You think that might be a tad overstated? Voters in those states will have more than a say. They will determine who gets elected. It will be easy to vote, but hard to cheat. You might have to have a photo ID. You might have to request an absentee ballot. None of which is all that difficult. There is nothing to prevent voting officials from setting up water stations on voting lines, but it is illegal, as it is in many states, to electioneer and offer anything to voters within a set distance from the polls. You want people harassed or bribed by either side while they wait to vote? What is the legitimate concern here? That your party won't be able to cheat is not a legitimate concern.

The reason AOC should not debate is that she would be made a laughingstock by MTG. AOC has platitudes but no real command of the facts of climate change. She also has no real understanding of the energy industry or transportation systems or even what is in the Green New Deal. Her grasp of economics is shockingly low. Her whole candidacy and tenure in office has been managed by the Justice Democrats and other Leftist think tanks. She can read prepared lines but has flubbed badly in impromptu interviews. She risks having a meltdown, being forced into a humiliating retreat…

The fact is George Floyd had a lot of fentanyl and meth in his system. The fentanyl level was 11 nanograms/ mill. Death by overdose has been certified in people with as little as 3 nanograms per mill. That is where the " over 3 times a lethal dose" number comes from.

However, as a habitual user, Mr. Floyd would have developed some tolerance for the drug. But no one can perform a test to say beyond a reasonable doubt that the lethal dose for Mr. Floyd was not 8 or 9 or 10 nanograms/mill.

The medical examiner said…

Your saying someone else is wrong doesn't make you right. Please offer a coherent argument, not simply an unsupported assertion. Perhaps you could try pointing out specific flaws in the logic of the arguments I made. Maybe cite some data to support assertions of your own. I can't find a case in the last two decades in which a police-involved fatality wasn't investigated. Some were ruled as justified, others as non-criminal mistakes and errors in judgement, and some resulted in presentations to Grand juries, and others have led to criminal cases with officers being tried in courts. Every loss of…

You have the wrong set of billionaires in your sights. The truly dangerous billionaires are those on top of the Tech and Social Media Giants. They control the media and are busy restricting communication of ideas they do not like. They act in concert, control huge swathes of industry, impose boycotts on states, but are somehow immune to anti-trust prosecution.

You also seem to have argued yourself into a circle on immigration and endless overseas wars. You realize lax border enforcement and open immigration policies hurt the economic well-being of lower and working class people. But you end up lauding…

Thank you for letting me know how to find the statistic. It checks out. Now to the basic point that it doesn't demonstrate systemic bias. According to your stat, Blacks are 3 times more likely to be killed by police, because 28% of those shot are Black while Blacks are only 13% of the population. But Blacks are 7 times more likely to be arrested for murder. According the FBI UCR , Table 43 A there were 4,078 Blacks arrested for murder versus 3,650 Whites in 2019.

That means Blacks were just over 50% of those arrested for murder…

This is completely ridiculous piece that displays incredible ignorance about America. America is awash with guns. People already have tens of millions of them and millions are flooding across the open border Biden has instituted. The only people who will obey gun control laws are the law-abiding citizens. Fewer will obey an Executive Order as it is dictatorial and lacks all legitimacy. Local police will not enforce it. Gangs and criminals will not obey any gun restrictions. Gun control laws makes regular citizens into criminals and forces them to deal with black market gun dealers.

The Progressive Democrat police defunding…

So you are unaware of the well-known speeches by Obama, Biden, Schumer, and most other Democrats favoring the filibuster? Please do the tiniest bit of research before making up provably false assertions. Democrats have never advocated eliminating the filibuster when they were in the minority.

I doubt you really do oppose the filibuster. If the Democrats lost the Senate in 2022 and the Republicans move to eliminate the filibuster, won't you be issuing a passionate defense of it?

So it was racist when the Democrats used the filibuster to stop Senator Scott's police reform bill last year? The Democrats were happy to use the filibuster repeatedly when they were in the minority and they gave speeches waxing eloquent in defense of the filibuster. They are thus total hypocrites: they don't even believe their own attacks on the filibuster. It is just a short term political ploy to push through a partisan agenda they have no mandate to pass. But attempting to end the filibuster will backfire badly for the Democrats. When Republicans take control of the Senate in 2022, they will be able to repeal everything the Democrats passed. How the Democrats will whine then about the loss of the filibuster.

All very touching and nothing I would object to. But, back to the question, would you agree to pay an extra 10% of your salary in taxes so people can buy caviar and filet mignon with their food stamps?

Caleb Mars

Mathematician, Statistician, Businessman, and Academic. Student of history, poli sci , and the Bible.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store