Pre-Election Special: Is Democracy on the Ballot, or is the Republic Out of Control?

Uh Oh… I just saw a comment on FB and there may be some truth to it. Fetterman’s all coherent now, really sharp… I wonder if the Take The High Road conservatives were swindled with a Virtue Signal bait & switch?

Wondering why so many Red Waves got swallowed up by Dems? It’s not in person votes , people! It is ballots being sent out, harvested, collected, adjudicated and counted by Dems for Dem strategy election fraud. Machines can print up any new ballots that they need to to win.
Bill, please read what Sundance wrote the Conservative Treehouse on Nov. 9th about the difference between ballot-counting and in person votes. Clearer than ever before.
No wonder Hobbs wouldn’t debate. Hobbsgoblin knew it wouldn’t be necessary!! No wonder Fetteredmind won. And biden sat in his basement and got 80 million votes. GOOD GRIEF.

It’s 6:30 am here in Southern Az. My husband is out riding his bike and just called me. He was going by our church where there are lines of cars around the block with people waiting to vote.
All of a sudden he saw 17 javelinas cross the road in front of him. What a sight! I look at it as a sign. Get out and vote you javelinas, and vote Republican!! Nobody messes with javelinas!

I think that too many are counting their chickens before they hatch. The Babylon Bee is right, there may be too big a difference for the Dems to cheat, but I’ll believe it when I see it.

Great show as usual guys.
Since I have been listening to you guys for a while now, I have started using this technique and the results have been about 66/34. The larger group just goes to the tried and true name calling approach and the other group actually thinks about what I’ve said.
For example: I was recently at a League of Women Voters forum, where the 6 others at the table were leftist and then various candidates would come up for an interview at each table. In the legislative races, (state house and senate) the question from the League was “will you defend women’s reproductive health rights” After each Democrat gave their standard talking point answer of absolutely that is a God given Constitutional right. My abbreviated question for them was; God nor the Constitution granted you this right and since the baby in her womb is not her body but that of another human being she is carrying. Where does this mythical right to kill this other human come from? Not one Democrat candidate could answer that question.
So at the end of the night two leftist from my table came up to me and said that my questions made them think. So I took that as a win.

I have been saying for years, if not not nearly decades, that the “blob of cells” in your body is not your body. It is, scientifically, biologically a separate, living human being to people who say “its my body, my choice. Not debatable if you “follow the science”. The question is: what rights does it have vs the woman? The right to life is basic. If you don’t have that one, you can’t have any other. That does include the right to defend yourself, even if that means killing another human being. Thus, If a pregnant womans life, or extreme harm is in danger, abortion is an option.

This would be very rare; as in the violated saying “Abortion should be safe, legal and rare.

Trump just made a jibe at DeSantis, Pompeo and Cheney.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-mocks-desantis-pennsylvania-rally-ron-desanctimonious
Trump and Pompeo need a contested Republican preselection in 2024 and Cheney will be there too. There are issues that need to be raised and Vice Presidents that need to be tested. I think Pompeo is the most likely VP pick. They will debate the tiny foreign policy differences in Republican policy and will tag team on Cheney and force her to articulate her policy positions. Because of the Russian Ukraine situation, foreign policy will be the main issue. If its just Trump and Cheney she will just yammer about Jan 6th but if Pompeo is there she is forced onto policy. At this stage we have not seen her articulate her policy disagreements with Trump’s foreign policy but that under lies her opposition to Trump and existed pre-Jan six. Trumps poke at DeSantis gets the pro DeSantis people to shift to Pompeo where Trump needs them. Trump Needs DeSantis running Florida in 2024. Its more 5D chess. The left and the RINO’s fell for the bait perfectly.

This might be useful. Roman Balmakov is excellent. He is one of the early Epoch times guys.
Two things I noticed. Both parties are battling down to the last hour. Secondly some of this voter fraud is in very safe Democrat seats meaning that all the cheating is wasted if its a Red wave yet in spite of that the RNC is not ignoring it.
https://youtu.be/-faNq1cyxSA

Bill, you need to get hired by the RNC to be their media relations director.

Bill talked about the Republicans attempts to get an earlier civil rights act though but its unsearchable, google disallows it. Wikipedia mentions it, gives the earlier year 1957, does not mention the Republicans at all. These are things someone needs to fix. I can log in to Wikipedia and propose changes but will be overruled without back up. Ideally some retired Republican that voted in 1957/ 58, or was a staffer then, should make the edits to Wikipedia. That has more force than a random Aussy.

My theory is that someone in the Californian democratic party sounded out Gypsy Taub’s militant nudists as the next grievance group after the trans-fanatics and then when Gypsy was done for pedophilia they backed down. DePape took it badly and went after her. The cameras were not monitored because people are coming and going from Nancy’s place, while she is there, that the DNC don’t want public. At no time did Paul Pelosi perceive the real threat. To him DePape is genuinely a friend and a political ally in need of care but NOT incarceration. When the Police arrived Pelosi approached DePape expecting a sane response; he was now in a position of caring power with police backup. It went badly for him.
The false maga web site was pre-created by some smart but woke silicon valley programmer and just needed the next attacker, or shooters, name added before deployment. The meta data and page dates are all fake. It did not predate the attack. DePaps name and details was added with in an hour of the first report.

Bill’s “Simple Things We Could Do” as conservatives when asked to defend things like our republican form of government or gun rights reminds me of the “What We Stand For” videos from the Tea Party days. Bill could be hired by the Republicans to become the mastermind who trains the tongue-tied, shallow, non-thinking, illogical, unable to argue, gullible candidates they need to prep for debates.

Yes, he had a great series called, “What We Believe” Parts 1 thru 7 I believe. We need to share those far & wide. “Simple Things We Could Do” sounds great too, don’t know how I missed it.

As a truck driver, in 2020 I started getting so cynical and pissed off that I started to question if bringing cities food might be counterproductive. Tell people who make demands to put that in their pipe and smoke it.

When BW says that he doesn’t recall this level of low behavior, I think of the Jefferson vs. Adams vitriol, carried out through partisan newspapers. The difference, though, is that Jefferson and Adams personally had respect for each other. They were strongly against each others proposed policies, but the insanely awful disinformation was the printed words from their followers.

Trump never had a majority in Congress or the Senate because of the RINO’s. Now with this election there is only one RINO running and he will win because the Democrat is that bad. That will mean there will be only three or four RINO’s left in the House and two in the Senate. They will not have the numbers to effect the vote or committees. It will be a Maga Parliament.

I have seen Republican candidates making the emotional arguments that Bill recommends. However you don’t see this on the MSM and you have to watch Rumble where people including Steven Bannon, Seb Gorka, and Dan Bongino show you those campaign adds and media interviews.

The 2 wolves and the lamb argument fails because SJW are mostly vegetarian. They reject the premise of the metaphor. You need to find a wording that works with them and that’s requires research. Two factory owners and a farmer voting on pollution laws.

Fabulous. Really good summation of the situation. .

Since California is a sanctuary state, why the mention of the “intruder” as an illegal Canadian? This whole Pelosi incident has more holes than a block of swiss cheese.

“Losing our democracy?” Just look at California. Democrat party took majority in 1970 – 52 years ago. IF – big IF – people became even a little bit politically aware at. age 18, there is nobody under the age of 70 who has lived under anything other than democrat rule of the state. They have been kept in a state of fear by that party all their adult lives. They know nothing else.

We are losing our democracy, our way of life. Really, according to whom and based on what ideological belief in the role of the state?
The biggest problem we have is that so few understand what we stand to lose.
What we need are not more political labels. We already have too many and no one, including those who claim a label, seem to understand what they mean either. Political parties are clearly demonstrating George Washington’s prediction that they will be the death of us as a free nation.
I claim my citizenship as an American. I do not hyphenate, I am a native American, I was born here. Speaking of a land of migrants most of the planet, especially this hemisphere is made up of migrants. The mitochondrial DNA record has no indigenous peoples other than in the northeast corner of what is now known as Africa and the Middle East.
So, what do I believe constitutes an American culturally? It is those who believe in individual sovereignty, liberty, and the responsibility for self-governance. It includes a belief in natural rights not government privileges. It means believing in our foundational principles, codified in our Constitution that supports the individual over the state. That the government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed.
To me, it is just that simple, but it apparently is so very hard in the face of power addiction and corruption.

There is politics, there is history and then there are the political lessons of history.

Of the two controlling parties in the United States — Republicans are perhaps the worst at learning the political lessons of history and applying them to their own advantage.

Democrats do a great job of looking at history and picking out the lessons regarding the things that will advance their power, then applying them successfully. We should be grateful that they are almost total failures at seeing the long view and are constantly kneecapping themselves with their own shortsightedness.

That said, it’s important to realize the motivation behind Democrat short sightedness. Democrats believe in and are striving for Total Victory. In the collective consciousness of the Democrat Left every incremental step towards achieving total power is irrevocable. Once they have made some sort of conquest they tell themselves that step is permanent and move on to the next one. They think this way because they have corrupted academia and the press to the point where they truly believe themselves to be on the path to total power — Because corrupt academia and the press have told them so.

Thus the ever stronger Democrat Left thinks that if they can but once achieve a lock on power they will never again lose it.

When they cheated, lied, slandered and pulled out all the stops they were able to take down the most popular President in modern times. This is a phenomenal achievement and not in a good way. Through a combination of tactics they actually succeeded in putting a dotard puppet in the White House and removing the President who has been their greatest threat in decades.

It’s not hard to see how they might think they can now do anything they want to. They very nearly can but not quite. They can smell total victory but they’re not really tasting it yet …

What concerns me greatly this election is the ‘election denier’ foofaraw hullabaloo that Democrats are hammering on so vigorously. They know they really don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to election results denial, they know that they are the ones who started using the denial of results in legitimate elections as a means to undermine their opposition. Knowing this and making an issue of it anyway is something more than casting aspersions on the more Conservative Republican candidates like Kari Lake. It’s not working if that is the intention so it’s very likely there’s some other intention behind this tactic.

I think they’re prepping the post election battlespace. I think it has finally sunk in to the powers-that-be on the Democrat Left that if this election is conducted fairly and transparently to the point where all Americans can have confidence in the results — That they will lose badly.

So I’m expecting to see them cheat in every way possible, even openly and obviously — Then label every single person who happens to notice and speak out about their cheating as an ‘election denier’ and say “See, we warned you about these people who are trying to ‘destroy our sacred Democracy’.

I hope I’m wrong but I don’t think I am.

This is a double edged tactic. The countermeasure to it at least at this point in time is an overwhelming voter turnout with overwhelming Republican votes sweeping Republicans into office despite the best efforts at cheating from the Democrat Left.

If that happens the Democrats have shot themselves in the foot because they can’t claim election fraud, can they? If they do, they’re the ‘election deniers’. The ‘election deniers’ tactic only works for them if they can manage to cheat sufficiently to get their own people elected.

It seems clear to me that they’re betting the farm on that tactic and believe their cheating will be successful enough that post election they can use accusations of ‘election deniers’ to silence and negate objections to their cheating.

What concerns me greatly is why they appear to believe that so much that they’re setting the stage right now.

This coming Tuesday is a pivotal election in the history of our Republic.

I’m not certain that voting will be unpolluted and uncorrupt enough to truly reflect the will of the American People. I am certain that the Democrat Left believes for some unfathomable reason they’re going to win by whatever means necessary. That they clearly appear to believe that is what worries me.

Because believing that means they are either bone stupid regarding how their policies have negatively affected the American People or … They know something we don’t.

Time will tell.

I looked at a sample ballot for my area and, thankfully, democracy wasn’t one of the ballot initiatives. I WILL support our constitutional republic by voting this week!

Yes, a few minutes before Bill mentioned it, I was also thinking we should emphasize the governmental structure of our designed constitutional republic compared to the founders fears of mob rule from the past failed history of “democracy” [I initially mistyped that as “demoncracy”, rather apropos.] Our government did not evolve over time, like the English “constitution”, but just over the few months of the summer of 1787 during the Constitutional Convention, as bright educated men caused various ideas to continue to be considered valid, or pushed aside as not viable [i.e., failed to survive], based on human nature and 3000 years of known history.

That is what is so frustrating about McConnell and McCarthy, as congressional “leaders”. They say a lot of anti-liberal things, or anti-Democrat Party things, but still don’t promote these foundational and fundamental ideas of our founding. Of course they are beneficiaries of the status quo, so don’t want to upset the apple cart.

There are upsides and downsides to legislative term limits, but the upsides are looking more and more attractive. Kind of surprising the framers did not consider such limits during their discussions of checking and balancing power in government. Perhaps the framers were considering that would place limits on their own prospects of gaining power under the new constitution. [Sad that I had that thought about them, isn’t it?]

Yes, it is sad to think that about our founders. Sadder still that it’s the very thing keeping our “leaders” from fixing that significant omission.

I’m against Congressional term limits for a lot of very good reasons. Many of those reasons have to do with unforeseen and unintended consequences.

When there’s any question I default to trusting in the wisdom of our Founding Fathers. If the Founding Fathers’ intent was for people to only serve two terms in office they would have put that in the Constitution. That they did not demonstrates de facto their intentions.

True, their vision was more of a Citizen Statesman than a Professional Politician scenario. There’s no real doubt about that but they were also not unaware of the possibility that a popular and correct Citizen Statesman might become a perennial Professional Politician. Thus rather than limit terms in office they left that decision up to the voters.

It’s still a decision of the voters these many years passed.

Passing a law or an Amendment (personally I don’t think it can be done without an Amendment, that’s what it took to put a two term limit on the office of POTUS and passing an Amendment is a very difficult process) that takes the choice from the hands of the voters and codifies it in law was not the intent of the Founders.

A less drastic measure would be to limit to two terms the internal House or Senate LEADERSHIP roles of a Senator or Representative. As in no more than two terms as Speaker of the House, President Pro Tempore of the Senate etc. That would keep the bad from percolating up and displacing the good without the inherent handicaps and unintended consequences of a two term limit to hold an office.

I think that could also be accomplished by codification and congressional rules rather than the Amendment process. It would be easier to do than a Constitutional Amendment and a lot easier to undo if it turns out to not work the way people think it should.

(Briefly — I think term limits on the Presidency are a good idea. If the policy is adopted to always pick a Vice President as a running mate that is capable of and expected to be able to win after a successful POTUS’ second term. This carries on good and correct policies without creating a virtual King. The better job a POTUS does, the more likely his VP is to get elected assuming they’re of the same political cloth. It’s not the same thing at all as Congress.)

Term limits throw out the good with the bad. I can’t think of any Republican that would be for term limits if they were very happy with the Republican leadership they elected. If we had a faithful, correct Constitutional textualist in the role that McConnell now plays why on earth would we want to limit him to two terms? Same goes for McCarthy. All that does is play into the hands of our political opposition.

We want good people in those office, not short timers. I was in the military and I’m all too familiar with the ‘short-timer’s attitude’. If you want to remove motivation to do a good job, then to ‘lame duck’ every good person on our side in Congress is a great way to guarantee that.

That would mean that the bad on our side would be free to vote against our interests when they hit their second term. Most would have nothing to lose politically and would be thinking about their employment prospects after their last term ends. If you want a lot of Mitt Romneys and Liz Cheneys that’s a great way to go about getting them.

To get really, truly good people we have to entice them into government and away from the private sector. Very few good, successful, savvy people would want to leave a lucrative career just to put a six year (House) or 12 year (Senate) hole in that career to serve in Congress. Term limits rule out many of that kind of person.

I have a whole litany of reasons not to go with term limits and these are just a few examples.

The problem isn’t how long someone serves in office. It’s what they do while they’re in office and why people keep electing them if they’re the wrong type of person.

The problem that term limits attempts to solve is a short range gain with a long range loss. It would get rid of Schumer, Pilosi, McConnell and McCarthy today without fundamentally addressing the problem in the long run. The problem isn’t one of how long a person serves, it’s who serves and what can be done about them.

The way to fix the problem is to get the Republican Party back on track, spurning RINOs and representing the will of the American People. If we can accomplish that there would be little need for term limits but if we do accomplish that and we have term limits then that ascendancy is in jeopardy. Term limits essentially in that case cut off our noses to spite our faces.

Donald Trump was a pathfinder President in showing that the Republican Party can do just that and get back on track with voters. Ron DeSantis, Greg Abbott, Kari Lake, Glenn Youngkin and others are picking up that idea and it’s a very, very popular one with voters. It gets Republicans elected in a big way. There appears to be a sea change coming and the best way to dampen out that wave before it ever hits the shore is term limits.

Term limits create a very chaotic and unreliable government in the modern era where we want and desperately need a continuity of good policy. That term limits were not included in the original Constitution is very likely due in no small part to the vision and wisdom of the Founding Fathers. They did a lot of things to forestall and prevent a descent into tyranny down through the ages, knowing full well that the situation as it stood in their day would not last forever. I trust them and I think if we can just stick with their guidance in the form of the United States Constitution we’ll get ourselves back to where we want to be.

What I’m not in favor of is the Mistake of the Democrats. Which is to change things around today for short term gains ignoring the long term effects and unintended consequences. Term limits solve the McConnell/McCarthy issues of right now but destabilize the underlying Constitutional imperative of a government accountable to The People that are foundational to our future liberty and prosperity.

This destabilization is a result of putting a drop dead expiration date on both good and bad. It kills off the bad as well as the good representation. It leaves Congress even more susceptible to a Deep State by reinforcing for all practical purposes permanent Congressional staffers pulling the strings of power. We can term limit members of Congress but we can’t do a damn thing about their choices when it comes to hiring staff.

I like Ted Cruz a lot, I’d vote for him if the Republicans nominated him. But I notice that not only is he pushing an Amendment for term limits, the conditions of his proposed Amendment exempt himself and everyone else now serving in Congress from the parameters of his Amendment. Not until their next election cycle, permanently as long as they keep getting reelected.

That not only doesn’t solve the immediate problem, it doesn’t really guarantee a particularly positive future either. If Ted thought it was such a great idea he would apply it to himself as well. It’s telling that he chooses not to.

Tinkering with the Constitution to create term limits should be the last thing we try to do. There are many other urgent issues to be resolved. Whatever energy anyone would spend on term limits should be redirected to solidifying election transparency and reliability. That’s the real threat we face today and that’s an existential threat. Congressional term limits have too much potential to go awry through unforeseen and unintended consequence.

When I was growing up I had a second cousin who was basically a wild animal. Her parents didn’t believe in discipline or boundaries, mostly ignored her and just let their little darling do anything she wanted. She was always filthy, wild eyed, inchorent, sulky, mean, thieving and about as much fun as a ricocheting bullet so we generally wouldn’t play with her. All of that amplified and increased while she grew older and as you might expect she died very young.

I learned an important lesson thanks to her so she did do some good in this world. When she was about 10 she took to yanking the toaster by the electrical cord off the counter to get attention. In her poor neglected world any attention was good even if it was negative. So did her parents finally realize they needed to teach her not to do that after buying several toasters? No, they didn’t. The solution they came up with was to bolt the toaster to the counter. Naturally then she just went off to find some other destructive thing to get attention. But, hey, the toaster was safe.

I view term limits as a ‘bolt the toaster to the counter’ sort of solution. All Congressional term limits really accomplish is to solve a symptom of a much more systemic problem.

27 replies on “Pre-Election Special: Is Democracy on the Ballot, or is the Republic Out of Control?”

Leave a Reply Cancel reply