It's The Atlantic. Jungle primary is their goal to save Murk as well in Alaska, and they wish Dems would put Cheney somehow up in Wyoming too.

Because they are so moderate and smart, and have no core beliefs/principles; perfect Republicans if we have to have any in federal office. Heaven forbid parties select who to put on the general election ballots, it's better to empower the media to tell people what to do en mass.

Quote:

---

We urgently need visionary leaders and institutional reforms that can lower the stakes of political competition.

---

Ok.

Start by repealing the 16th and 17th Amendments.

As long as government has the power that it does, the stakes cannot be lowered.

Anyone know anything about the author?

Occasionally, a Borg Lefty (same thing) will write something pretty logical and reasonable. An no, bipartisanship isn't what we need. The Republicans will be happy to get on board with any legislation when the Borg legislation either works, or doesn't remove somebodies liberty to accomplish the goal, which is ALWAYS the opposite of what's intended.

I saw the title of his book.

Quote:

---

About the author: Yascha Mounk is a contributing writer at The Atlantic and the author of The Great Experiment: Why Diverse Democracies Fall Apart and How They Can Endure.

---

As a general rule of thumb, Dem policies always creep towards authoritarianism, so the author HAS to find a positive stat, and expand on it by creating an entire article. Or, of course, the oldy but goody, include genuine facts, but leave out 60% of the other facts that make the policy horrible.

The 17th needs to go, for sure.

Now they need bipartisanship?

Lmao.

About a decade or more past that point.

Quote:

---

"including that the GOPwouldn't work with the White House to combat inflation."

---

In other words, the GOP wouldn't agree to trillions more in spending for the BBB stupidity, which any person with an inkling of common sense realizes would make inflation worse, not better.

No crow needed.

Thanks and Gig 'em.

Keegan99 said:

---

No crow needed.

Thanks and Gig 'em.

---

LOL. Is THAT why you have been avoiding that thread like the plague?

Nope.

But I appreciate your concern.

The film remains an incomplete presentation that will remain on the fringe. And True The Vote will do likewise because they fail to make a coherent, tight case that can be digested by a broader audience.

Nothing else to say.

Keegan99 said:

---

Nope.

But I appreciate your concern.

The film remains an incomplete presentation that will remain on the fringe. And True The Vote will do likewise because they fail to make a coherent, tight case that can be digested by a broader audience.

Nothing else to say.

---

I'm not concerned. I'm laughing at your talking point getting destroyed and you running away to hide.

And the idea that this documentary isn't digestible by a "broader audience" is hilarious.

Nothing destroyed.

And a broader audience isn't going to ever watch a 90 minute film that falls to get the ball into the end zone.

Keegan99 said:

---

Nothing destroyed.

And a broader audience isn't going to ever watch a 90 minute film that falls to get the ball into the end zone.

---

They want you to go back to the film thread because there is now video posted of single mules going to multiple drops in the time period and dropping multiple batches of ballots.

Per what you said, IIRC, that is getting the ball over the goal line.

Personally I dont care if you go back because I know your distaste for saying "the election was stolen" is fueled by your hatred of Trump and not anything logical.

Hers what you don't seem to get: I'm on your side. I agree with the thesis of the film. I want as many people to come to that realization as possible. Yet you seem to think that I'm the problem?

If that's your approach to salesmanship of what happened in 2020, then... Good luck.

To do so will require a much tighter, more objective presentation. Without all the hackery.

If True The Vote can't produce a simple one-sheet and a 5-10 minute video laden with hard evidence, not speculation, they will fail.

I agree that the ballot harvesting operation made the difference in swing states.

The election was within the "margin of fraud" because Trump was uniquely polarizing.

Those are not mutually exclusive.

Keegan99 said:

---

Nothing destroyed.

And a broader audience isn't going to ever watch a 90 minute film that falls to get the ball into the end zone.

---

LOL.. and yet you think a broader audience is going to read a (in your words): "a fully-sourced-and-cited, unimpeachable report"?

You EMBARRASSED yourself on that thread. That is why you are afraid to go back.


Keep moving the goal posts, buddy.

No, I think a broad audience will watch a 5-10 minute video, as I said.

You back that up with a full, lawyer-esque report.

Nah, everything I said is true. They have failed to make a cohesive presentation that is likely to change minds and effect change.

Keegan99 said:

---

No, I think a broad audience will watch a 5-10 minute video, as I said.

---

No, you said:

Quote:

---

When someone has the goods, they don't do a *movie*.

They publish a fully-sourced-and-cited, unimpeachable report.

---

Which is laughably moronic.

So which is it? A 5-10 minute video in which you would then complain that it wasn't detailed enough? Or "a fully-sourced-and-cited, unimpeachable report" that nobody would read? You can't have it both ways.


You got caught in a moment of idiocy. Just admit it and eat your crow like a man.

It would be both. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Think of the Bonfire Commission.

The engineers got on stage and did a quick run-through. Then there was a massive, professional document that had all the details.

Again, you seem to think that I'm the problem. Buddy, I agree that the mules and ballot harvesting were a thing.

But the sales pitch made by Dinesh and True The Vote is destined to go nowhere.

Keegan99 said:

---

It would be both. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Think of the Bonfire Commission.

The engineers got on stage and did a quick run-through. Then there was a massive, professional document that had all the details.

---

And yet NOBODY watched or read the document that had the details of the Bonfire Commission. I can't even tell you what YEAR it came out or who was on it.

You asked: "So where is the video of the same person making the multiple drops on the same day?" That video was provided and you have yet to come back to that thread since. That is cowardice. Plain and simple.

You are really failing in your desperate attempt to save face. You were wrong. Admit it. That's the honest thing to do.


Why don't you at least make these "points" over there?

Quote:

---

But the sales pitch made by Dinesh and True The Vote is destined to go nowhere.

---

Your proposals would have been 1000X worse. The libs are going to discount it no matter what we do. The best is to get it out to as much of OUR side as possible. Doing it your way would have been EASY to brush under the rug. D'Souza has several of the most watched political documentaries in history. You simply have no clue what you are talking about.

You kept "calling me out" and derailing other threads.

Providing the video after-the-fact is helpful. But it's not a good presentation.


And yes, people did read the Bonfire Commission report. That said, if all the engineers did was get on stage at Reed and talk and NOT show their work with a hefty report, you can be sure there would have been lots of questions.

That's generally how good investigations are done. You have an oral presentation. Then a high-level summary memo. Then a full report.

Reminds of Bruce Springsteen's commercial w/Jeep. After years of threatening to move to Canada if Trump was re-elected, crying that everyone who didn't vote like him were hateful racists, etc. he has a commercial calling for everyone to come together.

F.

Off.

Keegan99 said:

---

I agree that the ballot harvesting operation made the difference in swing states.

The election was within the "margin of fraud" because Trump was uniquely polarizing.

Those are not mutually exclusive.

---

So would you say it is accurate to say that Trump would have won without massive coordinated leftist voter malfeasance in 2020?

Keegan99 said:

---

You kept "calling me out" and derailing other threads.

Providing the video after-the-fact is helpful. But it's not a good presentation.


And yes, people did read the Bonfire Commission report. That said, if all the engineers did was get on stage at Reed and talk and NOT show their work with a hefty report, you can be sure there would have been lots of questions.

That's generally how good investigations are done. You have an oral presentation. Then a high-level summary memo. Then a full report.

---

Who has more viewers/readers? The Bonfire Commission report of D'Souza's documentaries?

And, BTW the point of the Bonfire Commission report is not the same as this documentary. This documentary is not to present a case to the DOJ for prosecution. Biden's DOJ isn't going to do squat anyway. The point of this documentary is to convince as many voters as possible. They aren't going to read a report, and a YouTube video is easy as hell for big Tech to ban.

Doing it this way has far more effect than any of your ideas. That's why he's successful at it and you are not. Hell you can't even convince 2 TexAgers that you are right.

Back to the point of the article - we'd have a lot better candidates if we got rid of the primary system completely because it incentivizes the candidates to race to the extremes, with the most recent example being ending up with a right wing lunatic vs. a full blown socialist for governor in Pennsylvania. Ranked choice let's the moderates who probably make up the middle 70% of the country vote for candidates who are a more accurate representation of the general public. Unfortunately the parties both need the primaries for fundraising purposes so it'll never be fully adopted.

The death throes of a bunch of losers with failed ideas

Can we clean up this derail by atm? Worse than a Tanya derail.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Back to the point of the article - we'd have a lot better candidates if we got rid of the primary system completely because it incentivizes the candidates to race to the extremes, with the most recent example being ending up with a right wing lunatic vs. a full blown socialist for governor in Pennsylvania. Ranked choice let's the moderates who probably make up the middle 70% of the country vote for candidates who are a more accurate representation of the general public. Unfortunately the parties both need the primaries for fundraising purposes so it'll never be fully adopted.

---

Moderates are the worst. They don't believe in anything. They are just trying to figure out what the people like so they can get power. And the average voter is a moron. We don't want anybody leading like that.

Hagen95 said:

---

Can we clean up this derail by atm? Worse than a Tanya derail.

---

Had to be done. He was avoiding the thread where he made an ass of himself. Bumping that thread over and over did no good.

aTmAg said:

---

Hagen95 said:

---

Can we clean up this derail by atm? Worse than a Tanya derail.

---

Had to be done. He was avoiding the thread where he made an ass of himself. Bumping that thread over and over did no good.

---

There was a time when personal call outs and attacks while derailing would get you the ban hammer. Just a heads up.