Posts Tagged ‘election 2020’

Captain Kidd: Well Captain Barsiliano are you satisfied?

Captain Barsiliano: I still put no trust in him.

Spitfire Stevens: Well I do and enough to give him my ship as soon as it’s re-rigged

Captain Barsiliano: No man is taking a ship out of here unless he has a rope around his neck like any known pirate. All right if he wants to sail let him sail on the Scorpion as my navigator, I have need of one and at once. When he comes back with blood on his hands he can hoist his own black flag, but not before.

Against All Flags 1952

If you have to point to one single moment on election night that could turn out to be the most fateful moment, not only of election 2020 but of the history of the republic, it would be the moment when vote counting was suddenly stopped in several states, all critical, all necessary for victory and all now the subject of charges of massive fraud.

To understand why I wish to take you back to the one election Lyndon Johnson ever lost, the special Senate election of 1942 in Texas. Johnson (unlike Joe Biden) worked incredibly hard with appearances all over the state, but had also like his chief opponent Governor Pappy O’Daniel pulled a few fast ones to get what appeared to be an insurmountable lead to the point where he allowed safe districts to be reported.

That was all O’Daniel’s friends (or rather his enemies who wanted him out of the governor’s chair) needed. Suddenly “late” returns from counties in East Texas where Congressman Martin Dies, another candidate for the open Senate seat, had previously run strong with 46% of the vote with O’Daniel getting 34% and Johnson 11% and a 4th candidate Mann 9%. As Robert Caro put it on paged 738-739 of his 1st volume on Lyndon Johnson:

But Dies did not do as well as he had done earlier. He received only 82 of these “new” votes — not 46 percent but 32 percent, Johnson and Mann didn’t do as well either: Mann received 6 votes or 2 percent; Johnson did particularly badly; he received 3 of the new votes : 1 percent. O’Daniel, who had received 34 percent on the first returns, received 64 percent on these later returns.

This pattern was repeated in county after county in east Texas where O’Daniel’s “Magic Ballots” kept turning up. Johnson manged to get a few “corrected” returns from a few spots but as official returns had been sent in such things were few and far between. He contacted George Paar known as the Duke of Duval who was the power there and bluntly asked for more votes. Duval’s reported reply: “Lyndon I’ve Been to Federal Penitentiary and I’m not Going Back For You” was logical. Because the official numbers had not come from East Texas no matter how many votes he agreed to provide O’Daniel’s folks would simply create more in counties that had not yet reported. In the end his 5000 vote lead became a 1311 vote loss 175,590 to 174,279.

And that brings us to the stopping of the vote count in those critical states.

The Democrat bosses in Nevada, in Michigan, in Wisconsin and in Pennsylvania each knew that they were capable of stealing their own state but each of them also knew that their own state would not be enough. What’s the point of stealing Nevada and or Wisconsin with it’s 10 electoral votes or even Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral votes if it just meant narrowing the margin of the Trump victory, especially if such a victory was followed by a federal investigation that could put them away for a very long time?

No each of them had to have blood on their hands so to speak. Each of them had to be sure that the other bosses necks would be on the line. Each of the had to be sure that they would be all in on the steal (and I suspect each of them had to be sure that the media and the tech giants would back them up, I would not be surprised if there was coordination with those folks during the pause in the count.) and I suspect only when they agreed to hang together rather than risk hanging repeatedly did the counts resume.

Now if the GOP candidate had been Mitt Romney or George W Bush or Charlie Baker or any other GOP squish, this would not be a problem (of course if any of them were running those states would likely have gone blue anyways so the point would have been moot) but alas for them the GOP candidate is President Donald Trump who has no intention of backing down. As Lou Agular puts it:

We are living out the first act of The Godfather. Remember the cliffhanger. Near Christmas, like today, five Mafia families execute a coordinated attack on Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando), riddling him with bullets. In the immediate aftermath, there is a profound sense of doom. Everyone expects the Godfather to die, and all seems lost. Only he does not die. He lives to initiate a counterattack against the five families with his successor son, Michael (Al Pacino).

Donald Trump is the American Godfather.

This is going to the various state court and then to the Supreme Court (as whichever side loses at the state level will appeal) and might end up in the House as the GOP controls the legislatures of more than enough of the disputed states to send their own set of electors to the house. All of these are going to be tough on the furniture so to speak

I hate to say it and I dread the possibility but it may even end in actual blood as it’s unhealthy to convince a group of people who have been arming themselves to the teeth for over a decade that participating in the democratic process is a waste of time, particularly when sitting members of congress on the left are openly talking of blacklisting and punishing those who voted against them. If it reaches the state legislature phase I would not be shocked to see Antifa style mobs going after legislators in season and finding them selves countered by armed citizens. That’s a recipe for bloodshed which I’d not like to see but the folks who stopped those counts decided was worth risking (spoiler alert it wasn’t).

But no matter how it eventually ends badly or bloody or both the moment in history which precipitated whatever ending comes will be the one when those states decided to stop counting so the bosses could decide if they were going all in.

Note I’ll be discussing this on Friday on my livestream podcast at 11 AM EST the Twitter Gulag edition.

Update: As to why they decided to go all in, that’s here.

Update 2: We’ll be discussing this on the DaTechGuy off DaRadio Livestream Podcast Friday at the special 11 AM Booming Trump economy time along with testing Twitter Censorship and a rundown of what I think will happpen, you can find the livestream at my Youtube account here.

Senator: Fletcher, there’s an old saying: To the victors belong the spoils.

Fletcher: There’s another old saying, Senator: Don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining.

The Outlaw Josey Wales 1976

As you might have heard I won my appeal and was allowed back onto twitter yesterday. They stated my account had been locked in error.

Nice to know that it turned out I didn’t post or share:

“privately produced/distrubted intimate media of someone without their consent”

The first thing I did was tweet out my post titled:

Twitter / Left Censorship A Sure Sign You’re Hitting the Target

The 2nd thing I did was send out some DM to the people I bet with on the election and to Fault Lines Radio (who usually contacts me via twitter to invite me on_ to warn them that I might end up being blocked again:

Here is the DM I sent to fault lines radio show:

Quick FYI just got out of the twitter gulag for posting a link to #benfordslaw piece that they claimed was porn posted without the consent of the person involved. after the lockout I refused to delete the tweet and appeals, won the appeal and checking if the lockout is still automatic for it. If I am locked out or suspended best way to get me is a comment on my site datechguyblog.com use the term ” (not showing this for obvious reasons)” & I’ll know it’s you guys. wish me luck

And then I sent out the following tweets:

Now I should point out something here that I didn’t realize until a few minutes ago. When I look at test 1 while logged onto my own account I can see my tweet.

BUT when I look at test one when not logged in (which is how I’m accessing these tweets now what shows up in place of the tweet is “This tweet is unavailable”.

Oddly if I click on that “unavailable tweet” in that different browser the tweet shows up and I can access the piece

But I digress…

So after test one it was time for test 2

so I did

Everything was seemingly working and I was literally in the process of typing out that twitter had passed test two when suddenly….

Mind you this was less that one hour after I my account was unlocked and I had been informed by twitter that I had been locked out in error.

As normal there was an email notice from Twitter. One guess what the email said I had done…

…if your guess was they said I had distributed:

privately produced/distributed intimate media of someone without their consent

Then you are correct.

So in summery for the 2nd time in under two days twitter has not only locked my account but slandered me by claiming I’m pushing out Porn.

I’m again appealing this lockout. Here is what I wrote them this time

Not only have you once again slandered me with a palatable lie claiming that I shared “privately produced/distributed intimate media of someone without their consent” but you did so less than one hour after you UNLOCKED said account acknowledging that this same accusation over tweeting out the same link which goes to a piece on Benford’s mathematical law was false and stated I was locked out in error and apologized for doing so.

Furthermore you did so after I tweeted twitter safety saying I was about to retweet the tweet that you apologized for locking me out over to confirm that things were restored. That doesn’t cover you guys with glory.

If you are so afraid of people seeing circumstantial evidence of Joe Biden’s election 2020 magic ballots have the strength of character to admit that’s why you’re locking my account rather than making base and slanderous accusations against me distributing porn.

Last time it took about a day. Let’s see how long it takes this time for them to admit they are wrong.

I further intended to keep performing this test when reinstated and going through this process until twitter removes the lock on that piece or bans me.

I suspect that will be sometime after the court cases on election 2020 are resolved…unexpectedly of course.

Closing thought. If they are persisting in this kind of thing, that suggests they know they are not secure in their position and are doing all they can from keeping regular people from seeing rational arguments demonstrating the existence of Joe Biden’s Magic Ballots

If you were one of those folks on twitter who followed me you would have noticed that I had a habit of not blocking trolls, or idiots, or people who swore at me, practically the only way to get blocked by me was to be an obvious bot (identical tweets to many people usually with either no icon or a picture of a pretty girl often named something like joe3882472100) or to tweet images of pornography. Even those who insulted the church instead of being blocked would go on my Perpetual Twitter Novena list so I could pray for them.

The reason for this is simple. If the left was making a stupid or weak argument in my opinion the best thing is for people to see it and then to laugh at them. For example. A few hours before I was locked out I had the following exchange with such a person:

the response to this was a rather foolish one on our leftist friends part

You see once someone states you have put out “demonstrable lies” the logical thing is to say: OK Demonstrate them. He didn’t take it very well.

Now if I had just blocked such a fellow I would not have been able to illustrate to those who follow me and him that said statement about “demonstrable lies” was blowing smoke. Instead I was able to illustrate to my followers and his that he was full of it.

And that brings us once again to twitter locking me out.

You see if people are saying something stupid, or outrageous it’s simple enough to counter such folk because such arguments are generally over the top and given the number of people on twitter there is no shortage of bright people on the other side who could do so.

BUT if people are saying things or making observations that are factual and or credible, something that the average person can understand or even something that might make you think, like the link I sent out that got me locked, then you risk a discussion that can be lost.

Now if you are a person who wants facts and truth that’s not necessarily a bad thing. After all if my opinion is wrong or “demonstratively false” I’d like to know it because I believe in truth and fact.

BUT if you are a person trying to advance a false or a weak proposition such as:

Donald Trump had a historic performance among non-white voters and outperformed his previous vote share even in blue cities EXCEPT in four cities in four swing state where Joe Biden not only outperformed Trump but out preformed Barack Obama enough to swing said states.”

Then the last thing you want is anyone advancing factual or credible arguments against it, particularly arguments that are easy for people to understand.

Or to put it simply, if our leftist friends on Twitter and Facebook thought that Joe Biden’s #election2020 #magicballots in #detroit #philadelphia #atlanta & #milwaukee were legitimate as sure as the sun rises in the east they would point at such posts and simply laugh or provide evidence that could easily or credibly counter assertions to the contrary.

But

If our leftist friends on Twitter and Facebook think that Joe Biden’s #election2020 #magicballots in #detroit #philadelphia #atlanta & #milwaukee were legitimate as sure as Jeffery Epstein killed himself then they will go all out to prevent evidence or arguments which support that fact.

The question isn’t if President Trump’s team has evidence of vote fraud. He does and plenty. The question is can he provide the courts with enough such evidence that will cause the courts to prescribe remedies to counter Joe Biden’s #Magicballots . You don’t know and neither do I. This is likely going to go to the Supreme Court.

But the Hollywood / media / academic / big tech left are fighting a different fight. The standard of evidence convince the avg person is MUCH lower than the standard to convince a court and right now the circumstantial evidence is more that sufficient to convince any citizen whose religion is not politics that the fix is in.

That’s the dirty little (Not So) secret here. They’re not censoring stuff because we’re making incredible arguments or points, they’re censoring us because we’re making credible arguments and points that the average person can understand.

In other words they’re still scared because they know it’s not legit.

As the election counting, and soon to be recounting, rages on, there are plenty of people that tell me they just “couldn’t vote for Trump,” even though in theory they are conservatives. Personally, I vote based on what a candidate says they support, or has demonstrated they support, for policies that I care about, ranging from foreign policy and gun control to right to life and taxes, and then on a scale of how much I care about each. For example, I care more about foreign policy and abortion than taxes because I’m directly affected by foreign policy and I’ve seen first hand how pervasive abortion theory is in hospitals, but I’m not making enough money to care if the tax rate jumps significantly.

I also know that while I’m a policy voter, many people have an emotional connection to voting, and they have to “like” the candidate they are voting for. We can discuss whether that makes sense in another article, but we should recognize that candidate likeability does matter to many people. It’s likely what got Bill Clinton elected. But is likeability enough that it mattered to Trump’s election?

Although the data isn’t complete yet, I pulled Reuters election data and used Wikipedia for 2016 election data to try and answer the question: Did people not vote for Trump that would have voted for another Republican Presidential candidate that was more likeable? I sampled data by looking at states that had Senate races. My theory was that if someone was a “Never Trumper,” they would likely still vote for the Senate Republican in their state. I also looked at Libertarian votes to see if they made a difference. The states I ended up picking were Arizona, Michigan, North Carolina, New Mexico, Alabama, Georgia, Minnesota and Colorado, in what I think is a pretty decent spread.

First, was their a surge in Libertarian votes? Not at all.

Just looking at raw numbers, Libertarian votes went down, in many cases drastically. 2016 was a banner year for Libertarian and Green Party vote, but this year they just did not have the turnout, despite running Jo Jorgenson, a very likeable candidate.

Second, was there a noticeable Never Trump vote? I calculated the difference between Presidential votes and Senate votes between parties and then compared them. The numbers aren’t 100% aligned. I calculated a scaling factor to multiply the Senate votes by to balance numbers. Then I took the difference from Senate Republicans vs Trump votes to see if there were “Never Trumper” votes. If there were, I then calculated if the difference mattered.

The results are interesting. In Arizona and Alabama, the number was negative, meaning Trump had more votes than the Senate Republican. In the 6 states where there was Never Trump votes, only one, Georgia, would have mattered.

While not 100% scientific, we can reach a few conclusions:

  1. The Never Trump vote is real, but not everywhere.
  2. Where there is a Never Trump vote, it mostly doesn’t always matter, even in swing states.
  3. Libertarian vote didn’t appreciably go up this year.

For Republicans, this is good and bad news. It means that the Never Trump faction isn’t nearly as big as the media might make it out to be. Better still, when people had a choice between a more likeable candidate (Jo Jorgensen), they actively chose not to vote for her, far more than the 2016 election would have indicated.

The bad news is that Biden wins in key states can’t be attributed to candidate hatred. Democrats ran a relatively weak, bland candidate, and he is either coming out on top or close to it. That means that overall people are looking favorably on Democrat candidates. Whether its the biased news media, demographics, vote rigging or policies, Republicans are not in a good spot, because short of major changes, they don’t have a chance at capturing the Presidency in the future.

This post represents the views of the author and not those of the Department of Defense, Department of the Navy, or any other government agency.