Hanlon's Razor Is Getting Rusty in the 2024 Election
Don't attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

The summer's presidential politics have been ripe for conspiracism: the Democratic candidate switcheroo, the attempt on former President Donald Trump's life, the rise (and fall) of Project 2025, the late-breaking veepstakes. It's tempting to understand each of these plot developments as manifestations of an elite cabal's sinister game of 5D chess. We've never needed Hanlon's razor more.
Hanlon's razor reminds us not to attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. The namesake of the adage—a Robert Hanlon from President Joe Biden's beloved Scranton—offers little context for interpreting the phrase; it appeared as a stand-alone in a 1980 book of clever sayings. Later, it was picked up by early Usenet boards and often invoked to reject various conspiracy theories.
One of its most famous users is, confusingly, the similarly named Robert Heinlein. In his novella Logic of Empire, he offers this variant, to explain the recurrence of colonial slavery on Venus: "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity."
While not quite as dire as Heinlein's Venusian dystopia, conditions here on Earth certainly look bleak. Far from being a grand master–level game of villainous chess, the final months of the 2024 U.S. election season are best understood as children playing a game of Sorry!
There was without a doubt a conspiracy of silence around Biden's cognitive decline. But Hanlon asks us to consider whether all but his very closest family and associates might have chosen not to examine the evidence too closely until the very end ("When Biden's 'Bubble Wrap' Burst"). His advisers almost certainly foolishly overestimated their capacity to manage his deficits and also guessed wrongly about the speed of his decline. There may indeed have been people involved who were motivated by ill intent, but they were never as powerful as the stupidity that dominated at every stage. The result was a chaotic scramble to replace Biden with Vice President Kamala Harris, the person who was already his most likely successor and replacement.
One might think presidential assassinations are an exception to Hanlon's razor. Surely taking potshots at politicians is pure malice in action? Not so fast. We remain largely in the dark about the motives and machinations behind the attempt on Trump's life, and the information we have about the shooter's politics seems mixed. Perhaps he, like John Hinckley Jr. before him (who took aim at Ronald Reagan in an attempt to win Jodie Foster's love), was laboring in ignorance (or delusion) about the way the world works. And, of course, he mostly missed.
Project 2025 is not unusual in Washington, D.C. Many think tanks—and magazines—conceive of themselves as the cartographers and human resources department of the nation's political future. They craft road maps and corral talent in order to be poised to strike when electoral victory is at hand. The goals of this particular cluster are more authoritarian than usual. But the methodology is familiar. What's notable isn't the belief that this strategy for influence could work; it has before. It's the belief that it could work now. As Stephanie Slade explains in this month's cover story ("'Only the Best People'"), the built-in dysfunction of the MAGA GOP is a form of insurance against a truly world-changing conspiracy. Trump himself has already quenched, fueled, and then reextinguished the fire of Project 2025 with casual remarks as he campaigns, and there are months left to go.
At least one reason we need Hanlon's razor in the first place is that many of the incompetents believe themselves conspiracists. It's more flattering, at least by certain lights, to be malicious than to be idiotic.
It used to be said that the Democrats were the stupid party and the Republicans were the evil party. In this, as in so many things, the two parties have moved closer together while also moving in the wrong direction, converging on policies and political practices that are both stupid and evil.
In recent political history, January 6 is the great test of how hard-core a Hanlonian one is willing to be. The riot and trespass on the Capitol was a display of villainy so stupid that it rusted the razor right through. Yet even there, stupidity proved to be the more powerful force. While there were certainly villains in the mob, the rowdy morons won the day—and lost the fight.
Hanlon's razor is, in the end, a call to condescending charity toward one's opponents and one we'd all do well to keep in mind as we descend into the final weeks of the election season.
This article originally appeared in print under the headline "Hanlon's Razor Rusts."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
“It used to be said that the Democrats were the stupid party and the Republicans were the evil party.”
When was that? I’ve always heard it exactly the opposite (often with the added note that sometimes they’re both evil AND stupid, and we call that bipartisanship)
I believe you are correct, and it is fascinating how KMW manages to reverse the order of the joke.
Yes you are correct. She can't bring herself to say that Democrats are evil.
Is the point of this article supposed to be that the democrats need Hanlons razor to claim stupidity when they are actually being evil?
Is it easier to elect or forgive stupid people than evil people?
I guess both parties need hanlons razor.
FOAD, Nazi shit.
So, are you final,y going to answer whether you’re an Islamist or a neo Nazi? Or are you going to continue to cower from me like a little bitch?
Yeah, you’ll cower. You’ve got a lot to hide.
Why not both?
I’ve considered that possibility. In any event. He’s too much of a little pussy to answer. Obviously ashamed of his anti semitism.
Like I told you before you attention seeking needy fuckwit, if you ever refute anything that I’ve said I’ll answer your feeble question.
Since that will never happen, you should just fuck off troll.
You can always hide behind hanlons razor. I’ll buy that.
Ok pussy, we get it. You’re a gutless neo Nazi/ Islamist coward with the courage of your so-called ‘convictions’. I’m used to that here. Sarc hides from me like a little bitch too.
Face it, you’re really too ashamed of what a pathetic fascist/ islamofascist you are to tell us anything.
Oh, and everything you’ve ever claimed here has already been refuted by everyone else already. They quickly beat me to the punch. So there’s nothing left for me to refute. You’re just a pathetic anti semite who probably gets the shit kicked out of himself regularly when you run your mouth at any Jews unfortunate enough to cross paths with the mass of odious idiocy that you are.
So fuck the fuck off, and also, you’re refuted.
I’m pleased with the optics.
You obviously disagree with things I say. Don’t you think you should spend more time trying to refute me than making feeble ad hominem attacks?
Even if I were your bogeyman, you still couldn’t refute me.
Truth is my greatest strength and your greatest fear.
It sucks to be you.
You’ve been refuted on the same points multiple times. You’re just too fucking stupid to understand that. And too much of a pussy to demonstrate any pride in your Islamist Nazi bullshit.
Everyone here laughs at you, even the drunk, the pedophile, and the morbidly obese pedophile won’t have you. Perhaps if you beg them, they’ll let you be their sloppy bottom during their next child porn viewing session.
Now beg my forgiveness for your pathetic rudeness. Especially after we’ve all been so kind to a loathsome shitweasel Nazi/islamist, such as yourself.
Prove it.
Post a link to and clearly describe how you or anyone else here has ever refuted anything that I’ve said.
You won’t because you can’t and you’re a lying waste of skin.
Now everyone will see you run away you anonymous coward pussy.
Hahaha
“…Post a link to and clearly describe how you or anyone else here has ever refuted anything that I’ve said…”
Here, steaming pile of Nazi shit. Now wave your arms, post more bullshit and claim your hat hasn’t been handed to you:
Misek’s “irrefutable” evidence shown to be largely lacking in evidence and refuted where we find some few scraps:
1) “There has been no objective forensic analysis at any supposed site. That means that there is no physical evidence.”
That’s a lie.
Contemporarily, there was ample evidence in carcasses, skeletons, other human remains, mounds of possessions, gold dentures, etc.
Even in 1994, comparisons cyanide ions remaining on the walls of buildings where Zyklon-B was used sparing as a fumigant and the walls of the cellars at Auschwitz shows drastic deltas: Institute for Forensic Research, Cracow: Post-Leuchter Report (archive.org)
2) “Any activity that demonstrates and shares evidence to refute the holocaust is a crime in every nation where it allegedly occurred”
Irrelevance
3) “The crucial event of the story is the cyanide gassing of millions of Jews. That never happened.”
Lie or possible attempt at sophistry; cyanide is the active ingredient in Zyklon-B.
4) “Jews have published books illustrated with pictures of themselves shirtless dragging piles of gassed bodies from the chambers to cremation ovens.
But cyanide is absorbed through the skin and NOBODY could have survived a single day of such activity much less collecting reparations into their old age reminiscing about it years later.”
Bullshit. It is possible to die from contact, but the primary cause of death from Zyklon-B is ingestion of the gas containing the cyanide.
5) “And so it goes with every bullshit story. The facts prove otherwise.”
Irrelevant attempt to poison the well; not evidence.
6) “Let’s not forget another old timey favourite.The story of Babi Yar is a popular lesson in Jewish schools described as the single largest event of the holocaust.
The lesson is that between 30,000 and 100,000 Jews were taken to a ravine in Ukraine where they were killed.
The story is told by one Jewish survivor, Dina Pronicheva, an actress who testified that she was forced to strip naked and marched to the edge of the ravine. When the firing squad shot, she jumped into the ravine and played dead. After being covered by thousands of bodies and tons of earth she dug herself out, unscathed, when the coast was clear and escaped to tell the story.
She is apparently the only person in history to successfully perform a matrix bullet dodge at a firing squad. The soldier aiming point blank at her never noticed her escape. Never walked a few steps to the edge of the ravine to finish her off.
They were stripped naked to leave no evidence. Naked she had no tools to dig herself out from under 30,000 bodies and tons of dirt.
Only after the deed was done, the nazis realized that so many bullet ridden bodies were evidence. Oops, rookie move. So they brought more Jews and millions of cubic feet of firewood to dig them up, cremate them on gravestones and scatter their ashes in surrounding fields.
There has been no forensic investigation at the site. None of the bullets allegedly burned with the bodies have been recovered. Not one shred of physical evidence of this has ever been found.
There are military aerial photographs of the area at the time but they don’t show any evidence of the narrative, no people, no equipment, no firewood, no moved earth, no tracks of any kind.
Simply stating these facts is a crime in Ukraine where the Babi Yar narrative is taught in school”
To be honest, I haven’t heard of this but as regards any of evidence with reference to the Holocaust, it says nothing at all. It is totally irrelevant.
7) “Have you ever heard of the Bletchley park decrypts of the famous German enigma machines? It was credited for turning the tide of the war as allies knew what military actions the Germans were planning.
Only released in the 1980s those translated messages included prison camp information, deaths, transfers and requests for medicines to treat illnesses. The numbers of dead don’t support the holocaust narrative of which there was also no mention of”
Cite missing for YOUR claim, but:
“Allied forces knew about Holocaust two years before discovery of concentration camps, secret documents reveal”
[…]
“The Allied Powers were aware of the scale of the Jewish Holocaust two-and-a-half years earlier than is generally assumed, and had even prepared war crimes indictments against Adolf Hitler and his top Nazi commanders…”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/world-history/holocaust-allied-forces-knew-before-concentration-camp-discovery-us-uk-soviets-secret-documents-a7688036.html
8) “Are you willingly performing the feeble mental gymnastics required to believe, as the story goes, that Germans were communicating in code about prison camps while talking plainly about their military actions with their top secret enigma machines?”
OK, this goes beyond parody, and this represents the Nazi shit’s level of gullibility.
Simply, yes, the Nazis did NOT want to broadcast to the world that they were engaged in mass-murder, as the post-war interrogations proved. If there’s ‘mental gymnastics’ here, Nazi shit just got a unanimous “1”.
9) “The numbers of dead from German enigma decrypts does align with Red Cross numbers”
Cite missing.
“The Red Cross regularly visited all prison camps. It was their job to report the cause of all deaths. They recorded a grand total of 271,000 among all camps for the entire war. It is a matter of record.
Are you performing the feeble mental gymnastics required to believe that the Red Cross were so incompetent that they were completely unaware of 95% or 5,629,000 deaths?”
Is Nazi shit so gullible as to believe the Nazis would welcome the Red Cross to the death camps? Seems so. Value as “evidence” = zero
10) “Zyklon B is an off the shelf insecticide used among other places in Prison camps to delouse clothing and bedding to save lives by preventing deadly typhus. The system used for years before the war employed heating to release cyanide gas, fans to circulate the gas and more to exhaust the chambers to make the de loused articles safe to handle.
Pictures of this equipment and the small de lousing buildings with clothing racks still exist in Prison camps. But no evidence of any gas delivery system has ever been found in the shower houses where the bullshit holocaust allegedly occurred. In fact, the story has changed to that they just threw the heat activated pellets onto the cold drainless floors in rooms full of people.
Such an inefficient method would have taken too long to kill the required number of Jews. The pellets couldn’t be spread evenly in rooms full of people. The cold drainless floors would have delayed the release of cyanide from the pellets that people would have swept away from themselves. Any dead would have released all their bodily fluids and their bodies covering the pellets. Vomit would have been added to the floor prior to entering such a room.”
Arm-waving; see about for Zyklon-B concentrations. Value as “evidence” = zero
11) “According to Martin Gilbert in his book, Holocaust Journey, the gas chambers at Treblinka utilized carbon monoxide from diesel engines. At the Nuremberg trial of the Nazi war criminals, the American government charged that the Jews were murdered at Treblinka in “steam chambers,” not gas chambers.”
Arm-waving, Value as “evidence” = zero
12) “Gasoline engine exhaust contains about ten times the carbon monoxide than diesel. Diesel exhaust is relatively safe. Even if the Diesel engines were running at their maximum of 500 ppm, death would take several hours. Far too long to support the narrative.”
One approximation, one number many assumptions, no support. Value as “evidence” = zero.
13) “If Germans had used gas engines, death would have been in a few minutes. But in the holocaust narrative for treblinka diesel was used even though they had plenty of gas for their tanks. Nuremberg still recorded that they were “steam chambers”.
Which stupid lie is more believable? You have to perform some feeble mental gymnastics to buy that.”
More arm-waving, weak attempt at well poisoning, zero evidence.
14) “Jews had been publicly claiming a holocaust of 6 million Jews in various nations no less than 166 times between 1900 and 1945. Only to coerce sympathy to raise money. Like the wastes of skin who fake cancer on go fund me pages.
The story of gassing Jews began as British propaganda to turn popular opinion against Germany. It was inspired to draw attention away from Jewish Bolshevik war crimes in Russia because that would work against allied propaganda. It also served global Jewish interests to create undeserved sympathy for Jews who had publicly organized boycotts of Germany to drive Germany to war.”
Anti-sematic rant, followed by idiotic conspiracy theory; not anywhere close to “evidence”.
15) “There is a documented letter from the head of British propaganda to the head of the war office recommending that they cease the “gassing Jews“ propaganda because there was no evidence for it and if found out would work against their propaganda efforts.”
I’ll bet there were all sorts of letters which were embarrassing during WWII. Try finding some evidence
16) “The only thing the bullshit holocaust narrative has in common with WW2 is that they were both the creation of Jews.
These Jewish leaders are admitting it. Are they lying?
“We Jews are going to bring a war on Germany”.
David A Brown, national chairman, united Jewish campaign, 1934.
“The Israeli people around the world declare economic and financial war against Germany …holy war against Hitlers people”
Chaim Weismann, the Zionist leader, 8 September 1939, Jewish chronicle.
The Toronto evening telegram of 26 February 1940 quoted rabbi Maurice l. Perlzweig of the world Jewish Congress as telling a Canadian audience that” The world Jewish Congress has been at war with Germany for seven years”.
Smells strongly of “DID YOU HEAR WHAT TRUMP SAID!!!!!”, but regardless, even if true, it is irrelevant to the question.
Nazi scum responds with further bullshit, claims the above is only a flesh wound: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UijhbHvxWrA
Stick your head in a gas oven and die, Nazi shit.
I said post a link for a reason fuckwit. So post the link to the article where that appears.
Because EVERY TIME you ever repasted your feeble attempt I refuted it line by line.
Your failed attempt to refute what I said, though the best your feeble mind is capable of, doesn’t constitute success.
Post the link fuckwit. Let everyone see.
Hahaha
You’re a lying waste of skin anonymous coward.
I’m not going to let your shitstain lies stand for even one hour longer.
Here’s the link that demonstrates your feeble failure refuted line by line that you didn’t want to post.
Sucks to be you.
https://reason.com/2023/03/22/the-crusade-against-malinformation-explicitly-targets-inconvenient-truths/?comments=true#comments
Please deliberately ignore the very next sentence.
In this, as in so many things, the two parties have moved closer together while also moving in the wrong direction, converging on policies and political practices that are both stupid and evil.
That sentence says the Democrats are converging on evil while Republicans are converging on stupid. So she's saying that they're both stupid and evil.
But you can't and won't acknowledge that because, well, because that would be honest and defy the "Reason is leftist hurr durr" narrative.
And you are missing the point that she got the original form of the joke reversed, perhaps by stupidity.
And you are missing the point that she got the original form of the joke reversed, perhaps
by stupiditystrategically.And reluctantly?
I find it easier and generally more correct to assume malice.
Yes, malice on KMW’s part. She knows better and is gaslighting us here.
Here also:
His advisers almost certainly foolishly overestimated their capacity to manage his deficits and also guessed wrongly about the speed of his decline. There may indeed have been people involved who were motivated by ill intent, but they were never as powerful as the stupidity that dominated at every stage.
There is no way in hell that people did not know from Biden’s frequent and public handshakes with the wind and encounters with the Easter Bunny that he was not in serious decline. And yet they persisted in saying he was as good as ever (that’s damning with very faint praise, however).
KMW, you are a dishonest cant.
But they AREN’T “converging” on evil. They’ve ALWAYS been the evil party. (At least as long as that joke has been around.)
The fact that KMW, and apparently you, can’t see or acknowledge that is why people say what they say.
Above the sarc comment I see seventeen (17) grey mooted lewser rectangles, all of them packed with stupid, evil and superstitious. It's like a textbook proof of Nietzsche's comment on faith v. reason: To avoid seeing many things, to be impartial about nothing, to be a party man through and through, to estimate all values strictly and infallibly—these are conditions necessary to the existence of such a man. Yet God's Own Prohibitionists are almost exactly the same as the other looters they goggle at in efforts to ignore libertarian freedom.
Kmw is a dem shill.
Don’t you just love the way she pretends that no one knew about Biden’s dementia?
Or that you can't divine any motivation for an attempted assassination. That she tries to play up the "he was a registered republican" dishonest argument further discredited her analysis. If nothing else you can use Occam's Razor to say that the shooter wanted Trump dead. Further, without any evidence of a personal vendetta it would be fair to assume that it was politically motivated (noting the supporting evidence of his family being devoted democrats).
As much as I like Reason delving into logical principles, this is horribly misapplied and shows her inability to use reason
Even if he was a Republican, that doesn’t really say much, considering how many NeverTrumpers there are still registered as such.
And in PA dems were encouraged to register as Reps to vote in the 2022 primary to get Dr Oz on the ballot as the easier-to-beat candidate. It worked.
It's been said both ways. I heard it said the way in this article before I heard Buckley reverse it.
I recall it being said the Dems were stupid to run Adlai Stevenson again against Ike, during the McGovern campaign, and then Dukakis. Landslides tend to bring out the "stupid" comments.
The Democrats lost with Stevenson twice in the 1950's rather than nominating the much more popular Estes Kefauver, but it wasn't stupidity, it was a deliberate choice by evil party bosses. Kefauver became popular through a series of Senate hearings that exposed links between big city governments and organized crime. All over the country, the largest cities were run by _Democratic_ machines in cooperation with gangsters. I'd say the bosses of those machines were definitely evil, and they controlled the Democratic party tightly enough to shut Kefauver out and go with a definite loser - twice.
McGovern was closer to insanity than stupidity. The Democrats had got fed up after the Chicago national convention/police riot and temporarily displaced those party bosses, and what filled that power vacuum in 1972 was the lunatic-socialist wing. They were so out there that apparently Richard Nixon could not believe it, and hired burglars to plant bugs to find out what they were really up to. The longer-lasting effect of this was that the Democrats put the bosses back in control.
I think what happened with Dukakis was that Gary Hart's sudden sex scandal and withdrawal left the bosses with a short time to find another candidate, and they just misjudged their man. Not evil (or not more than usual), and not stupid, just rushed. And Dukakis looked worse than he really was because he was not just running against GHWB, but against Reagan's legacy.
Since Dukakis the bosses didn't always choose the most evil candidate, but IMHO Hillary was in 2016, and I cannot think of a more evil choice in 2000 than to pick a man who was obviously becoming demented and would be mentally unfit to be President before his term was over, and then select the evil, incompetent, and unpopular Harris as his backup.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But the Republicans held the Presidency for 20 years out of 24 (1969-1992), and accomplished very few of their goals. _That's_ stupid.
Even in the UK they call the Tories the stupid party.
It has always been the exact opposite. This whole article is gaslighting and bullshit to excuse KMW and Reason's complete incompetence and bias that led them to fail to fully cover any of these stories. Right now I'm questioning whether the progressively retarded editorial slant here is due to Koch's influence or just KMW being a shitty person.
Never blame stupidity where the evidence very clearly shows evil intent. Blame KMW.
Don't attribute something to stupidity when it can be FAR better explained as a conspiracy. The author seems unable to conceive that groups of people could be acting in unison to deceive other groups of people. Typical Beltway Libertarian - someone I strain to even consider a libertarian. Libertarians are skeptical of authority. ALL authority. Not so much the Beltway Libertarians (see her ludicrously non-skeptical view of vaccine efficacy and the government bodies advocating that).
And KMW is the worst of the worst. She is FROM DC, and has the Reason office in DC, exactly where it should not be. They swim in the swamp and drink in the filth and evil therein.
In recent political history, January 6 is the great test of how hard-core a Hanlonian one is willing to be. The riot and trespass on the Capitol was a display of villainy so stupid that it rusted the razor right through.
Interesting. Was that dude at Tiananmen Square stupid, evil or both? Were the colonists who threw tea into Boston Harbor stupid, evil, or both? Were the people who smashed through the Berlin Wall stupid, evil, or both?
^THAT is the question!
Put KMW's tits in a vice and ask were the BLM rioters and the secessionists of CHAZ evil, stupid or both?
Project 2025 is largely fairly bog standard conservative policy points that have been demonized entirely out of proportion by the Democrats attempting to creatte paranoia in their base. It is interesting how much the writers here pearl clutch about GOP "authoritarianism" as being ingrained it's candidates, but Democrat authoritarianism is treated as some kind of unfortunate happenstance.
Yep and still no word on the un project 2030, or unesco sel for esg. You know the things actually happening.
Or the in lawyer saying they have plans for if Trump gets elected.
Kmw is a cunt hack.
You’re far too kind.
Ny understanding is that it's at least the 2nd of a series of 5-year plans Heritage publishes, the previous being Project 2020.
Heritage has been publishing position papers like 2025 for a number of years and despite the caterwauling by the Dems and corporate press, it's all pretty mainstream vanilla Republican talking points and policies. Nothing out of the ordinary for them.
You know who else published 5-year plans!
Mein Project 2025 is a blueprint for Christo-Fascism.
Brian Doherty - pick this angle up please.
For the libertarians.
Hey, Stupid Pedo Bushpig, you still seem to be the most retarded asshole here.
And still floundering since the Biden system shut down.
most retarded asshole here
In a crowd with Jeffy, sarc, moderation4all, etc. that's a very tough call.
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Seethe harder Kiddie Raper. Once Reason is all used up by Koch it should be cheap to buy it. Then you’ll be turned over to the proper authorities for your pedophilia.
“Mein Project 2025 is a blueprint for Christo-Fascism.”
Here’s Project 2025, Shrike.
First explain to us how it is fascist, then explain to us what “Christo-Fascism” even means. Does it just mean anyone who isn’t keen on your totalitarian Pagan-Globalism?
Fucking idiot, no wonder Open Society canned you.
https://www.project2025.org/truth/
Secure the Border
Project 2025’s policy reforms would end America’s decades-long border crisis by:
-Thoroughly enforcing existing immigration laws.
-Aggressively constructing a wall on our southern border.
-Efficiently identifying and rejecting fraudulent asylum claims.
-Restoring the “remain in Mexico” policy for people awaiting asylum claims.
-Arresting, detaining, and removing of immigration violators anywhere in the United States.
Unleash American Energy
Project 2025’s policy reforms would secure abundant access to energy for the American people, including low-cost gasoline, by:
-Ensuring access to abundant, reliable, and affordable energy.
-Removing efforts to push sustainable-development schemes connected to food production.
-Stopping collaboration with and funding of progressive foundations, corporations, international institutions, and NGOs that advocate for climate fanaticism.
-Ending the Biden administration’s war on fossil fuels in the developing world and supporting the responsible management of oil and gas reserves as the quickest way to end wrenching poverty and the need for open-ended foreign aid.
-Ensuring that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission facilitates rather than hampers private-sector nuclear energy innovation and deployment.
De-Weaponize the Federal Government and Dismantle the Deep State
Project 2025’s policy reforms would restore self-governance to the American people by:
-Firing supposedly “un-fireable” federal bureaucrats.
-Closing wasteful and corrupt bureaus and offices.
-Eliminating woke propaganda at every level of government.
-Restoring the American people’s Constitutional authority over the administrative state.
-Returning governing power to the Congress and President instead of unelected bureaucrats.
Improve Education
Project 2025’s policy reforms would strengthen our education system by:
-Expanding school choice, so all children have the option of a great education, regardless of zip code.
-Promoting parents’ rights in public education so American schools serve parents, not the other way around.
-Removing critical race theory and gender ideology curricula in every public school in the country.
-Returning education control to state and local governments.
Shifting some functions of the Department of Education to other departments including Labor, Justice, and Commerce.
Help, help, the “fascists” are advocating… less government.
Don't you know that opposing Democratic plans for fascism is exactly what they call "fascism"?
antifa
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.
Amazingly the Donkeys think 1984 is a "How To" book, and are following it very closely.
Project 2025 is largely fairly bog standard conservative policy points that have been demonized entirely out of proportion by the Democrats attempting to creatte paranoia in their base.
Oh, you mean just like how Republicans treated "Green New Deal" back in 2020.
The Green New Deal policies contained a great deal of of half baked notions which would drive up energy costs for little gain.
Jeffy is just telegraphing his extreme neo Marxism. Just like he does with his open borders, pro pedophile/child grooming/child mutilation, and anti constitutional beliefs.
Please take a train to Hawaii ASAP. WTF is it with progressives, communists and Nazis and their obsession with trains.
WTF is it with progressives, communists and Nazis and their obsession with trains.
Very efficient in moving Proles between work camps.
The GND was an actual bill being proposed and pushed in Congress you absolute knob.
Project 2025 says that the priority of politics is the well-being of the American family, which goes beyond anything any other mainstream group has stated explicitly - and is of course strongly anti-libertarian.
As I implied in an earlier thread, this sounds more like the kind of crap you'd come across in Nazi Germany or the USSR.
I agree that both GOP and Democrats have authoritarian streaks uncriticised by their own supporters but I think a key difference is that the Democrats don't want their leader to be an actual dictator. The MAGAs definitely do, as any fule kno.
That's nothing like what you hear in ussr or nazi Germany. They literally encouraged family members to turn on each other if they went against the party.
Fuck off and die you retard
They encouraged families while also encouraging citizens of all ages to root out enemies within. This is two different levels of social policy.
Just google "Soviet family posters" or "Nazi family posters" at a minimum. And note too how Nazi Germany passed early pro-family laws while the USSR moved quickly from Marx's view on the family to Stalin's. But that requires knowledge, you fuckwit.
Look Shrike, you need to back down and apologize, before you thoroughly embarrass yourself (again). It’s you democrats who are leftist totalitarians. Not republicans.
Just admit you’re wrong, apologize, and then GTFO.
I posted Project 2025 right above, Shrike2.
Why don't you zip up there and quote which part matches your claims.
From P4 of the Forward – there is other stuff:
PROMISE #1: RESTORE THE FAMILY AS THE CENTERPIECE
OF AMERICAN LIFE AND PROTECT OUR CHILDREN.
The next conservative President must get to work pursuing the true priority of politics—the well-being of the American family. In many ways, the entire point of centralizing political power is to subvert the family. Its purpose is to replace people’s natural loves and loyalties with unnatural ones. You see this in the popular left-wing aphorism, “Government is simply the name we give to the things we choose to do together.” But in real life, most of the things people “do together” have nothing to do with government. These are the mediating institutions that serve as the building blocks of any healthy society. Marriage. Family. Work. Church. School. Volunteering. The name real people give to the things we do together is community, not government. Our lives are full of interwoven, overlapping communities, and our individual and collective happiness depends upon them. But the most important community in each of our lives—and the life of the nation—is the family
https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FOREWORD.pdf
Oh my god, that sounds horrible.
1. That’s the forward, you misleading fuck, where they talk about the hoped for results of Project 2025. That’s not the actual measures, and there's nothing there that baks your claim..
2. And what the hell is wrong with “restoring the family as the centerpiece of American life” as a hoped for result?
Are you some sort of misanthropic nut who thinks the centerpiece of American life should be the state? What’s the alternative? Collective childrearing in children farms?
3. Putting the family first is literally the opposite of what the Soviets and Nazis did, and you know that you lying fuck. They insisted that the state came first and told children to report their parents.
You guys really are demonic monsters, and you just lie and lie and lie.
Seriously, your evil.
Literally the opposite of your claim, Shrike2.
Pavel Trofimovich Morozov (Russian: Па́вел Трофи́мович Моро́зов; 14 November 1918 – 3 September 1932), better known by the diminutive Pavlik, was a Soviet youth praised by the Soviet press as a martyr.
His story, dated to 1932, is that of a 13-year-old boy who denounced his father to the authorities and was in turn killed by his family.
His story was a subject of reading, songs, plays, a symphonic poem, a full-length opera, and six biographies. His politicized and mythologized story was used to encourage Soviet Bloc children to also inform on their parents.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavlik_Morozov
See also: Traitors in the family: Stalin's informers
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-483230/Traitors-family-Stalins-informers.html
Again, literally the opposite of your claim, Shrike2.
Spying on Family and Friends
Discover the effects of the “Malicious Attacks” law, which criminalized dissent to the Nazi party, had on one German family and on German society as a whole.
The Nazis wanted to breed pureblood Germans and didn't give a fuck about how. Have the wife calve out 40 or grow them in a breeding program.
The Nazi breeding and infanticide program you probably never knew about
Forced procreation, kidnapping, and execution of babies were all carried out in the name of a master race
Half the time they'd kidnap "racially valuable" children and put them into SS Home Schools.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_of_children_by_Nazi_Germany#
Not exactly putting family first, is it, you misanthrope.
Stalin's informers.....say that sounds a great deal like Michigan Sect. of State, Bensen, who told the rest of us to inform on anyone who questioned the election.
Cohencidence? Nahhhhhh
Or Tampon Tim's order for anyone to inform on their family ,friends and neighbors if they didn't lock themselves away during the covid hoax.
He also ordered the cops to fire on anyone disobeying Komrade Walz's lockdown order.
Putting family above regime politics is nazi now? You make kmw look smart
He's a lying piece of shit. The Nazis and Soviets were very anti-family, and there's a mountain of literature to prove it.
But he thinks he can make a vague allusion to Google and propaganda posters and get away with his dishonest smear.
For all your lying bullshit, the Nazis and Soviets extolled the family though placed conformity above it.
And if you're too stupid or dishonest to see what Project 2025 has o say about the family, I can't help you.
We know YOUR stupidity is far beyond assistance, steaming pile of TDS-addled shit.
FOAD, asshole.
That is antilibertarian, how?
It seems to advocate relationships created from spontaneous order are more important than government.
Walz encourages people to inform on their friends and family if they defy his Marxist edicts. So that’s entirely a democrat thing.
You know who else advocated breaking up the family...
Many people were traveling with Jesus. He said to them, 26 “If you come to me but will not leave your family, you cannot be my follower. You must love me more than your father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters—even more than your own life!
Huh? Practically every politician in every country says hir priority is the well-being of that country's families. And since everybody's part of a family, how is it anti-libertarian? It's just vapid, is all — a way of saying, "We're for what's good."
It's how the family is emphasised and centralised in the document that's significant.
The fiends!
It’s how the family is eMpHasiSed and ceNtrAliSeD
The fact that he actually thinks that there is something wrong with that and expects others to as well, tells you that he's a monster inside.
And? Does your side find the concept of family so sinister that anything promoting it is seen as seditious to the communist utopia?
Communism has always identified the family as its primary enemy.
Nope. IIRC Marx regarded marriage as a bourgeois institution and initially the USSR wasn't big on the family, but they changed their tune after a short while.
As usual, Wikipedia provides a starting point. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_in_the_Soviet_Union
Oh, woke-ipedia is what you’re referencing?
Jesus, god you’re retarded.
Fuckwit, I cited Wikipedia as a place to start.
Would you prefer I had cited Conservapedia?
And it's still more evidence than you'd provided for your ignorant assertion.
The only fuckwit here is you, bruv.
You really are a Shrike. You didn’t really read your own link.
“initially the USSR wasn’t big on the family”
Understating it a little, aren’t you?
Marxist theory on family established the revolutionary ideal for the Soviet state and influenced state policy concerning family in varying degrees throughout the history of the country. The principals are: The nuclear family unit is an economic arrangement structured to maintain the ideological functions of Capitalism. The family unit perpetuates class inequality through the transfer of private property through inheritance.
Which is probably the reason why all the pro-family stuff gives you the heebie-jeebies, Shrike2.0.
The revolutionary jurists, led by Alexander Goikhbarg, adhered to the revolutionary principals of Marx, Engels, and Lenin when drafting the codes. Goikhbarg considered the nuclear family unit to be a necessary but transitive social arrangement that would quickly be phased out by the growing communal resources of the state and would eventually “wither away”. The jurists intended for the code to provide a temporary legal framework to maintain protections for women and children until a system of total communal support could be established.
But eventually they realized that SRG2-level hate for families had a downside:
In 1921 alone, seven million orphans were displaced, roaming town and countryside.[10] Government agencies simply did not have the resources to care for the children. An adopted child could be cared for by a family at virtually no cost to the state. The 1926 code would reinstate adoption as a solution for child homelessness.
With 11,400,000 men dead defending the homeland in WW2 they started to realize that their family hate might not exactly be productive in repopulating the USSR:
The Family Edict of 1944 would be a continuation of the conservative trending of the 1936 code. Citing the heavy manpower losses and social disruption following World War II, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet enacted laws that would further encourage marriage and childbirth.
“The 1944 Edict offered greater state-sponsored benefits to mothers, including: Extended maternity leave, increased family allowances even to unmarried mothers, promises of burgeoning child care services, targeted labor protections, and most notably, state recognition and the honorary title “Mother Heroine” for mothers who could produce large families.”
So the Soviet revolutionaries were radically anti-family just like SRG2, until they realized that they were going to lose the country.
But even the Soviets didn't hate humanity as much as SRG2 and wish for its extinction, so eventually their radicalism was reversed.
Probably a lot of people have bad associations with "family" because they have a hard time with their own family. They think of "family" as "everybody in the family except me".
Perhaps. I had and have a very good time with my family.
Trump is so pro-family he's had three of them.
Biden was so pro-family he married his babysitter as soon as his wife died.
Then he showered with his 13yo daughter.
Nothing says progressive like molesting your child.
It's purported that a politician once came out in opposition to mom and apple pie. His body was never recovered.
Apple pie is a waste of good fruit. Mom's OK.
the well-being of the American family. which goes beyond anything any other mainstream group has stated explicitly – and is of course strongly anti-libertarian.
Interesting--prioritizing the well-being of American families is considered an "extreme, anti-libertarian" stance?
Marxists hate families, too, so the face-fanning over the idea that their well-being should be promoted is simply confirmation of their political theology.
Heritage mentions family, and your addled mind goes to Hitler. Like all conspiracy theorists, you're connecting dots with no numbers on them to draw your own picture.
1. What a load of unmitigated bullshit. The Democrats have been looking for their next FDR since that piece of shit died in office.
2. To the extent they aren’t trying to install a dictator it’s because they have edfectively created a dictatorship of the proletariat through their absolute control of the bureaucracy.
You don't take over a country by stupidity.
Therefore the democrats are malicious.
Hey, there is plenty of room for most Democrats to be stupid.
Donkey leaders are evil, followers stupid. Most both.
"and therefore the democrats are malicious."
Pretty much sums it up. Furthermore, I would posit that where two or more democrats are engaged against democracy (obviously with malicious intent) there is no reason to steadfastly rule out conspiracy, now is there? Unless your goal is to trash anyone who questions the stink of what malicious democrats tend to do by calling them "conspiracy theorists." That is an assault that seems to me at least as malodorous as what the democrat bastards are doing in the first place. Almost makes one a co-conspirator of sorts. Wink wink, nudge nudge.
Plenty of right-wing posters here advocate for “taking their country back”, which necessarily involved taking over their country. Therefore these posters must be malicious for them to succeed, according to you. Until now, I: thought most of them (domain-specifically) stupid instead, I must admit.
"Plenty of right-wing posters here advocate for “taking their country back”, which necessarily involved taking over their country..."
Did you major in "Strawman", asswipe?
It isn’t malicious to remove anti constitutional neo racist traitors. Especially when they commit massive election fraud to remain in power. Maybe you should go back to England, where your fellow travelers havealready destroyed your country with the bullshit you believe in.
"Conspiracy theorists!" "Right Wing" Posters! Egads! How much wrongthink can we cover in one day at Reason!
Hey, wait a minute. Individuals advocating for taking their country back, I had always assumed were people who can actually see the country they were born in has been systematically been stolen right out from under them by corrupt politicians, media, tech giants and self-aggrandizing elites who've gaslit a collective of idiot sheep to vote them into power, which they intend to hold onto permanently. That they taunt these freedom-loving individuals endlessly by... Oops! I've gone and drawn attention to individuals vs collective thing. Wrongthink. My bad.
How has the average American had his country taken from him? Was he disenfranchised, for example?
I did stipulate "people who can actually see..."
You didn't stipulate who the average American is nor what was taken.
First of all, I never used the term "average American."
Second, as to what was taken, does "the country they were born in" ring a bell? Yes, rather broad I must admit, so as to include the most important things (at the very least) like the right to due process, the entire Bill of Rights or even just the expectation of equal justice under law. And so what if these things have never been in force exactly one hundred percent? The degree to which they've been selectively ripped away from at least half of the populace is a matter of scale, and has been increasing exponentially, since 2016, when an outsider blundered onto the scene, ostensibly to make some corrections, was duly elected to effect them, and was assaulted (maliciously, wouldn't ya know) at every turn by every form of parasite who'd been infecting our vulnerable system for decades. For shame!
But now the ruling elites (if you would) of this country have exposed themselves as flaming tyrants, and YOU cannot see? Please. Your responses all up and down this comment section reflect a lack of any sense of scale. You response to the mention of J6 was pathetic. You need a sense of scale? J6 was Reichstag Fire 2.0, pure and simple for anybody interested enough to look. To look, with the intent to see, that is.
Your presence on what is supposed to be a libertarian outpost makes no sense unless you are a robot blundering around planting vapid questions and insults. Or a dedicated troll. People here are supposed to be against tyranny, not for it. Or blind to it. Thank God actual humans do possess the means to isolate truth from propaganda. Focus... There. That should satisfy all your inquiries.
Yes, when COVID hysteria was used as an excuse to have an irregular and questionable election.
It is indeed arguable whether election processes were strictly followed in the light of Covid, and one of Trump’s very few court wins was on that but it is also worth noting that as voting is a constitutional right, it is certainly within the spirit of the constitution that during a national emergency that might otherwise make it more difficult to vote, measures to make it easier are not obviously bad.
And of course the election itself, in terms of votes, counting, etc. was unremarkable notwithstanding Tramp’s and his acolytes’ allegations of theft and obvious attempts to bypass the legitimate result. There were indeed one or two irregularities, like Pennsylvania's law requiring that in-person ballots be counted ahead of mail-in ballots, passed in order to give the impression of fraud when the mail-in ballot numbers hit.
Says the partisan who admits he refuses to look at the evidence.
If you're a white male, try getting a job at one of the high tech industries or at FarceBook.
If You're a white male notice how the trans community treats you.
Was Stalin malicious or just stupid and incompetent? How about Pol Pot? Mao maybe? How about Walz destroying small businesses and letting rioters burn down whole city blocks? There is real evil in the world and right here in the USA. Waving it away as incompetence and conspiracy theory is a lazy excuse by libertarians who are too cowardly to confront it.
There are never conspiricies, it's not like time magazine ran an article about 2020 election collusion between msm, big tech, the dnc, and voteing officials.
The problem is that many of the evil think they’re doing good, like the Jan 6 rioters, for example.
And some TDS-addled shits think the J6 protest was 'criminal'. You have to be imbecilic to believe such, but just read what asswipe here posts.
Why haven’t the cops who invited them into the capitol been arrested?
Some cops let some rioters in. Other cops didn't, nor did all trespassers enter peacefully. And apparently some police let rioters in as a better tactical solution than trying to stop them.
But I am unaware of any cop charged with assisting the rioters enter.
Oh, so they let them in for a tactical advantage?
You are too stupid to live.
Aragorn: “Open the gates so we can have a tactical advantage!
The tactical advantage is not getting the shit beaten out of you when you're outnumbered hundreds to one. This is not difficult.
IT's difficult for Vulgar Madman as it requires reasoning power, intellectual ability etc.
Yeah, all those people that milled about, staying inside the velvet ropes really made for an intimidating presence.
I didn't say, "tactical advantage", you cretin. I said, "tactical solution". Faced with a large number of rioters at least potentially violent and a small number of police at a particular door, opening the door may not be the worst option.
100% of the evil ones think they're doing good. It's always been that way. The only possible exception I can think of is biker gangs.
What's the point of the article? Is it saying Hanlon's Razor is no longer reliable, and that therefore if we see actions that could be interpreted as a result of stupidity, we're more justified than previously in thinking they were malicious? Does the rusting work retroactively, so that actions of the past that were concluded to be results of stupidity should be reassessed for the potential that they resulted from malice?
This article is a fantastic entry from Reason's Editor in Chief, Katherine Mangu-Ward. It is valuable because KMW clearly, and concisely articulates her worldview in a way that we have only been able to infer from the results of her behind-the-scenes editorial decisions. Between terrible headlines designed to create "TRUMP! Rage Clicks" and a selective disinterest in certain stories until they are too big to ignore, we have all known that the captain of the Reason ship was off course, but here we see in her own words just how far down the Urbanite Blue Bubble that she is.
This whole article is a case study in what Editors of magazines do in general, and KMW's specific approach. While journalists might be responsible for crafting a story with facts, it is the editor's touch that crafts a narrative from the stories.
(Continued)
Part I: The Strawman
This entire article is an example of how an Editor has the power to choose selective facts to create a meta narrative. KMW starts by cherry-picking several "Plot developments" over the last year, including the "Hide the Decline" campaign around Biden's mental acuity, and the rise and fall of Project 2025. She beseeches us not to see "each of these plot developments as manifestations of an elite cabal's sinister game of 5D chess".
KMW offers no quotes, cites, or examples of ANYBODY out there seriously suggesting that both Project 2025 and the protection of a doddering drool-cup were part of an "elite cabal's" grand conspiracy. Indeed, most would see the two events as examples of two different forces at political war with each other.
But this is how an Editor sets the hook. She has taken recent events and combined them together into a strawman of "People think this stuff is all part of the same conspiracy." She has fabricated the case of a fictional opposition to craft her narrative.
In essence, KMW's entire premise is to say, "If I can show you that THESE events are not part of a grand conspiracy, then there is no conspiracy, and you should attribute Hanlon's razor."
But it is easy to see how sloppy this construction is. Just because she proves that these 5 things are not part of a conspiracy does not mean that no conspiracies exist. Indeed, as we see later, she is hard pressed to deny a conspiracy. This is like saying "Because that robbery, gang shooting, execution of a mafia informant and random car accident are clearly not all performed by the mafia, we should just generally assume there is no mafia out there."
The article reads like a Sarcasmic comment.
Damn dude, that’s cold. True, but a cold blooded thing to say. At least you didn’t compare it to a Pedo Jeffy shitpost.
Shackleford and ENB usually come closest to that.
Also true.
Part II: When a Conspiracy is not Evidence of Conspiracy
KMW's already flawed thesis- that we should (by default) assume incompetence instead of conspiracy- hits a self imposed rough patch right out of the gate when she discusses the "Hide the Decline" campaign around Biden's cognition.
KMW says, that this campaign was "without a doubt a conspiracy". So in her very first case study, she has already told us that defaulting to incompetence was wrong, and that those insisting that there was a conspiracy were right. For some reason this doesn't deter KMW. KMW's case comes down to basically the assertion that because the conspiracy failed, the conspirators must be incompetent and therefore Hanlon's razor prevails.
Not so fast. Hanlon's razor does not say "Even if there is a conspiracy incompetence will undermine it." It is specifically telling you "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." That is, unless you have evidence to suggest that intent to do wrong was involved, chalk it up to blundering negligence instead.
We should all be able to agree that hiding Biden's mental decline was WRONG. No matter how noble your aim, you are concealing or lying to the world about the health of the most powerful man in the world. And you are hiding information that the public should know before they vote for him a second time. KMW linked to Welch's article documenting the many ways in which the media, administration and other officials intentionally hid this information, or chose not to pursue clues of its existence. The fact that they were undone by countermoves (by all accounts Pelosi was behind making the debate early enough to sink Biden in time for a switch) does not mean no conspiracy to commit this ethical infraction existed.
So by KMW's own words, we know there was a conspiracy, and her entire narrative is flawed.
It is specifically telling you “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” That is, unless you have evidence to suggest that intent to do wrong was involved, chalk it up to blundering negligence instead.
Here is the flaw with this construction of Hanlon… you dont have to have evidence that the intent was to do wrong. You can just as easily have the intent to do ‘right’ as seen by our betters.. but that our betters know the plebes wont swallow their medicine until they make taking it a fait accompli – hence the conspiracy.
You just need to have evidence of intent.
No. These people covered up the truth for years. Maybe they thought their overall goal was noble- protecting america from evil conservatives- but nevertheless they INTENDED TO CONCEAL THE TRUTH.
They KNEW they were concealing the truth. We know this because they purposely limited interviews, and purposely went out to the public and uttered bald-faced lies that Biden had never been better.
You can't hand-wave this away. Hanlon's razor isn't "Never attribute malice that which could be explained by people doing the wrong thing for the right reasons." If you want to create an Ersatz's Law for that, go right ahead.
For you to believe that Hide Biden's Decline was actually not a conspiracy, you have to believe that everyone in on it was actually TOO STUPID to realize that Biden was declining.
Exactly my point (that I apparently failed to make clear).
I think we’re on exactly the same page here.
I never liked Hanlin’s law the way it was always put forward. At least in the current area, there’s no reason for anyone to attribute benign stupidity to almost any action taken politically these days.
For me, the rev is poster child for the attitudes involved. Just salivating at the prospect of all of us, getting ready to be force fed by our betters.
But I do think there is a distinct difference between stupidity and misguided intent- enough of a difference for them not to be lumped together. There is a difference between someone kicking you and tripping over you in the dark. When they intended to kick you- whether it is because they rationalized it as a "necessary evil" or actively intended harm, we should call that out specifically.
I’m salivating at the thought of liquidating them when they try.
On re-reading your additional point, I do understand what you are saying.
I don't dislike Hanlon's law- it does have uses, especially in the realm of discussing bureaucracies. I renewed my Drivers License last month, and have still not received it in the mail. Is the DMV out to get me, or are they morons? Hanlons law would lead me to assume (probably correctly) that it is the latter.
You are right that Hanlon's law should use the term "Intent" instead of "malice". Because government is increasingly filled with people who are of the "break a few eggs" persuasion. They are not cracking skulls with malice, because as deluded, evil authoritarians, they truly believe what they are doing is right.
I tend to view them as entitled, apathetic, and unmotivated. When I was in the Army, I was temporarily assigned to the DoE office at Fort Riley. It was run by civil service workers. They were nice enough, but very unproductive and had a minimal work ethic. They didn’t go the extra inch, let alone the extra mile. I suspect that’s the case with most government workers.
Thanks.
As for the Biden cover-up, plenty of people who promoted that were, and are, stupid. But stupid was not the motivating or sustaining force. That was conspiracy.
There was no Biden cover-up, you moron. His senility was out in the open for all to see.
The truth is that Democrats are pussies and only when it became apparent Old Joe was going to drag down dozens of Sen/House members did they manage to show a little spine and talk to the old fool who thought he was winning despite all evidence he couldn't.
turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
There was no "cover-up?" So why were people lying about it, telling us it was all "Cheap fakes" and that Biden was still as sharp as ever? Why were people leading Joe around by the elbow in public?
Why are you even bothering telling this obvious lie? What, exactly, do you get out of it?
SPB is gaslighting us, of course. If it was out in the open, then why do we have numerous quotes of the current Dem candidate, Biden's press secretary, Pelosi, and numerous officials claiming on record that Biden was fine? Because they enjoy saying things that "everyone" knows is untrue?
But that's SPB for you. If he could erase inconvenient history to make his arguments stronger, none of us would know that he was banned from this site for posting kiddy porn.
See my comment below. SPB has lost his feed and can't hope to achieve gas-lighting on his own.
He’s pretty stupid, and lazy too.
He also likes to fuck children.
Up to, and even past the debates, we were getting quotes from Democrats that Biden was sharper than ever in staff meetings. Even after the debate, we were getting rationalizing that week and half old jet lag was the reason for Biden's poor performance, not that he has a poorly functioning brain.
That was the cover up. The outright denial of a reality everyone could see for years.
Even here the softball criticism was that he was old. It wasn't until well after the debate that Wolfe mentioned the likelihood of dementia. KMW and/or her staff have stayed far away from really talking about the manner of his mental decline in spite of commenters pointing it out since at least 2020
Wow, straight up retard. I guess you might have aimed for gas-lighting, but you ended up with Baghdad Bob denial comedy.
Fucking pedophile clown. It’s going to end real fucking bad for you.
You continue to be the dumbest motherfucker to post here, demshill.
And the conspiracy didn't fall. The goal was to maintain Biden as the puppet figure head of state. Deposing him via the 25th would have put Harris in power early enough for the proles to see how horrible she really is and would have guaranteed a Trump victory. The debate and everything that followed was carefully managed to spring an unknown candidate on the electorate with a short time window wherein they could use the MSM to gaslight the the candidate into the white house. Biden fucked things up by immediately endorsing Harris. But the strategy was seamlessly adapted. All of this is in the public record. It's not a conspiracy theory. It's conspiracy reality. And it's malicious.
Part III: The Cherry Picking Stawman Continues. PLUS: “Occam would like a word, ma’am.”
KMW’s next foray into intellectual inanity is to take up the attempted assassination of Trump. Again, KMW chooses the flimsiest argument to demolish and tell us that once again, Hanlon’s razor wins the day. Here again, we see the editor’s touch: running with only the facts most convenient to her narrative.
On the question of “Conspiracy” KMW would have us believe that the only relevant questions are about the shooter. There is enough doubt about the shooter’s politics that it could merely be that he was crazy. Clearly there is no evidence of a conspiracy here, right? Therefore, Hanlon’s Razor, right?
But while there are questions about why the shooter’s info isn’t being released, there are far more facts feeding the conspiracy-mill. Secret Service Officers whose physique made it impossible for them to provide coverage of Trump. Repeated requests for more officers that were denied by the administration. Secret Service personnel that were conveniently missing from posts guarding the shooter’s vantage point. There are many charges leveled, but the most compelling ones are that the Administration was deliberately under-protecting Trump while trying to encourage "lone wolf" shooters with their rhetoric. While I actually do tend to lean towards Hanlon’s Razor here, the fact that KMW ignores all of this evidence to go with “the shooter was cray-cray, end of story” tells us how intellectually uncurious she is.
And that intellectual laziness gets KMW in trouble here, because the case she makes about the shooter’s mental state ISN’T HANLON’S RAZOR. That razor isn’t “attribute crazy instead of malice.” It is “attribute STUPIDITY.” And KMW is not arguing that the shooter was too stupid to understand he was shooting the president.
In fact, this is more akin to “Occam’s Razor”, which suggests that all things being equal, the simplest explanation is the most likely. Yes, it is more likely that the shooter was a crazy individual, rather than part of a grand conspiracy of an elite cabal…but again, this is not the case KMW was making. And her lazy confusion does much to undermine an already terrible article.
One factor that goes into the disservice done by the SS is the cop mentality (shared by prosecutors and others in government) that it's better to attribute and punish wrongdoing than to prevent it. Like, hmmm...we can let or even encourage someone to shoot the president, find who did it, and all be heroes! Or, set fire to the building so we can put it out, and all be heroes! And get raises and more jobs for our relatives. It's evil but at a low, diffuse level that's not necessarily specific to the individuals targeted.
Hell, a lot of supposed law enforcement in this and other countries revolves around provoker agency. But it's just business, don't take it personally when you're killed, we'd've done that to anybody.
there are far more facts feeding the conspiracy-mill. Secret Service Officers whose physique made it impossible for them to provide coverage of Trump. Repeated requests for more officers that were denied by the administration. Secret Service personnel that were conveniently missing from posts guarding the shooter’s vantage point. There are many charges leveled, but the most compelling ones are that the Administration was deliberately under-protecting Trump while trying to encourage “lone wolf” shooters with their rhetoric.
Okay, Overt, if it is your claim that KMW and Reason aren't giving enough credence to these facts that "feed the conspiracy mill" then let's go all the way. Let's talk about whether Trump is a no-shit Russian asset. Let's talk about Trump's association with Epstein and whether he had a thing for underage girls. Let's talk about - and I actually had a lefty friend tell me this one to my face - whether Trump staged his own assassination attempt (with inside help of course, hence the conspiracy) in order to generate sympathy for him and boost his poll numbers. Why not?
These are all batshit insane conspiracy theories of course, and if Reason were to actually take them seriously, it would damage their journalistic credibility. They would rightly be labeled as kooks and cranks. And guess what, the same argument holds for conspiracy theories that you and your friends happen to give credence to. There are at least a half dozen sites that cater to as many right wing conspiracies as you desire. Reason shouldn't be one of them.
Reason shouldn't become just a pretentious version of Zerohedge.
These are all batshit insane conspiracy theories of course, and if Reason were to actually take them seriously, it would damage their journalistic credibility.
Sacrificing pursuit of the truth is always worse than sacrificing prestige, but surprise surprise, the cosmopolitan cares more about being viewed as elite has more important.
“Okay, Overt, if it is your claim that KMW and Reason aren’t giving enough credence to these facts that “feed the conspiracy mill” then let’s go all the way”
Yawn. I do not argue for Reason “goes all the way” to investigate conspiracy theories in this post. I argue that KMW- having chosen to write about conspiracy theories- is incapable of making a case that supports her thesis.
Let’s first note that in the post you replied to, I specifically acknowledge that Hanlon’s Razor is the likely explanation for the failed attempt on Trump’s life. I think it far more likely that the Sec Svc was incompetent than they set out to see their charge killed. Get that? I actually think this argument is a SLAM DUNK that would have improved her entire article.
But KMW brought up the conspiracy theories around the shooting, not me. She is the one who incorrectly suggested that if she can show the shooter to be crazy, no conspiracy exists. I can’t believe I have to say this to you, but if you are going to suggest that the conspiracy theorists’ argument is incorrect, you should probably confront the actual argument they are making. As I note above, it is easy to do and would actually make her article stronger.
Instead, she completely misses the actual arguments people have made, and she confuses Occam’s razor for Hanlon’s Razor. I don’t ask for her to do any more than support her assertions, and her failure to adequately do so makes her and the magazine look bad.
It is no secret that you and I have ideological differences. Step out of that space for a moment, and understand that I am not criticizing Reason's unwillingness to pursue "Right Wing" stories. As noted above, I AGREE THAT THERE IS NO CONSPIRACY TO KILL TRUMP. I am criticizing their Editor in Chief for turning this magazine into a Rage-Click Mill, where their flagship authors do nothing but write hot takes on the latest trend so that they can boost their SEO score with extra links to other Reason articles.
Traffic generation is important, of course, but you can do that and still maintain editorial quality. But KMW's own writing shows how intellectually lazy they have become. Rather than taking a few minutes to craft a well-thought argument, KMW produced an illogical dumpster fire FOR THE PRINT EDITION- not even a hot take.
I want to follow up to help clarify here, because I think that the attempted Trump assassination is a perfect example of how lazy KMW, and thus Reason, has been.
Soon after the attempt, there was a mad dash to attribute the shooter to one party or another. He was registered republican! He donated to progressive causes! He said X! Within a few days, Reason had put out a couple articles basically saying, “History shows that these people are typically crazy, and trying to pin them to one ideology or another may be difficult.” I think that was a fine stance to take in the aftermath, when we had very little information.
The problem is that we are now 2 months later, and an enormous amount of information has come out in multiple whistleblower leaks, congressional investigations, and reporting from other news sources. But KMW is still repeating the same line that Reason repeated the week after the event: “Look, this guy was probably crazy, end of story.”
Now I am going to apply a little “Hanlon’s Razor” here and suggest that this is not due to malice on her part, but just incompetence.
Again, if KMW had talked about all the SS incompetence that has been revealed; the fractured communications between local and federal authorities; the agents sleeping on the job- all of this would have STRENGTHENED THIS ARTICLE. It would have helped prove her point.
So I think this is evidence that she is incompetent or just doesn’t care. Two months ago she followed this story for a week, and decided all she wanted to know about it. Her mind was set on what happened- crazy dude did something crazy, end of story. That wouldn’t be a problem except she decided to write a story about all these bad conspiracy theories. Rather than research her arguments, she just regurgitated what she “knew” and as a result her entire article suffered.
This is what I mean when I accuse her of intellectual laziness. She made up her mind months ago, and never bothered to update her understanding. We are all tempted to do this, but the whole reason journalists and editors are paid for their position is that they are supposed to be better than this. I repeat: if she had updated her knowledge on what has transpired regarding this event, she would likely have been able to write a better article that goes further to prove her point.
This epistemological closure permeates Reason’s writing. They continued with the “Private Censorship is Okay” line even as more and more evidence was mounting that the government had a hand. But the lack of curiosity- the willingness to challenge their assumptions led to them failing to catch a major story until after others had broken it.
And today, Reason has just run with the line that Zuckerberg was a hapless victim of censorship. But there is ample evidence that Zuckerberg was actually cooperating with Government to be their private stooge- just as the State Department was funding NGOs to create (bullshit) lists of “russian bots” on social media.
This is the behavior of a magazine that values content creation over knowledge. They have a meeting, decide on the position Reason will take on an issue, and encourage their authors to write column after column regurgitating the same viewpoint- like that old chef who continues to serve the same menu that made him famous 2 decades ago.
We need to get rid of KMW, because we need an editor who is willing to challenge their own narrative every time someone brings an article to publish. It may be the 50th time they are writing about the Twitter files, but the editor should continue to be saying “is this reason article from 2 months ago still a good source? Have there been new developments since then?”
Failure to show this level of rigor is how magazines eventually wither and die.
Hahahahahaha, goddamn Jeff.
Well I'd like to see you debate and destroy KMW but I have to disagree that the most likely explanation for the assassination is just Crooks was a crazy loner and the SS just fucked up. Taken as a whole the evidence argues for a conspiracy to me. The regime's open antipathy to Trump. The refusal to provide adequate protection. The immediate cleaning and potential destruction of evidence by the FBI. The immediate cremation, and potential destruction of evidence, of Crooks' body. The continuing stonewalling by the regime of basic facts of the case. Apparently a local cop got a shot from the ground hitting Crooks' rifle while the SS sniper waited until five more shots were fired before taking the headshot in his scope. Crooks is classic FBI asset material right out of central casting. If this isn't a deep state conspiracy they aren't doing much to convince anyone otherwise. The entire event is already being memory holed and if history is a precursor we will never know what actually happened. If anybody cares.
All those resources and still couldn't kill him? Why didn't they have a backup shooter? Or a bodyguard with a knife? Or poison in...anything?
CONCLUSION: Put It All Together, and Weep for the State of Libertarianism's Masthead
I could go on through all the category errors and fallacies of KMW's article, but I've got real work to do. I think the case is clear that KMW demonstrates herself as someone incapable of rational discourse. She cannot construct a logical case, and is the epitome of confirmation bias. She is so used to selecting the facts you shall consider, that she really thought this article was a convincing refutation of conspiracy theories (some of which aren't theories any more).
And I argue that this is prime evidence of why KMW is unfit to be an editor at Reason, let alone Editor in Chief.
I acknowledge that "Hanlon's Razor" and "Occam's Razor" are both important to critical thinking. As I note above regarding Trump's assassination, I tend to think Hanlon's Razor carries the day in that specific case. However, that is different from publishing an article that suggests "It's Hanlon's Razor all the way down, all the time".
Ask any journalist about their profession's proudest moments, and you will receive a list of uncovered conspiracies- Watergate, Monica Lewinsky, Tailhook Scandal, etc. These dogged quests for truth define peoples' careers and keep the powerful in check. And KMW has told us that as guiding hand of Reason, her assumption is that the real story is how government is dumb.
My gripe is not philosophical here- KMW's editorial stewardship has left Reason late to the party, or just plain wrong throughout the greater part of the last decade. We know for a fact that actual conspiracies were being perpetrated against us. The Obama Administration actually weaponized the three-letter agencies against his political opponents. The Biden Administration really did conspire to censor opposing viewpoints with the help of social media.
And through this, Reason was nowhere to be found other than to recap the work of journalists actually willing to look for evidence.
Reason was flogging the "Private Companies are free to Censor" line for months after it was increasingly clear that the Federal Government was using them as proxies. Not only that, they were actively supporting the censorship with articles from Sullum like, "Rand Paul's Criticism of Cloth Masks Was Stronger than the Evidence Justifies"- which basically suggested it was Paul's fault he was banned from YouTube (and btw: the Science would eventually vindicate Paul).
Only when the Twitter Files dropped did Reason suddenly decide they needed to change the tune about these private companies and their censorship. And since then we have seen a strong insistence that this was all the Government's doing. To this day, there is no interest in exploring how Corporations *willingly* collaborate with the federal government to infringe on our rights. Soave has now written several articles insisting that Zuckerberg was a victim, despite them hiring scores of Obama/Clinton staffers into their highest ranks, and begging for the government to regulate the entire industry.
Likewise, it wasn't until Biden's disastrous debate that Reason was willing to post an article from Welch saying what most people had already figured out. Other than some offhand notes from Wolfe in the Mourning Lynx, there was no interest from KMW in investigating the fact that the leader of the free world was a babbling old coot and that the executive branch, congressional leaders, and most of the media were conspiring to conceal that from the public.
This article shows why Reason has been so bad. KMW can't even tell the difference between Occam's Razor and Hanlon's Razor but she will muster all the condescension her Yale degree can offer to preach about our own lying eyes. This muddled mess of an article pulls the curtain back to reveal just what a muddled mess this magazine's reporting has become.
The governing board of Reason should see this article as the punchline of a long-running, bad joke that KMW has made of this magazine. Each fallacy, category error, and inaccuracy should be an indictment of the Editor in Chief and be the straw that finally, blessedly, breaks this camel's back. Get her out of the Magazine. Find someone who is interested in real, actual liberty and uncovering the creeping fascism enveloping our country.
Really, really well said.
It's naive and disingenuous partisanship. Trump used the power of his office to target political enemies. Learn more about the JEDI contract, Ten billion were at stake for the Pentagon's plans to put the military's cloud computing under a single vendor. Amazon was in the running and Trump tried his darnest to ensure that Amazon's bid failed. Amazon is owned in part by Jeff Bezos, a critic of Trump and owner (in full) of the Washington Post.
FOAD, asshole,
Amazon uses all chink components for their servers. They should be no where near the pentagon
The Washington Post published many stories that put Trump in a bad light. That's what earned Bezos a place on Trump's list of enemies. You can look into it further if you are curious. I don't believe Trump ever mentioned Amazon's components. His complaint was that the USPS was being taken advantage of by charging Amazon too little for their services. All false, as the service was making money from their dealings with Amazon.
Keep making shit up.
No, you shut up!
No, you shit up, you stupid bitch.
No, you shut up!
We should meet up sometime, and resolve this impasse. I consider it likely your attitude will rapidly change.
Are you saying there’s a chink the armor of our national security?
So fucking what? Besides signaling your TDS, how does your comment relate to Overt's dissection of this piece and of Reason policy?
I don't give a shit about what Overt thinks about Reason's policy or writers. I'm commenting about Trump's use of the powers of his office in targeting of political opponents. Read my comment again, it's a brief one, and that should be clear.
mtrueman: I don't actually give a shit about what we are talking about, I'm just here to bitch about Trump. See? They are the partisans.
If you are curious, look into the issue of the JEDI contract. It will blow your mind. It is far more serious and consequential than your tiresome whining about Reason and its staff. You will thank me. You are a serious and intelligent person, Overt. It's time you focus on serious and intelligent issues.
mtrueman: I know it wasn't germane to the subject at hand, but please read my newsletter about Trump. He was very bad, but I'm not a partisan.
I'm thanking you for being funny beyond parody, mtrueman.
"but I’m not a partisan. "
Just naive then. In that case you just might profit from learning about the JEDI contract. Let's discuss this later, shall we? As one non partisan to another.
"I’m thanking you for being funny beyond parody, mtrueman."
It's more like satire. Parody is essentially mimicry. Not my bag.
"Just naive then."
Of course you are naive. That is why you don't recognize how partisan you are being when you try to make every discussion a referendum on the Other Team.
"It’s more like satire. Parody is essentially mimicry."
No it is certainly self parody. You are making a fool of yourself.
Facts are facts. It's not partisan to point out that Trump used his office to target his enemies.
"It’s naive and disingenuous partisanship. Trump used the power of his office to target political enemies. "
Poor Mtrueman points out several conspiracies and thinks that invalidates my theory that there are actual conspiracies worth reporting on.
I only noted your reluctance to call Trump out for using the power of his office to target political enemies. Perhaps you were unaware of the events around the JEDI contract. You should be thanking me for educating you rather than petulant insults.
I was not reluctant. It just wasn't germane, you marx-addled moron.
That said, "You are such a partisan, let me make this all about Trump" is the funniest example of lefty projection I've seen all day, so good for you.
"I was not reluctant. "
I believe you are reluctant. You still refuse to acknowledge how Trump used the power of his office to use the JEDI contracts to target his political enemies. As I mentioned earlier, it is out of naivety or disingenuous partisanship. Raising the JEDI contract would put Trump in a bad light. Hence the reluctance.
Hey dumbshit- not talking about something is not the same as "refusing to acknowledge" something.
I didn't talk about the Bay of Pigs, Operation Chokepoint, gulf of tonkin incident, the 500 million dead at the hands of your favorite commie tyrants orr myriad other actual government abuses of power. That doesn't mean I refuse to acknowledge their existence. It just means they weren't needed to prove my point.
But your obsession with Trump says more about you than me. And the fact that you won't let this go after beclowning yourself repeatedly makes you look very, very petulant. And silly.
Are you interested in elected officials using their office to punish political opponents, or not? Once you've familiarized yourself with the shocking details of the JEDI affair, then we can have a serious discussion. Until then, all you've got is red baiting and insults.
"But your obsession with Trump says more about you than me. "
Naturally. My obsessions are mine, yours are yours. as god intended. I am currently obsessed with debian's OS for the rpi, and I don't expect you to share it.
Are you interested in the 500 Million innocent people murdered by the commie tyrants you admire, or not?
News Flash: I have no need to have a serious discussion with you, because you are not a serious person. You are a marx-addled moron who uses digression into obscurity whenever you are uncomfortable discussing the subject at hand.
I will not be baited into the billionth internet argument about whether or not orange man is bad. I am not a fan of the man. The only thing more tiresome than that re-tread is this diversionary schtick that you seem to think is so clever.
If I accept that Trump was a bad man who abused government, it does shit and nothing to the argument I advanced in this post- it in fact strengthens my argument, as it is yet another example where Hanlon’s Razor does not apply.
So please, go fuck yourself. You have stopped being silly, and now you are just annoying.
"Are you interested in the 500 Million innocent people murdered by the commie tyrants you admire, or not? "
Not. My comment was about Trump's persecution of Bezos. You'd prefer to insult and bluster than discuss anything that might put Trump in a bad light. I had you pegged as a partisan right from the start, despite your denials. I was right all along.
"The only thing more tiresome than that re-tread is this diversionary schtick that you seem to think is so clever."
It's about a president using the power of his office to persecute those who disagree with him. It's not diversionary, it's right on the nose, the very complaint you raised in the first place.
" I am not a fan of the man. "
I am willing to accept that. You're a party before the man man. As I say, a partisan.
"Not. My comment was about Trump’s persecution of Bezos. You’d prefer to insult and bluster than discuss anything that might put Trump in a bad light."
Well, I'd prefer to stick with the discussion at hand. But since you want to change the subject to "Let's talk about how bad Trump is", I have no qualms changing the subject to "Let's talk about how mtrueman's heroes were some of the most brutal murderous people in human history".
"You’re a party before the man man. As I say, a partisan."
That's because like all good marxists, you see everyone outside of stalinist totalitarianism to be part of the "other party". That's fine, but again you are showing who the real partisan is.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yes, you are naive and disingenuously partisan, we all know this.
>Weep for the State of Libertarianism’s Masthead
You mean Spiked-online ?
The governing board? What, like you think they didn't want it this way?
The Reason Foundation's problem is that of being a relatively small fish and therefore needing to distinguish themselves. If they say the same thing as a bunch of avowedly "conservative" or "right" loudspeakers, they lose. So they have to say, "We're different!", no matter how ridiculous they wind up having to get to do so. Admittedly, KMW may have blundered by making it too obvious; or maybe it's not a blunder, there's just no good way to do it.
The leadership organizations of the libertarian movement in the USA are victims of success, or at least of improved times. 50+ years ago they had a tough job trying to get attention as against the background of false dichotomy cast as "left" vs. "right". In the meantime politics in the USA has been reoriented so that there's now a clearly better choice, and often an actually good choice, for libertarians between Democrats and Republicans. And Trump has been in the process of making the Republicans even better, when they had a tendency to backslide toward the Establishment.
What else could Reason have done? One thing would've been not to focus on US presidential politics — to just leave it as too obvious to deserve or need commentary — and to instead focus more on developments elsewhere in the world and/or at other levels within the USA. Reason was good for many years in reporting on foreign trends from a libertarian POV. They're still mostly good in reporting and analysis of policy developments within the USA where partisan influence on those developments is slight or inconsistent enough to be ignored, which unfortunately isn't many of them these days. They used to be good in reporting on developments in science and technology, until they developed certain hobby horses caused by having just certain staffers on those beats. Sometimes they wound up on the wrong side of history, but at least they tried, and could honestly say they were being different while not straining to be so.
Sometimes they may be boxed into taking certain incongruous stances. Remember "Byline", the radio commentaries from Cato "from liberal, conservative, and libertarian perspectives"? In answering my question of why they included such obvious statist commentaries as those from Julian Bond, Chris Hocker (or maybe it was Dave Boaz) explained that they had to, since the Fairness Doctrine was still in effect, and the overall libertarian slant of "Byline" had become too obvious unless they fuzzed it with contrary matter; Julian Bond was a late addition to the stable.
The Reason Foundation’s problem is that of being a relatively small fish and therefore needing to distinguish themselves
I think this is largely correct. There is no reason for Reason to exist if they become "just another right wing site". The folks at Federalist and Breitbart and NR do it much better than Reason ever could. And the key distinction is that Reason isn't just a bunch of right wingers! They are not going to chase every niche story that Republicans care about because that's not their job.
It is hilarious watching shills come out of the woodwork to tell us that if you admit that, yes, the Biden administration was conspiring *with intent* to censor private citizens and conceal the failing mental state of its principal, that makes you a “Right wing site”.
This of course isn't about "chasing niche stories". KMW is the one who brought up these items and tried to tell us they weren't really examples of authoritarians being authoritarians, but instead stupid people being stupid. She was covering it, and she was choosing to foist a poorly reasoned narrative upon us to explain what happened.
Nope - what would make Reason a right-wing site is if they do what you asked, and investigated every right-wing conspiracy theory that is currently in circulation (while of course ignoring the left-wing ones, because those are just crazy pants, right?) I mean, why DIDN'T Reason say more about how Ray Epps was "OBVIOUSLY" an FBI plant? Hmm?
Best as I can tell, you want them to be a slightly-less-crazy version of Zerohedge. Sorry, but no.
“I mean, why DIDN’T Reason say more about how Ray Epps was “OBVIOUSLY” an FBI plant? Hmm?”
I did not mention Jan 6 once, and I challenge you to find a single post from me on the subject. So to be clear: you are imputing on me a position I have never taken.
Your game of bait and switch is as transparent as it is banal. You are bringing up Jan6 because it is a story you think is more defensible than Biden's senility or Censorship. You want to talk about Jan6, because you do not want to talk about the actual scandals of government abuse from the Biden Admin. It is a fact that the Biden Administration was concealing his mental decline. It is a fact that the Biden Administration was conspiring to silence conservative viewpoints with a campaign of censorship by proxy.
And I don’t think that Reason should report on these things because it is “right wing”- they should have reported on them because they were hugely consequential to the county. Biden’s mental health resulted in a near unprecedented shake up in the presidential race. You obviously aren’t happy it happened, but only a shill like you would argue that it is only important to right-wingers. If only Right-Wing sites were willing to report on this ACTUAL FACT up until it was clearly obvious, then that tells you more about mass media (and yourself, and Reason) than it does about any right wingers.
And the censorship scandal is, frankly, Reason’s bread and butter. They were reporting on social media censorship for the past 8 years, but never once sought to explore the revolving door between Obama/Clinton staffers and social media payrolls; They were not interested in understanding why social media was adopting very specific narratives during the Hunter Biden scandals and covid censorship.
Lots of media missed this, and they were wrong. I know that is inconvenient to you, but there we go. The fact is, signs of Biden’s decline were there for any person to investigate. The signs of government censorship were there for anyone to investigate. Government censorship is one of Reason’s major issues and they were not interested in following up. And had they done so, they would have the scoop and accolades instead of Greenwald, Taibbi and Weiss.
Overt, did you really expect Jeffy to be anything other than sophist and disingenuous? It’s his stock in trade. He lies and portrays everything not supporting the democrat narrative as ‘extreme right wing’. He doesn’t even try to hide it anymore. To the point that I don’t see why he bothers to pretend he’s anything other than what he is, a neo Marxist.
I did not mention Jan 6 once
No, you mentioned "facts feeding the conspiracy mill". So why not all of the Jan. 6 conspiracies? Why not ALL of the conspiracies?
You are bringing up Jan6 because it is a story you think is more defensible than Biden’s senility or Censorship.
This is you attempting to stuff words in my mouth. Don't you object when you think I am doing that to you?
Maybe you really are just another conspiracy nutter. Want to talk about Bigfoot and the 'so-called Moon Landing' while you are at it?
So why did you try to change the subject to January 6th when Overt has very clearly dissected this actual article?
"No, you mentioned “facts feeding the conspiracy mill”. So why not all of the Jan. 6 conspiracies? Why not ALL of the conspiracies?"
Because KMW brought up a specific set of "conspiracies".
Here is your problem: You are blinded by your Team Blue Crusade. So when you read my screed, all you saw were facts that make the left look bad, and your lizard-brain reflex was to start throwing out things that make Team Red look bad, hoping to make me look like a hypocrite. You are so obsessed with that battle that you never bothered to actually understand what my screed was about.
My screed was not a defense of the right or attack on the left. It was a criticism of the article itself, and its author, Katherine Mangu-Ward. She is a terrible leader for Reason, and the lazy writing in this article shows why.
Read my screed again, and you will see that I am not focused on the actual conspiracies, but the arguments she makes about them. When I criticize her not discussing the "facts feeding the [assassination attempt] conspiracy mill", it is not because I think they will make the right look better, or the left look worse. It is because omitting those facts made her article weaker. Had she brought up all the subsequent data about SS incompetence, it would have made her invocation of Hanlon's Law more convincing, and even undermined the Right Wing conspiracy theorists that you accuse me of supporting.
Get it? I am not demanding that KMW investigate every right-wing conspiracy theory. I am demanding that when she uses them as evidence, she does so in a convincing manner.
Please, go back and read many of my criticisms of Reason's writing. You will find that I am rarely taking issue with their conclusions. ("You are ignoring X! What about Y!"). Sometimes that happens, but generally I am critiquing their rhetoric. Because their editing (lead by KMW) is atrocious- headlines crafted as inaccurate click bait; links to articles that don't probe the point- sometimes proving the exact opposite; "Reporting" on events from the other side of the country, using only third hand info from NYT or WaPo; logical fallacies.
Now, in my conclusion I pointed out how KMW's editing has led this magazine down a bad path, ultimately missing the boat on the Government Censorship Campaign. While it is unfortunate for you that this is largely a story that makes Lefties look bad, I mention it because it is a prime example of a conspiracy that ACTUALLY HAPPENED- a conspiracy that Reason should have been all over. It was a conspiracy that they missed because they are being lazy. And this laziness is going to lead them to miss the boat once more.
People on the left used to be very worried about creeping fascism- that is the alliance of corporations and government against the public. Defining principles to judge what is acceptable cooperation between private and public sectors, and what is actually infringement on our rights will probably be THE defining question of the next decade. But Reason is consistently missing the boat on this. Because Reason is being lazy- taking a world view where only government is capable of abusing our rights, and corporations are as hapless victims as any other citizen. Until KMW leaves this site, we cannot fix that.
I disagree with your thesis, Roberta.
KMW did what pretty much every lefty news rag in media did during the Trump years- she turned Reason into a click-bait outrage farm. This wasn't novel. It wasn't differentiated. The spent the entirety of Trump's term running hot takes on whatever latest bullshit he spewed- just like HuffPo and Politico.
I was working with HuffPo at Yahoo during this period. Every time Trump's latest brain fart trended on Twitter, HuffPo's traffic would spike 10 - 100x. Because of facebook and twitter. And KMW figured out how to tap into that outrage loop. To this day, half the stories proffered by Sullum, Soave and ENB are reactions to some trending story on X.
Reason was not differentiating itself from the crowd- just being libertarian would do that. No, they were happy being one of the bottom-feeders collecting scraps from the latest news cycle. Entire articles filled with nothing but links to tweets and other reason articles, all designed to boost their clicks and ad revenue.
I see it as of a piece with the trend Reason was on for many years before KMW came aboard. She just developed it to the utmost.
Epic takedown. And I would really like to see you debate KMW on the editorial demise of Reason magazine. You articulate it far better than I could.
Shit! Slow clap. Well said. Even while I think you're being generous to her on several criticisms, that was such a brutal indictment of how bad this article is and how unfit KMW is to be a writer, much less the chief editor of a magazine based on logic.
Outstanding.
Hey, um, KMW, any thoughts on the loss of free speech in Brazil with the dictator judge Alexandre de Moraes?
https://x.com/AlexandreFiles
Introduction:
He's even violating Brazil's constitution:
So, KMW, any thoughts on this as Reason is supposed to be for free minds, not just free markets?
The aftermath of the Lula 'election' will be the template used for the Ds if they get power after November.
More activist D judges, more dictats from the Prez in the form of executive orders, more collusion with social media oligarchs ... suppression of a larger swath of free speech. Roll in a little Chinese cross polinization with some social-credit scoring and some govt mandated ditgital currency... etc.
Given that fhe SC is owned 6-3 by the right, a successful attempt at stealing an election with the necessary support of the SC is more likely from the right than the left.
Further, there are enough on the right who believe that the last election was stolen and the next one might be to think that they will regard attempting to steal in 2024 as fair play.
Keep on keeping on with your retarded conspiracy theories asshole.
What conspiracy theories, fuckwit?
Go back to your child porn Shrike.
You mean the same 6-3 SCOTUS that didn't hand Trump the presidency in 2020?
That's a conspiricy theory! He doesn't mean harm!
-kmw
Uh, sure.
We certainly are not lacking stupidity in our current political and social system, but when all the random idiots line up in the same direction, you might be stupid to dismiss any intent.
This is what happens when a nation treasonous-ly votes Al’Capone criminals into lawful office.
If you’re more concerned about ‘armed’ (Gov-Gun) Al’Capones STEALING your neighbors earned belongings for you and whatever crusade you’re on than upholding the LAW (US Constitution – Liberty and Justice) you end up with a mess of a gangland nation.
This is preschooler common-sense.
You can’t hand the nations monopoly of ‘GUN’ Power to people who think STEALING is the cure for everything. Their evil will show up in more ways than that one alone.
The first question every voter should ask themselves is does this politician aspire to ensure Liberty and Justice for All or do they just aspire to building a criminal gang of [WE] mobsters out to STEAL on your behalf. Gang-building usually by skin-color, gender, religion and/or earned wealth status.
Please realize and acknowledge that 'Guns' don't make sh*t.
Their only human asset is to ensure Liberty and Justice for all.
The riot and trespass on the Capitol was a display of villainy so stupid that it rusted the razor right through. Yet even there, stupidity proved to be the more powerful force. While there were certainly villains in the mob, the rowdy morons won the day—and lost the fight.
All true. One would think that would be the end of MAGA and Trump. But they keep coming back like a bad case of syphilis.
And now SCOTUS has granted Donnie immunity so the right can be both stupid and successful in their totalitarian quest.
Speaking of stupid...
turd, the TDS-addled ass-wipe of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
"Donnie" had nothing to do with the riot.
What riot? The guided tour?
But AOC almost died!
Good thing she had that fainting couch, where she was in mortal danger, miles away.
Paraphrased ...
"D*mn that Constitutional right to petition the government for redress.", SPB.
"De-Regulation is an act of totalitarian quest!", SPB.
Or we could take elite Democrats at their word when they tell us they are super-super-smart. Thus what they do must be intentional--and evil.
Both teams are awful.
Both teams use fear over relatively minor issues in order to distract from much larger, consequential issues, like taxes and spending and war and health.
Team Blue uses riled up fears of Handmaid's Tale to distract you from the fact that their tax and spending policies lead us to ruin.
Team Red uses riled up fears of drag queens to distract you from the fact that their tax and spending policies lead us to ruin.
There is a reason why so many people don't vote. Voter participation in this country is 60% in a good year, which is pathetic by every other Western democracy's standard. So many people don't vote because they don't want to participate in this clown show either.
Nothing will substantively change until the two party system is dissolved. And that means, at the start, not endorsing either team.
Voter participation in this country is 60% in a good year, which is pathetic by every other Western democracy’s standard.
The only votes that matter are those that show up. And all other contemporaries are more socialist than us, which raises the question of why would you expect increased vote participation to lead to libertarian outcomes.
Both teams are awful.
That says that Republicans are awful too. Since criticism of Republicans equals praise for Democrats, you're praising Democrats.
Both teams use fear over relatively minor issues in order to distract from much larger, consequential issues, like taxes and spending and war and health.
Democrats did it first, so by saying it's bad when Republicans do it you're saying it's ok when Democrats do it. You're praising Democrats.
Team Blue uses riled up fears of Handmaid’s Tale to distract you from the fact that their tax and spending policies lead us to ruin.
You didn't praise Republicans, and criticism of Democrats without greater praise for Republicans equals praise for Democrats.
Team Red uses riled up fears of drag queens to distract you from the fact that their tax and spending policies lead us to ruin.
Straight up leftist attack on Republicans. That means you're praising Democrats.
There is a reason why so many people don’t vote. Voter participation in this country is 60% in a good year, which is pathetic by every other Western democracy’s standard. So many people don’t vote because they don’t want to participate in this clown show either.
Again, no praise for Republicans. So that statement is praise for Democrats.
Nothing will substantively change until the two party system is dissolved.
You want to dissolve the Republican party? That's praise for Democrats.
And that means, at the start, not endorsing either team.
Not endorsing Republicans is praise for Democrats.
Yup you got it. The people around here who still support the two party system do so because they actively want Republicans to win. "Voting against KamKam" doesn't cut it.
Shut up, faggot Nazi.
Good thing Trump was a good president the first time around. You just hate him because he isn’t pedophile and illegal friendly. Like your democrat owners.
You’re a boring drunk.
The result was a chaotic scramble to replace Biden with Vice President Kamala Harris, the person who was already his most likely successor and replacement.
WTF? Just WTF are you claiming?
Biden and his party had zero intention of running fucking Kamala, even after Biden’s disastrous debate performance. The powers that the DNC represent (call it “conspiracy” or whatever you want KMW) pulled the plug on Biden’s ass, but he got the last laugh endorsing Kamala in his surrender speech. The fuckers only got Obama on board with it days before their sham convention.
Are we really to believe everything that’s transpired at the DNC since the failed Trump assassination attempt and Biden’s coup, was thought out months in advance? “Kamala’s Joyful Campaign” was the best they could come up with on the notice they were given, LOL.
D- on gaslighting effort from the editor of Reason
Yeah, Harris did so poorly previously that it's hard to imagine that they really wanted her. In fact, it's enough to make me wonder if they want to lose this time and just lucked into their base being so partisan that they don't notice this is the same Harris they overwhelmingly rejected previously.
Her first move out of the gate was to endorse price controls and this is 'the best' Democrats have to offer? So much so that they essentially installed her over the will of their own voters?
Ok, sure, whatever you say KMW. *eye roll*
Any chance Harris has this time around completely rests on her party affiliation. It has nothing to do with her, her policy positions, or what she might actually do. She is the 'not Trump' candidate, and it remains to be seen if that's all she needs to win. So far, objectively, she is a mix tape of all the Democrats biggest mistakes (and some Republican mistakes, to boot) wrapped into one cackling package.
What they "lucked into" was Trump stupidly agreeing to debate Biden before Biden could be nominated. Had he held off the debate, either Biden would have been messily removed without a convenient excuse of him doing poorly in the debate, or Trump would have exposed Biden in a Sept. debate when it
would have been much less likely they could prop Harris up as the candidate of Joy and everything Holy.
The weirdly early debate is perhaps the best evidence of it being an intentional plan. Though the other explanation is that the Biden campaign tried to come up with debate conditions that Trump would not agree to attempt to put the blame for no debates on him.
Not installing installing the brown female heir apparant likely would have caused a serious rift in the Democrat's coalition. Campaign finance law likely restricting the use of money previously donated to Biden to Harris is the other major reason. They were in a jam, and Harris was the easiest solution.
I think Biden's warchest was the real reason. Lots of money that nobody else would have been able to raise.
Manufacturing a perception of "joy" in the electorate is not cheap. 50 cents a post on the reddit starts to add up, you know.
That’s what I thought at the time: that they expected to take the “L”, but a more respectable L, by debating early and then yanking Biden for…anybody, really. Replacing him would look bad and be bad for the candidate who took his place, but not as bad looking for the party as if they left him in. But then they blew it by not getting him to leave office. If they were going to nominate Harris anyway, you’d think they’d want her as incumbent, even if just as an excuse to nominate her.
Historically, the VP of the incumbent party, when the incumbent isn't running, becomes the presidential candidate.
Except this has never really happened before, so there is no established precedent.
Incumbent means current office holder. Bush I, Gore, Biden, all incumbent’s VP.
Except the incumbent was running this year and actually won a majority of his party's delegates and was the clear candidate of his party until he was destroyed in a debate. The closest parallel I can think of was 1968 when LBJ as incumbent dropped out after performing poorly in an early primary at which point other candidates ran in the rest of the primaries and caucuses for the nomination. Never before that I can recall has the incumbent ran and won his party's nomination only to be removed from the ticket for another candidate.
Never before that I can recall has the incumbent ran and won his party’s nomination only to be removed from the ticket for another candidate.
And then was just given all his money while the media wrote articles saying it was 100% legal because we say so, and even if it isn't, it'll all be spent before anyone can do anything about it.
Monty, they’ll keep doing this thing where they pretend that it was in totally normal. That’s what Jeffy and Sarc do.
Btw the 2008 Republican nominee was not the VP of the incumbent ( who was not running after being term limited) but instead was a sitting US Senator.
And in 2016 the VP of the term limited incumbent did not even run and was instead a sitting US Senator.
Those are exceptions. As a general rule the VP get dibs.
Except that since 1980 only three sitting VPs ( and that includes Harris) have been given the nomination of their party when the incumbent didn't run. Those being George HW Bush, Al Gore and Kamala Harris. Both George HW Bush and Al Gore went through the primary process and had challengers unlike Kamala Harris who simply took over when the incumbent POTUS was forced out. Biden served as VP but did not run when the incumbent POTUS was term limited but came back four years later.
"Biden served as VP but did not run when the incumbent POTUS was term limited"
It wasn't his turn. Biden had to wait 4 years because Obama stole Hilary Clinton's rightful candidacy in 2008.
FOAD, asshole.
Historically speaking, if Biden had chosen not to run at all, Harris would have been the nominee anyway. That is the justification foe the claim that she is the "most likely successor".
I had a friend tell me 5 years ago that Kamala Harris was going to be installed by the powers that be, because of how easily she could be manipulated, if they could figure out a way to install her as president, regardless of how she polled. When he later saw Biden pick her as running mate, he figured that was part of the plan, and that Biden would soon be pulled from office for his dementia.
She was always the first choice of the Regime, and it was clear she was being set up for it in how she was being covered by the press, breathlessly reporting on her various "girlboss" gasbagging in the Senate in the same way they treated Obama.
The problem is that Harris is nowhere near as charismatic as Obama was, and can't convincingly lie about how much she likes the country like he could. There's nothing in her record that shows her as anything other than a power-mongering professional politician of the 20th century third world type. That's why Tulsi was able to nuke her campaign so easily, and as you pointed out, it's also why the Regime wants in the executive chair to serve as their cover.
I'm assuming their preferred slate of candidates would have been VP in a post election removal of Biden so there were no funding or election considerations immediately. Beyond Kamala herself that might explain some of the VP slot refusals.
There are more than one breed of “conspiracies”; one does not require active interaction, simply noting that a certain level of dishonesty or lying about a certain specific seems to be delivering the desired result and then falling in line: The smoke-screen around leakin’ Joe’s dementia, for example. Converting the J6 protest into some sort of criminal activity for another. Claiming Cackles’ “interview” being other than a meeting between her and two support animals but one more.
Don’t recall the right being involved in such slimy activity, but you have to be very careful of any ‘report’ by the legacy press; they are ripe with them.
Makes me wonder what sort of decisions/actions default to malicious/stupid binary.
It's not a binary that applies to our personal lives. I've only rarely heard it used about regular people doing something with some attention and thought (like a jury or a checkout Clark).
Perhaps he, like John Hinckley Jr. before him (who took aim at Ronald Reagan in an attempt to win Jodie Foster’s love), was laboring in ignorance (or delusion) about the way the world works. And, of course, he mostly missed.
I just wanted to note how disgusting this is. I might think Joe Biden is a doddering old racist piece of shit, but I don’t endorse assassinating him nor would I just brush off him being shot as ‘oh well, it was only a flesh wound’ like he’s the Black Knight in some Monty Python sketch.
There is little doubt that if Biden had been shot, we would still be hearing about it daily right up through the next election. They would be foaming at the mouth claiming the shooter is indeed part of a broad effort by Republicans to kill their opposition, and there would never be a single mention of Occam’s Razor.
Maybe I’m wrong, after all this is mostly a pure hypothetical, but given how much water the media has carried for Biden I don’t think it’s much of a stretch.
And remember, that wannabe assassin did indeed kill someone.
And the federal government swept in and grabbed all the evidence, and let the body be cremated.
All we will ever have is what the democrats determine is safe for us to know.
That is exactly what they would have done. You would also see a Raskin, Schiff, AOC, Goldman, etc. given daily platforms on major media outlets to scream about phony. ‘extreme MAGA conspiracies’, and how the FBI should go after republicans who dissent.
Both looter Kleptocracy collectivist factions actively promote, endorse and practice the initiation of deadly force at every opportunity and on the flimsiest of pretexts, albeit through goons and dupes. Morally they've as much right to sneer down on the lone dead kid as Hitler's single party had to sneer down at the 15-year-old who shot a Jew-bullying Nazi to death in Paris. The loud yelping comes from the preachers suddenly feeling what they practice--on their own hides.
"Don't attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
For that to be valid it would be necessary that malice and stupidity were mutually exclusive, and they aren't
Precisely. This is definitely a "yes AND" scenario.
Speaking of stupid and evil political parties... The LP may not be evil, but that's largely attributable to their abject lack of political power. But as far as stupid goes, no party comes close.
It's a real accomplishment to take 5-15% of the population who are aligned with you philosophically, and to so thoroughly turn them off with your messaging and candidates that they'd rather vote for the (R)etard or the (D)ouche.
No, that much of the population was never aligned with LP even philosophically, because not much of the population is radical, and since neither of the major parties is radical, even that portion of the population that you think is aligned with LP is better aligned with either or even both of the major parties.
If the LP took stances like, "While we think [government program or policy here] is necessary, we think it goes too far as currently implemented, and should be cut back by 10%," then you'd see as large a fraction of the electorate as you think aligned with them.
Attention Jesus Caucus nazis and anarcho-communist bootheads, the wizened pizzle sock is talking to y'all.
One wonders who this candidate and messaging would have been to secure even 10% of the vote for a third party Libertarian candidate since 1972?
By 1972 the Nixon Law financing looter kleptocracy political campaigns was already a year old. https://libertariantranslator.wordpress.com/2015/09/05/nixons-anti-libertarian-law/
LP votes still increased from 4000 to 50 times, then 250 times as many by the 1980 campaign when anarco-looter infiltration began in earnest and objectivist principles were targeted for extermination by republican nationalsocialists.
If you don't expect conspiracism in politics, you don't know what it's about. What good is having a political party or faction unless you engage in some confidential concerted action?
Don't attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by ham-fisted malicious retardation.
The summer's presidential politics have been ripe for conspiracism: the Democratic candidate switcheroo, the attempt on former President Donald Trump's life, the rise (and fall) of Project 2025, the late-breaking veepstakes. It's tempting to understand each of these plot developments as manifestations of an elite cabal's sinister game of 5D chess. We've never needed Hanlon's razor more.
Are we suggesting that what happened with Joe Biden, the creation of Harris as the preferred Democratic presidential candidate despite not receiving a single vote, a campaign funds transfer of some $100 million to a candidate completely skirting campaign finance laws (despite what one may think of said laws) and the not one, but two successful elections of literally brain dead candidates and then the sudden elevation of a candidate who's largely brain dead on her best day, and a Time Magazine article telling-- in detail-- how it was all done-- to be a mere Vaudevillian act of stumbling backwards into success?
It used to be said that the Democrats were the stupid party and the Republicans were the evil party.
Yes, and the reason that statement was crafted that way is because it was crafted by someone who fits nicely into that category I've talked about so much: We seem to be able to ascertain when the right goes too far, but there seems to be no sense of when the left goes too far.
Right wing politics are simply evil and immoral... the left, on the other hand means well and are fundamentally good, but through ineptitude have failed to create super-majorities in every state, county and city in the Union, despite their generally preferable and well-meaning politics.
Just so you know, there's a reason why Blue states and cities tend to end up as Machine political districts. No one does Machiavellian politics better than Democrats. I'd actually say the reality is the reverse: The Democrats are the evil party and the Republicans are the stupid party. Dems not being evil because everything they believe is fundamentally evil, but because the way in which they operate and win. The Republicans are stupid because they are unable to answer this method of operating in any meaningful way, they get rolled at the table which results in this: More than 200 former Republican presidential staffers sign open letter endorsing Harris over Trump. Or this: P.J. O'Rourke Endorses Hillary Clinton
Since the 1960s, the Democrats have become the party of the super-wealthy, most of its top operatives and power brokers are in areas of finance, law, and in the last 20 years, the tech sector. That type of pedigree doesn't get you 'nice but stupid' politics. Just sayin'.
We seem to be able to ascertain when the right goes too far, but there seems to be no sense of when the left goes too far.
We know what "the right going too far" looks like: it is the social conformity of Nazi Germany and the political repression of military dictators everywhere.
We know what "the left going too far" looks like: Stalin, Mao, Castro, North Korea, and every failed leftwing experiment everywhere.
And the uncomfortable truth of modern America is, the status quo is far closer to the right wing extreme than the left wing extreme. If we were on a football field and either extreme was an end zone, America would be somewhere around the 25 yard line on the right side of the field.
So "going left" means realistically we stay on the right side of the field. Look at Obamacare and how fiercely that was opposed. It was NOT "socialism" by any rational measure. It was a centrist approach to health care. But that was viewed as if we were going to Stalinist hell.
So there is a near zero chance that there will be a touchdown at the left end zone. The right end zone on the other hand.. just look up the percentage of Republicans who favor a military dictatorship.
And the uncomfortable truth of modern America is, the status quo is far closer to the right wing extreme than the left wing extreme.
LOL, fuck off with this gaslighting. Leftists literally control or have majority influence on every single institution in this country, social and economical–schools from the bottom to the top, the media, entertainment, corporate board rooms, venture capital, information technology, even the military now. To the extent the right even has input anymore is almost entirely due to political consolidation in red states over the last 20 years.
Now, the left certainly likes to pretend that we’re just a step away from “fascism,” but they’ve been lying about this since Marcuse, and there’s no need to take it seriously. Because what they call “fascism” is just “anything which isn’t leftist.”
Leftists literally control or have majority influence on every single institution in this country, social and economical–schools from the bottom to the top, the media, entertainment, corporate board rooms, venture capital, information technology, even the military now.
No, centrists to center-left liberals do. "Leftists", like AOC, have virtually no power outside of their individual districts.
"But look at all the left-wing radicals in universities!" Sure there are a lot of radicals as professors. But the people who actually RUN the places, administrators, are risk-averse pussies, not fiery revolutionaries.
"But look at companies like Disney pushing wokeism!" Companies like Disney are chasing dollars. They are delivering what they think their audience wants to consume. And the minute that changes, they will change too. They already have.
And look at how this "wokeism" emerges: left-wing groups, or "woke" employees, or "activist investors", or somesuch, try to nudge companies like Disney to go in a more "woke" direction. No one is forcing them, and these activist groups have to go to the *owners of capital* to do it. They can't go to the government to force all these companies to "go woke" because there is zero chance this could ever happen. The closest any state got was California when it tried to mandate a certain composition of corporate boards, and even that was struck down as illegal. All of this "leftist control" that you complain about is not even all that leftist, is all occurring within an inherently right-wing capitalist system, and is primarily motivated by profit not ideology.
So yes, all of these things that you complain about are small nudges towards the left-wing endzone but still from firmly on the right side of the 50-yard line.
No, centrists to center-left liberals do. “Leftists”, like AOC, have virtually no power outside of their individual districts.
LOL, yeah, besides a platform that's loudly signaled by their media allies.
“But look at all the left-wing radicals in universities!” Sure there are a lot of radicals as professors. But the people who actually RUN the places, administrators, are risk-averse pussies, not fiery revolutionaries.
They aren't centrists. Just because they aren't joining their students in the tent camps doesn't mean they aren't marxists. By your logic, Stalin was center-left because he wasn't like Trotsky.
“But look at companies like Disney pushing wokeism!” Companies like Disney are chasing dollars. They are delivering what they think their audience wants to consume. And the minute that changes, they will change too. They already have.
Every corporation in the country pushes cultural marxist anti-white bullshit now.
All of this “leftist control” that you complain about is not even all that leftist, is all occurring within an inherently right-wing capitalist system, and is primarily motivated by profit not ideology.
It's always been driven by ideology. Just because people like Soros, Wyss, and Fink have a shit ton of money doesn't mean they're capitalist. They're marxists, just like the pigs in Animal Farm.
So yes, all of these things that you complain about are small nudges towards the left-wing endzone but still from firmly on the right side of the 50-yard line.
It hasn't been from the "right side of the 50 yard line" in decades, and it's telling how you're trying to minimize it with stage 2 of the leftist dialectic: "Yes, it's happening, but it's not a big deal."
Jeffy carries a lot of democrat water for being such a fat piece of shit.
I agree with your overall assessment there. It works only because of how "left" and "right" are constructed, and how the non-conformity of the "left" quickly becomes the conformity of the "right".
Two gangs of predatory looters whose unwitting hosts are homogeneously ignorant and gullible HAVE to evolve into pretty similar shrewdnesses of simians. Non-simian exemplars--wolves, coyotes, jackals, dingoes--are obviously alike in behavior, just as the dumb herd animals they hunt or stalk for carrion are also broadly similar. Thank Nolan libertarian spoiler votes have been leveraging them away from totalitarianism this past half-century. We've SEEN where Hitler/Stalin coercive altruism goes.
So to you the BLM riots were perfectly fine, the assault on the capitol in May 2020 was peachy, the storming of Congress over Kavanaugh was cool and an attempted assassination was political as centrist and normal? Seems about right for you and your far left viewpoint.
And fuck off you lying, gaslighting cunt; Obamacare is Socialism in it's fascist form if you ever bothered to look at tmit honestly.
Obamacare is Socialism
No. The British NHS is "socialism". Canadian single-payer health care is "socialism". And even these are not truly socialist because private health insurance still exists in these places. Places with truly socialist health care are for example China, South Korea and Taiwan, where private health insurance is not even allowed. People who know what these terms mean laugh at you when you call Obamacare "socialist".
Places with truly socialist health care are for example China
Nope. Both public and private.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_China#Current_healthcare_system
If I remember rightly the US has the world biggest socialized healthcare system in Medicare and Medicaid.
ObamaCare is socialist on the fascist model, The government dictating to a nominally private industry.
Jeffy has to lie and propagandize at every opportunity.
Self-Denial much?
If Obamacare isn’t Socialism what exactly would you call it?
Socialism is the foundation to Communism. The definition fits perfectly and what you contrast it to is just the fuller extent of Communism.
And this is exactly why the left-party is criminal and treasonous and is out to destroy the USA.
"If Obamacare isn’t Socialism what exactly would you call it?"
Private medical insurance companies, private hospitals, private doctors, nurses and orderlies. Socialism is public. Like Canada, the UK, Europe etc.
Socialized medicine in the US is seen in the military, with its publicly funded, owned and operated facilities.
Exactly how is medical really ‘private’ when it’s all Government funded? (hut hum; Obamacare)
“Many socialists think that essential services—such as healthcare, education, and even food—should be provided to the citizens by the government.” … “Another common misconception is that there is no private property in a socialist society.”
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/socialism
"Exactly how is medical really ‘private’ when it’s all Government funded?"
As I already pointed out, medicine is socialist when it comes to the military. For the rest of us, it's private. The hospitals, doctors, nurses etc are not government employees. The insurance companies are run as profitable businesses. For the poor and indigent, the welfare system kicks in, helping out with medical care, food, housing, clothing, education etc.
Do you think the non-poor gets to void gov theft (taxes/socialist-healthcare) just because they purchase from a private party with their own earnings??
Talk about a complete line of BS.
In the fantasy-land of medical care grows on trees.
The very premise of socialism is 'armed-theft' of those 'icky' people.
And that is EXACTLY what Obamacare does.
I hadn't understood that when you say socialism, you mean a government that taxes its citizens. Under your definition, every government in the world is socialist, which is not a helpful distinction in my opinion.
There's nothing confusing about it.
Socialism STEALS from one person for another. Robbing Peter to pay Paul. Equal outcomes from un-equal effort. etc, etc, etc....
Taxing to defend a nation and ensuring Liberty and Justice for all (as provided by the US Constitution) works on the exact *OPPOSITE* ethical grounds as the aforementioned.
"Places with truly socialist health care are for example China"
No, China's health care system is closer to the US, ie the more money you have, the more health care you have access to. Canada, the UK, Korea, Germany, France, Japan, etc are much closer to the socialist ideal, at least when it comes to health care.
"Places with truly socialist health care are for example China, South Korea and Taiwan, where private health insurance is not even allowed."
Are you sure about that? Perhaps not.
In point of fact, there is evidence FDR copied that from Hitler while mystical conservatives, robbed of the power to kill over beer, were worshipfully admiring christian nationalsocialism. The votes from "both" looter parties were in the bag just when--thanks to Bert Hoover/Harry Anslinger prohibitionism--the Crash had boosted CPUSA membership sevenfold.
Jeff is getting better and better at exposing the monofilament lineworld fallacy of looter kleptocrats. Promise to force doctors to let women die and pay cops to shoot kids over plant leaves and confiscate homes and savings? Right-wing economy-wrecker. Promise to ban electrical energy until the USA is as capable as Uganda to resist communist infiltration? Leftist anarco-commie fifth-column. Reject both? Reason subscriber weary of looter whining in both keys.
Well, the Democrats lacked courage earlier when not getting Biden out of the way during the nomination process. You would have them say, "we fucked up but we're still going to let Biden stand in November". The Democrats did the pragmatic thing - and underlying the major complaints on the right about imagined violation of democratic principles, how awful to treat a kind old man like that, etc. is the realisation that the Democrats have stumbled into accidentally putting forward - now officially - a candidate who might beat Trump, when the felon looked like a shoo-in after the debate/cle, That strikes them as unfair.
"...when the felon looked like a shoo-in after the debate/cle, That strikes them as unfair..."
34 felony convictions for late library book returns!!!!
You are a slimy pile of TDS-addled shit, ain't you?
FOAD, asshole
Shrike, go peddle your democrat propaganda somewhere else. Or go back to your kiddie porn.
"Mrs. Biden, your husband's presidency ends in one of two ways, one of them involves the 25th Amendment. We'll wait outside for your answer."
KMW: Conspiracies? Pshaw! *sent from mobile device on the sidelines*
What is the evidence for the claim that Biden was threatened with a 25A removal?
More than there was for Russiagate.
So anonymous unnamed sources in a right-wing news article. Got it.
Have you actually read the 25th Amendment provision to remove a president? There is zero chance it could happen in the current context. If a 25A resolution actually were to go to Congress, most if not all Republicans would vote to keep Biden in power, because they want Trump to face a weak opponent not a relatively stronger one like a President Harris with the power of incumbency.
The way it is constructed, the 25A cannot be used for political games like this. It is just too hard to do, and rightly so. It would frankly be easier to blackmail Biden into resigning. That is why your source here is very obviously full of bullshit.
So anonymous unnamed sources in a right-wing news article. Got it.
You uncritically believe "anonymous unnamed sources" in left-wing mainstream media news articles. In fact, you frequently cite them as always correct, unimpeachable authorities and experts. So what's the problem?
Pedo Jeffy is massive lying hypocrite?
" So what’s the problem?"
They're anonymous. And the media has a less than stellar record. Exercising skepticism is the right move.
Good argument. Pity to waste it on a faith-blinded mystical looter.
This looter cannot count to 270, yet wants to lecture educated Reason subscribers on the machinations of looter conspiracies to rob, murder and enslave the public. Lysander Spooner had this ilk figured out back when Comstock totalitarianism was first grafted onto the postal monopoly!
In the upcoming Reason article, “Should We Blame Fauci for the COVID Pandemic?” Hanlon’s Razor also fails! We can blame both stupidity AND malice for the NIAID’s failure to prevent the COVID-19 pandemic. Moving at a snail’s pace, the Congressional investigation into Fauci’s culpability is almost beside the point. If you or I had lied to Congress the way Fauci is clearly guilty of having done, we would be up to our necks in FBI investigations and ladder climbing prosecutorial misconduct, at the very least!
If you or I had conspired the way Daszak and Morens did to prevent smoking gun communications from being uncovered by freedom-of-information-act investigations, prosecutors would be threatening to jail our families if we did not agree to testify against Fauci in a criminal investigation; or rotting in a Federal penitentiary awaiting our appeals. Apparently deep state career officials are not subject to the full force of the law the way the rest of us “subjects” are.
Two years ago Fauci should have been charged with lying to Congress if not for criminal negligence in funding a contractor who was clearly in violation of the research contract and obstruction of justice. And if Morens and Daszak are not immediately referred to the FBI for investigation of criminal conspiracy then there is no justice left in America.
That's all just a conspiracy. You don't know that it wasn't actually Randy Marsh fucking that pangolin, which is of course the most likely explanation, so no need to go to conspiracy theories.
-KMW
I think this goes to show you just why Hanlon's razor is so un-useful for interpreting our government. Sometimes there are ample examples of both.
Sometimes people are negligent and do stupid things. And then, they try to intentionally obfuscate their stupidity. This is why there is a saying in government that, "It's the coverup that will ultimately get you." Maybe someone was dumb, but there are far more people willing to cover it up, and that is the conspiracy.
Just look at Biden. That dude is essentially stupid at this point. See? Hanlon's razor. But the conspiracy is all the power-brokers and sycophats covering it up.
It’s been said here already many times many ways, but Hanlon’s razor goes straight to Hell once you’ve seen malicious intent over and over. And it’s long past the point where Im immediately suspicious of people who defensively cradle it like it’s some sort of empirical fact every time.
Also, it never had to be malice. It’s also cold calculating pure power utilitarianism, as well as blind altruistic allegiance to esoteric neo-commie cults (and saving us from “literal Hitler”s) that make the actual conspiracy wheels go around.
Right. We're far past the point where incompetence is a reasonable explanation.
Add up the salaries squandered on politicians and bureaucrats and THAT is the pot in the poker game looter cardsharks are willing to lie, cheat and kill for. The Gee Oooh Pee pandered to Harry Anslinger zombies, George Wallace ku-kluxers, Beatles album burners and race suicide girl-bulliers. These last--accidentally enabled by 4M Libertarian spoiler votes to get their agents on the Supreme Court--are what cost God's Own Prohibitionists the 2020 election. Tough tittie they tried to reenslave women and now feel apposite reprisal force.
The 2025 Project is less an embodiment of conservative ideology than a reminder that Human Events and Heritage view with suspicion all small magazines that use big words.
The democrat party is less an embodiment of leftist ideology than a reminder that neo Marxists crave total authoritarian control over the population.
Why is the editor of Reason a flaming evil Leftist?
I think it had part to do with moving to D.C. and another part to do with the last Over-funded funding campaign.
It really is turning into a leftist sh*t rag.
Inquires the masked, anonymous, illiterate mystical sockpuppet...
Hanlon’s razor seems to be in full swing with the conspiracy theories surrounding the 2020 election. As a person who works at the polls on election days, I was struck by how little people actually knew about the voting process. People, including the former President, would put forth ideas about how cheating would happen with no idea how complicated it would be to even try and that there was no chance of changing the vote.
Many years ago, I was struck by what Arthur Schlesinger said about the assassination of John Kennedy. He spoke about the difficultly for people in reconciling that one man, Lee Harvey Oswald, could commit such an act of evil. So, many people turn to conspiracy. I think this is the case in the 2020 Election when the true believer could not reconcile Trumps loss and turn to conspiracy.
The inability to reconcile leads to conspiracy, often fuel by ignorance, hence Hanlon's razor.
People like you check in a few people who don't show up and then feed some extra ballots through. It takes very little in the way of gaps in oversight for even an individual to swing the outcome in a swing district. When Zuckerberg's efforts in 2020 included getting a bunch of ideologically aligned poll workers in place that just increases the gaps that bad actors can take advantage of.
You know better than what you say. Why lie? Cheating is easy when the beneficiaries have no interest in investigating it. An actual polling place is more secure than the additional methods added. Our system is shit and there is no good reason to believe the results reported haven't been tampered with
Hence the often used rebuke "no evidence of widespread cheating". Widespread being the operative word. It doesn't need to be widespread to affect one close district here or there.
A widespread plan even in a small district evenly divided would require a large number of people be involved. For statewide races like senators, governors, and the Presidency, you require massive number of people be involved. No way to hide that.
Bullshit.
Joe Kennedy delivered the 1960 election to JFK by manipulating the vote in just a few precincts in Chicago and Charleston, WV.
Got something closer today? Going back over 60 years to find an example. Hell if your going back 60 years keep going and talk about Boss Tweed and the election in the movie, "Gangs of New York".
As I noted people, like you, who have little idea of how voting works think up ways that cannot be done. You know a polling place requires a number of workers, and they would all have to be in on the fraud. Just not going to work to get enough votes to take the risk.
And somehow Atlanta managed to keep counting briefcases of votes under the table, after hours. Apparently it isn’t that hard at all to violate election laws when the governors are in your pocket.
Never-mind those 6,000 Trump votes that didn't get counted until re-counting occurred. Never-mind live TV actually deleting Trumps vote count. Never-mind postal workers who admitted to crossing state lines with ballots. Never-mind, Never-mind, Never-mind ... The most secure election ever!!! /s
All of which never happened.
Your ignorance is unbelievable.
The entire video of it was headline news dumb*ss.
All of it absolutely happened, you lying commie shill.
You can run but you can’t hide you anonymous coward.
Like I said, Prove it.
Post a link to and clearly describe how you or anyone else here has ever refuted anything that I’ve said.
You won’t because you can’t and you’re a lying waste of skin.
Of your “everybody” who you claimed has “refuted everything I’ve said, exactly nobody is helping you.
Now everyone will see you run away again you lying pussy.
Hahaha
Your cowardice saved for all time on personal computers everywhere.
I’ll use this whenever I want to prove what a lying waste of skin pussy you are.
Hahaha
You’re the one hiding you dumb bitch. Just answer the question.
ARE YOU A NEO NAZI, OR AN ISLAMIST?
And NO ONE HERE gives a fuck about your insane ramblings about the Holocaust, you deranged anti semite. Multiple people here have refuted your idiot conspiracy theories and nutter claims at least a hundred times now.
Now answer the question. Then get back in your fucking corner, m’kay bitch?
You’re a demonstrated liar.
You said in this thread,
“Oh, and everything you’ve ever claimed here has already been refuted by everyone else already. They quickly beat me to the punch. ”
Then you said,
“And NO ONE HERE gives a fuck about your insane ramblings about the Holocaust,”
Why would I entertain any question form a needy pussy lying waste of skin like you?
I’m pleased with these optics, saved for all time on computers around the world and will use this as proof anytime I want, of what a lying waste of skin anonymous coward you are.
Hahaha
Bullshit. You are obviously the one who doesn't understand how it works.
"He spoke about the difficultly for people in reconciling that one man, Lee Harvey Oswald, could commit such an act of evil. "
That's hardly surprising. It was the Dallas cops themselves who rushed to book depository, and established that indeed Oswald was in the building at the time of the shooting, but not in any position to do the shooting.
"I was struck by how little people actually knew about the voting process. "
Isn't that baked into the system? Don't voting procedures and protocols differ from state to state, county to county, election cycle to election cycle? Such a confusing mish mash is bound to erode both knowledge and confidence.
Of course, especially when real experts such as a former Marine sniper as well as those within the field say there is no way in hell Oswald could have shot kennedy. The film footage proves JFK was shot by someone else.
Oswald, the CIA patsy, never made it to the courtroom. He was shot and killed by an FBI agent. Photos prove it was NOT Jack Rubenstein aka Jack Ruby. Months later Ruby died from cancer. At least two Dallas detectives were also shot and killed that very day...what did they know.
Finally as the last act to clean up the entire shit show, Dorothy Kilgallen was poisoned with a barbiturate cocktail. All her notes from the interviews with Ruby mysteriously disappeared.
The real conspiracy theory is that Oswald acted alone.
Where will they find another magic bullet that exists and enters several bodies striking bone and leaving fragments and changing directions but emerges in pristine condition on the victims surgical bed?
Does anyone really think Biden would have quit if the assassination was successful?
At the time of the Kennedy assassination no one would think a crazy person would do something like shoot the President. Today with the frequency of shootings we know that kooks are out there.
Biden was on his way out when the assassination attempt happened. Had the assassin killed Trump the Republicans would immediately have gone to a younger candidate and that would have forced Biden to drop out. Joe Biden thought he could beat Trump who is also old.
Do you just make shit up and go with it because it sounds good in your head?
“Throughout American history, there have been 17 direct assaults against presidents and presidential candidates. Five of those incidents resulted in death.”
Either these attempts were ALL “unhinged lunatics” meaning Kennedys would hardly be “unexpected” or they were conspiracies, like Trumps will undoubtedly be shown to be.
I believe the number was 4 Presidents killed by assassination. The first three Lincoln, Garfield and McKinley were close contact kills. Oswald used a long-range weapon. Something not seen in earlier attempts. All four killers could be described as lunatics but motive differed. Booth was a Confederate sympathizer, Garfield's killer a disappointed office seeker, McKinley an anarchist, and Oswald we will likely never know for sure. I suspect he was like Thomas Matthew Crooks a person looking for attention.
I doubt you will find any conspiracy in the Trump assassination attempt. The Secret Service did a poor job, but the reason is the same old story. The department's focus was not where it should have been in PA, but rather it was focused on the upcoming convention in Milwaukee, WI.
Suffice to say I will do everything in my power to discern, accept and share the truth.
So you’ll stop denying the Holocaust and admit that Osarel ar Ethel good guys?
Now all you have to do is identify whether you’re a neo Nazi or an Islamist. We’ve been more than patient with you.
You’re a demonstrated liar who can’t refute anything I say and when your feeble ad hominem attacks fail you “ask” me to stop saying what you can’t refute.
You’re pathetic and,
No.
Oswald may have shot Connally, but one shooter hit JFK in the throat from the horizontal plane described by the RR tracks. Simple trig and the Autopsy chart showing the neck entry wound above the exit wound on JFK's back prove this. Elm street slopes 3º downward, and the tracks on the overpass are level with the tracks that cross Houston St. from behind the Book Depository. A canvas-covered truck stopped in traffic on Commerce was in a good position to have originated that shot.
Had Trump been killed, there would have been massive civil unrest that would have resulted in the election being cancelled.
As you have said Bullshit. The Republicans would never allow Joe Biden to continue after January 20, 2025. In addition, the Republican replacement candidate would be younger increasing pressure to replace Joe Biden and the replacement candidate would get the sympathy vote. It is good Donald Trump was not seriously injured and it would have been better had he not been hurt at all. But the Republicans would have gained more.
All indications are that Oswald shot Connally, the former Navy Secy who downgraded his pension. JFK was evidently hit by more than one shooter, none of them six stories up.
You usually don't swing a razor. You might cut something unintended.
Some people even struggle to reconcile the fact that Trump's would-be assassin was allowed to amble around the rally grounds with a range finder for an hour, climb up to the obvious best shooting platform unchallenged, have his social media scrubbed and his three encrypted cell phones disclose nothing, and had a history of donating to progressive causes, with the official story that it was just Secret Service and local police incompetence and the Trump rally was just a target of convenience for some basement-dwelling loner to get famous, as proved by him reading news stories on his phone that mentioned other newsworthy figures.
The only conspiracy theory that I trust is that the Democrats will use every dirty trick in the book, including more lawfare and even the possibility of another assassination attempt. The Neo- Marxists will stop at nothing as they have no morals, only the thirst for total power.
"the Democrats will use every dirty trick in the book, "
They play for keeps. Like adults. At stake is control of the levers of power to the empire.
"and even the possibility of another assassination attempt."
The problem is another attempt might succeed. Then Trump would be replaced by someone who is younger, fitter, and less senile. No, the Democrats have as good an opponent as they can hope for.
FOAD, asshole:
mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
"Spouting nonsense is an end in itself."
If Trump is killed or imprisoned, there will be a massive violent uprising, and there will be no election.
"there will be a massive violent uprising"
If Jan.6th is anything to go by, I don't think you have anything to worry about. Carry on.
It's not "anything to go by", because it was not a violent uprising.
I don't think you need to worry about it. We'll be fine, thank you.
You won’t. If you had the slightest bit of sense you would be very afraid. But you don’t.
It isn’t. You democrats have no concept of what is coming if you don’t stop before it’s too late. The only reason we allow your kind to draw breath is the rule of law. Once enough Americans realize that’s gone, then so are you.
It doesn’t help your odds that democratkind are largely beta male soyboys who don’t know the dirt thing about firearms. Let alone own, or are trained in their use.
But go ahead and assume the government will protect you, when the fact is that most of the people doing the protecting hold our values and beliefs, not yours.
When almost every major news outlet ignores the obvious (Biden's mental decline) for months, follows the same daily news script almost word-for-word, and calls it "fake news" when one or two outlets hints at the truth, I think conspiracy is a much more logical conclusion than synchronized stupidity.
Democrat corporate media has been coordinating since at least Obama’s time in office. Likely before that.
Einstein was Wrong:
Einstein reputedly said that there were two things that were infinite, the universe and human stupidity. He then added that he wasn't sure about the universe.
He was wrong on both counts. The universe is limited and so is human stupidity despite Reason's attempt to extend stupidity through KMW and SS.
A conspiracy doesn't require secret meetings and encrypted messages stuffed under park bench drop sites. It only requires a confluence of ideas, the very ideas that Reason refuses to condemn. Child mutilation is actually debatable on Reason.
Reason's elitist literati, who see themselves as completely above the fray, consistently fall on one side of the culture wars, the side that denies that there are groups of rotten people on the left who promulgate rotten ideas. Sentient beings cannot reasonably deny the existence of such an ideational conspiracy. Sentience seems to be in short supply at Reason, a magazine that has thoroughly denied it's origins with it's adoption of post-modern epistemology, the very same epistemology developed by the left to implement its irrational goals.
The most important question in any discussion is "How do you know?" Reason magazine's answer "You can't know anything!"
Therefore, you can't know that there is a conspiracy, you can't know that people work together based on ideas, you can't ever be certain of anything.
Note to foreign readers: anonymous mystical altruists in America often impersonate scientists and engineers in hopes of bluffing through an argument from fake authority and real strawmen.
Oh, please.
Without stupidity, political candidates wouldn't have anything to say.
the rise (and fall) of Project 2025
You know that never rose in the first place, right? Literally nobody signed on with it. That was 100% media gaslighting.
The comments above, with a couple of exceptions, provide overwhelming evidence of BOTH malice and stupidity on the part of the 99% republican Trumpanzee MAGAts copying and pasting them from their nationalsocialist gospels of hatred. The stupid part is the idea that a large enough shrewdness of screeching simian altruists will--like in a Solomon Asch experiment--pressure libertarians and objectivists to suddenly vote for the prohibitionist initiation of force that has caused or worsened EVERY economic crash these past 120 years. https://libertrans.blogspot.com/2024/04/1987-crash-naming-names.html
Since the Democrats are pushing the notion that it's the end of democracy as we know it if Trump wins, wouldn't it be justified for them to lie, cheat, and steal the election to ensure its survival?
Of course, a Trump victory won't remotely be the end of democracy in this country, but can you blame anyone for thinking that the Democrats' By Any Means Necessary attitude will lead to an actual fraudulent/stolen election?
More brilliance from Katherine Mangu-Ward, despite the gibberings of the banana gallery in these comments.