What Was the "Argument" in the Election
I hate to add my blog to the piles of blogs and pundits analyzing and pondering the meaning of the just passed election. But that's what I feel like doing today.
I've always like Senator Ted Cruz's summary of politics. He once said, "First, win the argument. Then, win the election." I think there is a way of applying that to anti abortion Catholics and Protestants. The link talks of Catholics who now feel they have no political home because Republicans let them down with Trump but they remain against abortion rights.
Taking Cruz's win-the-argument thesis, I'd call the past election about an argument between two groups. One group's argument was, "Trump's a jerk." The other's argument was, "Abortion is wrong." The group, "Trump's a jerk," won the argument and then the election.
While one can argue the election, or any election, it about more complex issues, I believe in the end elections hinge on very simple arguments like this one. If someone has a message for the public, it needs to be boiled down to just a few words. It needs to fit on a billboard for drivers at 70 miles per hour.
For years to come, elections in the U.S. will be about abortion. I've been thinking my group, abortion rights, needs to find a different argument than the one used today, "Women have the right to choose." Recently in Northern Ireland a decision political decision in favor of abortion rights came about because of a different argument.
I may be wrong about parts of the story but as I understand it a woman had several miscarriages. With abortions not legal she went public with her fear that her several miscarriages would arouse suspicions of law enforcement. Making abortions a private, not government, decision would remove her from preying government. This is a different argument than "Women have the right to choose." It is, in fact, the central issue in whether abortion should be legal or not. Women's privacy was central in the Supreme Court's Roe v Wade. The woman's argument above was powerful in establishing legalized abortion.
In the future, I hope elections involving abortion rights can be a face off between "Abortion is a woman's private matter" versus "Abortion is a law enforcement against women matter." The side that wins this argument will win future elections.
Remembering back to 2015, I remember Jon asking me early on in the presidential race who I thought was going to be President. I said Trump. The whole cast of atheists on the blog (probably 2 or 3) laughed during this comical time of 10 republicans debating on stage. With the typical grim atheist worldview, a little comic relief was in order. Trump was wholly underestimated by all. Saying that "Republicans let them down with Trump...." is another underestimation. The trap was set and the corrupt with their 300 pre-election lawsuits bit very hard without any thought or real thinking. They are invincible and unaccountable, right? Just ask them for their favorite flavor of ice cream. Time to reel them in.
ReplyDeleteHenry Nov 14, 2020 at 8:13 PM “Trump was wholly underestimated by all.”
DeleteAs King Ubu in face paint, looking like the KFC extra crispy Colonel, Trump the man is but a brand or an effigy representing vanity, mendacity, avarice, duplicity, indecency, and corruption. He is adored by 70 million “patriotic” American voters.
Now for some “grim atheist world view”: Trump’s presidency was just what the country needed to complete a radical polarization, the pre-requisite for re-establishing the center. More than 75 million “patriotic” American voters, tired of choking on the MAGA snake, bit off its head and spit it out. Chances are the synthesis will not be pretty. During the transition booby traps are being set, the salt is being sowed, and the judiciary is packed. It will take at least a generation or more to recover from the last four years.
Yes a lot of us feel plundered by high taxes. Yes most of us feel exhausted by this pandemic. Who would like to pay $750/year in income tax and if infected by COVID-19, receive the fully tax payer funded Trump treatment protocol? Was the Donald insuring domestic tranquility and providing for the common defense? Who was plundering who?
Henry my favorite ice cream is Chocolate Revel. Don’t get caught in black-face or bronze-face ‘. There’s a new sheriff in town. As you said, “Time to reel them in.” Welcome back as well.
Ardy--Henry and other Trump fans enjoy talking of the underestimated Trump. I've never seen one admit they may have over estimated him. A "better" trade "deal" with China that never materialized. Still no success in any of his court cases. It was almost better looking for weapons of mass destruction.
Delete"A "better" trade "deal" with China that never materialized."
DeleteWe made money off tariffs on China. Their retaliatory tariffs had little to no effect. The increased cost of raw materials was mostly inflation. During the initial period of tariffs and retaliatory tariffs the Trump haters had made the assessment mid 2019 that the Trump tariffs had cost us a lot of money. However, when one stops listening to the pundits and starts looking at real data, the Consumer Price Index for raw materials fell for several months straight during this same time period. If the retaliatory tariffs from China had any bite, we would have seen a RISING Consumer Price Index for raw materials during the tariff "war". Despite what all the "fact" checkers have proclaimed, the real data points to a Trump victory on trade with China. In fact, a genuinely better trade deal with China materialized. In order for the "fact" checkers argument to work, one has to first assume 0 inflation and count the increasing cost of goods solely due to tariffs. This was not the case.
Now waiting for all the irrelevant "black face" and "bronze face" arguments.....good stuff. Very fact based. LOL
Henry "We made money off tariffs on China."
DeleteThat's interesting. China is not importing much grain from the mid west like they did. Farmers have been paid BIG amounts to make up the shortfall. After the embargo Asian countries set up their own trade group and are going forward without as many imports.
Here is some more current data with regard to grain from a local reliable source, Agweek:
Delete"To date, China has bought 10 million metric tons of U.S. corn versus 60,000 metric tons last year and 20.6 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans versus 3.6 million metric tons last year."
Grain exports are back on track in 2020, and we are still making money on tariffs. China got sick of paying a higher price for soybeans down in Brazil in 2019, which was re-traded American soybeans because Brazil did not have enough of their own capacity. So in essence, China still was buying our grain in 2019. Trump has mastered the art of the tariff.
Henry "Grain exports are back on track for 2020."
DeleteYou sound just like Trump when he bragged exports to China are "at record highs, $16-$17 billion." Actually, in 2012 they were $26 billion.
The issue isn't that folks underestimated Trump.
DeleteThe issue is that folks overestimated Trump's supporters.
Welcome back, Henry.
ReplyDeleteFraud should result in long sentences for people who orchestrated the various forms of fraud; multiple voting, illegal people voting, mail-out, etc.
ReplyDeleteThere is no doubt that Trump won this election if only legal votes are counted.
There is reason to believe that Trump will serve his second term starting in January 2021, rather than January 2025.
Biden is a soup kitchen president, if he ever takes office. He will continue the destruction of America which Obama started but Trump reversed.
Matt--"There is no doubt Trump won this election if only legal votes are counted."
DeleteThe hearings in various courts is coming up soon. We'll here if there is any evidence for your claims.
"There is no doubt that Trump won this election if only legal votes are counted."
DeleteYou mean we can't have more votes than registered voters or faster vote counts than the speed of the machine? C'monnnn man! We are the democratic party. We are brain surgeons in our manipulations and can do anything. When that fails, we dox the law-abiding citizens working as Republican canvassers, labeling as racists (without evidence, without evidence) on a national level.
Henry "C'Monnn man!"
DeleteTrump hired the best attorneys in the country to present evidence of crooked votes and/or counting. The last I heard they had 14 decision by judges. 14 losses. But pray. Maybe they will win one.
We need a betting pool for the last day of Trump as President. I'm saying he will resign on Dec. 15. Pence will acquit for all crimes against humanity. Pence and Biden are old buddies so things should go smoothly after that.
Based solely on his reputation and integrity, Lin Wood would not have continued with this mess had there not been adequate evidence. His integrity is such that the MSM cannot touch him. And he is standing up for Trump? I find that very interesting. It is very early yet. Remember when Gore sued, it took 37 days to resolve. And we are expected to have resolution the week following election day? (Of course election day is a matter of interpretation if you are from the democratic party. They wanted it to be several days after The Day. So in that light, we are expected to have resolution same day :) ) I love these double standards. LOL.
DeleteHenry "Based solely on his reputation and integrity, Lin Wood would not have continued..had there not been adequate evidence."
DeleteI watched a video of him. He made it clear he is being paid. Rudy is getting $20,000 per day. I suppose Wood is getting the same. I gather his theory is something can be found in the voting software because he tossed out numbers that could not be off by just illegal voters. But, since he has not examined the software nor have any of the other Trump fans there is no evidence anything was wrong with it. In the meantime, be sure to send money. Rudy and Wood need it. Some of the fund raising is designated to vague uses--Trump needs it to pay for his business mistakes.
PS The hand count continues in Georgia where Wood has filed in court. So far the hand count is close to the machine count, Biden ahead by a healthy margin. After the hand count Trump can demand a recount by machine. After that shows Biden won the $20,000 a day a lawyers will have to come up with some other way to justify stalling. Maybe require a count with all counters standing on their heads. They might reverse enough numbers to give the state to Trump. Then it would be fair.
DeleteUh..Oh...the reeling has begun. A well coordinated pattern of corruption is coming to light. Damn press conferences! Damn affidavits (evidence). Who is the man behind the curtain orchestrating the opposition to Trump? This person hand picked Kamela. That initially didn't work. The effort was resurrected by disenfranchising Bernie a second time. Then this person hand picked Biden who can't string a sentence together. And then Biden surprisingly happened to pick Kamela after their primary baggage. Then the election came, and the corruption seemed to have a centrally located coordination effort with multiple international ties to enable the voting fraud (Smartmatic and Dominion). Who is this person? I don't know. The crimes will have to be federally investigated and the evidence followed. Whose doorstep will they arrive at? Who knows. This is big.
DeleteHenry--"The crimes will have to be federally investigated and the evidence followed."
DeleteI watched Mayor Giuliani and thought he was strange. I wondered why he didn't just stick with swore statements and not start in on wild national conspiracy theories, city histories, "data in Venezuela" and such crazy stuff. Just now I wondered how the old line conservative press took his news conference. So far as I know the Chicago Tribune is a good example of a huge conservative paper. Here was it's take on Giuliani:
"At a rambling news conference Thursday, Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, mixed misleading statements, wild conspiracy theories and outright fabrications as he attempted to suggest that Trump still had a viable pathway to winning the election."
I still have my money on a Dec. 15th resignation. Pence's pardon of crimes to humanity will be on Dec. 20th.
DeleteI turns out celebrity attorney Wood has neither standing to go to court nor a case to be made if he had standing.
Deletehttps://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/19/federal-judge-rejects-trump-allys-bid-block-election-certification-georgia-438563
LOL....I hear rumblings coming out of Georgia right now of extensive evidence of fraud. I remember Joe Biden (Office of President-Elect, whatever that is) on election night with all the horn honking. He gave a faltering address. I can't remember though if that was the time where his wife was nudging him, instructing him what to say. However, I distinctly remember one of the things he was muttering was that they were going to win Georgia. (Honk, Honk!) At the time of this claim, Trump was ahead by a significant margin in Georgia, and this seemed absolutely bizarre. I was wondering what this man was talking about. Then when I woke up the next morning, voila, Biden had a sudden spike of single vote Biden-only ballots at 5:00 AM dramatically raise him up to victory. I think a mistake was made here. His handlers should not have informed him election night that the fix was in. They are so sure of themselves and bold, that they are sealing their own self-incrimination. I can't wait to see the evidence. There is already significant evidence filed in other cases. Reel them in!
DeleteHenry "There is already significant evidence filed in other cases. Reel them in."
DeleteI haven't seen an "significant evidence." Maybe you could point to some. Rudy mentioned some ballots arrived in plastic garbage bags. Apparently he thinks that is illegal.
As to Biden predicting he would win Georgia, I think it was Trump who predicted he would win it. Why did Trump believe he would win it when the big Democratic areas were not in yet? Something fishy there, right?
I was watching CNN with its "tap-the-precinct" board. He said through the whole evening Biden would do well when the urban and mostly black areas came in.
In the final analysis, this is reality: Court cases in the past have protected legal votes (legal voters). If votes were made legally courts have protected the right of those voters' votes to be counted. Trump's clown car of attorneys has not come up with any significant evidence of illegal voters.
Poor Tucker Carlson is now on the outs from Trump supporters after requiring the dim witted lady attorney to provide evidence of her claims.
"Dim-witted lady"...
Delete"Nice" argument, Jon. She provided Tucker evidence prior to refusing to continue with the dialogue. What more do you want her to do? If you are concerned with incivility, listen to the rudeness of the reporters at the recent press conferences. They are savagely chanting, yelling, grand standing, and interrupting.
Henry--"What more do you want her to do?"
DeleteA little honest research. The voting machine conspiracy is just plain false. Did not happen. Could not happen.
"The Trump administration’s top cybersecurity expert, Chris Krebs, wrote that there “is not a single point of failure and such systems are subject to multiple audits to ensure accuracy and reliability,” including with paper backup. (Trump fired him for admitting this.)"
That is, someone or ones would have had to individually doctor hundreds, maybe thousand, of INDIVIDUAL voting machines to change the outcomes in many states. Then, if the machines were tested before the votes began they would have had to pass the tests.
The lawyer clown car does not actually want to get into court. They want to current state of affairs to continue: They lob grenades from press events. If they got into court state governments would throw grenades back. Their game would be over. The status quo is best, Trump can continue to claim he won and his donations from the gullible will continue
Today on the Sunday talk show former Gov. Cris Christy said the same thing I wrote above. The lawyer clown car does not want to get into court. In court they have admitted "This is not a charge of fraud." They know they don't have evidence of fraud. At news conferences they use the term "fraud" over and over.
DeleteTrump knows only one schtick. Obama was not a "legal" President because he was not born in the U.S. Biden will not be a "legal" President because Trump was the election winner. We can look forward to this for years to come.
Sidney Powel has been fired. She was the funniest clown in the clown car.
Deletetoo much black and white here. sure, Trump is not a towering political giant, the stuff of which great statesmen are made. for that matter, how many politicians are towering giants anyway? not many I dare say. nor is Trump the kind of devil caricatured by those who suffer from Trump
ReplyDeleteDerangement Syndrome. that said, I think that Trump has no hope of turning defeat into victory. yet, all this fuss has its positive side. it shows us that votes are not always accurately counted. that fraud can, and has occurred. (we know, for example that some dead people "voted" in the 2020 elections). that some folks managed to vote twice. that voting machines can and do malfunction. what does this tell us(or should tell us). it tells us that our election system is not infallible, that errors, that malfeasance is not limited to the imaginations of conspiracy mongers. that we do have problems to be faced up, not arbitrarily denied. BTW, I too think that the PA situation smells a tad "fishy"
The abortion argument is one that will continue indefinitely, and one of the primary reasons is because both sides of the issue have really made no attempt whatsoever to understand each other.
ReplyDeleteI can think of a dozen good arguments against outlawing abortion. We can talk about how a fetus shouldn't have any legal standing until it gains some kind of awareness in the third trimester. We can talk about how it's unfair to have men make decisions on woman's health issues, as pregnancy is essentially a natural form of discrimination. We can talk about how outlawing abortion is likely to cause far more pain and misery than our current status quo.
But I think relying on the "freedom to choose" argument is not the correct path because it's not even addressing the argument that the anti-abortion crowd is putting forth. People who truly believe that human life "beings" at conception are going to have a very difficult time accepting any policy that would end that life.
But that's fine, because human life doesn't begin at conception. It begins when a human starts to gain some understanding about its place in the world.
I'm not sure why the left seems to be afraid of using that argument, as it is, in my opinion, the one that trumps this debate.
Bryan K Thank you for your thoughtful comments.
ReplyDelete"It begins when a human starts to gain some understanding about its place in the world." That's an interesting concept. I've read the human fetus has no more self awareness than a rabbit or dog fetus.
To me, the big issue is how pregnant women will be treated in a no abortion country. It seems inevitable after looking at El Salvador and other countries a woman would need to keep her pregnancy secret from doctors. That would inevitably mean many deaths to both women and babies. If she had a miscarriage doctors would be required to report the missing "person" to law enforcement who, in turn, would be required to investigate what happened. A woman who had attended an abortion rights rally would be considered "a person of interest" in the missing fetus.
You mentioned how the two sides do try to see the other's point of view. In ten years of blogging I've not had one anti abortion commenter come on here and discuss the details of how miscarriages would be investigated in a no-abortion U.S.A.
I think the concept of "how much self awareness" is debatable, and I'm not even 100% certain where exactly that line is other than the fact that it's somewhere in the third trimester. The gray area, though, is an area I won't cross for any reason in the debate precisely because I cannot imagine the fetus at that stage as being entitled to any kind of human rights. I prefer to stay out of any argument beyond that, though, because...well, I'm a man.
DeleteThe interesting thing about the "olden days" is that I have a feeling that a family was rich enough, lot of illegal abortions were classified as miscarriages.
Bryon K "...a..lot of illegal abortion were classified as miscarriages."
DeleteWhere this blog originated, Fargo, ND, my friend born in the late 20's grew up on the streets there. He said it was common knowledge among his teenage friends which doctors would "take care" of a teenage pregnancy. Of course, doctors at that time were nearly all general practices and no records need be kept.
Young pregnant women get abortions now in countries where all abortions are illegal. It is increasingly possible to have abortions using products from the pharmacy. This does not stop anti abortion operatives and politicians from using anti abortion to their advantage. There is money to be made and power to be gained by opposing abortion.