777 Comments

Constitution Amendment Proposal

The Constitution lists only three qualifications for the Presidency — the President must be at least 35 years of age, be a natural born citizen, and must have lived in the United States for at least 14 years. The Framers of the Constitution gave us the bare minimum for qualifying.

WHY on Earth would we put someone in the most important position in the country without being vetted?

I think most Americans would agree that we should require any and all Presidential candidates to have CREDIBILITY,

Congressional Experience, a clean track record,trustworthiness and moral standards. These are just a few of the most important requirements to be in the most important job in our country. Our future depends on it!

Let’s hold our elected officials accountable to make sure Presidential candidates are worthy of the position!

Expand full comment
Sep 16, 2022Liked by Robert Reich

I am compelled to remind people of one simple fact. Together, the American people have elected good presidents. We did NOT elect George W. Bush. We did NOT elect Donald Trump. The electoral college put these two men in the white house - NOT us.

We need a constitutional amendment, abolishing the electoral college.

Expand full comment

Add the filibuster!

Expand full comment

The filibuster is not in the constitution but is a Senate "rule". It does not require an amendment to get rid of it.

The essential problem with the filibuster derives from the minoritarian nature of the Senate, itself. The Senate must be either dramatically reformulated or done away with. This does require an amendment.

The House has become minoritarian as well due to gerrymandering. Gerrymandering needs to be gone. This does not require an amendment; however, an amendment would prevent the all too frequent on again off again villainy by the SCOTUS and state legislators that we see on so many issues.

Expand full comment

I agree with this, and also think states should not be involved in drawing congressional districts. The districts should be neutrally drawn based on population count. A computer could do it.

Expand full comment

Judith Johnson ; Good idea!

Expand full comment

Abolish the Senate!

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Also just rules.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Yup.

Expand full comment

In order to get there, need to win the midterms. Database of unregistered women, Contact, Mervis Reissig

merv4peace@gmail.com

Consider the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, Sixteen jurisdictions have signed on, pledging to assign their Electoral College votes to the popular winner once enough other states have also signed on, so that together those states have enough electoral votes to guarantee the popular winner— states controlling at least 270 electoral votes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact#:~:text=The%20National%20Popular%20Vote%20Interstate,and%20the%20District%20of%20Columbia.

Expand full comment

Incremental progress is fine with me, as long as we remember the long-term goal is eliminating the electoral college forever. :)

Expand full comment

Been a part of the National Popular Vote movement for many years. Thanks Daniel for bringing forth this!

Expand full comment

Both the filibuster and the electoral college are destroying our democracy. The filibuster makes legislating too cumbersome by allowing indecision to rule over action. A capable legislator should be able to vote yes/no in fair representation of his/her constituency. "Maybe" or "no vote" should not be an option in the real world. The electoral college is a decision avoidance mechanism that insults the integrity of popular elections. The results of an accurate popular vote is sufficient and impressive to declare a winner. I have read the Popular Vote Interstate Compact which solves nothing by continuing to recognize the existence of an electoral college. We have witnessed the disaster of inaccurate outcomes in the 2000 and 2016 elections and yet we timidly stand by to allow this bullshit system to continue to insult the American voter. The Electoral College should be abandoned. Failure to do so will result in the realization by voters that Citizen's United, the corrupt lobby for profit influence on Congress, the Electoral College and the filibuster all combine to render popular voting a meaningless exercise. It may not be a revolution when people no longer care to vote but it will be the end of our democracy.

Expand full comment

Simply win the midterms. FLIP four Senate races in Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Expand full comment

Although it would be great to eliminate the Electoral College, it would take a Constitutional Amendment and the kind of Democratic control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency that we never get. Liberals also tend not to vote in the mid-terms and if it wasn't for the Dobbs decision there would likely be a new influx of Republicans in this mid-term. Republicans would never, ever join in such an amendment. They like winning without the popular majority. So doing what you suggest becomes an impossibility and that is why the Popular Vote Interstate Compact is so important. It creates an end run around the un-democratic Electoral College. Perhaps if we can get enough states to join and make the Electoral College useless, it may be easier to amend the Constitution and get rid of it then, but till then...forget it.

The filibuster is equally un-democratic. It forces the majority to accept minority control. What is infuriating about it is that it is only a rule in the Senate and easily gotten rid of. Why Biden can't see how limiting it is is beyond me. It does not allow any progressive movement while at the same time allowing what Republicans want. Military spending, trade agreements, arms sales, budget resolution, executive branch regulations removal, Supreme Court Justices, and conservatism, meaning nothing progressive changing. That is what they want. If it is eliminated it is true that the Republicans would more easily pass their agregious and draconian measures as we would be able to. But they would only be able to do so half the time as we would be able to. That is better than not getting anything ever and we would be able to change things back again when the tide shifts. I cannot think of a better way of affecting the voters when they see the kind of nonsense they seek to pass.

Could they eliminate Social Security? Possibly, but imagine the political consequences if they even tried it. They can change the rules too when they get a majority and it is in their best interest as they did to allow themselves the ability to install Supreme Court justices. Look where we are now. That is what happens when you allow them to change the rules when they want and to be afraid to do so yourself. There is nothing to impede them from changing the rules when it suits them.

Expand full comment

no. the electoral college system has to stay and will stay.

it will stay because to change it would require a constitution al amendment, which requires 28 states to ratify. which obviously isn't going to happen since ratifying it will disenfranchise the smaller states, and there is no way on earth that they are going to go for that.

the purpose or the EC is to ensure that the smaller states would not be bulldozed by the democratic votes of the large cities. it has nothing at all to do with slavery or the protection of it.

as for this shibboleth of the 'popular vote', that is nonsense. the entire purpose and design of our republican system is to defuse the dangers of the 'popular vote'. for example, today immigration is a topic de jure. most illegal aliens migrate to the larger cities. where, if you had your way , they would become citizens and be allowed to vote.

so, why on earth would a voter in , say Idaho, or Wyoming, or Rhode island, have their vote be equivalated to that of a recent immigrant for Honduras or Nigeria, in the determination of their land use, or any other policy affecting their regional situation by someone who just came here, and never was in Idaho, Wyoming or Rhode island.

this is the purpose of the EC system and why it is going to stay, as long as our republic endures.

Expand full comment

Tried to like but couldn't. Excellent post.

Expand full comment

If you refresh (reload) your page you should be able to ❤️

Expand full comment

still need education, though -- Don't count on all women to be voting for their best interests.....Look around at the churches!

Expand full comment

I know several women who are loyal church going members who have had abortions. Quietly though. Hope they remember those times.

Expand full comment

Love that idea but how to get stupid states like AZ to pull that one off?

Expand full comment

Good point, the peerless in vacuous idiocy State of the union, would present problems, as would a few others with unctuous derps as denizens!

Expand full comment

Thank you!!

Expand full comment

this compact , if ever enacted, has zero chance of passing SC constitutional review. stop wasting our time.

Expand full comment

James, the amendment process was included in the constitution for the purpose of changing any part of it. While it is very difficult to get 2/3rds of the states to agree, that is how it's done.

The recent Supreme Court decision on abortion is testing the court in ways it never faced before. Basically its legitimacy is being tested, which means it has lost legitimacy, which means it is losing power. The SC can only go so far, before they are too weak to uphold the law, let alone the constitution. Maybe, just maybe, the now weakened court makes this a good time to start pushing the process of abolishing the electoral college.

Expand full comment

Do you mean the Supreme Court? For “South Carolina is too small for a republic and too large for an insane asylum.” ― James L. Petigru. Born in Abbeville District, South Carolina on May 10, 1789

Expand full comment

Says the Constitutional law expert.

Expand full comment

Making demands and insults, as in your next comment, are hallmarks of a Troll. Are you trolling or do you have a legitimate argument for discussion?

Expand full comment

Why would South Carolina be needed to sign on?

Expand full comment

Let’s throw the “Fed” into the mix as well!

Expand full comment

I think Keiths' amendment proposal (a concept PROVEN by the former president and current traitor) and the abolishment of the electoral college should BOTH be enacted as amendments to our Constitution. In this way, qualified candidates chosen by the majority of Americans would be elected. Gerrymandering must also be done away with to prevent putting "a finger on the scale" of the state and local outcome of elections. And Laurie is correct that the filibuster should also be abolished. So, write or call your Representatives and Senators, people, and make a lot of constructive noise!! And vote out those of bad faith who have no place in our government.

Expand full comment

Also write to the President. He is blocking the elimination of the filibuster too.

Expand full comment

no. what we need is an constitutional amendment mandating only paper ballots, that can be preserved and used for federal elections.

and as for getting rid of the EC.... can states that might disagree with allowing NYC, LA, and Chicago to rule the nation, secede if it happens?

why should a recent immigrant living in NYC have a preponderate say in land use policies in, say, Idaho, or Wyoming or North Dakota?

Expand full comment

why shouild states with essentially NO populace determine who will lead the nation simply because they have been given given carte blanche by a construct held over for them from the civil war and reconstruction?

Expand full comment

because they live there, and are part of the 'union' of equal states.

Expand full comment

It's not equal. Those citizens are over-represented by virtue of their getting the same two-senator representation as more densely populated states.

Expand full comment

Actually, I agree with paper ballots but that means mandating the states all use paper ballots. Despite the complaints from the Republicans about the computer balloting, they would be the first to block such a measure. After all, they would no longer be able to claim computer fraud to contest free and fair elections.

As for the EC the opposite is true now and honestly, there would not be any choice in the matter, just as there is none now.

What makes you think that recent immigrants are voting if they are illegal? If they are legal they have every right to vote, they have become citizens and have equal protection under the law. Do the land use policies that you speak of in Idaho, Wyoming, or North Dakota include global warming denial?

Expand full comment

-Forget about a constitutional amendment for what we need even more. We have no consensus for that.

-The fact is the smaller states have more of a say and do rule the nation!! We have minority rule.

-Recent immigrants do not vote.

Expand full comment

Why would they? If a STATE has a need, why would that necessarily be a matter for FED legislation in the first place? And why would a NY Rep object to a land use policy in Wyoming?

I get your point, but I think you've set up a straw man (or a bogeyman), and that's not a good reason to avoid discussion of an important racist and minority-controlling institution.

One citizen, one vote.

While we're at it, Congress MUST neuter Citizens United.

Expand full comment
Sep 18, 2022·edited Sep 18, 2022

In order to neuter CU, one must eliminate the SCOTUS decisions that created the foundation for it: Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, Buckley v. Valeo, First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti seem to be the primary foundation. That requires either a sweeping, antagonistic SCOTUS decision undoing that whole structure (will never happen) or a constitutional amendment (very difficult and lengthy process).

There is a proposed amendment in Congress to do that and that would do all of that (HJ Res 48).

There are several that would do parts of it. And there is one or two that would actually make matters even worse (HJ Res 1, for example, would make anything any state passes in correcting CU or in expanding CU constitutionally valid and make nothing challengeable in court, thereby creating a crazy quilt of contradictory laws, much like we currently have and will see only get worse for abortion and voting rights, etc).

Expand full comment

Corporations are not people in the first place. CU and other rulings/laws under "free speech" gives a lot of weight to voices that have money. That is wrong. Given the state of our system and the vulnerability of voters, and sadly, the corruptibility of politicians this is another corruption of our democracy. It abuses the first amendment, broadens it in fact when the SCOTUS refused to broaden the meaning of the Constitution, Constitutional amendment/s regarding a right to abortion. It's another way for money interests to partner with other GOP goals to grab and hold power for the minority. It's "corporatism".

Expanding the court after getting a strong Democratic majority would work to overturn CU.

We have a way to go to make this country truly of the people, by the people and for the people.

Expand full comment

Why can't Congress pass a law that neuters CU?

Expand full comment
Sep 16, 2022·edited Sep 16, 2022

A NYRep could object if it was federal lands....drillling,cattle grazing, and other usage for instance. It's OUR land. Land management agencies manage this and the Federal Government has the say, not the state. You must look to whatever the CURRENT US administration is allowing as to how it is managed. We have been though this controversy... "drill baby drill"... Sarah Palin.

Voters do not have equal weight in our federal system either.

Agree about Citizens United but good luck with that given the current Supreme Court and the obstructionist Congress.

Expand full comment

Ah, yes, fed. lands. Would a NY Rep's position be dispositive? Idk.

Imo what people here are angling toward is one person, one vote, and doing away with anti-democratic institutions. I'm on board with that. Also with reining in Senatorial tyranny and minority rule.

Expand full comment

Recent immigrants cannot vote. To vote you must be a citizen and have lived in the country at least three years. To become a naturalized citizen an immigrant must demonstrate an understanding of the US government and history, and an oath of allegiance must be taken.

Expand full comment

We all should take part in stewardship of the lands of the United States. The lands belong to the entire society, not just to the people who decided to put down stakes there. Exploitation has to be removed from decisions about land use.

Expand full comment

so you believe people living 2,000 miles away from land should have equal say to its disposition and use as the people right right on it?

i think the people living right on that land might decide to dispute that with forceful means.

Expand full comment

Yes, James, I do. This land is ultimately the property of the society. It is the society that invented the idea of deeds and real estate, etc., and ultimately you have to realize, and I have to realize, that a deed is only as strong as the society that set up the system. You start from that, and try to reason it out for yourself.

Our entire society has a vital and primary interest in the health of the land, and in its use or protection from use and abuse. It has a primary interest in conserving healthy ecosystems, in not poisoning or polluting the land, in ensuring its enduring value for future generations and not destroying its future value for the whims and greed of a current generation.

This is not even an opinion. It’s just a fundamental fact. If you ponder it, you will realize that you, your dog, the birds around you, everything that is part of the environment, is at the mercy of the human society that currently dominates this land. This sort of thing hardly was true in the distant past when humans were not so numerous and our technology so potentially destructive. But now …

You had better hope that the society that issued the deed that says you “own” a little piece of this planet endures at least as long as you do. If it doesn’t, your piece of paper is worthless.

But that’s neither here nor there with respect to this question on whether other members of the society have as much say and interest as you have (just because of where you happen to be standing) in the condition, health and conservation of the land around you.

Yes. We have.

Expand full comment

Amen and B men too!

Expand full comment

Raffey, you are right about the electoral college, what a stupid wasteful thing. I believe those who proposed it knew it but their slavery brains couldn't imagine a government they couldn't control the way they controlled their property.

Expand full comment

Actually it was the Florida Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court with Sandra Day O’Connor’s vote that gave GWB the presidency with just a difference of 534 votes. Al Gore disagreed with the decisions but accepted them. How times have changed. Now there is to be rioting in the streets if Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has his way! He should be indicted for those comments alone!

Expand full comment

Luana Miller ; It is now obvious who is really behind Lindsey Graham's comments. tRump echoed them himself, publicly!

Expand full comment

Absolutely true! The electoral college has to go.

Expand full comment

Get rid of the electoral college!

Expand full comment

Amen!!!

Expand full comment

If I could give this comment multiple hearts, I would! THIS IS SO-O true! Maybe not in the future the way changes to education are going on, but notably true so far!

Expand full comment

I certainly agree, but that will be difficult and take too long. In the meantime, lets implement the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Expand full comment

I totally agree! We must banish the Electoral College!

Expand full comment

Then there is the problem of majority rule. Trump WAS elected by the rich and those who wanto be or identify with the rich. Bush was elected by the supreme court.

Expand full comment

The rich may have voted for Trump but he was NOT elected by anyone. He lost the popular vote in 2016 and in 2020.

Expand full comment

Sometimes I wish the blue states would secede from the Union (but keep the keys to the nuclear weapons.) I think if those blow-hard red states really had to manage without our collective wealth, technology, arts, universities, awesome cities and shores, they would soon stop whining.

Expand full comment

BRAVO

Expand full comment

And a hearty AMEN to that!

Expand full comment

We need to 'vet' our voters too! More teaching of civics and economics, so the voters are not ignorant and easily misled. Just basic things about the rule of law, and how it can ensure freedom and Democracy.

Expand full comment

Laurie, serious civics classes for every student, perhaps at 2 different times during their K-12 education would be a good start. Then, making sure every student is registered to vote when they turn 18 would help too. They did that for several years at the high school where I taught and the students loved it. They took buses to the county courthouse several times during the year as they turned 18. The kids actually dressed up and thought it was a big deal. Some parents even came along as chaperones and registered too. I don't know if they are still doing it because COVID intervened and I retired last year. I would love to see that all over the country, then followed by getting the students to investigate the various candidates and offices they are running for.

Expand full comment

When I went to highschool, graduating class of 1960, we were required to take 4 years of history and pass the classes as a requirement of graduating. This is no longer the case. Civics and history should be mandatory. Young people are woefully under educated in these areas. They have no idea how our country works.

Expand full comment

Sad, yet so very true! I taught 8th grade for 44 years and found that the 2nd half of my career had my students so very ignorant of the basics of government and civics...and the last 8-10 years presented me with parents who were even more ignorant of the information. Add growing cynicism and disrespect for the rule of law and the Constitution, and you have the mess we're in now.

Expand full comment

amen. class of '65 here and I enjoyed 'civics' and believe that every student should be required to attend those classes

Expand full comment

You just described why we have an ignorant populace of younger people. We don’t need to teach more STEM classes. It’s history and civics that will make good citizens. Those should be mandatory and, as Anne says, taught at every level as they once were.

Expand full comment

Exactly. It’s no mistake replacing and eliminating the most important subjects students need to guide their citizenships throughout their lives have been and are being shelved. History and civics!

Expand full comment

High school history (class of 69) skipped over anything that didn't show America as gleamingly perfect. I was in my 20s when I first heard about Japanese internment camps and was shocked and horrified. A real eye opener about America the Beautiful! Over the years, have learned much of what else was missing from my education and much of it is ugly and obscene. 😳

#awakenowandvotingblue

Expand full comment

I read much more than I used to because I have time to now that I’m retired. I just found out about Tulsa last year! Never heard anything about it in my 12 + grades in school. I wonder how much more of our history has been hidden?

Expand full comment

Cheryl, I have a BA in Poli Sci with a minor in US History from very liberal SFSU, class of1969. I NEVER once heard of, nor read about, the Japanese CONCENTRATION camps during my five years of study at SFSU! I learned from a neighbor two doors up, my parents' best friends who lived the nightmare. I also NEVER heard word one about the destruction of "Black Wall Street" in Oklahoma, nor the "Zoot-Suit Police Riots" in LA. Only because OUR history, ALL of it, is of great interest and importance to me, have I had to tenaciously "dig deep" to discover it and therefore use it in my own classes when I taught. Many, many "skeletons in the American closet"!

Expand full comment

Cheryl P. I was in my 70's when I saw the story of 'Black Wall Street' in Tulsa, about an entire section of the city's affluent and successful Black community's businesses and homes set on fire and the Blacks in the community attacked and many were murdered. I lived in the civil rights era and thought I knew about most of the Black history (So I thought!).

Expand full comment

Yes! Agree!

Expand full comment

That is a wonderful post! Also a retired educator. I watched them gut education in PA for no good reason. I retired 6 years ago. My working friends tell me it was a total disaster during COVID. The lack of preparedness still flabbergasts me. As unforeseen as COVID was, you mean they had no disaster plans? None that I was aware of. By design? Republicans Smucklicans.

Expand full comment

I have to disagree. If public education is gutted from the state level down, there is a very good reason from the pov of the people doing the gutting: An informed citizenry is antithetical to special interests.

Only citizens themselves can fight that.

Expand full comment

True. People have the power to change how they’re governed, for now. PA was deeply gerrymandered to the benefit of republicans. The state Supreme Court ordered the map redrawn after refusal by the hard right conservatives. This new map was not as helpful in 2020 as hoped, however, there is a sizable shift to favor democratic policies in PA. Ultimately, the R’s are done. The return of abortion rights to states put them in a coffin. Anything after that are the nails.

Expand full comment

I had a civics class in 9th grade. Our teacher made it mandatory to read 1984. He was a WWII vet and he wanted us to remember what the world would look like under a fascist regime. We also had to write a book report and discuss it in class.

Expand full comment

If you haven't seen "V for Vendetta," treat yourself. It's closer to what we've personally witnessed these days, and the kind of regime the MAGA-wankers would support. The story is good enough, but the >setting< is - to my mind - much more important.

Expand full comment

I loved that movie! And I agree we are headed that way. And the concept behind "V" is what we need to be. Trump is trying to scare us with his rhetoric about bad things happening. I live 30miles outside the closest city. I have a sign on my gate "No Trespassing. I have a weapons and a Backhoe. " Not that I am anti-social, but I am not going to put up with radical right wing nut job. I live in a SUPER RED STATE. I also have a bumper sticker that says "Tuck Frump". :-)

Expand full comment

BTW: I'm a'gussin' you're from Iowa.

Expand full comment
Sep 17, 2022·edited Sep 17, 2022

Also, I agree with you. Exercise your 2nd Amendment rights. You're just as likely to need it for self defense against those claiming to keep them for self defense as any other kind of desperado. I'm aware my view on that is >probably< unpopular in this forum, but there it is. Like the question at the end of the movie asks about what will happen next, and the nominal "hero" - the detective, not V, who is a perfect anti-hero - begins his reverie with: "What always happens when unarmed protesters are confronted by an armed mob." (I've taken a bit of liberty with that quote. Actually, I think it's armed soldiers. I need to review the flick for a proper quote.)

Expand full comment
Sep 17, 2022·edited Sep 17, 2022

If you get a chance, pick up a copy of the original graphic novel. The contrast is breathtaking. In the movie, V is heroic. In the original graphic novel, he is quite something else, and the story isn't particularly enjoyable. I couldn't help noticing the parallel role of the epidemic in the movie with what we've been through. Notice also, that theocracy in charge of things in the movie predicts what the MAGA-publicans are all about - and that was a projection for Britain!

Expand full comment

What a great assignment!

Expand full comment

Ruth This is an excellent idea.

Expand full comment

I am glad that there were only Presidents that were installed as a result of the decision of the Electoral College. The Electoral College should be neutral and try to elect the best candidate to become the president. If they can’t do that then it would be better to let them go since the people have already elected their choice and that should be it.

Expand full comment

you mean things like a civics class in high school? why was that taken away and when, and what is now in its place?

Expand full comment

James, most states no longer require a civics or government class. They have 2 years of US history which usually has only a glancing pass through the Constitutional era in favor of all the wars, the interesting stuff, you know. I used to give each of my students a pocket Constitution and Declaration which we would read from periodically and discuss. They especially liked reading the amendments and why each one was proposed and passed. I don't know if any of them still have the books, but I hope so.

Expand full comment

instead all that has been replaced by crypto CRT b.s., that only instills hatred and disillusion for the US and baloney gender indoctrination.

Expand full comment

#1) Yeah, I'm against cathode ray tubes as well. Stop CRT's! Go, LED's!

#2) What you got against baloney? It's one of the celebrated foods of my people. Didn't you see the movie, "Yokels in the Mist?" We, the People of the Trailer, are a shy and sensitive type. HA!

#3) I didn't know that baloney gender was a controversial issue. I watched that movie about Oscar Meyer, too. No indoctrination there.

#4) Like minded people like to like like minded people. I think I think, therefore I think I am.

Expand full comment

and therein lies the rub and bane of this experiment...if you educate people and tell them of things oh I dont know like the evolution of race, slavery CRT and how it fostered anguish and hatred amongst the peoples of the nation perhaps they would understand and appreciate more of things...like eqquality and democracy. call it a fun fact

Expand full comment

dude, i am genuine , real, 12th generation American, tri racial 'PoC' (formerly 'colored')

who has actually experienced 'racial discrimination' and 'prejudice' and guess what?... the US is , was, and should still be, the greatest place on the f'ing planet for literally everyone until the crypto Marxists took control of the levers of power.

people like Reich...

Expand full comment

All good questions. It varies, I guess. This is a big country. In some areas civics is being taught. Financial literacy too. But not all.

Expand full comment

The heart won’t light up❣️A few years ago our high school civics teacher got his class completely engaged and pointed out that even as students they could influence events. His taught one of the in person classes (before Covid). The students hated a tv class taught by someone in another state who just sat in front of the tv and read. About 15 of them attended the school board meeting and they all signed up to speak. They were articulate and honest in describing the complete waste of time the tv class inflicted on them. It was televised by a woman who films public forums. The kids got a big round of applause. The teacher was sanctioned for suggesting they do this, criticized for having “gone around the lines of communication.” He should have been praised.

Expand full comment

Well, here is a good story from the Intercept.

“High school senior Shiva Rajbhandari won elected office in Boise, defeating an incumbent school board trustee backed by local extremists.”

Expand full comment

Maggie mac ; Politics is dirty. People want their way and are short sighted.

Expand full comment

Economics.

Expand full comment

Civics, economics and HISTORY... all of our history, and in particular Black history. We are where we were pre-Civil War, following (in response to) Reconstruction and during (in revolt of) the Civil Rights movement= A backlash to expanding the franchise of Democracy. the same tactics are just being repeated- mislead an uninformed electorate, divide the voting power of the electorate in addition to preventing or nullifying the votes of certain segments of the population that are marginalized and are seeking access to the franchise, use threats and violence (terrorism) and if lying, cheating, stealing and killing fails, just end the game... take my ball and go home with it so no one can play, no one wins. End Democracy.

Expand full comment
Sep 16, 2022·edited Sep 16, 2022

fyiurban ; I found this in my local paper. ; "The deep dysfunction that enabled the abortion ban, elimination of the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to address climate change, and elevation of gun rights beyond all others have imperiled the preamble's promise to secure "The blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our posterity." The deep dysfunction that enabled these decisions stems from three impediments to democracy embedded in the Constitution since 1787. The U. S. Senate, The Electoral College, and the state legislature's control over voting rights.

All three were deliberately designed by the framers to blunt threats to the interests of men of property, including slaveholders, from democracy. Excerpt from an article in The Daily Hampshire Gazette 9/13/2022 by Bruce Miller, professor emeritus ; Western New England University School of Law. Westfield, M.A.

Article entitled : Can we fix our Undemocratic Constitution?

Tuesday, September 13, 2022 gazettenet.com/opinion

Expand full comment

Noting has changed!!! The 'men of property' are today's billionaires and corporate interests that still have the most wealth/power. They continue to influence policy that helps them retain or gain, more wealth/power. They still manipulate us into fighting/blaming each other or some random boogeyman, in an effort to prevent us from realizing who actually has a thumb on the scale to satisfy their selfishness/greed. They still manipulate voters to build paradoxical (example- so called 'evangelical christians" in coalitions with white nationalists/supremacist) coalitions that serve the interest of the wealthy/powerful at the detriment of their own interest!

Expand full comment

fyiurban ; This is not the entire article ; I wanted to share the part that lists the 3 things that prevent functioning of our Democratic form of government, and prevent it from improving. I know that the very wealthy buy our votes by 'donating' to our representatives' campaigns. Citizens United is what happens when even the highest court is corrupted when installed by the moneyed interests. Naming our problems could help us begin to educate others and solve these serious problems. Unlimited money, even 'dark' money is killing this experiment in 'self rule', or Democracy. The Republican owned media lie to us about inflation , for example ; suggesting that increased labor costs somehow are to blame. While viewing many 'news' programs on mainstream media, and reading the newspapers, not a single source talks about the greatly increased profit margins of corporations. The 1% tax just implemented on stock buybacks is not enough to solve the problem. Nothing but a 'figleaf'.

Expand full comment

White men of Property still utilize those 3 things, primarily via bought Republican politicians (and some democrats). They still facilitate minority rule as they were designed to. Overcoming them requires a super-majority of voters coming together and using our power-in-numbers. But they know this, and continue to successfully divide and conquer us- fighting among each other for crumbs (trickle down) and blaming everyone/thing accept the right one/thing, all by design. Designed to keep us from understanding what and who the root of the problem is- men of property aka billionaires and corporate interests.

Expand full comment

How about every voter needs to pass the same test people take to be citizens?

Also teach media literacy.

Expand full comment

Have you ever looked at the application requirements for Naturalization? I just did, and imo a lot of it is hogwash unless the answers are fact-checked. There's a looong form (N-400) to fill out -- it's quite "interesting."

Here's my favorite question -- imo it supports your idea that everyone needs to follow the process. § 12, Additional Information About You (Person Applying for Naturalization), Q. 11: "Have you EVER advocated (either directly or indirectly) the overthrow of any government by force or violence?"

I'd like to hear TFG's explanation of his "No" reply if questioned about Jan. 6.

Expand full comment

explain this a bit more and why it is relevant:

"I'd like to hear TFG's explanation of his "No" reply if questioned about Jan. 6."

Expand full comment

"in context it is pretty clear what i am referring to, or are you unable discern that?"

Expand full comment

The Big Lie of election denying is everywhere.but Fox 'News' and other MAGA, winger media.

Expand full comment

this i like.

Expand full comment

Civics education is required in the public schools in every state, with required civics classes in 39 states; elsewhere, the subject is integrated across other social studies classes. The problem is in legislative agendas which pressure schools to focus on math and reading test scores, and which dictate what can/should be taught about civics.

Expand full comment

Maybe so, but the content and importance of the course can vary widely.

Make Civics a requirement to begin high school, and require a higher level of knowledge and understanding to graduate, including getting a GED.

Expand full comment

Are you talking about bringing back a literacy test in order to vote?

Expand full comment

No, much more than a literacy test. Actual knowledge.

I don't know how to balance the responsibility of voting with the idea that everyone should get a vote and that all votes are equal. I don't think that someone who doesn't know what they are voting for, who votes because they were paid to vote a certain way, who votes based on lies and doesn't care, who will not accept the results, who doesn't understand the job of the position they are voting for, is really benefiting democracy. I'm guilty of that myself. I vote straight down the ticket and for many of the down ballot positions I don't have any knowledge of the candidate or the job. I don't think it makes any sense that this is the way these government positions are filled, by people like myself who are ignorant, didn't do any research, and are automatons.

IMHO if people were required to know about the candidates and the jobs, we wouldn't need to worry so much about money in politics. As it is now one of the most reported item in campaigns is who raised the most money which is another way of saying who will have the most prevalent propaganda, lie the most, but the most votes. People make decisions on our govt.. with less information than we do as consumers. There are no consumer protection laws in elections. No warning labels, no list of ingredients. And no option to return the item for a refund or exchange or the right for a class action.

Expand full comment

DK Brooklyn ; In some places, people actually sell their votes There was a story a couple years ago about that. It involved a candidate running for office in a Southern state. His own son testified against him. The cheating Pol was crying publicly. Sad!

Expand full comment

ShirleyD ; Absolutely not! I would hope that these things could be taught in high schools, as student's minds and worldviews are developing. Critical thinking skills in evaluating media would be in there, too.

Expand full comment

Literacy tests, I have read, we're often filled with questions that would stymie certain groups who faced questions that would only have answers that white people would know.

Expand full comment

The problem with civics courses, is that they can become 'controversial' because people do not agree on facts.

Expand full comment

I just heard that there is a push in Kansas to reduce the amount of civics and history hours required for graduation of high school.

Expand full comment

They sure know what they Don't want in Kansas, and they know how to vote!

Expand full comment

Retired educator here. I had to sneak civics in to my lessons every now and then because cuts to education were so deep in the early ‘00. All history/civics/Am Gov/ classes were cut to a 4-1/2 week course for 7th graders only. In ‘08 Gov Tom Corbett-PA, one of our recent 1 term R governors, set out to snarl education funding for years. High school had World History but not the plethora of American academia offered in my high school years. I will praise him on his gasoline tax for roads and interstates. We have the highest gas tax in the country, but I don’t mind. The improvements have been vast and I can see my tax dollars working.

Expand full comment

Provided the civics curriculum and the passing-out tests are designed and administered by foreigners. A committee drawn from Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Holland, Spain and Germany should do. Otherwise you are only trying to feed people your own national myth.

Expand full comment

And across the board. Don't let private schools or regressive state ed. boards find ways around teaching good citizenship.

[In general I'm all in for letting public schools be managed at the local level, but I think I just found a reason to say we may need national standards too. Strong ones, not ones that cater to the lowest common denominator.]

Expand full comment

well, there needs to be a curriculum that has as its basis real historical documents, with contrasting ideas and philosophies, along with honest, not distorted facts of the past.

along with logic and rhetoric and real empirical science.

none of which is taught in public schools today.

maybe even the establishment of a real non partisan leadership academy that any citizen could be qualified for by testing.

Expand full comment

There you go again with your 'alternative facts' AKA 'contrasting ideas!'. Bullbeans!

Expand full comment

so you are laying claim to knowing what is absolute truth?

Expand full comment

No, but there is this question of 'distortion'. There are facts ; like Biden won.

Expand full comment

There IS a difference between contrasting ideas and " alternative" facts .

Expand full comment

It depends on who is talking, Connie D. I was replying to James Twine.

Expand full comment

No disagreement here, James.

Expand full comment
Sep 16, 2022·edited Sep 16, 2022

Jan Churchwell ; Absolutely needed! Voters who are clueless will never get what they want. (and need).

Expand full comment

For an excellent education in economics listen to Richard Wolff, Professor of Economics. He is a first rate talker who can explain economics so all can understand it. You can find him on You Tube and he heads up "Democracy at Work." Check him out; you won't be sorry.

Expand full comment

ok. i will give it him a listen.

Expand full comment

I agree. Graduated '66 with no civics and was taught Civil War was just over states' rights. But I can't help but think the right would somehow twist your idea to be 'indoctrination'.

Expand full comment

Absolutely!

Expand full comment

Good idea. I agree we need to set that bar much higher than it is, given the likes of Trump can qualify currently for the highest office in the land - or in the world.

The framers of the Constitution even then likely assumed higher moral standards for THEIR time, and didn't feel the need to qualify it in writing. But they did feel they had to specify the ones that could be quantified.

A man of 35 was a much "older" individual, relative to the life expectancy of the time. Now, 35 is still a young man, having seen only about 1/3 of his/her time on this earth, relatively speaking. But in the 18th century, by 35, it was more like half, if not more.

For women, it WAS even more, since the vast majority of women were married, and without effective birth control (other than separate bedrooms, which only the most affluent could afford) and therefore exposed to the perils of multiple childbearing.

But, regarding the moral and social values you list, how many sitting "congresscritters" can even pass that standard now? Personally, I think being able to pass our own Citizenship Test with a perfect score, should be the bare minimum standard to sit in government, in addition to the rest. Even those who only wish to become citizens, not President, have to have a wider range of knowledge of the workings of our government and its historic documents than obviously is currently being shown by numerous sitting lawmakers even now!

Expand full comment

Applicants for any government job should be able to pass a FBI background check that includes a comprehensive criminal record check against the FBI's national database, which will include arrest and conviction history, as well as traffic violations and even parking tickets. Some employees must pass lie detector tests for certain jobs. Applicants could be given qualifying tests like the Foreign Service Officer Test, which any member of Congress should be able to handle. https://careers.state.gov/career-paths/worldwide-foreign-service/officer/fso-test-information-and-selection-process/

Trump eliminated some hiring requirements in favor of the spoils system, which some pundits say is baked into the Constitution. He had cabinet members who could not pass background checks.

The worst example is Kushner.

Expand full comment

Daniel, teachers in Pennsylvania have to get those background checks you mentioned, except the lie-detector test (which is not exactly reliable anyway) and child abuse clearances, repeated fingerprinting every few years all of which we had to pay for. I have not heard of one teacher anywhere in the state who didn't pass. It was for us just a big waste of our money, but we are not writing laws and potentially undermining our government. Once would have been plenty. Anyway, I blame McConnell for even bringing unvetted nominees to the senate for a vote. There are no words for someone who knows someone is unqualified and holds a vote anyway, knowing his clan will, in lock-step, do whatever he says. He is morally bankrupt, even worse than Baby Donnie, because he knew exactly what he was doing to our nation. Donnie had only the barest of an idea of what he was doing. He just liked the cheers, drooling of the sycophants, and power he got from proclaiming things, his orgasmic pleasure. McConnell is just an amoral jerk. Neither of them should ever hold any office, but alas, both have.

Expand full comment

Oh Ruth, but those nominees WERE vetted...by none other than Lenny Leo, dontcha know? He of the monied but very secretive Federalist Society, working the dark money corridors of power, doing the bidding of our very own oligarchs.

Expand full comment

We need to make the "Dogs of War" by Pink Floyd a national anthem for the democratic party. If you have never heard it, you might want to listen and follow the lyrics. They are very interesting. It was written in 1987 but are even truer today.

Expand full comment

I thought i might explain the "Dogs of War" as a national anthem for democrats. The dogs are the MAGA republicans. Repubes are like this:

"For hard cash, we will lie and deceive".

"The dogs of war don't negotiate

The dogs of war won't capitulate,

They will take and you will give,

And you must die so that they may live".

That is who the Repubes are.

Expand full comment

You are absolutely right!

Expand full comment

Actually we also used an appropriate test, had personal rating system and created a best qualified list.

I represented school districts in Pa in the early 70's. We fired non tenured teachers at will after giving them a right to a hearing under the Pa local agency law. Fired a lot of tenured teachers also. Later I represented teachers who were charged will all types of violations, including lying on their applications for employment. I had cases in several states.

I was later involved in judicial complaints.

After OPM stopped doing background checks, they hired felons. Imagine hiring "judges" who had not passed the bar exam, had been suspended, etc.

Expand full comment

very good point. I think most people assume background checks are done. How do,we get the people in charge to pass laws to regulate themselves? The Supreme Court feels they are above the ethics rules that lower judges have to follow. Impeachment no longer seems to have much meaning. How,do we put the toothpaste back in the tube?

Expand full comment
founding

A Move On petition?

Expand full comment
Sep 16, 2022·edited Sep 16, 2022

What do you do then, Daniel, about rich sociopaths who can tie up the courts every time they defy the law? One could end up with a squeaky clean record, in his eighth decade still stomping around a nation he fractured.

Expand full comment

Daniel, you are right. Anyone running for public office should have to submit to the same scrutiny as a school teacher, and for federal office pass the State department test. But by future president should have to sit for a psych-ed exam as well. We should be advised professionally if a candidate is nuts.

Expand full comment
founding

Yeah, a problem with that, however, is discrimination against Black people by the police and the criminal justice system. How do you deal with that? A lot of the time the charges are trumped up, no pun intended.

Expand full comment

Oh Shari, I like your idea of having every candidate for office taking the citizenship test. Then, the results should be published. Maybe a few questions not on the test should be thrown in to see if they really do know our Constitution, you know, the one they are swearing to uphold and defend. Maybe 20 of the 100 questions should be different from what is on the citizenship test. A score of say, 85% should be the cut-off. That would be fun, and informative. I'd like to see Dr. Oz or Doug Mastriano of PA take such a test.

Expand full comment

Have you ever actually looked at the citizenship study test? https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/questions-and-answers/100q.pdf You study the entire set of questions. But when it comes down to taking the test only 10 questions are asked verbally. In order to pass you must answer 6 of the 10 questions correctly. Quite honestly I think it’s a pretty easy test that most Americans couldn’t pass.

Expand full comment
Sep 16, 2022·edited Sep 16, 2022

Ruth, the score should be 98%. If they are going to run and govern the country they should be very well read on our laws and especially the constitution!

Expand full comment

98% would knock out over half of our Congress!

Expand full comment

The test should have “what is the capitol of every state. The test should have a difficult part about how a democratic government works( like how does our government work?)

Each test should have a word definition and then an example so we know what candidates know about Communism, Socialism, fascism, Buddhism (lol) etc.

then , the voters should be reminded that a vote casually ignored is a penny not saved! This knowledge opportunity must be made public before elections.

Just like the dark money has to be revealed so we know who is holding us captive to ignorance.

My brain blew up...... splutter, splutter ...

Expand full comment

Thank you, Ruth!😉

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Deal with just the “ facts ma’m

Expand full comment

Keith Olson ; Certainly agree that we could do a much better job of vetting our top leader. But 'the money' wanted someone who would raid the cookie jar that is our treasury. And we let him ; He "did not even have to wait", to give trillions to those who have billions! First thing he did in office!

Expand full comment

Yep, Laurie, we got someone who was very open to cookie-jar-raiding and he did it. I doubt if anyone will ever find out just what our Treasury Secretary did, then Congress gave him the job of supervising COVID funds. ugh!! Why isn't he being investigated? He seems to have sneck under the wire, as they say.

Expand full comment

Republicans now in office support Tr🤮mps authoritarian goals. They are not going to renounce him or his rhetoric.

Expand full comment

AND get dark money out of politics...they did an incredible disservice to America by calling corporations = individuals

Expand full comment

End Citizens United. Period.

Expand full comment

Yes! End Citizens United! And purge the Supreme court of illegitimates.

Expand full comment

Keith, I really like your idea for an amendment. I know the founders didn't imagine someone as bad as Trump running for office although they knew people like him, I'm sure. We need to do a better job of vetting people for a lot of offices: president and vice-president, of course, the Federal court system (especially Supreme Court justices), all cabinet officials, military leaders, and probably others I have not thought of. There needs to be a process stated for how that happens. Perhaps there should be a non-partisan office on vetting candidates. No outside group should have as much influence as the Federalist Society has had in pushing ideologue court nominees. That would be illegal and if caught, the group should be prosecuted. The amendment is certainly worth consideration. Thanks for suggesting it.

Expand full comment

There should be double blind psychological examination given to all people in government positions of power, i.e. SCOTUS, President, Vice president, Cabinet Secretaries, Military Leaders. People in charge of weapons of mass destruction and everyday weapons purchasers prior to purchasing weapons. Food for thought.

Expand full comment

I love that idea. And publish the results.

Expand full comment

The Founders knew that requiring specific qualifications eventually would allow control to go to a few. They relied instead on the education of the public and their responsible behavior, in reliance on true rights of vote - despite the "quirks" that were allowed to develop, like the electoral college. The fact is that it is the responsibility of Americans to EDUCATE their children on HOW TO LEARN - not just the bare needs for general employment -- so that they can VOTE WITH KNOWLEDGE. But that declined greatly over the years, as the public became less interested in knowledge and more interested in entertainment. Congressional experience?! The crooks start in state government and work up the ladder today! We need term limits to bring the "service" of government back to the people's needs, instead of money's influence. But to do that, we need better education for everyone at any level desired! Only then will we be a free nation with leaders genuinely capable and not the puppets of the wealth or power.

Expand full comment

I agree with your suggestions, except for the one about term limits. We already have limits on the durations of terms for elected officials (except maybe for some judges). But I think you are suggesting limits on the number of terms one person can be elected to. I disagree with that. If a person has done a good job in office, I think we should be able to elect them for another term, as long as they still have the mental and physical capacities to do the job. Term limits will do nothing to take money out of politics. We need other solutions to reduce that problem.

Expand full comment

Congress passed term limits on POTUS to two terms in 1950 ( after Franklin Roosevelt's 4th term), however they didn't see the need to do the same for their own legislative body. I believe that needs to be done.

Expand full comment

I disagree. I believe that if an elected official does a really good job, then we should be able to elect them for another term.

Expand full comment

Perhaps so, however we cannot do that for a U.S. President. Congress felt the need to limit Presidential terms to two. I know of no effort being made to change that, either by grassroots efforts or by legislative efforts. I can only assume that most Americans are fine with that.

Expand full comment

That is irrelevant to my point. There should be no term limits on presidents.

Expand full comment
Sep 16, 2022·edited Sep 16, 2022

OBSERVATION: The local, broadcast news here seems to be tacking back to the border problem, and not ignoring DeSantis' current action.

(Actually, I have no objection to spreading the immigrants around to help relieve the burden of legitimate processing and disposition. That way it makes sense. What doesn't make sense is where and where >not< the immigrant burden is being relocated. There are plenty of big cities in "red states," too, >and< they're a lot closer to TX & FL, as well as more cost-effective - by far - for the states' taxpayers, than transporting them to the Northeast! I say let the Federal Government handle that - not individual states. Indeed, interstate issues are the legitimate purview of the Federal Government. As it stands, FL & TX >appear< to be kidnapping immigrants and transporting kidnap victims across state lines. That's a bona fide federal felony. Are we >next< to believe state governors above the law, too?)

JUST IN: https://youtu.be/eg5Nm3R0cio , https://youtu.be/xjHl4sdmvRA

Expand full comment
Sep 16, 2022·edited Sep 16, 2022

DZK ; That is the whole problem ; they are weaponizing human beings who are seeking asylum. (although who knows where DeSantis and Abbot got them are who they really are?) They are targeting 'sanctuary cities' in left leaning states/cities. So much as to say "So you want migrants who are entering the country illegally? Here they are! Take care of them! Unethical and illegal I would think. Human trafficking? If this is not illegal, it should be.

Expand full comment
Sep 16, 2022·edited Sep 16, 2022

I think it looks like kidnapping and transporting kidnap victims across state lines - a felony.

Expand full comment

Transporting children across state lines without permission. I feel that is a felony.

Expand full comment

It could possibly be misappropriating taxpayer dollars in committing a felony, as well, to my perception.

Expand full comment

I agree, the Biden administration should be stopped from doing that, immediately!

Expand full comment

Yes, I agree!

Expand full comment

UPDATE: https://youtu.be/3NxX_orvxhw

Expand full comment

dzk ; Thanks for this!

Expand full comment

Keith, It is shocking to my to my foreign friends that we allow the president to wave a magic wand and essentially pardon a big law breaker! And that our SCOTUS is chosen by the current pres (with Congressional approval) rather than voted in. These pardons are completely out of control and one person having the ability must go. Criminal Flynn is now going to oversee elections!!

Expand full comment
founding

Yeah, the ability to pardon should be eliminated except in death penalty cases.

Expand full comment

Insane! The former guy pardons those with whom he committed crimes! Talk about the abuse of the pardon power! If it is not specifically codified, they just 'get away' with it! Absolutely no ethics! No consequences either!

Expand full comment

Keith, YES!!!

Expand full comment

Congressional experience does Not belong amongst these qualifications.

Expand full comment

Yes, I think at first blush what you say makes sense, but who would vet them? Would a black person or a woman--or a black woman--EVER be "approved."

Expand full comment

I don't necessarily disagree with your proposal, but it would require a lot of work to implement. We would need to settle not only on the criteria and methods to be used to qualify the candidates, but we would need to settle on a committee to do the vetting. Neither would be easy

Expand full comment

and just who is going to decide these qualifications. it wouldn't be the citizens in an election, could it?

who else?

ideas?

Expand full comment

Some form of Civil Service registration, perhaps

Expand full comment

Fay. I have no doubt we have the wherewithall in our government to set standards for political candidates. It shouldn't be too specific because we don't want to make the qualifications so narrow it would cause people to envision only one type of person to serve , but perhaps some kind of government/representative experience should be a top item. I am sorry, but a fake TV star does not qualify anyone for any office.

Expand full comment

whats the test and standard for "credibility"?

Expand full comment
Sep 16, 2022·edited Sep 16, 2022

Lindsay Graham, Marco Rubio, Kevin McCarthy and other prominent Republicans are all co-conspirators acting in concert and providing comfort and support while running interference for Trump. They can't be expected to do the right thing for the country. The other Republicans other than the 2 in the Jan 6th Committee are all too weak.

Expand full comment

Bob, you are right about those "prominent" Republicans. They think they will get something if they can get Trump elected again. They know he is incompetent, but they like being able to manipulate him to do their bidding. I do believe taking down the whole Republican party for a while is the only thing that can save it and us.

Expand full comment

I think he forgets, and I mean intentionally, that more of us voted for Biden than any voted for him! This American will absolutely stand for him being charged, indicted and thrown into prison!

Expand full comment

Wjust need MORE of us to do it again.

Expand full comment

this country needs more humor in it's politic.

Expand full comment

at least 15% of those 'votes' were fraudulent.

Expand full comment

For Christ’s sake give it a rest. Nobody actually believes that at this point. Everyone except Trump himself has said, some flat out, that the idea of a Big Steal is just a Big Lie.

Expand full comment

Yay! Suzanne! You said it just right?! Claiming fraud with no evidence is as big a lie as the big lie. It didn't happen unless it happened in Texas, Florida, Mississippi, or Alabama, the deep south for Baby Donnie. No one seems to have checked those votes. Ha! I'm joking. The election is over. Baby Donnie is stuck in his little world of unreality, and the rest of the crew is trying to pretend Trump knows anything about anything. It is crazy!

Expand full comment

You are right to question those states whose election apparatus is controlled by Republicans who are notorious for projecting their own wrongdoing by accusing Democrats of it. Those votes should've been examined, & had they been, it is very possible we wouldn't have had to suffer through Manchinema obstruction.

Expand full comment

Really? Come into the light and put away your news feed. Open your mind and quit sleeping on your 'My Pillow'. I honestly do not mean to be a little rough here, but this Big Lie was proven to be just that.

Expand full comment

I am sorry. I have a long background in IT, electronics hacking, radio, etc, and as far as I can see, the analysis and methodology given in '2000 Mules' has not only NOT been debunked, but is conclusive.

Forget about the thousands of personal I witness affidavits, and surveillance video.

you all have been defrauded. which may be ok with you, since 'orange man bad',

but it is Biden's 'election' that is the 'Big Lie'.

sorry to disabuse you of a fiction which is so important to you.

Expand full comment

"2000 Mules" is "widely debunked". https://www.npr.org/2022/09/08/1121648290/a-publisher-abruptly-recalled-the-2-000-mules-election-denial-book-npr-got-a-cop

This claim is by disreputable people- outliers, widely disproven, yet you traffic in this. Which makes your credibility zero as well. The fiction is entirely yours regardless of your claims about yourself which mean nothing if they have any veracity. You are of course free to be a stubborn fool.

Expand full comment