Rob Meyne
- Sept. 8, 2020
- 4 min read
Perhaps the least debatable statement one can make about the 2020 campaign is that it is going to be unusual. Duh. In a year characterized by riots, a pandemic, and an invasion of rabid honey badgers, it is almost inevitable the election will be different.
Democratic leaders and their sycophantic cadre of flying monkeys in the media are circulating the message that, whatever happens, they will not concede. The Hildebeast, notably, has said Biden should not concede. The careful reader might notice that the Democrats have been promoting the fear that Trump will not concede, even if he loses, but have no problem doing that very thing. In 2000, the Democrats set the standard for not accepting election results. Al Gore fought until, literally, there were no legal options remaining. The key issue was Florida, where Gore never led a single vote count. Ultimately, fewer than 700 votes in Florida determined the winner. Which reminds us how important it is to make sure there is no fraudulent voting, or inaccurate counts.
The Democratic leadership has still not fully accepted the results of 2016. They blamed everyone and everything for their loss, except for the real causes: a flawed strategy that ignored key states, a bad candidate, and being outworked by their opponent.
Some commentators have even raised the specter of Trump refusing to leave, and ask what we would do about it? Well, this just in: if Biden wins the election, he will be sworn in at noon, EST, January 20. Full stop.
If a supposedly unmoored Donald Trump chains himself to the Resolute Desk or locks himself in the adjoining bathroom where Bill Clinton did all manner of disgusting things, it will not matter. Biden would still become president. Elected officials are not determined by their GPS coordinates.
Not long after Biden is inaugurated, if he wins, he will likely step down, handing the presidency to Kamala Harris. At least most of us expect that is what will happen as Biden seems incapable of even mounting an active campaign, much less being president. But in any event, it would not be Trump.
This is a wonderful example of the cognitive dissonance that indwells the progressive/socialist movement. They accuse others of doing what they are doing, have no trouble with the hypocrisy of it, and no sense of shame. Saul Alinsky, about whom Hillary wrote a paper in college, gets lots of credit for championing the notion that one should accuse the opposition of doing what you are doing.
The left has long practiced a strategy that rests on the concept. Examples abound. Affirmative action, for example, depends on the belief that the only way to atone for past racism is to treat people differently today based on race. The left often sees racism in the actions of conservatives when, in truth, it is only their doctrine that allocates benefits, worth, or resources based on sex, skin color, or heritage.
There are zero major conservative positions that treat people differently based on their race; there are many leftist positions that do.
Or consider the back and forth on the potentiality of another COVID relief bill. One of the goals the Democratic Congressional leadership holds onto is the repeal of the limitations on state income tax deductibility on federal income taxes. This is important to them because thousands of their most generous donors are gazillionaires who live in high tax states like CA, NY, and CT.
The net-net, of course, is that those who live in low tax states, in effect, make it possible for other states to have high income taxes by subsidizing them through the deductibility on federal returns. Who would benefit from this change? Rich people. Again, duh. Democrats are holding up aid to average Americans to secure a massive tax break for rich Americans. But the hypocrisy eludes them. If we had an honest, competent media, of course, they would not get away with it. But most of the media today are Democratic apologists, fluffers, and enablers.
Many conservatives – most, based on my experience – do not evaluate people’s worth or role in the world based on skin color. When we see Tim Scott, we see a senator most of us like. When the left sees him, they see a black person who has sold out.
President Trump is a known quantity to most Americans. If you do not know what you think about President Trump you either have not been paying attention for nearly four years, or you are so intellectually bereft that you don’t have any business voting. If this describes you, please remember: if you fill in a mail ballot, all you must do is throw it in the trash. If you vote in person, please do so on Wednesday, November 4.
For the rest of us, hope remains that a minimal quantity of voters will see through the fog of equivocation, double standards, and misdirection to focus on the binary choice that will be before us November 3. This is not a personality contest or a group singing of “Michael, Row the Boat Ashore.” The future of the nation, and therefore the world, is at stake.
It is also not particularly important whether you like the candidates. Policy – what they will do and have done in the past – is paramount.
Like him or not, if you are a socialist/progressive, you will want to vote for Biden. Like him or not, if you are a conservative/constitutionalist, ask which candidate will pursue policies that make our country stronger, safer, and more prosperous? It is not a difficult question.
