Election 2020

The Voters Eschewed Extremism on Election Day

Americans are nowhere close to embracing the radical left.


Contrary to most predictions, Election Day brought no blue wave. While former Vice President Joe Biden won the presidency, it looks like the Republicans will keep the Senate. Even more surprisingly, the Democrats appear to be on the verge of losing as many as 13 seats in the House of Representatives. If this proves to be the case, it would be the smallest House majority for any party since 1919.

The electorate's rejection of the Democratic agenda in the legislature actually makes it somewhat surprising that the Democrats won back the White House. As a result, the blame game is afoot among our friends on the left.

Those in the progressive wing of the Democratic party are accusing their more moderate colleagues of being inept at running campaigns, while the relatively few centrist Dems are complaining about their progressive colleagues' open embrace of socialism.

Yet, it's possible that the problem is precisely that traditional Democrats have not done enough to put as much light as possible between them and the party's progressives.

While serious people acknowledge the real problems that infect today's criminal justice system, for example, sloganeering to "Defund the Police" scares away more than a few voters. Further, use of the word "socialism" cannot but hurt Democrats outside of college towns and upscale urban locales such as Brooklyn.

Reporting on comments made by Democratic Rep. Vicente Gonzalez of Texas, The New York Times wrote, "The 'average white person,' Mr. Gonzalez added, may associate socialism with Nordic countries, but to Asian and Hispanic migrants it recalls despotic 'left-wing regimes.'" Exactly. And House Democrats' uncritical embrace of the Green New Deal likely stirred justified worries among voters about the astronomical future costs of their energy bills.

Voters also understand that because Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D­–Calif.) believed a blue wave was inevitable, she refused to compromise and accept a deal offered by the White House for a second stimulus agreement. She couldn't accept less than her $2.2 trillion deal, which included proposals with many of the traditional Democratic handouts to special interests.

Despite her insistence that pesky Republicans are to blame for not letting her have her complete way—and despite many in the traditional media echoing her self-serving message—voters understand that half a stick of gum is better than no gum at all, and thanks to Pelosi, no gum is exactly what they got.

Voters are often rationally ignorant; however, some of them still may have noticed the slew of House votes that would leave them with less money in their bank accounts, less control of their lives, and higher cost-of-living expenses for years to come. As The Wall Street Journal reminded us this week, House Democrats "voted for huge new tax increases, vast new spending, a gradual end to fossil fuels, and the most radical labor agenda since 1935."

For more evidence that the voters' lack of enthusiasm for progressive policies likely explains the Democrats' reduced majority in the House, one should consider this election's down-ballot outcomes. Illinois and California, two of the most progressive states in the Union, provide good examples. In Illinois, voters rejected by a 55 to 45 percent margin the so-called Fair Tax Amendment. That progressive tax scheme would have amended the state constitution to replace the flat income tax with a progressive one.

In California, some serious progressive dreams to steal more freedom from people were crushed. Proposition 22, for instance, saved Californians from an attempt by regulators to upend the digital platform economy by forcing the industry's companies to reclassify independent contractors as full-time employees. Voters disallowed cities to impose rent control and rejected a massive property-tax increase with Prop. 15.

In more fiscally sound states, voters took some power away from the legislature. For instance, Colorado voters adopted Prop. 117, closing a loophole in the state's Taxpayer's Bill of Rights, which subjects tax hikes to voter approval but not fees.

Sure, on election night, it wasn't all sunshine and free market victories. Voters also approved bad policies, such as Florida's minimum wage increase to $15 per hour and spending initiatives all over the country, even in states where they rejected tax increases.

But the overwhelming message from election night is unmistakable: Americans are nowhere close to swallowing the false promises and absurd fantasies of the radical left.


NEXT: Masks Not Very Effective at Protecting Wearers, Says New Danish Study

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “The Voters Eschewed Extremism on Election Day”

    If contrary to common sense the voting was real, then apparently white American men have suddenly embraced the woke extremism that was rejected by women and minorities.

    1. Regardless of how much fraud their was, both 2016 and 2020 were so close in the closest swing states that it was probably all down to weather, traffic accidents, and quirks of the calendar as to who won. Trump got lucky in 2016, looks like unlucky in 2020.

      You can’t read anything in the tea leaves from who won. It makes no difference if it was valid or rigged. It was too close for any such analysis.

      1. No, it was not close.

        In PA, in 2018, deep-blue Gov Wolf was elected with an absurd increase in votes that surpassed any prior mid-term turnout by well over 50%. It was laughably fraudulent.

        In 2020, Biden pulled in 400k increase in voter turnout, 8% above Obama in 2008, and 20% over Clinton in 2016. This is on top of Trumps 10+% increase in votes. The total votes in PA are extreme, with Dem turnout beyond any realistic projected level.
        What makes this even more questionable, is the registration data, which had Republicans gain 200k registrations over 2016 and Dems flat, with no increase. The Rep registration increase is close to Trump’s overall vote total, so it makes some sense that the registration and GOTV directly translated to the gains. For Biden, that 400k increase in votes comes with no registration gains, not replubican defects/losses, just straight turnout. This has never happened before….there is no historic example of anything similar, particularly when campaigning was negligible at best. And what makes in even more unusual is that Philadelphia, which accounts for close to 15% of PA votes, had a negligible impact, and Trump gained quite well in Philly. Biden’s 400k increase camefrom select suburban counties with utterly implausibel 30%+ increases over Clinton in 2016, where at the same time Trump was also pulling in increases of 10-15%.

        This is why people in PA think there was fraud. It makes no sense and is completely counter to everyone’s expectations in the communities.

        1. The people in Pennsylvania who think there was fraud have not reach that belief based on any empirical calculations or tangible evidence. Certainly, no evidence has been presented in a court of law demonstrating fraud on a scale sufficient to turn the election. No, the vast majority of Pennsylvanians claiming fraud are simply parroting talking points they’ve heard. You can argue an increase of support for Biden in the suburbs is “implausible” but it happened in other Midwest states.

          1. and you can GFY. don’t presume to tell me, a PA resident, that I am simply parroting talking points. I have spent a lot of time going through county and precinct results. They are implausible, particularly relative to the local enthusiasm.
            my traditionally purple county had a 20% increase in Biden votes and a 15% increase in Trump votes, but yet no one seems to who those Biden voters are. There was no enthusiasm, no defections, nothing. In precincts of 1000-2000 voters it is not at all difficult to gain a sense of the community….orders of magnitude better then any pollster.
            Based on historical numbers in elections the last 30 years, and intimate knowledge of the locality, the fraud is blatantly obvious.

            And to repeat. GFY

            1. Ba ha ha. Go find a courthouse. I’m sure a judge will find your “intimate knowledge” persuasive. Oh, and I didn’t say you were parroting talking points (please read more carefully). My remark was an observation of the rank-and-file talk-radio, Fox news, “Trump or Die!” folks. Your bullshit is more “no one knows my county like I do so I know vote totals better than the people counting votes” which is more original (and tin-foil hat) than most. The purple counties in the Commonwealth are generally suburbs of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, all with at least 100,000. It’s impressive to know exactly how tens (or hundreds) of thousands of people will vote from your parents’ basement. But, hey, convince a judge in a court of competent jurisdiction that your brain constitutes evidence of fraud and I’ll gladly rethink my position.

              1. Ah, I see you are just a raging a-hole who is not interested in discussion. good to know.

                The fraud is blatantly obvious to most PA residents and the rage is building. We’ll see what comes of the lawsuits, but either way it is profoundly problematic for the electorates respect for their government. Dismissing it is laughably clueless and naive….but on-par for a dem shill.

                1. Mike, do you seriously expect people to acquiesce to giving the election to Trump without him even providing any acceptable rationale for it in court?

                  1. I never even suggested just ‘giving the election to Trump’.

                    However, I have strongly suggested that the allegations be taken seriously, based on the extensive taint seen in the results. Trump deserves his day in court. To dismiss that out of hand is ridiculous.

                    1. He’s had many days in court, almost all of them ending with a loss and incredulity from the judge.

                  2. Not really, Tony. Most of the lawsuits thrown out were filed before the election. If I understand correctly, groups affiliated with the Trump campaign have only now filed a few lawsuits, presenting evidence after the election took place. We’ll see where they go.

                    1. Do you think they might be finished by the time we have to inaugurate a new president?

                    2. No idea. It’s obvious that one side will do all it takes to delay the legal process, while the other will try to rush everything through. I’m curious to see what will happen.

                    3. If Hillary Clinton had stretched that election out even one extra day, you would hear the screeching of Trump fans at Alpha Centauri.

                      The entire world thinks Trump is embarrassing himself and the country.

                2. Most implies a majority. Since a majority of Commonwealth residents are registered Democrats, I find it difficult to imagine how “most” are outraged. I’m not dismissing anything. In a nation of laws, one is obligated to seek redress through the courts or through the legislature. Since Pennsylvania couldn’t manage to agree on something as simple as canvassing before election day, I don’t have particularly high hopes. That leaves the judicial system. If you were in any way serious, you would pursue redress in reality rather than on an Internet forum.

              2. Don’t worry progtard. Sidney Powell has already found the courthouse.

                1. If only there were a way to wager on the outcome, I could enjoy a far more comfortable retirement.

            2. Talked to a well-connected suburban GOP insider yesterday. He says there was no apparent vote fraud in Philly suburbs. He thinks the suburban voter was turned off by Trump’s personality, and the other factor in high turnout was the ease at which mail-in ballots could be obtained and people who never took trouble to vote in person could now simply go out to their mailbox. He noted an exceptionally high percentage of returned legitimate ballots that had votes for only the presidential candidate. Down ballot, the GOP apparently did quite well in state races, except, of course, for said Philly suburbs.

              1. Weird that it was just suburban Philly.

                1. Not really. The vote was close enough that you just needed to turn the soccer moms. More importantly you needed to get them to bother to vote.

                  Independents, libertarians, greenies, those are the votes that matter.

                  Look Donald Trump had an amazing run. From where he was to president is astonishing. I do not expect grace and dignity. I think a significant number are sick and tired, and that is in a real sense.

                  The first and only crisis and most Americans, by a slim majority would prefer a change in leadership.

                  So not at all weird. It is entirely plausible and understandable.

                  1. The first and only crisis and most Americans, by a slim majority would prefer a change in leadership.

                    So what’s up with choosing Biden?

              2. Don’t tell Mike2P. I would hate to disrupt his mind-meld with the electorate of his purple county.

            3. “Implausible”

              You keep using that word.

              I don’t think it means what you think it means.

              Given that this libertarian gets to turn to criticizing the new government. This is going to be fun.

          2. Lots of evidence has been from statistical analysis, affidavits from poll watchers, and examples of dead voters. You refuse to acknowledge it or allow a deep audit for proof.

            Pa has violated one law that requires ballot envelopes to be kept for 2 years and disregarded one federal judge and probably a USSC judge in not segregating ballots.

            Youre just ignorant.

            1. I didn’t realize the Commonwealth was waiting on me for a “deep audit.” By the way, what exactly is a “shallow audit”? Courthouse. Go. Now. Take your evidence to a place it matters. Seems rather silly to call me “ignorant” when you’re the one making a legal argument on an Internet forum when the fate of the nation hangs in the balance.

              1. he’s another one of the big talkers on here who couldn’t make an argument to save his life.

                but he and his little crew white knight for each other and shit up all the threads

                they constitute a tribe of little bitches who either:

                1: have a mountain of evidence but are too pussy to stand up for the country they love
                2: actually have nothing but hearsay and feelz (hint: its actually this one)

                like the guy above: “I just KNOW my local area and the enthusiasm!!!” – straight feelz, but he is convinced

                These people are hopeless, they cant just eat the L everyone knew they had coming

                1. Actually, if I were a Trump-ista, I would be encouraged about how much closer the race was than predicted, how the “blue wave” didn’t materialize, and how the GOP will likely hold the Senate which will essentially hamstring the Biden agenda. Of course, I suspect Trump is more about a cult of personality than any rationale analysis.

            2. Jesse, perhaps it’s comforting for you to know that even if Biden cheated in swing states, he still was actually the candidate preferred by millions more Americans.

              We don’t want the awkwardness of two terms of a president the voters rejected both times.

          3. You can argue an increase of support for Biden in the suburbs is “implausible” but it happened in other Midwest states.

            So true. It happened in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Minnesota–why, in some states it happened within minutes of them shutting down the polls for the night. Shut down the counting, and WHAM! a sudden increase in support for Biden in the suburbs in crucial midwestern states.

            Weird how it didn’t happen in states that WEREN’T crucial, no?

          4. Stop eating Biden’s ass.

        2. You’re missing the point, MikeP2. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that all your claims about fraud in PA are clear and easily provable. Nevertheless, when you roll up to the national level and pro forma the results, it remains too evenly divided for either party to claim a “mandate” – which was all that ABC was saying.

        3. campaigning was negligible at best.

          The less we see of Biden, the better a candidate he becomes.

      2. Not really luck. High turnout generally favors Democrats, and sending everyone a mail-in ballot pretty much guaranteed high turnout. (And made it easier for Dems to round up their supporters’ votes.)

        Trump’s style turned off some conservative and independent voters, and his handling of the COVID-19 crisis turned off some elderly voters. Those people weren’t going to vote for Democrats for Congress, but they viewed Biden as acceptably moderate.

        Either that or one high profile election is easier to cheat than 435 elections.

    2. Do you want to earn cash online from your living room, easily work with a laptop for a few hours a day, earn 550-650 euros a day and get paid every week by deciding on your working hours? it is all true and completely changed my life. Then try this. Click Here For More information.

    3. I am now making more than 350 dollars per day by working online from home without investing any money.Join this link posting job now and start earning without investing or selling anything.

      Follow Instructions Here……… Home Profit System

    4. Joe Biden appeared to clinch a victory on Saturday morning to become 46th president of the United States, closing out an election cycle that was dominated in the final months by debates around COVID-19, the economy, and police reform……….USA MORE INFORMATION.

    5. Google is by and by paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I have joined this action 2 g months back and I have earned $31547 in my first month from this action. I can say my life is improved completely! Take a gander at it

      what I do………Visit Here

  2. I am heartened by the Dems losses in both houses; I had expected such to happen in 2022, not now. It just might shrink Joe’s plans considerably.

    It also puts the kibosh on any plans Kamala might have had to get rid of Joe, imagined or real. Last thing she wants is to preside over a losing game; her plans would certainly be much more radical and clumsy than Joe’s. Coming from California, she never had to pay attention to Republicans before, her brief term in the Senate was all in the Democrat echo chamber, and as President, all she’d do is lie, waffle, contradict herself, and generally make her political naiveté even more obvious. Joe at least has had experience with Republicans and is probably more dangerous now than Kamala.

    1. Coming from California, she never had to pay attention to Republicans before

      Hell, she never had to pay attention to moderate Democrats before either. She probably assumes everyone with a D after their name believes the same bullshit she does.

    2. Did they fist bump her at least?

  3. The Voters Eschewed Extremism…

    Now I am hoping that the REAL extremists will do the same! Of course, that includes Antifa! But it also includes TRUMP and His fascist supporters, who believe the elections were totally rigged, and are lusting after a coup and a REAL Trumptatorshit! Nothing less than a 1-party state will satisfy them!

    1. Wow, whatever you’re on, seems like good stuff. I’d ask you to share, but I’m not a fan of hallucinogens.

      1. I’d rather be on hallucinogens than addicted, as Trumpistas are, to the theory that fluoridated water is chock-full of tiny little Hunter Biden homunculi (one each per each fluorine atom, with a tiny sub-atomic Hunter Biden working the tiny little brain-control levers, and chucking an evil laugh) as they FORCED tens of millions of fluoridated-water-drinking voters to NOT vote for Trump!

        Worse yet, Trumpistas believe that the more times that they spread these kinds of tales, the more true that the tales will become!

        1. “I’d rather be on hallucinogens…”

          Based on this comment, your wish has been granted.

        2. Wow, when did the fluoridators switch out the Russian bots for Hunter Biden homunculi?

          1. Whoa, damned good question! I just don’t know any more! I’m thinking that I will have to add some LSD to my fluoridated water, and ask the Hunter Biden homunculi! ***IF*** I can get an answer, I’ll get back to you!

            (Meanwhile, maybe a Trumpista can pitch in here, and help us out?)

            1. I’ll pitch in. Kill yourself.

              1. What do you think that you’re earning for yourself by drinking the Evil One’s Kool-aid?

  4. I get paid more than $120 to $130 per hour for working online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining this i have earned easily $15k from this without having online working skills. This is what I do…. Here is More information.

  5. But the overwhelming message from election night is unmistakable: Americans are nowhere close to swallowing the false promises and absurd fantasies of the radical left.

    Voters are often rationally ignorant; however, some of them still may have noticed the slew of House votes that would leave them with less money in their bank accounts, less control of their lives, and higher cost-of-living expenses for years to come. As The Wall Street Journal reminded us this week, House Democrats “voted for huge new tax increases, vast new spending, a gradual end to fossil fuels, and the most radical labor agenda since 1935.”

    It is also unmistakable that Americans are nowhere close to being actual fans of the USA and insisting on Constitutional Law to protect themselves (Individual Liberty and Justice) in the face of having the option for gov-guns to STEAL “sticks of gum” because *earning* or making gum must be far worse than voting to steal it from your neighbors…

  6. The article is correct on policies but a huge % of the electorate votes on personality. Trump’s abrasive style wore thin on many. Obama had a relaxed speaking tone. The scam artist always comes disguised as the nice guy and will be able to sell socialism to the uniformed.

    1. “Trump’s abrasive style wore thin on many”

      No, actually, it didn’t. Trump pulled in far more votes than 2016, increasing in almost all demographics.

      Biden, implausibly increased vote counts by anywhere from 10-30% in select swing counties over where Obama/Clinton were.

      Report voter turnouts in swing states are astronomically above any prior election in recent memory with Trump gaining a lot, but Biden gaining far more. It’s laughably fraudulent particulalry when in states like PA, there was no increase in Dem voter registrations

      1. “Laughably fraudulent” that a Democrat won the presidential election in Pennsylvania where registered Democratic voters outnumber register Republican voters by 700,000?

        1. yes, laughably fraudulent that a dem candidate, who had no local enthusiasm, did little campaigning, pulled in 30% voter turnout increases in the absence of republican defects, or new registrations.

          Stop being a shill for the left.

          1. I miss the old Hit-and-Run. Ah, so if I’m not drinking the Kool Aid, I’m a “shill for the left.” Uh, OK. I think both political parties are odious, and the LP isn’t much better. As noted, you can take your argument out to reality for a spin, but you’re not changing election results here, amigo.

            1. Jose just worships Top Men, let him be.

              1. If only I could be successful worshiping anything. Just not in my DNA, I’m afraid.

            2. No. You’re a shill or the left because you’re a shill for the left.

              1. Poor Shitstain, his hero got beat by a senile geriatric.

      2. Then surely noted superstar lawyer Rudy Giuliani will be able to present evidence to that effect in one of Trump’s many lawsuits.

        1. Maybe it will happen.. Rudy’s specialty has been taking down complex organized crime rings. I’m on the fence about this, but the D political machine has demonstrated over and over that it wouldn’t have moral qualms about cheating to get its way…

          1. Surely you have some reference to these demonstrations of a willingness to cheat?

            I can point to what the president is doing right now to demonstrate his insatiable willingness to cheat.

            Rudy is the last guy who would do whatever Trump wanted him to. That’s why he’s there with his hair melting down his face. He’s the only one who would beclown himself enough to cater to the boss’s hysterical baby tantrum. Otherwise Trump would have some real lawyers. Real lawyers won’t risk their law license with these desperate frivolous lawsuits.

            I’m so glad you people never get to criticize any democrat ever again after this phantasmagoric four-year exercise in cultishness.

            1. References for the Democratic Party machine’s willingness to cheat:
              – Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s leaked corruption, which led to her resignation from the DNC chairmanship
              – Donna Brazile (she admitted to providing debate questions to the DNC preferred candidate ahead of the debate)
              – the recent PA Supreme Court ruling arguing that it’s basically ok to keep observers away from the vote counting process and away from individual ballots (as long as they are allowed in the room – the room being a convention center hall)
              – D politicians, including Biden, openly and knowingly lying repeatedly about Trump’s words (providing half-quotes, ommitting the words “not” or other qualifiers which would make the quoted statement mean the exact opposite as shown in the actual transcript, etc); misquoting people on purpose is also cheating, albeit legal
              – CA D party money laundering scheme to support their candidate (ultimately settled with a fine and no jail time)
              – Bloomberg’s shenanigans (in the legal gray area) paying off felons so they can vote in Florida
              – etc etc etc (all documented and admitted, by the way)

              1. Well I’m convinced.

    2. You’re presuming people voted to give the nuclear football to a guy with dementia, simply because Trump sends out mean tweets.

      I know the American electorate is dumb as crap, but that seems like really stupid reasoning, even for them. Fraud is much more plausible.

  7. Anybody can earn 350dollar+ daily… You can earn from 8000-10,000 month or even more if you work as a full time job.It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish.It’s a flexible job but a good eaning opportunity.simply give it a shot on the accompanying site…… Read More

  8. For more evidence that the voters’ lack of enthusiasm for progressive policies likely explains the Democrats’ reduced majority in the House, one should consider this election’s down-ballot outcomes. Illinois and California, two of the most progressive states in the Union, provide good examples.
    Voters in both states will reject policies put on the ballot, but still vote to give the party that proposed the policies control of the government. Californians voted to increase the Democratic majority in the state legislature.

  9. No thanks to the socialists here at Reason.

    1. Let’s be accurate in our terminology.

      Charles Koch doesn’t hire “socialists” to write for Reason. Instead, he hires left-libertarians who have common ground with socialists on issues like opening the borders and getting rid of Drumpf.

  10. “Radical” libertarians are the last mfers to be singing this tune. Biden ran on a progressive agenda and won. You guys never win anything not even close to anything. That’s not say y’all don’t have influence but you really are the last people on the planet who should measuring which way the wind is blowing by elections.

    1. Fuck off Lard of Strudel.

      Literally you are dumber than Tony, and being that you are one of his socks that is saying something.

      Biden will be facing a Republican Senate and in 2023 a Republican House. There will be no progressive agenda, except for the diarrhea that runs out of your mouth.

      1. “Fuck off Lard of Strudel.”

        At least this sock is correctly named.

  11. Despite the various spins making the rounds it seems clear that it wasn’t Dem turnout that was much higher than expected but rather conservative turnout. What confuses people seems to be that a large portion of those conservatives also opposed Trump. It’s that mix that led us to a Dem winning the presidency but not these other elections.

    1. Most, if not nearly all, of the support for Biden was anti-Trump. There was no enthusiasm for Biden among Biden voters, just a media-fueled dislike of President Trump. So Biden got the votes, but the Progressive policies mostly failed, because there was no popular movement to the far left.
      One thing that we can look forward to – Biden could shoot and kill someone and, unless it was VP Harris, no Republican would even consider impeachment. It is sort of like having Von Ludendorff as Chancellor and Hitler is Vice Chancellor. Change is bad.

      1. Whoa, I had to think it through for a few seconds on the latter part (I’ll be honest… I am getting old, and sometimes the brain slows down)… But, Government Almighty dammit, I think that you are CORRECT!!! About ALL of your comment! Kudos!

    2. “What confuses people seems to be that a large portion of those conservatives also opposed Trump”

      But that is simply not true. Trump has record approvals among registered Republicans. There is zero evidence of conservative defection as he significantly increased vote totals over 2016. If anything, it can be argued that he had Dem converts as Republicans enjoyed increases in voter registrations in many key states.

      In PA, Dem turnout showed a 30% increase over 2016 in key surburban counties, where Republicans’ added to their vote totals anywhere from 10-20%. Republican increases largely tracked their registration increases. For Dems, registrations were flat….it was all turnout. or, as it is so exceedingly atypical from any prior election, there was massive fraud.

      1. C’mon, Mike, statistical and behavioral anomalies that have no precedent in human history totes aren’t suspicious.
        And the libertarian moment is here!

      2. Could it be that Trump has record approvals among Republicans but not conservatives?

        1. Entirely possible, but I wouldn’t know how to parse that out of the returns.

          A non-Republican conservative would need to be registered as Dem or independent/other in PA. Trump’s increases in vote totals in PA are in-line with the increase in Republican registration. It’s likely that some republicans voted for Biden and dems voted for Trump, but as Trump’s overall vote totals in PA increased significantly, its difficult to see what he ‘lost’. It’s a media myth that Trump lost support. He increased in vote totals in almost all demographics and in any other year would have won in a landslide. The only reason he didn’t was because Biden increase his vote count by numbers that beggar belief.

    3. Interesting that drug reform ballot questions did so well so broadly with that much conservative turnout. Makes me wonder what “conservative” means in the USA currently.

      1. The progressives are the nanny statists now. Conservatives want government to leave them alone.

    4. “What confuses people seems to be that a large portion of those conservatives also opposed Trump.”

      Said the liberal.

  12. Many on the left fetishize voting and the will of the majority. How about some national elections on who should be exiled? We can start with federal officials and work our way down to the neighborhood Karens.

    1. Expatriating top progressives would be a kind way (I can’t say humane, as progressives have no souls) to dispose of them.

  13. De Rugy sees this election as a repudiation of Democrats?

    What a dumbass.

    No wonder her side can’t compete in the culture war. Even if the bigotry and stale superstition didn’t doom them in modern America, the belligerent ignorance would still ensure the liberal-libertarian mainstream’s victory against the clingers.

    1. When your Presidential ticket has negative coattails, yes, it is a repudiation of your Party.

      1. Biden won by seven or eight million votes. Republicans have attracted more votes than Democrats in presidential elections once in three decades.

        The House will continue to have a Democratic Speaker. Democratic House candidates received substantially more votes than did Republican House candidates.

        The Senate is a toss-up. More Americans elect Democratic Senators than Republican Senators.

        The culture war is not over but has been settled. The Republicans have lost, are losing, and will continue to lose.

        Other than that, though, great comment, you bigoted, obsolete clinger.

        1. Keep your focus on that culture war distraction while we focus on what matters. I’m glad you’re satisfied with winning the table scrap issues of our civilization. It suits you.

    2. What a dumbass.

      You are ugly, and your mommy dresses you funny. Nyah.

  14. “Contrary to most predictions, Election Day brought no blue wave. While former Vice President Joe Biden won the presidency, it looks like the Republicans will keep the Senate. Even more surprisingly, the Democrats appear to be on the verge of losing as many as 13 seats in the House of Representatives.”

    I don’t have a PhD, but I spent 45 years programming computers, and picked up the ability to recognise logic. There is no logical connection between the prediction that the electoral college will make Basement Bunker Biden president (for a while) and all the rest of the results.

    1. The Republican party is full of secret Biden voters who love the Green New Deal and peaceful protesters, even though the former is designed to destroy the economy and the latter calls them Nazis and physically attacks them. Makes sense

      1. No. They’re predominantly uneducated white male independent voters who just don’t show up politically anywhere else until Joe Biden’s online campaign rallies totally convinced them to fill out the ballots that had been mailed to them.

        1. No no, you mean ballots that were filled out without telling them!

    2. It’s possible that there are enough ticket splitters motivated by antipathy to Trump.

      But why speculate when you can calculate the difference between number of votes for Democratic and Republican candidates for Congress and realize that gerrymandering works. It’s why these swing states have Democratic governors and Republican state legislatures as well. The country is firmly on the side of Democrats, as a whole. Republicans just steal Congress, because they can.

      1. Tony, there are 26 Republican governors & 24 Democrat governors. There is no mandate for Democrats or their policies.

  15. Cheese and rice, it doesnt matter what they embrace, if GA runoffs go poorly, we get a huge helping of Venezuela

    1. Disaffected, delusional bigots are among my favorite culture war casualties.

  16. Anti-White thugs attacked White people that attempted to hold a peaceful political rally in D.C. If Anti-White ideas are so good, then why do they need street violence to make sure nobody disagrees? It’s obvious that Antifa really only wants White Genocide which is the third-world pouring into EVERY White country & ONLY White countries then chasing down “White flight” with diversity.

    1. In the end you’re worm food. Why worry?

  17. It’s not over-yet…the proggies could still snag the two GA senate seats and have a majority thanks to Kamala, then ram through whatever GND or other leftist agenda they want because all they will need is a simple majority. I doubt they will pick up both seats, or even one, but stranger things have happened

    1. Unlikely to happen. And the Democrats would have only two years. The more aggressive they try to be, the more seats they’ll lose in the midterms. Divided government is the best outcome.

      1. Divided government is the best outcome.

        The best of the current, most probable options. A meteor striking D.C. on Jan. 21 leaving nobody but maybe Paul and Massie alive, with several smaller meteors striking various governors’ mansions and state capitals across the nation would be the best outcome.

        1. Even better would be a satanic rapturing of the progressives. Lucifer selling them all home, to Hell.

        2. Is that something I can donate money towards on GoFundMe?

      2. If the Democrats pull off their voter fraud unopposed, they won’t lose any seats in the midterms, or ever again. The US will be run by the equivalent of the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (sic) which ran México unopposed for about 70 years before taking a short break. Demographic changes will also help the Democrats in the decades to come.

        1. I’ve been alive long enough to hear the coming Democratic majority for decades. Blue wave!!! Blue tsunami!!! Run for the hills. Talk to the left about Miami. The AOC progressive wing mistakes Brooklyn twitter for reality. The one constant is that whoever is running the government is fucking things up. The electorate is just a Charlie Brown running back and forth between Blue Lucy and Red Lucy.

  18. “If you like your form of government you can keep your form of government.”

    Said no progressive, ever.

    1. I have no doubt they’ve said it. Just not honestly.

  19. “The electorate’s rejection of the Democratic agenda in the legislature actually makes it somewhat surprising that the Democrats won back the White House.”
    Hmm. Ya think?

  20. The voters eschewed radical socialist extremism by voting for the candidate proposing a national supply chain czar.

    The voters eschewed radical socialist extremism by voting for the candidate who liked the GND so much, he came up with one of his own.

    The voters eschewed radical socialist extremism by voting for the candidate that talks about using F-15s and Hellfire missiles on American citizens, domestically, out-of-hand.

    The voters eschewed radical socialist extremism by voting for the guy who really wants a national mask mandate if people would just let him get away with it.

    What’s next? We name a cow ‘Socialist Extremism’ and if the voters elect to slaughter the cow we declare victory over Socialist Extremism?

    1. Yeah I don’t see how you can have it both ways. Biden has promised full on socialist change. If voters think they can stop him in the house and senate they may get a nasty shock in 2022.

      1. It also ignores the gross miscarriage of liberty and justice that happens outside the Exectuive and Legislature. For the latter half of the Trump Administration, the ATF has been quietly re-writing rules so that they can be administratively reinterpretted under a more favorable administration. Who needs Congress to pass laws/block when the Executive will refuse to sic the DOJ on administrative bodies that run amok? Your AR pistol that’s legal today can be declared illegal on Jan. 21. Your fully EPA compliant VW vehicle can be declared non-compliant on Jan. 21. Your citizenship under DACA… etc. etc.

        1. Now that we have ACB on the SC, I really hope the ATF goes full retard about pistol braces. It will suck in the short term but they keep rewriting their rules, we need them to go too far and get checked.

          While almost no one uses them this way, pistol braces were originally designed to allow people with disabilities to shoot firearms they otherwise wouldn’t be able to handle. Taking them away would significantly impact those people’s ability to exercise their 2A rights as understood by Heller and McDonald.

          I don’t see a way where the ATF wins the inevitable court case, particularly considering the first people to manufacture braces explicitly asked the ATF if it was OK and got approval.

    2. Trump’s big idea was to build a giant pointless wall. It’s not capitalism just because it’s stupid.

      People don’t like the word socialism. Everyone likes government giving them shit they want.

      1. I love México, but it is a failed state run by politicians connected to the worst of the worst – satanic gangs lusting for blood and trying to recreate ancient ritual, gory, indigenous sacrifices. Until their society decides to reign in those monsters, the country should be shunned by the civilized world. In fact, we should build a giant wall around it. (I agree that most Mexicans are incredibly nice and decent, but we need to put pressure on them to put an end to that evil; the fact that they tolerate those monsters means we cannot cooperate as societies in the short run).

      2. Trump’s big idea was to build a giant pointless wall. It’s not capitalism just because it’s stupid.

        People don’t like the word socialism.

        Trump’s big idea was not to call the American public deplorable. No matter how stupidly low a capitalist sets the bar, a socialist will manage to waltz under it.

  21. You wouldn’t know this from social media or mainstream media or the nattering nabobs in academia, but the real story is that most Americans are centrists. They weren’t fans of Trump but neither were they particularly annoyed by him. They don’t know what “socialism” is but they distrust levelling measures coming from the elite. California voted for every “D” on the ballot but against every proposition sponsored by the “D”s. Etc, etc.

    Now of course there are enclaves for radical thought. I have friends who are rabid Trump supporters, to the point that one of them might even have a Trump tattoo. I also have friends who dutifully vote the Democrat party line. It was because of them that I thought Prop 15 and 22 were going down in flames, because I seemed like the only person who was against them (my Trump friends pretty much ignored the initiatives).

    So we have a Silent Middle. One of the highest turnouts of any election, that resulted in one of the closest elections, both in the popular vote and the electoral vote.

    It makes me think we’re not as bad off as we think.

    1. It makes me think we’re not as bad off as we think.

      Except that the Overton Window has been shifted. Federal emergencies can be used to declare a protracted series of bad decision-making based on nascent data as long as popular support can be drummed up. Far-reaching national policy can be crafted from the bad decision-making as long as it can be sufficiently retconned. Not that we were particularly or systematically immune to such bad action in the past, but this election (more than the last and the one before it…) is more representative of a tolerance, if not open embrace of it.

      Sure, it’s better that everyone’s smartphone now folds neatly in their pocket and weed is, maybe, a little bit more free. I remain unconvinced that it was worth the economic ruin incurred by collaborating with the country that obfuscated on the disease that’s killed a quarter of a million Americans and who’s government is holding more than a million of its own people in concentration camps.

      1. https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1329167205255274498?s=19

        The protests are everywhere except the US. Have we given up our liberties so easily?

    2. Most people everywhere at all times are centrist, but the center keeps moving. The distribution around the center point is interesting, but I’m not sure how consequential it is.

      Pretty much worldwide, governments have run up large unfunded liabilities to current and future retirees. They signed on to an enormous war on drugs which is now easing outside of Muslim areas and Red China.

  22. Americans voted for their “team”. The one thing the mainstream media refuses to talk about is how little policy discussion there was leading up to the election. How could this be a rebuke of Socialism if no one ever dared even talking about economic policies?

    To be clear, when economic policies were talked about they looked, well, rather socialistic.
    1) Coverage of pre-existing conditions. How got through an election cycle without ever discussing this whopper baffles me. How exactly do you cover pre-existing conditions without asking people to subsidize unhealthy people? They still voted for Trump though. Score one for Socialism.
    2) Deficit spending as an economic tool. Not exactly Socialism, but certainly not a traditional Republican platform. Trump’s so-called greatest economy was all based on the power of deficit spending. Any fool given the ability to run up those deficits could have yielded the numbers he did.
    3) Using tariffs and trade policies to meddle with the free market and pick winners and losers in the economy. Check.
    4) Use immigration controls as a tool to boost wages for low-skilled workers? Might as well enact minimum wage legislation because they both create higher wages and are both unliked by small business owners who don’t want to have to pay the higher wages. But that never got questioned by the Republicans. So they are all about meddling with the labor market. Might as well be Socialists.
    5) Operation Warp speed. Yep. Trump took credit for that piece of Socialism and his voters loved it.

    So let’s cut the crap with “voters rejected Socialism” journalism. Journalists dropped the ball on this election and went with the team-based analysis. Now they want to rewrite history so that the elites can get back their “free market” B.S narrative that was never true.

    1. Whether Biden holds on, or Trump scores on his Hail Mary pass, what all the voters (except for Jo’s) want is traditionally known as Fascism. Amtrak may be socialist (but less so as some private carriers have sprung up) but it is fascist-style regulation that controls the nation’s railroads. Almost every other industry has management and labor constrained and directed by fascist-style government agencies.

      1. If we want to describe things more precisely, #1 is socialist, #2 is fascist or classical populist, #3 is dirigiste, #4 is nationalist-labor (if I may use “labor” politically as an adjective), and #5 is fascist but with great laissez-faire potential.

    2. Operation Warp Speed was partly socialist, but largely deregulatory. Of course it’s one of those worst-of-both-worlds combinations in that it imposes risk on everyone for private economic gain. However, I believe the deregulatory changes won’t be completely transient, but will be remembered, serve as an object lesson, and lead to broader deregulation of drugs, medical devices, and the like.

  23. You’re missing the point, MikeP2. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that all your claims about fraud in PA are clear and easily provable. Nevertheless, when you roll up to the national level and pro forma the results, it remains too evenly divided for either party to claim a “mandate” – which was all that ABC was saying Read More.

    1. wow, the bots are calling out individual commenters now

  24. So let’s sum up the Reason take on the elections:

    A Democrat President, a Democrat House, and what still could turn out with the Dems controlling the Senate (VP deciding vote), meant what….

    An embrace of Republicans and their libertarian lackeys like at Reason? Now that’s logic for you.

    By the way, if you don’t think Trump represented the most pointed version of extremism in politics, you haven’t paid attention to his embrace of white supremacists, separation of children from parents, acceptance of foreign aid in elections, requests that his AG arrest and prosecute his political rivals, use of tariffs, his complete lack of governance as represented by COVID stats, his denial is science in about climate change and pandemics, and his multitude of lies every single day.

    But heck, you write for Reason…no surprise.

    1. Wow, Jack, impressive ability to not utter one accurate thing in such a tedious and boring post. Kudos, SQRSLY Jr.

    2. Trump was such an authoritarian fascist he allowed all 50 states to set their own COVID-19 policies, and declined to claim emergency powers to centralize more control? Huh?

  25. It’s a bit masturbatory to draw sweeping conclusions from the results of a national American election, considering the presidential, Senate, and House elections all see millions more votes for Democrats than Republicans, a long-term trend at this point. Yet the Senate may remain in Republican hands because states with 1 million total people get the same two senators that states with 30 million people do.

    Cue freethinking nonpartisan libertarians defending this nonsense because it biases the entire system to Republicans. Same as the electoral college. Only one popular vote win for Republicans since the 90s (in 2004 when we were still giving Bush credit for failing to prevent 9/11).

    So yes hysterical exaggerations about socialism and all the other stuff in the parade of horribles Republicans have to offer instead of ideas, probably not widely popular. But the people don’t want Republicans in charge at all.

    Cue assholes explaining why yes Madison totally intended for Republicans to have essentially a 10 point built-in advantage because they have such brilliant ideas like giving Donald Trump nukes.

    1. Or Democrats could try to craft their appeal better to low population states. I wonder why they don’t.

      1. Now that is a great point, and I’m surprised it doesn’t come up more often.

        The rules are the rules. They were set up in an environment where he existence of political parties was actively discouraged. Whatever the authors of those rules felt about who should be over- or under-represented in government, it’s the job of politicians to collect a coalition on those terms.

        It’s unfortunate reality that partisanship has been increasingly mapped to demographic facts like race and population density. But you’re right, my complaint is with the system, which is too anti-democratic for my taste.

        1. The alternative is a system where low population states have essentially no sovereignty. A bunch of Californians get to dictate laws in states that they have no intention of ever setting foot in.

          This wouldn’t be as much of a problem if we actually had federalism, but since we have an all powerful Federal government the Electoral College is even more important now than when it was created.

          1. That complaint is nonsense. Republicans who live in California are just as disenfranchised as Democrats. I do not understand these arguments that amount to “if we pretend California didn’t exist, Republicans would always win!” Sure. Let’s drop Texas into the ocean too while we’re arbitrarily redefining the country.

            Right now politicians have to pay much more attention to the interests of swing states, which are arbitrary.

            The Electoral College can only serve one function: either affirm the democratic choice of a majority of Americans, or let the loser win. Since the only times in recent history the EC has exercised its bizarre function, we got the two worst presidents in history, I think it can be said that it serves no purpose whatsoever except a destructive one. The EC was meant to protect us from lunatics like Trump.

            1. How is paying more attention to California, instead of say Pennsylvania, not just as arbitrary?

              “More people live there” is arbitrary criteria in a Republic. It would be a valid argument in a direct democracy, and everyone from all sides of the political spectrum should be grateful that we don’t live in one of those.

              The EC wasn’t meant to protect us from anyone. It was meant to ensure that states with smaller populations weren’t excluded from governance, because at the time they’d probably have said “fuck it, we’re not joining your stupid country”.

              1. “More people live there” is arbitrary criteria in a Republic.

                Lol no it isn’t. Arbitrary is being a state that happens to have the demographic mix necessary to make it a swing state. Swing states were not part of the plan.

                You’re skeptical of majority rule because majorities don’t want Republicans. That’s the only thing that matters. You don’t care about small states. You care about Republicans winning.

                If the EC was a compromise sop to small states, fine, that doesn’t make it good. It means we give affirmative action to the people who live in small states. Hence my objection. Why is affirmative action for citizens of small states a good thing?

                I kindly object to the notion that someone living in rural Idaho is a better arbiter of public policy than someone living in LA.

                1. And I kindly object to the notion that someone living in rural Texas is a better arbiter of public policy than someone living in Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Delaware and Maryland.

                  FMDH is right. Without a Senate and the EC there would never have been the nation as it exists. Remember, almost all the original small states at the Constitutional Convention are now reliably blue.

                  1. All I’m asking for is that each person affected by the governing office at issue gets an equal vote. Like how it’s supposed to work. How it works in every other corner of democracy in the world.

  26. On election day, voters in the USA don’t have a realistic choice of extremism. The extremists haven’t won major parties’ nominations, so unless the voters want to vote for independents or minor party nominees, which hardly any do, they “eschew extremism” by default. So what does this headline even mean?

  27. Stalinist warmongering torture-master John Brennan and cronies, lock-down fascist governors and mayors, Bush-era neo-cons, and Antifa got the President they salivated for.

  28. Americans are nowhere close to embracing the radical left.

    So true.

    It’s a pity that the radical left isn’t after hugs though. They don’t give a crap if you ’embrace’ their ideas. You will do as you’re told of lose the ability to earn a living.

  29. And House Democrats’ uncritical embrace of the Green New Deal likely stirred justified worries among voters about the astronomical future costs of their energy bills.
    Actually, given California, I’m more worried about keeping my lights on and my refrigerator running.

  30. Of course the big loser is libertarianism. Republicans don’t even care about pretending to care about fiscal prudence. Republican voters only care about culture war hysteria.

    For libertarians it’s down to the same choice it always was: Do you want big government in the form of more public and environmental welfare, or do you want big government in the form of walls and concentration camps to keep the undesirables in their place?

    Government doing science, or government shoving Jesus down our throats. Government subsidizing new energy technologies, or government subsidizing drilling the national parks. Criminal justice reform or locking up your political enemies.

    1. No Tony

      Libertarians did not lose anything.

      That is where you miss the point.

      I am not playing the game by your rules.

      1. What influence they had in the Republican Party seems to be slipping away in favor of more, eh, reactionary impulses.

        If libertarians are a significant political faction that cares about libertarian outcomes, I think they have to make the choices I outlined. Perhaps even redefine freedom in a more robust and meaningful way. Because taking draconian immigration policy and “law and order” politics in exchange for a tax cut is not an especially convincing stance from a deontological or utilitarian perspective, as I’m sure you agree.

        If you claim it remains relevant despite electoral realities, then the same goes for socialists or anyone else with an ideology.

    2. the most significant criminal justice reform came from Trump

      1. Well, the First Step Act came from a bipartisan coalition of Congresspeople and interests, but Trump did sign it, and he deserves credit for that.

        Before we get carried away, that reform only affects the small proportion of criminals in the federal system, which also goes for the crime bill Biden championed in another era. Real reform is needed at the state and local level.

        1. Before we get carried away, that reform only affects the small proportion of criminals in the federal system, which also goes for the crime bill Biden championed in another era. Real reform is needed at the state and local level.

          “Real reform is needed!” He shouts while sweeping actual, though miniscule, positive reform into the same bin as actual, though miniscule (and more protracted), negative reform.

          1. I gave Trump credit for something, I’m not gonna suck his dick.

            1. Based on this forum, you’d have to stand in line.

            2. For somebody who says he’s not going to do it, you sure talk about it an awful lot.

              And openly fantasize about others doing it an awful lot.

              And steer conversations that have nothing to do with sucking his dick in the direction of sucking his dick an awful lot.

              I’m not a doctor so I can’t conclusively say that you’re obsessively fixated, but if we replaced “suck Trump’s dick” or similar sexual reference to Trump in each of your posts with “snort some blow”, “drink a fifth”, or “put money on the horses” I would be pretty sure that you should seek professional help.

              1. What’s wrong with sucking dick?

                Also, stop trying to cancel humor, snowflake. Dick jokes aren’t a new thing.

                1. What’s wrong with sucking dick?

                  You’re the one that keeps using it as an insult and I’m not cancelling anything. I didn’t say you can’t or nobody can make dick jokes. FFS, I whipped out the pseudonym ‘Elver Galarga’ on the fight club thread earlier today. The problem isn’t the dick jokes, it’s your obsession with one particular dick.

                  I don’t know what your specific affliction is, I just know I’m not the trained professional you need to see about whatever shame or guilt you feel about your desire to commune with Trump’s member.

                  1. You’re better than this. Getting offended at jokes is pretty lame. It’s also a cry-bully doppelgänger of the woke movement. Let’s keep it out of here.

                    I get the same routine from mother and the other one who follows me around copy pasting incredibly lame stuff. They can call me a thousand names, stay silent while Nardz makes death threats, then cry cry cry when I notice they seem to want me to fuck them.

    3. I don’t spend one second afk worried about who the president is. try tennis or something.

    4. I’m not sure Republicans ever cared about fiscal prudence. It was a bed time story, not a platform. Much like Democrats, I think Republicans care about 1) getting elected; 2) concentrating power; 3) rewarding friends; 4: punishing enemies.

  31. Half a stick of gum is better than no gum at all?

    Congress wasn’t planning to buy us gum. They were planning to put it on our credit card, along with a lot of stuff for their friends.

  32. “This is the new face of the Democratic Party”

    Said Tom Perez about Alexandria Cortez, two years ago.

  33. >>won the presidency

    your crystal ball says different things than others’.

  34. I’m starting to come around on the voter fraud/irregularities thing. I’m beginning to think that Democratic voters actually do prefer Biden over Obama and Clinton.

  35. If Biden won, democrats were REWARDED for extremism displayed in totalitarian covid responses, BLM and ANTIFA extremism, Critical Race Theory, and breaking every convention of peaceful transition of power.

    You don’t like Trump. Got that message a while ago. But what kind of incentive is there to enact sound policy like decreased taxes, regulatory reform, and sound judges if you don’t reward those policy decisions?

    But no. Democrats deliver is the most clownish of 4 years and we hand them the presidency and you think that translates to rejection of extremism? GTFO. You are a complete idiot.

    1. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are not extremists, and their winning the election and kindly requesting a normal transition like we’ve always had is not a threat to democracy. You want them to be labeled with all the boogie monsters you listed, and that worked to some degree, but not enough to scare enough of the people who feared Trump’s erratic insanity more.

      There are real problems in the world. The stuff going on in some sociology department somewhere is not one of them. You gotta stop worrying about what 18 year-olds in college are doing. You’re being had.

      Republicans chose the politics of fearmongering over having any good ideas. That is nothing new. The entire issue of abortion exists because they couldn’t get enough traction with interracial marriage anymore. Nobody but Catholics cared about abortion when they started with that crap.

      There is a pandemic and recession and climate change and injustice. Republicans have no ideas for these problems so they distract you with McCarthyism 3.0 and miscegenation panic 6.0. When you folks gonna wise up to their bullshit?

      1. Harris has become increasingly Marxist as a response to her base. She’s craven and will join whatever goose-stepping philosophy her supporters demand of her, because she lacks a soul.

        1. Where’s her birth certificate am I right?

      2. “There is a pandemic and recession and climate change and injustice. Republicans have no ideas for these problems”

        And what is the D solution besides massive, authoritarian government programs?

        1. Massive, not-authoritarian government programs. What’s your plan? Deny the problems exist? How helpful.

          1. It’s definitely a cool trick. Invent or overplay problems, then claim you and you alone have the Ultimate Answer, and anyone who questions you is a Sciencology Denialismist. Rinse, repeat.

            1. Well, whatever you’re claiming is fake or overstated, I’m sure you have some respectable scientific literature at hand to confirm your claims.

                1. Summary: Heat related pollution events flat or down.
                  Sea level rises: flat or down slightly.
                  Grain production in central canada: Up, not down
                  River levels: Up, not down as predicted
                  Forest fires: Down slightly, not up as forecast.*

                  *Now, forest fires can be a funny thing. Even though the evidence supports MY position, forest management is a major factor. We know that if a state stops managing its forests and wild lands (California/Australia) then you get much worse fires. So if a government did a good job of managing its lands, you might see a reduction in forest fires which could be argued has nothing to do with climate change either way.

                  1. Some guy in ancient Mongolia said the earth is flat, therefore tax cuts create jobs. Wtf?

          2. Really? Non-authoritarian? So no mandates on energy production and use, wealth redistribution, restrictions on human gatherings, or proscribed speech and behavior?

            1. I think you need to consult a dictionary or a book on political science. Anything but the internet.

        2. And what is the D solution besides massive, authoritarian government programs?

          Given the 60+ yr. history of massive, authoritarian government*s*’ inability to solve, avoid, or effectively prevent those problems you’re being exceedingly generous in calling it a solution.

  36. The electorate’s rejection of the Democratic agenda in the legislature actually makes it somewhat surprising that the Democrats won back the White House.

    Another interpretation: the electorate presumes the Democrat “Pen and Phone” President will simply executive-order the agenda.

    1. It’s more efficient that way. Cut out the middle man. AKA The voter.

  37. Maybe. If Biden can resist the radical, elements, remain President as his party tries to remove him for incompetence him in favor of Harris, and just remain alive with the stresses of the Presidency at his age.
    If not, extremism is what you will get no matter what you voted for this election.

  38. Another interpretation: the electorate presumes the Democrat “Pen and Phone” President will in reality executive-order the agenda.


  39. Biden isn’t much of a golfer, so he won’t be able to order drone-attacks on Middle-Eastern weddings from the ninth hole in the name of American Exceptionalism. To make up for it he will ban American weddings in the name of COVID.

  40. The Democrats are a conservative party by the standards of anywhere else in the world. Since this article appeared, Biden’s majority in the popular vote has swollen to nearly 7 million, and not a single Democrat “radical” that I have heard of lost a seat. Bore down to concrete policies such as universal healthcare, gay rights and regulation of corporations and the US public is way to the left of either major party. It cannot have gone unnoticed by a movement declaring a desire to “Make America [sic] Great Again” that when it was “great”, top-level taxes were in the 90% range.

    Anyone thinking the Democrats are the “radical left” is, basically, a couple of perverts short of a fundamentalist religious organisation.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.