and again your entire 65 ignores the point that in 34 states that allow write in voting you must be registered as a write in candidate. It is not my problem that you are completely ignorant of this).

    You are purposely doing this and that makes it trolling. Go away.

    Don Qui you obviously have no concept of what got you a time out.

    Am I shocked that once again you trot out the trolling line in an epic dodge to avoid answering a serious and hard question designed to test the seriousness of your planning and research? In short no. It is the standard tactic of a 10th grader.

    Further to your brilliance in 65:

    The votes that you claim are not counted for a candidate are still counted as a vote cast.

    In a majority of the 34 states that allow regulated writ-ins they have regulations that explicitly state your vote shall not be counted. Here is California'

    15341. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no name written
    upon a ballot in any election shall be counted
    for an office or
    nomination unless the candidate whose name has been written on the
    ballot has complied with Part 3 (commencing with Section 8600) of
    Division 8.

    Got that? Don Qui... the law is quite clear your vote is not is not counted as a vote not cast (which on a valid ballot is considered an undervote) it is just not counted.

    Which, when I pointed this out, you asserted that you would get those votes "counted for the purpose for which they were cast" even if you had to FOIA them. Needless to say this caused my Detecoris taurus excretus 5000 alarm to go off.

    Now if asking you hard questions designed to force you to admit to your BS is trolling. then I guess I am guilty... I however tend to look at it as a public service of calling out flawed bullshit that can't withstand scrutiny.

    So Don Qui... much like your lie about being a non profit ( we both know you were lying, since anyone who has actually registered a NP would never "think" they were registered.) I don't expect you to come up with the proper answer about how you are goin g to get something counted that isn't counted, because you haven't got a clue and it would also require you to acknowledge that there is a flaw in your grand vision. Which all of us know you can't do.

  69. [69] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    Agreed, Bashi.

    While Don isn't smart enough to be anywhere as annoying as Michale got, he is getting especially churlish here. I wonder if CW is monitoring this. CW has been bapping out tons of content so he likely doesn't have the time.

    Don is monotonous, yes, but he simply never engages with anyone's concerns and criticisms of OD. Instead, he proceeds to get all pissy when no one buys in. So, alas, he is of no damned use to Weigantia...

    "Why on God's green earth would I discuss how to get One Dumbman off the ground when it's "leader" can't even tell the truth about being a registered NP."



  70. [70] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    Er, good trickle

  71. [71] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Er, goode trickle, with a shout out to Kick for her artwork, above. Sincerest form of flattery and all.

  72. [72] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Once again you are saying that the write-in votes are not counted for a candidate.

    You know I am not making that claim and you can't argue against the fact that they still have to count the total votes cast and then report the votes cast for candidates so you argue against a point I am not making.

    That is trolling.

    Go away.

  73. [73] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    see 72.

    Go away.

  74. [74] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Mtn Caddy-
    see 72.

    Go away.

    If you really want to know about the mistake I made and admitted then you must admit your mistake in the claim about write-in votes not being counted for candidates does not mean they are not counted at all.

    Instead you just keep bringing up the dodge and refuse to do what could get you the answer to the dodge.

Comments for this article are closed.