On November 7th, Democrat lackeys in the mainstream media declared Joe Biden the president-elect of the United States.
Of course, saying so does not make it true—though this may come as news to many in the industry. President Trump has not conceded the election. Many states have not yet certified their election results. And the preliminary results in several crucial states remain under litigation. The voting has finished, but the election is not over.
Nevertheless, Biden took the media’s cue and addressed a crowd in Wilmington, Delaware on the evening of November 7th. There, he declared a “convincing victory” and thanked his supporters for entrusting him with the “mandate” to “marshal the forces” of decency, fairness, science and hope. Armed with these “forces,” he pledged to combat partisan hostility, the coronavirus, the economic recession, systemic racism, and climate change. Biden also emphasized the need for national unity and promised to usher in “a time to heal in America,” saying:
It’s time to put away the harsh rhetoric, lower the temperature, see each other again. Listen to each other again. And to make progress, we have to stop treating our opponents as our enemies. They are not our enemies. They are Americans.
To the millions of Americans who have been even passively following the news since 2016, this call for unity is deeply hypocritical and unserious.
Who actually refuses to accept election results? Hint: It is not Trump.
For four years, Democrats refused to accept the results of the 2016 presidential election, blaming Russian interference, collusion, Ukraine, voter suppression, former FBI Director James Comey—anything to explain why Americans would elect Donald Trump over establishment candidate Hillary Clinton. Beginning under the Obama/Biden administration, the FBI embroiled the country in a three-year long witch hunt that will perhaps go down as the greatest political scandal in our nation’s history.
The FBI and DOJ grossly abused the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and targeted Trump advisors like General Michael Flynn in an attempted “Trump-by-proxy takedown.” The FBI and Obama White House criminally leaked information related to Crossfire Hurricane. The mainstream media recklessly misinformed the public. And Democrats like U.S. Representative Adam Schiff (D., California) peddled outright lies about the investigation. All of this contributed to (if I may borrow Hillary Clinton’s words) an “air of illegitimacy” that loomed over the Trump presidency for three years, even though there was zero evidence of collusion. Does Biden now expect conservatives to simply forget this ever happened?
For four years, leftists have claimed that the 2016 election was stolen and pledged #Resistance to #NotMyPresident Trump. When Stacey Abrams refused to concede the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race, Democrats hailed her as a righteous crusader for election integrity and voter rights. And in the lead-up to the 2020 race, Clinton advised Biden that he “should not concede under any circumstances,” suggesting Republicans would rig the count.
But this attitude toward election malfeasance suddenly shifted after November 3rd. In stark contrast to the left’s reception of Clinton and Abrams, when Trump refused to concede the election before litigation played out, the left immediately warned of a coup and indulged in fever dreams of Trump barricading himself in the White House and Biden playing the role of cool, calculated negotiator.
In reality, the election is not yet over, and Trump has no obligation to concede. Leftists should allow the legal process to play out before agitating themselves into a frenzy. And perhaps they should engage in some self-reflection in the meantime.
Democrats (not Trump) sow distrust in election results.
The same Democrats and leftist pundits who claimed that the Kremlin installed President Trump by manipulating the 2016 election now breathlessly exclaim, as the New York Times has, that there is “no evidence that fraud or other irregularities played a role in the outcome of the [2020] presidential race.” “[N]o evidence,” it says. If the Times says so, it must be true!
No, I do not accept that. There is, in fact, evidence of voter fraud and irregularity–the question for the courts is whether it is sufficient to overturn the election results as they currently stand. And I cannot take seriously any “news” outlet that fails to even mention (nevermind scrutinize) Biden’s norm-shattering performance. Regardless, Democrats and the mainstream media destroyed their credibility long before the first vote was even cast.
For the past four years, not only did they apply inconsistent standards regarding election concessions and push the Russian collusion hoax, but they have also shown little, if any, interest in actually ensuring election integrity. For years, Democrats have fought common-sense voter ID laws and voter roll purges, arguing that these are forms of “voter suppression.” They have supported ballot harvesting, despite the obvious vulnerabilities to tampering. And most precipitously, they used the coronavirus to justify experimenting with tens of millions of unsolicited mail-in ballots to outdated voter roles.
Why should Americans trust the results of an election when the safeguards protecting its integrity were so methodically stripped away?
Trump is entirely within his rights to challenge the preliminary election results. Indeed, he has a duty to the 73 million Americans who voted for him to pursue all credible leads of fraud. And anyone who purports to care about election integrity should welcome these investigations. Telling Republicans to preemptively abandon their president to preserve “trust” in the election system is nonsensical–that ship sailed when Democrats abandoned any pretense of election integrity.
Leftists have spent the last four years sowing distrust in our elections by baselessly claiming that Trump was illegitimately installed in 2016, and by throwing election security to the wind ever since. Americans–especially those supporting the “losing” candidate–must have faith in the results for there to be any chance of unity. And Democrats destroyed that chance.
Biden, get your house in order. Then we can talk about unity.
It is also preposterous for Biden to expect conservatives to “unite” alongside him for a more personal reason: when he says he wants to “restore the soul of America,” I simply do not believe him.
Forgive me for doubting that “healer-in-chief” Biden will restore civility to our public discourse after he, along with Democrat colleagues and so-called “journalists” in the media, spent the last four years demonizing the rightward half of America. Until Biden gets his own house in order, conservatives are right to reject this absurd call for unity.
I do not believe Biden is serious about “lowering the temperature” when he refuses to specifically condemn the Antifa and BLM thugs who set American cities ablaze this summer. There has also been no word yet from Captain Unity on the violent leftists who recently assaulted the president’s supporters during the “Million MAGA March.” I am not holding my breath.
I do not believe Biden will further good-faith, across-the-aisle dialogue when he tacitly approves former First Lady Michelle Obama’s declaration that the millions of Americans who voted for Trump are agents of “lies, hate, chaos, and division.” Or when he fails to raise even the slightest objection to U.S. Representatives Jim Clyburn (D., South Carolina) and Jerry Nadler (D., New York), who insinuate that Republicans support a modern-day Adolf Hitler. (Biden did liken Trump to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels, so perhaps the latter should not be surprising.)
I do not believe Biden will temper partisan hostilities when he remains silent as U.S. Representative Ilhan Omar (D., Minnesota) castigates the Trump base as white supremacist Klannsmen, and as U.S. Representative Maxine Waters (D., California) condones the harassment of Trump Cabinet members.
I do not believe Biden will restore decency when he selects U.S. Senator Kamala Harris (D., California) to be his running mate–the woman who wrongfully implied Justice Brett Kavanaugh was a rapist, likened our border security to the KKK, and prosecuted journalist David Daleiden for his undercover reporting on alleged fetal tissue trafficking by Planned Parenthood.
And I do not believe Biden will usher a “time to heal” when, for four years, he offered no pushback to the “journalists” who routinely—almost casually—likened the president to the most evil characters in history, including Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Joseph Stalin, and Mao Zedong. Beyond a few empty words, he has given me no indication that he is willing to confront the likes of MSNBC’s Jennifer Rubin, who say we must expel Trump and his supporters from “polite society” and “burn down the Republican Party.”
Leftists have created a climate in which supporting the president can get you defamed, boycotted, blacklisted, harassed, doxxed, threatened, assaulted, or even killed. And as it turns out, Biden’s ambivalence towards even the most vile bigots in his own party just doesn’t put self-respecting conservatives in the “uniting” mood.
So Biden, good luck convincing the righward half of America to unite.
*The views expressed in this article solely represent the views of the author, not the views of the Chicago Thinker.
Great article by the young writer for the Chicago Thinker. I would have liked to see the author make use of the example of the Charlottesville hoax, not only bc it is the most divisive lie in American politics, but also bc Biden made it the raison detre of his campaign. But this was a good article that is even more impressive when you consider the author is an undergrad. Puts our professional press corps to shame.
Are you serious? This article is just a regurgitation of the exact same right-wing talking points that have been constantly used over the last four years. Maybe when your standard is Tucker “America is great because we have the Grand Canyon, or something” Carlson, then this article is impressive, but when you go to a school that’s supposed to teach you how to write properly and think critically, bad-faith talking points will not get you very far.
Are you out of your mind? “Charlottesville hoax”. What hoax? When a bunch of Nazis showed up in my town, drove a car into a crowd and Trump called them very fine people? You, like this author, can only justify things by rejecting the truth in favor of outright lies that make you feel better about losing to Biden
Hi Charlottesville Resident,
President Trump, in fact, did not call the Neo-Nazi / white nationalists “very fine people” – that was a media-concocted hoax. In that infamous press conference, Trump very clearly said that there are “very fine people” on both sides of the statues debate, and specifically said “I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.”
Watch the presser yourself if you don’t believe me: https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/08/mike-pence-just-wrecked-kamala-harris-and-the-media-at-the-same-time-over-their-charlottesville-lie/
I cannot hide my disappointment that a Charlottesville resident does not even know about the media’s hit job in his own city.
There is honest writing about the Charlottesville Hoax but you have to look in alternative places.
I agree the official MSM narrative that “EVIL NAZIS CAME TO CHARLOTTESVILLE TO SPREAD VIOLENCE AND HATE” – that’s as bad as BLM hoaxes (Tawana Brawley rape hoax, Duke Lacrosse Team Rape Hoax, Saint Trayvon Martin hoax, Ferguson MO Hands up don’t shoot hoax,, Jussie Smollet hoax etc).
Here’s an honest report of what happened at Charlottesville where the Unite the Right rally was protesting the desecrations of Confederate statues at the University of Virginia at Charlottesville.
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/c869fb_a573de9ad4f04b0491b927ca9d48252c.pdf
Oh, I forget to mention one of the worst White racist hoaxes:
The Rolling Stone Magazine libel of UVA White Fraternity members supposedly gang raping a Freshmen female student as part of a racist pledge initiation.
Yeah, you guessed it the Rolling Stone Magazine blood libel turned out to be….
A hoax.
Libertarian ideas are about centrist protecting the process and core rights with non-coercive proposals that define the progressive, while conserving older forms. they correctly understand that true conservative and true progressive lifestyles complement and do not conflict, and to claim the concerns of either is ignorant or is itself willful ignorance in many cases.
They’re attacked as far right-wing or conservative by pseudo-progressives who are totalitarian anti-capitalist ‘socialists’ the orthodoxy of the Establishment today, what many people now call ‘regressives’ taking us into new forms of e.g. racism and confomism.
The Thinker isn’t perfect, but most of what they do would be viewed as wildly progressive a few years ago. Progressivism has been hijacked by totalitarians in the comments, who now also publish appropriating the names of people like Festinger, a libertarian.
keep smoking that copium and cry a little harder, while the recounts trump is spending millions of dollars on keep increasing biden’s margins of victory 🙂
Clearly the so called Thinker has as much journalistic integrity as a dumpster fire. Half of all the citations come from right-wing propaganda newspapers such as the Federalist, and even breitbart. At least try to use more respectable conservative news sources such as the WSJ or the Economist. Some of the articles you cite have already been proven as false, especially the NY post article. A quick Google search could have told you that, but hey, let’s agree to disagree. I think the conservative writers at my high school newspaper could have written something better than the garbage that comes from the thinker. Honestly, I feel bad for some of the respectable conservatives that I have met at Uchicago who are not as idiotic as this so called newspaper makes them seem. Also, voter fraud claims being made here are just complete bullshit. But hey we are all liars being paid by George Soros and your and all your MAGA friends are the only ones smart enough to know the truth right 😉
“respectable conservative news sources such as the WSJ or the Economist. ”
I respond:
Ha ha – you’re funny or more like, you’re just lying. The Wall Street Journal and the Economist are nothing even remotely close to honest, populist Conservative magazines, newspapers. Both have continuous pushed for complete open borders mass migrations, the great replacements to Europe, UK, USA. Exactly how is replacing our working class citizens with the lowest wage workers, extremely hostile religious (radial Islam) and unhealthy (COVID, TB, EBOLA) even remotely “conservative”?
I encourage the bright, honest writers at the Chicago Thinker to concentrate on topics, issues here in our University of Chicago, SS Hyde Park community and tell the truth as they see it. We still have the 1st Amendment and these good young people have the freedom to share their observations without being bullied by you and the mob.
Fantastic post, really excellent work all around. You mind if I just sit here like a good boy and cum?
Love the intentional lack of distinction you make between “refusing to accept the results of the election” on either side. The Obama administration facilitated and supported the transfer of power, while the Trump team has done their pathetic best to stand in its way. The scope of conservative thought really is a mile wide and an inch deep.
Also, nobody with even a shred of self-awareness could question Biden’s commitment to unity, while supporting Trump, who is pretty much the single most polarizing figure in the world.
Shit writing, shit argument. Don’t change your major to journalism anytime soon.
It appears that you have not read my article.
(1) Democrats and the media celebrated Clinton and Abrams for their refusal to accept the results of their respective races. I argue that it is then hypocritical for those same leftists to now claim that Trump is staging a “coup” because he refuses to concede even before the litigation has played out.
(2) Beginning under the Obama administration, the FBI and DOJ grossly abused FISA to spy on the Trump campaign, launching the country into a three-year long witch hunt over Russian collusion. For years, Democrats and the media claimed Trump was illegitimately installed by the Kremlin. Does that sound like a smooth transfer of power to you?
And your last point is a non-sequitur. Yes, I question Biden’s commitment to unity. And yes, I support Trump. Those are not inconsistent stances. If you believe they are, then you will need to make the argument – I will not do so for you. In the meantime, I encourage you to consider how perhaps the left’s smearing of Trump as a modern-day Hitler / Stalin / Mussolini for four years may have contributed to a polarizing public perception. You may dislike the man (heck, you may even despise him!), but I trust that you are not so ignorant of history as to find such comparisons appropriate.
You are fucking crazy holy shit lmaooo. How sad must you life be that you think anyone cares about your spicy take. Cry harder shitrepub your daddy lost.
The Clinton camp never said Trump didn’t win the votes he did; they said that there was widespread interference in the election by Russia, which was corroborated by both the GOP Senate and the Mueller report. The Mueller report explicitly stated that there was not sufficient evidence to do so. The sheer volume of arrests and convictions of Trump lackeys stemming from that report speaks to the fact that it was, in fact, necessary. Meanwhile, the evidence of voter suppression tactics in Georgia in 2018 was actually substantive. The Secretary of State, who was the Republican candidate (and winner) in 2018, instigated massive voter purges after the Supreme Court’s (constitutionally incoherent) decision in Shelby County v. Holder. It is intellectually dishonest to compare the substantive voter suppression claims made by the Abrams camp to the imaginary voter fraud claims made by Trump. Finally, no evidence suggests that the Obama administration’s surveillance of Carter Page was illegal.
Hello The Mob,
(1) I believe we would be in agreement that the U.S. should take steps to ensure that our elections are free from foreign interference. Yes, Russia interfered in the 2016 election – but there is zero evidence that Trump engaged in collusion. This, however, did not stop Clinton and the leftist media from pushing the unproven conspiracy: https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/13/will-all-the-name-brand-people-who-pushed-the-russian-collusion-conspiracy-get-off-scot-free/.
Indeed, as Sean Davis reports, “[CIA Director John] Brennan and the U.S. intelligence community knew months prior to the 2016 election that the collusion smear was the result of a campaign operation hatched by the campaign of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton” to distract from her email server scandal.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/06/breaking-dni-declassifies-handwritten-notes-from-john-brennan-2016-cia-referral-on-clinton-campaigns-collusion-operation/.
(2) You will have to explain how Shelby County v. Holder decision is “constitutionally incoherent” and subsequent (non-precleared) changes to election law in GA were unconstitutional.
Recall that central to this SCOTUS decision was the conclusion that “no one can fairly say that [the record] shows anything approaching the ‘pervasive,’ ‘flagrant,’ ‘widespread,’ and ‘rampant’ discrimination that clearly distinguished the covered jurisdictions [under Section 4(b) of the Civil Rights Voting Act] from the rest of the Nation in 1965.” In his concurring opinion, Justice Thomas went even further, saying “The extensive pattern of discrimination that led the Court to previously uphold §5 as enforcing the Fifteenth Amendment no longer exists.” Thus, SCOTUS found there was insufficient evidence of extensive discrimination to require preclearance from the jurisdictions previously eligible under Section 4(b). As the Majority indicates, we are not the same nation as in 1965.
(2, cont.) To make the “voter role purge = voter suppression => stolen election” argument, you must (a) show that the voter role purges suppressed the vote, and (b) prove – which is epistemologically impossible – that Abrams would have otherwise won GA. Even the former claim of “minority voter suppression” is a difficult argument to make when in fact, the Census Bureau reports that minority turnout has actually increased significantly over the last few years. According to the Pew Research Center, “all major racial and ethnic groups saw historic jumps in voter turnout” between the 2014 and 2018 midterm elections. And while Democrats lament that voter ID laws keep minorities from the polls, studies by both WaPo (2012) and Gallup (2016) suggest minorities overwhelmingly support these measures.
(2, cont.) We should also remember that Kemp was enforcing a 1997 statute passed by a Democratic-majority state legislature and Democrat Governor. These “purges” are statutorily mandated to ensure accurate voter roles, and I am not at all convinced that this maintenance constitutes voter suppression.
It is very unfair to say Trump’s claims of voter fraud are “imaginary.” At the very least, there are dozens of signed affidavits documenting voter fraud and irregularity. As I said in the article, it is up to the courts to decide whether the campaign’s evidence is sufficient enough to overturn the results as they currently stand. Perhaps they will, perhaps they will not. Regardless, Trump has every legal right to pursue credible leads.
(3) And finally, according to the Horowitz report, while the initial investigation of Carter Page was legal, later surveillance under FISA was NOT legally pursued. The FBI repeatedly lied to the FISA courts in order to spy on the Trump campaign: https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/17/fisa-court-confirms-the-government-lied-in-every-spy-warrant-application-against-carter-page/.
lmao not even lowkey this is one of the single worst things i have ever read. sad that this kind of thinking is what my school is producing. the cognitive dissonance and false equivalency is too much to bear
HI Sonni,
Please find your Grade and feedback below:
On November 7th, Democrat lackeys in the mainstream media declared Joe Biden the president-elect of the United States. [First, citing Breitbart is never a good way to start. Second, I’d be careful before implying Fox News and AP are “Democrat lackeys”. Please find better source in second draft]
Of course, saying so does not make it true—though this may come as news to many in the industry. President Trump has not conceded the election. Many states have not yet certified their election results. And the preliminary results in several crucial states remain under litigation. The voting has finished, but the election is not over. [Unfounded claim that many in the “industry” believe that saying someone is president makes it true. Writer is confusing democrats w/ Michael declaring bankruptcy in the office. One of the better paragraphs of the article]
Nevertheless, Biden took the media’s cue and addressed a crowd in Wilmington, Delaware on the evening of November 7th. There, he declared a “convincing victory” and thanked his supporters for entrusting him with the “mandate” to “marshal the forces” of decency, fairness, science and hope. Armed with these “forces,” he pledged to combat partisan hostility, the coronavirus, the economic recession, systemic racism, and climate change. Biden also emphasized the need for national unity and promised to usher in “a time to heal in America,” saying [No comments. Factually accurate and uses reputable source. Good work!]
To the millions of Americans who have been even passively following the news since 2016, this call for unity is deeply hypocritical and unserious. [I understand you are trying to prove a point but characterizing American news followers as a monolith does not come across well. Please try something like “To many of the millions…” Still misleading, but more precise. I would also look into replacing the word “unserious” as it doesn’t make much sense in the sentence.]
Who actually refuses to accept election results? Hint: It is not Trump. [Good use of cliffhanger! Though the use of tenses turns out to be misleading with what follows]
For four years, Democrats refused to accept the results of the 2016 presidential election, blaming Russian interference, collusion, Ukraine, voter suppression, former FBI Director James Comey—anything to explain why Americans would elect Donald Trump over establishment candidate Hillary Clinton. Beginning under the Obama/Biden administration, the FBI embroiled the country in a three-year long witch hunt that will perhaps go down as the greatest political scandal in our nation’s history. [Lots of revisions to be made here. First, 4/6 articles cited are opinion pieces in the Federalist. Very little credibility. The writer also writes contrary to their own premise in the line “anything to explain why Americans would elect…”
…If the premise is that Democrats didn’t accept results, then the argument “Democrats attempted to explain Trump winning” is inherently self-defeating. Though I would love to comment on the “witch hunt” and “greatest political scandal” lines, I’ll acknowledge that those are entirely allowed to be your opinion. However, please a.) don’t cite so many opinion pieces and b.) choose better sources.]
The FBI and DOJ grossly abused the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and targeted Trump advisors like General Michael Flynn in an attempted “Trump-by-proxy takedown.” The FBI and Obama White House criminally leaked information related to Crossfire Hurricane. The mainstream media recklessly misinformed the public. And Democrats like U.S. Representative Adam Schiff (D., California) peddled outright lies about the investigation. All of this contributed to (if I may borrow Hillary Clinton’s words) an “air of illegitimacy” that loomed over the Trump presidency for three years, even though there was zero evidence of collusion. Does Biden now expect conservatives to simply forget this ever happened?…
[The first line is somewhat misleading to the reader, as it nearly carries the implication that Flynn is innocent. However, and I apologize for not finding the source, I believe that the official court opinion is that the acceptance of a pardon is in and of itself an admission of guilt. Your claim of “zero evidence of collusion” falls under the logical fallacy of “proof by example”. You should be weary of using a specific example to make a more general claim (Off the record, I’d also recommend reading the Ukraine transcript in its entirety)]
For four years, leftists have claimed that the 2016 election was stolen and pledged #Resistance to #NotMyPresidentTrump. When Stacey Abrams refused to concede the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race, Democrats hailed her as a righteous crusader for election integrity and voter rights. And in the lead-up to the 2020 race, Clinton advised Biden that he “should not concede under any circumstances,” suggesting Republicans would rig the count. [The first few lines are somewhat misleading, but not quantifiably false. The Clinton line is also astoundingly misleading. The source used refers to the pretty well accepted knowledge that mail in ballots would, as they did, take longer to count. It is also worth noting that there were numerous issues surrounding the mailing of such ballots, and there were legitimate fears that many votes would take longer to arrive…
There were also fears that Trump would claim victory based off of incomplete returns. This did in fact happen. And before you think that Biden claimed victory off of incomplete returns, please keep in mind that there is a substantial difference between 70-90% of a vote being in and 95-99% counted but uncertified. On a personal note, I will acknowledge that I disagree fundamentally with Clinton’s awful phrasing, but to interpret as you have is, again, misleading.]
But this attitude toward election malfeasance suddenly shifted after November 3rd. In stark contrast to the left’s reception of Clinton and Abrams, when Trump refused to concede the election before litigation played out, the left immediately warned of a coup and indulged in fever dreams of Trump barricading himself in the White House and Biden playing the role of cool, calculated negotiator. [This again falls under the same fallacy of proof by example. Please rephrase.]
In reality, the election is not yet over, and Trump has no obligation to concede. Leftists should allow the legal process to play out before agitating themselves into a frenzy. And perhaps they should engage in some self-reflection in the meantime. [Personally, I agree with much of your words. Nobody should be in a such a frenzy as to lose their critical thinking skills. And I do agree that the left has much reflecting to do. However, I would once again implore you to choose better sources.]
Democrats (not Trump) sow distrust in election results. [nobody in their right mind would continue reading seriously after a claim such as this]
The same Democrats and leftist pundits who claimed that the Kremlin installed President Trump by manipulating the 2016 election now breathlessly exclaim, as the New York Times has, that there is “no evidence that fraud or other irregularities played a role in the outcome of the [2020] presidential race.” “[N]o evidence,” it says. If the Times says so, it must be true! [I know it’s sarcasm, but this is one of the few paragraphs with exclusively credible sources and I am legitimately proud]
No, I do not accept that. There is, in fact, evidence of voter fraud and irregularity–the question for the courts is whether it is sufficient to overturn the election results as they currently stand. And I cannot take seriously any “news” outlet that fails to even mention (nevermind scrutinize) Biden’s norm-shattering performance. Regardless, Democrats and the mainstream media destroyed their credibility long before the first vote was even cast. [Please please please use better sources. This is getting painful. I’m getting exhausted, as I had no reason to believe this project would take so long. I’ve seen most of the claims of “fraud” from the federalist debunked already, and I would encourage you to fact check them each as well. The “norm-shattering” article is so riddled with fallacies that it made me feel ill. As to point 4 in the article, I would encourage you to take a political science class. They could explain mobilization of bases far better than I…
…The gist of it is that Trump tapped a new base to vote, and they voted red all the way down. However, there were many conservatives that hate Trump, but found Biden palatable. They voted cross ticket. This is not earth-shattering stuff.]
For the past four years, not only did they apply inconsistent standards regarding election concessions and push the Russian collusion hoax, but they have also shown little, if any, interest in actually ensuring election integrity. For years, Democrats have fought common-sense voter ID laws and voter roll purges, arguing that these are forms of “voter suppression.” They have supported ballot harvesting, despite the obvious vulnerabilities to tampering. And most precipitously, they used the coronavirus to justify experimenting with tens of millions of unsolicited mail-in ballots to outdated voter roles. [This is really disappointing on numerous levels. I’ve already tackled a bit of collusion and don’t have the energy to do more. Voter ID laws are not common sense. The article cited does not do well to prove anything to the contrary…
What the author neglects to mention is the irrationality of voting itself. One vote rarely matters. Bipoc voters are less likely to already have such identification, and when faced with the irrationality of a single vote, many will not get one. There are many other reasons, but I would again encourage you to do your own further research. To your point on the coronavirus, all I can say is fuck off. I apologize for breaking tone. Wait no, I don’t. A lot of people have died, and others should not have to needlessly risk their own mental and physical wellbeing so that we can have the results “by the usual time”. I voted in person because I felt safe doing so and was able to ensure I had the ability to go at a safe time. Not everyone is so lucky. Please read up. ]
Trump is entirely within his rights to challenge the preliminary election results. Indeed, he has a duty to the 73 million Americans who voted for him to pursue all credible leads of fraud. And anyone who purports to care about election integrity should welcome these investigations. Telling Republicans to preemptively abandon their president to preserve “trust” in the election system is nonsensical–that ship sailed when Democrats abandoned any pretense of election integrity. [Misleading claims, however, I will agree that Trump should be well within his rights to pursue any “legitimate” claims of fraud. However, Giuliani has yet to file any claims of fraud. Again, please do your research.]
Leftists have spent the last four years sowing distrust in our elections by baselessly claiming that Trump was illegitimately installed in 2016, and by throwing election security to the wind ever since. Americans–especially those supporting the “losing” candidate–must have faith in the results for there to be any chance of unity. And Democrats destroyed that chance. [No sources cited, but it’s your opinion so that’s ok. I think the point on illegitimacy has more to do with the screwed up nature of the electoral college (again, either watch a john oliver or talk to your poli sci prof because I simply don’t have the time). Most have accepted that interference was largely delegated to media manipulation (which shouldn’t be overlooked) and that Trump legitimately won a game that should really be changed. I realize that my experience is anecdotal but I’ve yet to actually meet anyone that believes Trump didn’t get all of the votes he received.
Biden, get your house in order. Then we can talk about unity.
It is also preposterous for Biden to expect conservatives to “unite” alongside him for a more personal reason: when he says he wants to “restore the soul of America,” I simply do not believe him. [I mean, this is an opinion article. That is your opinion. I personally didn’t believe I would make it this far in the article without painkillers. I leave my current state up to your interpretation.]
Forgive me for doubting that “healer-in-chief” Biden will restore civility to our public discourse after he, along with Democrat colleagues and so-called “journalists” in the media, spent the last four years demonizing the rightward half of America. Until Biden gets his own house in order, conservatives are right to reject this absurd call for unity. [Nothing of substance worth commenting on]
I do not believe Biden is serious about “lowering the temperature” when he refuses to specifically condemn the Antifa and BLM thugs who set American cities ablaze this summer. There has also been no word yet from Captain Unity on the violent leftists who recently assaulted the president’s supporters during the “Million MAGA March.” I am not holding my breath. [I imagine you’ve quit reading my responses by now, but I believe Biden’s acknowledgement of ANTIFA as an idea was based off an FBI classification (though I will admit I’m not 100% sure of that, don’t feel like googling it, and will not assert it as fact)…
Honestly, this is a difference of opinion again, but I feel that much of the protest violence was justified (some of it also came from white ppl which was dumb). I’d encourage you to look into social contract theory, and the history of change through political unrest. If you’d like some links please let me know. As for the whole “attacking trump supporters unprompted” that’s a legit bad thing to do. However, we could go back and forth trading names of both attacked and deceased. Though I believe I would have more names to list, I think unnecessary attacking is pretty unequivocally awful.]
I do not believe Biden will further good-faith, across-the-aisle dialogue when he tacitly approves former First Lady Michelle Obama’s declaration that the millions of Americans who voted for Trump are agents of “lies, hate, chaos, and division.” Or when he fails to raise even the slightest objection to U.S. Representatives Jim Clyburn (D., South Carolina) and Jerry Nadler (D., New York), who insinuate that Republicans support a modern-day Adolf Hitler. (Biden did liken Trump to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels, so perhaps the latter should not be surprising.) [First of all, slightly misleading characterization of the tweet, but I honestly like it better the way you (mis)phrased it. Honestly, comparing Trump to Hitler isn’t the most effective. Nobody does Hitler like Hitler. But the Goebbels comparison is pretty spot on]
I do not believe Biden will temper partisan hostilities when he remains silent as U.S. Representative Ilhan Omar (D., Minnesota) castigates the Trump base as white supremacist Klannsmen, and as U.S. Representative Maxine Waters(D., California) condones the harassment of Trump Cabinet members. [If the robes fit you might as well wear them.]
I do not believe Biden will restore decency when he selects U.S. Senator Kamala Harris (D., California) to be his running mate–the woman who wrongfully implied Justice Brett Kavanaugh was a rapist, likened our border security to the KKK, and prosecuted journalist David Daleiden for his undercover reporting on alleged fetal tissue trafficking by Planned Parenthood. [I half agree with you. It was wrong of her to stop at implying. I implore you to read “Land of Open Graves” for a better idea of how our government used prevention through deterrence. For what it’s worth, I also dislike Kamala.]
And I do not believe Biden will usher a “time to heal” when, for four years, he offered no pushback to the “journalists” who routinely—almost casually—likened the president to the most evil characters in history, including Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Joseph Stalin, and Mao Zedong. Beyond a few empty words, he has given me no indication that he is willing to confront the likes of MSNBC’s Jennifer Rubin, who say we must expel Trump and his supporters from “polite society” and “burn down the Republican Party.” [You basically already wrote this paragraph. -1 for repetition]
@Leon Festinger You are amazing.
@Sonni Fitzsimonds Perhaps some additional review is needed before publishing an article like this. Opinions informed by facts and reliable sources are much stronger than those that cite other opinion articles and articles from unreliable sources such as tabloids.
Ideally, with an opinion article your goal (I hope) is to be convincing, fresh, interesting, and even informative. Simply regurgitating right-wing opinion just can’t effectively achieve that, or at least, seemed to fail at achieving that in this article, which felt more like a hodgepodge of ultraconservative talking points than a fresh idea formed from reliable sources.
Leftists have created a climate in which supporting the president can get you defamed, boycotted, blacklisted, harassed, doxxed, threatened, assaulted, or even killed. And as it turns out, Biden’s ambivalence towards even the most vile bigots in his own party just doesn’t put self-respecting conservatives in the “uniting” mood.
So Biden, good luck convincing the rightward half of America to unite. [Worth noting that many supporters of President Trump also frequently do the same based off of people’s identities, not their chosen beliefs. There is a difference. And once more, I’m pretty confident I have more names.]
Grade: C-. The curve of the other articles on this sight saved you from a failing grade. Please go about some introspection, rereading, and resubmit with better sources.
Sonni,
This is a very weird and poorly written article. Your source work here is not very good. I taught you better than this.
The preceding comment was not posted by Professor Nina Valiquette Moreau and should not be construed to represent Professor Moreau’s opinion. To the best knowledge of the Chicago Thinker’s editorial board, Professor Moreau has not publicly commented upon Sonni’s article.
The commenter wrongly assumed Professor Moreau’s name without her permission—and the Thinker’s board found it necessary to expose this misrepresentation.
It is stunning to me that an article like as this even needs to be written, but such is the state of our corrupt news media in 21st Century America. So true are its premises and so clear are the implications – I’m still trying to imagine what a counter-argument would even look like. It would certainly need to start with a denial of well documented history.
Calls for unity from the global leftist cabal should have been met with public gasps of laughter after the skullduggery of the last four years in which America’s most fundamental institutions have been attacked under cover of deranged Trump hatred. I urge you to keep up the courageous and honest way of life in the face of leftist intimidation. Many of the comments here suggest to me that you have, indeed, touched a nerve. Reminding leftists of their sins is never a profitable enterprise and you should expect to be targeted for pushing their noses in it.
PS: Paul Krugman, please call your office immediately lol!
Thank goodness someone else gets it! The Demoncrats have been chipping away at the foundation of our democracy since ‘64! Clinton never conceded, didn’t go to inauguration, and pressured Obama to not start the transition process. And then Obama pardoned her (and himself and michelle). It’s all there if you know the right websites. Someone should buy those Democrats proper history books!
I get my news from ABCNBCCBSPBSNPRWaPoNYTLATMSNBCCNNFNHuffPo so, I have no idea what is actually happening in the world…
My buddy told me Biden’s got a wealthy son named Hunter – anyone have any details on that? That family can really stretch a government paycheck. Public service. Who new is could be so……….. rewarding?
“Back to the basement, Joe – we’ll take care of the election and the nominations and the policies. You have a popsicle and try not to touch any kids. And put on some goddam pants!”
I can’t tell if this is satire or not. Either your satire is really incredible, or your sarcasm is really bad. I personally do get my news from NPR and the Hill, as they are both considered in the center for political bias (with NPR ever so slightly to the left and the Hill ever so slightly to the right).
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
best joke i’ve heard in a while.
npr, just a weeeeeee little bit to the left (of mao) and, the hill, just a little to the right (of mao). in other news, california just slightly west of rhode island and australia just a tad east of the moon.
your twitter account will NEVER be frozen.
ـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـاـا
من در صلح می آیم من در حال ساخت نظرات بالا هستم و عملکرد راست به چپ وب سایت شما را آزمایش می کنم.
ok passed , thank u! 🙂
(apparently there is a 200 comment minimum for comments haahahahahahhaahaahahhaah)
Dear Sonni,
I actually thought you were fairly intelligent and a well-reasoned person when we had class together, but reading this article has convinced me that what you lack in empathy and critical thought, you make up for in ignorance. You ought to take some time and reflect on what, if any, public service this bad faith garbage is performing.