There is a lot of crazy stuff that went on in the 2020 election and after. The veils have been ripped off much of it thanks to the release of the Twitter Files and Tucker's release of the Jan 6 security footage from the Capitol, but most of it was known, as you said, from the very beginning.
More of it could be proved if whistleblowers would come forward and be honest about their involvement in illegal acts.
The reality is that there is increasingly less confidence in the integrity of our election process--for good reasons--among those of every political persuasion.
Bob Evnen's reassurances to the contrary aren't fixing that. He would do better to come clean about the Albert sensors (the part of the vote counting machines that allows connection to the internet and tampering by third parties) and to scrap the ES&S machines for hand counting the ballots.
I hate having to hold European countries up as a role model for any reason, but--in this case, they are at least a cautionary tale: they contracted with ES&S before us. But they realized quickly that their votes were being tampered with and they scrapped the ES&S machines when it became clear that the vote tampering was a feature, not a bug, and hard baked into the design of the machines.
We need to be at least as honest and able to embrace common sense as the Europeans were in this instance--and go and do likewise.
I used to read you with interest when I lived in the U.S., 1988-1992, and wrote for the New Republican. Although I am, shudder, cower, a socialist I have never believed the right-wing of politics is wrong about everything. But if you go back to the origins of socialism you would find a great deal about doing your job to the best of your ability, regardless of your bosses. It was called pride, self-respect, and collectively the "dignity of labour."
Also not being in debt, living within your means, helping those neighbours more unfortunate then yourself, caring for each other. That does not mean there would be no disagreements, or personality clashes in groups, that is human nature. But all the arguments were how to make life better for those at the bottom and the lower middle.
Who on the right could object to that? Despite the froth about 'identity' politics most socialists I know are concerned about the economy and issues like housing, poverty, food banks, etc.How are food banks any different from soup kitchens? However, they also know that racist attitudes (identity politics) are fuelled by false narratives of 'privileged' 'immigrants'. Every single piece of research shows this is untrue.
But what is the driving force behind SOCIALism? A belief in a better world and that there are glaring injustices that should not exist in any society, and especially not in rich ones.
I don't know what has happened to you in the the intervening years but you are increasingly unhinged. One of the reasons I remain on the left in politics is a lot of our critiques, like it or not, are factually based. The utterly hysterical reaction to the toppling of a statue in Bristol, celebrating a slave trader, was met with cries of these people are bent on "destroying our history".
The same goes for Churchill and attacks on his statue in Parliament Square. I was once obsessed with the man and between the ages of 12 and 21 read so many books by him and about him that I was an expert on his life. To the point that I knew far more than a Mastermind contestsant in 1976. Guess what? I did NOT know about his bombing of Arabs in 1923:
Note the phrase "history reclaimed", i.e. TRUTHFUL history. Churchill was a great man, his energy was prodigious, his interests and breadth of imagination untramelled; and he made the right choice to oppose Hitler to the end, but he was also, on record, a vicious racist. The idea that history is 'threatened' or 'destroyed' by uncovering all of it is nuts.
Now you are posting support of completely lunatic conspiracy theories. The Heritage Foundation!! That bastion of academic objectivity, like ALL right-wing think-tanks, funded by obscenely wealthy mutli-millionaires and billionaires, who create 'analysis' to fit a pre-prescribed template. The same people who fund gerrymandering, right wing candidates for the judiciary, state politics, school councils, police commisioners, the list is endless. They now, because they have the money, fund and support hundreds if not thousands of Youtube channels, local tv and radio, Twitter bots and posts, alongside Telegram, Instagram, Tik Tok, and good old, reliable Facebook.
There is NO evidence of ballot tampering, or any saying Trump WON the election. There is abundant evidence of racist gerrymandering:
Obviously you won't respond because dealing with FACTS is not possible for right-wingers. You live in a bubble that tells you the 'left' control everything: the meedjah, the universities and colleges as well as schools, and the totality of culture from films to tv to music to newspapers; poverty is not real, just a failure of individual effort; racism not only does not exist it has been 'abolished' by misguided equal opportunities policies and 'affirmative action'.
Black people killed by the police at a rate 4 times more than white proportionally has nothing to do with racism, black people are 'naturally' more criminal than whites. In fact you are not far off claiming Wall Street is controlled by 'liberal elites'.
The worst of it is I don't give a fuck about your sexuality, and it is obvious nobody should have their political views assessed or determined by their sexuality. This is the mistake on the left of assuming those oppressed must ultimately be on the side of the 'left'. As though gays can't be fascists or racists as they clearly can.
But your liberty to be open about BEING gay, and NOT being ostracised for it, was a victory for people you despise. Who on the right of politics EVER campaigned for equality for gay people? Name me one.
Now, I don't need you to think you have to be 'left-wing' on economics because you are gay. I DO THINK you should acknowledge that you would not be where you are today without left wing activism.
For someone who screams loudly about freedom of speech I have not seen a peep out of you about the book banning across the U.S. Still, I am sure they are books you disagree with so that's ok is it not?
The problem is you are now in the realm of comment that is only a step from claiming the British monarchy are really lizards. You used to be intelligent.
I suspect I am pissing in the wing and you won't publish this. But at least look in the miiror and ask yourself a question: Is this really who I am?
You state: "I used to read you with interest when I lived in the U.S., 1988-1992, and wrote for the New Republican. " but I never wrote for such a publication. Are you thinking of someone else?
I might have got the publication wrong, it is 32 years ago, but I definitely read stuff you wrote in U.S. But is it true, unless I have mistaken you for someone else, that you are English originally, and made your home in the U.S and became a fairly renowned right-wing conservative commentator, while being openly gay. If I am wrong about that then I apologise very sincerely. If I am correct then my comments hold good.
Nope, you got the wrong Sullivan. You are referring to this guy https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/ who is not me. Hence I have the middle initial L in my name.
There is a lot of crazy stuff that went on in the 2020 election and after. The veils have been ripped off much of it thanks to the release of the Twitter Files and Tucker's release of the Jan 6 security footage from the Capitol, but most of it was known, as you said, from the very beginning.
More of it could be proved if whistleblowers would come forward and be honest about their involvement in illegal acts.
The reality is that there is increasingly less confidence in the integrity of our election process--for good reasons--among those of every political persuasion.
Bob Evnen's reassurances to the contrary aren't fixing that. He would do better to come clean about the Albert sensors (the part of the vote counting machines that allows connection to the internet and tampering by third parties) and to scrap the ES&S machines for hand counting the ballots.
I hate having to hold European countries up as a role model for any reason, but--in this case, they are at least a cautionary tale: they contracted with ES&S before us. But they realized quickly that their votes were being tampered with and they scrapped the ES&S machines when it became clear that the vote tampering was a feature, not a bug, and hard baked into the design of the machines.
We need to be at least as honest and able to embrace common sense as the Europeans were in this instance--and go and do likewise.
I used to read you with interest when I lived in the U.S., 1988-1992, and wrote for the New Republican. Although I am, shudder, cower, a socialist I have never believed the right-wing of politics is wrong about everything. But if you go back to the origins of socialism you would find a great deal about doing your job to the best of your ability, regardless of your bosses. It was called pride, self-respect, and collectively the "dignity of labour."
Also not being in debt, living within your means, helping those neighbours more unfortunate then yourself, caring for each other. That does not mean there would be no disagreements, or personality clashes in groups, that is human nature. But all the arguments were how to make life better for those at the bottom and the lower middle.
Who on the right could object to that? Despite the froth about 'identity' politics most socialists I know are concerned about the economy and issues like housing, poverty, food banks, etc.How are food banks any different from soup kitchens? However, they also know that racist attitudes (identity politics) are fuelled by false narratives of 'privileged' 'immigrants'. Every single piece of research shows this is untrue.
But what is the driving force behind SOCIALism? A belief in a better world and that there are glaring injustices that should not exist in any society, and especially not in rich ones.
I don't know what has happened to you in the the intervening years but you are increasingly unhinged. One of the reasons I remain on the left in politics is a lot of our critiques, like it or not, are factually based. The utterly hysterical reaction to the toppling of a statue in Bristol, celebrating a slave trader, was met with cries of these people are bent on "destroying our history".
The same goes for Churchill and attacks on his statue in Parliament Square. I was once obsessed with the man and between the ages of 12 and 21 read so many books by him and about him that I was an expert on his life. To the point that I knew far more than a Mastermind contestsant in 1976. Guess what? I did NOT know about his bombing of Arabs in 1923:
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2003/04/1920-a01.html
I will wager a large sum you didn't either. Or about his role in the Bengali famine:
https://historyreclaimed.co.uk/churchill-and-the-bengal-famine/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/29/winston-churchill-policies-contributed-to-1943-bengal-famine-study
Note the phrase "history reclaimed", i.e. TRUTHFUL history. Churchill was a great man, his energy was prodigious, his interests and breadth of imagination untramelled; and he made the right choice to oppose Hitler to the end, but he was also, on record, a vicious racist. The idea that history is 'threatened' or 'destroyed' by uncovering all of it is nuts.
Now you are posting support of completely lunatic conspiracy theories. The Heritage Foundation!! That bastion of academic objectivity, like ALL right-wing think-tanks, funded by obscenely wealthy mutli-millionaires and billionaires, who create 'analysis' to fit a pre-prescribed template. The same people who fund gerrymandering, right wing candidates for the judiciary, state politics, school councils, police commisioners, the list is endless. They now, because they have the money, fund and support hundreds if not thousands of Youtube channels, local tv and radio, Twitter bots and posts, alongside Telegram, Instagram, Tik Tok, and good old, reliable Facebook.
There is NO evidence of ballot tampering, or any saying Trump WON the election. There is abundant evidence of racist gerrymandering:
https://www.aclu.org/podcast/the-insidious-practice-of-racial-gerrymandering
Even with this Trump LOST.
Obviously you won't respond because dealing with FACTS is not possible for right-wingers. You live in a bubble that tells you the 'left' control everything: the meedjah, the universities and colleges as well as schools, and the totality of culture from films to tv to music to newspapers; poverty is not real, just a failure of individual effort; racism not only does not exist it has been 'abolished' by misguided equal opportunities policies and 'affirmative action'.
Black people killed by the police at a rate 4 times more than white proportionally has nothing to do with racism, black people are 'naturally' more criminal than whites. In fact you are not far off claiming Wall Street is controlled by 'liberal elites'.
The worst of it is I don't give a fuck about your sexuality, and it is obvious nobody should have their political views assessed or determined by their sexuality. This is the mistake on the left of assuming those oppressed must ultimately be on the side of the 'left'. As though gays can't be fascists or racists as they clearly can.
But your liberty to be open about BEING gay, and NOT being ostracised for it, was a victory for people you despise. Who on the right of politics EVER campaigned for equality for gay people? Name me one.
Now, I don't need you to think you have to be 'left-wing' on economics because you are gay. I DO THINK you should acknowledge that you would not be where you are today without left wing activism.
For someone who screams loudly about freedom of speech I have not seen a peep out of you about the book banning across the U.S. Still, I am sure they are books you disagree with so that's ok is it not?
The problem is you are now in the realm of comment that is only a step from claiming the British monarchy are really lizards. You used to be intelligent.
I suspect I am pissing in the wing and you won't publish this. But at least look in the miiror and ask yourself a question: Is this really who I am?
You state: "I used to read you with interest when I lived in the U.S., 1988-1992, and wrote for the New Republican. " but I never wrote for such a publication. Are you thinking of someone else?
I might have got the publication wrong, it is 32 years ago, but I definitely read stuff you wrote in U.S. But is it true, unless I have mistaken you for someone else, that you are English originally, and made your home in the U.S and became a fairly renowned right-wing conservative commentator, while being openly gay. If I am wrong about that then I apologise very sincerely. If I am correct then my comments hold good.
Nope, you got the wrong Sullivan. You are referring to this guy https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/ who is not me. Hence I have the middle initial L in my name.