This is even more depressing than the number of people who think Joe Biden is doing a just dandy job as President.
43% of those asked in a Morning Consult- Politico poll responded that the 2020 election should definitely not be overturned. That means that 57% are not certain that the election shouldn’t be overturned. Some think it probably shouldn’t be overturned—12%. 35% responded that the election results should definitely or probably be overturned. Morons. Since the election can’t possibly be overturned under any law imaginable or any sequence of events, and since even attempting such a thing would cause total chaos, the only answer that indicates that a respondent was taught civics by a fully functioning primate is: “Of course the 2020 election shouldn’t be overturned. What are you, nuts? Why are we wasting time even discussing this? Why don’t you ask if “Imagine” should come true?”
There is absolutely no evidence that the 2020 election, or any election, especially almost a year later, should be overturned, except the irrelevant fact that President Biden has loused up more faster and lost the trust of the public more quickly than any President in history—even with a disgraceful mainstream media trying everything but mass hypnosis to help Joe avoid accountability. The fact that you may detest the President is not grounds for voiding an election, though that is the insane theory that guided the Left’s attacks on Donald Trump for four years, including false claims that he was a madman and two contrived impeachments.
But you can’t blame this poll result on Democrats. The blame falls squarely on schools and neglectful parents, along with too many irresponsible and intellectually dishonest conservative pundits. Cementing its long-held and much deserved title as “the Stupid Party,” a full 60% of registered Republicans actually told the pollsters that they think the election should or probably should be overturned. The contempt that is due these mouth-breathers cannot be exaggerated. A similar amount of contempt is due any society that allows so much of its population to be both civically ignorant and incapable of critical reasoning.
Yes, a strong majority of Republicans think we have a parliamentary system…or can’t think at all. No party with a constituency this deluded or easily confused ought to be trusted with sharp objects, much less running the country.
Why hello, Gina! Back so soon?
Ethics Alarms 
So vote the straight Democrat ticket, then.
Okay, that was kind of snarky, however, in America we have only two choices realistically speaking. As you point out, but don’t really get into at length, it’s the Democratic party that’s spent four years trying to undo the 2016 election, by any and all means, fair or foul. It was the Democratic party, before President Trump was sworn into office and had done anything, that flooded airwaves and internet alike with poorly conceived commercials pitched at electors, complete with tinkly piano music and Hollywood has been repeating the same word three and four times, because people can’t be counted on to get what’s being said the first time around, urging them to throw the election to Hillary Clinton because Trump just couldn’t be trusted and the country had just made a horrible mistake, which it was their job to correct. If one party says that the election that didn’t go their way was a mistake and others should just ignore it to correct this mistake, what’s to stop members of the other party from thinking the same way, especially in an election that doesn’t look like it was completely on the up and up? If one party spends 4 years throwing everything but the kitchen sink at the other party’s president, what’s to stop the other from doing the same? If one party has its faithful talking about impeaching leaders and then running another election question what’s to stop the other party from thinking they can do the same? Most ordinary people are not lawyers, and really don’t understand the Constitution and what it allows and does not allow, and even if you told them what it did and didn’t allow, they would just say then it needed to be changed to allow whatever they want.
The Democratic party spent the last 4 years talking about how everything that made it more difficult for their representatives to get elected in sufficient numbers to form an unstoppable majority had to be changed. Was the filibuster getting in the way of them passing massive new legislation or stacking the courts? Then get rid of the filibuster and have everything sail through on a simple majority vote. Never mind that it’s already come back to bite them in the ass once. Better yet, reform the Senate to make it like the house, where it goes strictly by population, so the big liberal cities can dominate, turn every neighborhood of Washington DC into a state if that’s what it takes. If the courts say you are making a power grab, just a point a whole new bunch of liberal judges who will give you the stamp of approval, including four brand spanking new liberal judges on the Supreme Court to tip the balance decisively. If all of this fails, then just take to the streets and riot.
I don’t know where anyone could have gotten the idea that if the system won’t give you what you want, then you should just ignore the system. I don’t know where anyone could have gotten the idea that the system is essentially powerless, and if you just decide to reach out and take what you want, it can’t stop you. Actually, I know, and a big part of it was last year’s disgraceful surrender of most of this nation’s cities to the mob.
On their faces, a lot of these ideas appear absurd. They don’t appear as absurd when someone actually makes them happen. It’s the last couple of years haven’t taught us anything else, they have certainly delivered the message that if you have the votes, or if you have enough people willing to get violent, nothing is impossible.
Something else I just read, although I myself had not made the connection, who here remembers when loud and borderline violent activists essentially took over the Senate building while the cabinet hearings were going on? A few of these people actually intimidated senator Jeff flake into conditioning his vote for justice kavanaugh on there being an additional FBI investigation. Essentially, the loud mouths and the bullies got their way by being loudmouths and bullies. Should maybe then come as a surprise that a bunch of other idiots from the other side might have thought that if they entered the capital and acted like loud mouths and bullies they might get their way too?
Given the horrible choice between stupid and crazy, it’s wise to choose stupid. The US has survived stupid, and will again. At this point, the Left has gone crazy.
Was Trump a stupid choice? I am not sure. He tried to stem the tide toward one-world governance from either the UN or Brussels. His policy was “US political and economic interests are paramount and anything in conflict with those interests is secondary.” Is that wrong policy? If so, why? Trump appealed to the middle class who has been abandoned by both Republican and Democrat parties.
The Left has not gone crazy, though. The Left has had a long game in place since the 1930s, if not before, to make fundamental changes to the country by incrementally changing it. It started with unions, and proceeded into taking control over education (both local and state, and then, federal), the economy by expanding the bureaucratic state and burdensome regulations, the family structure, race relations, and the armed/security forces. Trump tried to reverse some of it in his ham-handed way but vested interests in the state department made sure he didn’t get to implement his policies by slow-walking them or outright defiance of his directives.
jvb
Nominating someone like Trump, or even allowing him to vie for the nomination, was stupid. Voting for him over Hillary wasn’t stupid, nor was voting for him over Biden, based on what Biden’s party had become. But no nation can prosper with a leader with Trump’s many toxic characteristics, regardless of what his policies are.
Steve, you said exactly what I was going to say, but much more eloquently.
Well done.
jvb
Jack,
Your link to “a Morning Consult/Politico poll” doesn’t work properly.
This is essentially just a more divisive and headline-grabbing way of asking whether people approve of the way the president is doing his job. I’ll bet a substantial number (probably most) of that 43% would have answered the question differently if it had been asked in 2017, indicating they have no better grasp of the basic functioning of their country’s political system than the other 57%. People don’t know how the Supreme Court or Congress work, either, so it’s no surprise they don’t understand presidential elections any better.
Hell, the mere fact that that asked the question this way indicates that the pollsters themselves either don’t understand how the system works, or they are intentionally trying to sow chaos and unrest.
Polls, polls, polls; they all stink! 😉
That said…
What sticks out for me about this particular poll is that many of the previous mentioned education, societal and culture predictions that Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt talked and wrote about years ago are coming to pass and the deliberate dumbing down of America is rapidly accelerating the further we move into the future. It’s as if flaunting ignorance and stupidity from a soapbox in the town square has become politically correct and socially expected. It turns out that what George Orwell wrote in 1984 that “Ignorance is strength” turned out to be prophetic.
Stupidity has no limitations and…
You’s Don’t Gets In Trouble For What You’s Don’t Know;
It’s Whats You’s Know FOR SURE When It Just Ain’t So!
I would like to see a poll that shows what percentage of people like to screw with pollsters before I leap to the conclusion that republicans don’t understand how our government works.
2021 America: vote stupid or crazy.
I did not know I am registered as a member of the Stupid Party.
Serious question: let’s say we end up with incontrovertible evidence for fraud in the 2020 presidential election and that it changed the outcome. What then? Should it be overturned? If not, what is the remedy?
If the alternatives are “suck it up” and “civil war” I know what I want, but I’m not the only one making that choice.
I remember reading a piece about, essentially and without calling it such, the Chicago Way. The article made the point that basically, if you win an election by cheating and voter fraud, that’s just how the game’s played. Kind of like NASCAR’s mantra, “If you ain’t cheatin’, you ain’t tryin’.” So, any professional political scientist would say, “Sure, the Dems cheated, but they cheated better than the Republicans, so, they won fair and square.”
This is the heart of the issue. If your state was decided by 10,000 votes and you find that in just 1 country there were 20,000 illegal votes from the wrong address, up to 10,000 from people who didn’t live in the state anymore, ~10,000 ballots that were officially never ‘sent out’ to the voters (but were filled out and counted anyway) and the entire activity log of the election count was intentionally deleted by officials, what do you do about it? When 1 county had 50,000 illegal votes counted, how can that election be considered legal? How many laws have to be violated before the election is considered illegal? Do they ALL have to be violated, or would that be enough to void the election? What do you do when you find that similar things happened in many other states?
Do you keep quiet ‘for the good of the country’, or do you demand something be done?
I’m worried that while this scenario did not get proven this time around, will in the near future. In a healthy government the “winner” would step down in favor of the loser, but we are nowhere near that.
Which part didn’t get proven? ALL the laws violated?
I mean, in Detroit, they physically threatened one of the canvassers to get the vote approved after she objecting to certifying an election where many of the precincts had more votes than voters and the county didn’t even have the voting data to examine. Then there were the machines that changed votes in other parts of the state, more cases of more votes than voters, etc. More questionable votes than the margin of victory, physical threats to get the vote approved, but that is OK, I guess as long as the Democrat wins. In how many states did the executive branch seize control of the election from the legislature against the Constitution? OK, I guess as long as the Democrat wins. Can third parties tied to the Democratic Party be allowed to harvest the votes of people in nursing homes who may not be of sound mind? OK, I guess as long as the Democrat wins (OK, the last one IS actually legal).
Perhaps it’s time to move the inauguration back to its original date in March. It might provide sufficient time to investigate any alleged fraud. Or it might provide sufficient time to tamper with evidence to disprove fraud. There are some things that other countries do, specifically requiring in-person voting by voters going to their assigned precinct; if voting isn’t important enough to someone to the point that they don’t know where they’re supposed to cast their ballot, better luck next time. Requiring a legitimate reason for each absentee voters’ ballots and discarding ballots that are postmarked after Election Day. Same day registration has to go in order to prevent people cruising multiple polling places and casting multiple ballots.
Today’s Democrats don’t even want people to register to vote or prove who they are. Just mail unsolicited ballots to everyone, including to foreign nationals, dead people, children, felons, and pets and rest easy.
This has already been signed into law in California, the state that paid $30 billion in Unemployment Benefits to prisoners, with tens thousands of claims coming from just a few different addresses. I’m sure that mail-in voting is totally immune from that kind of organized fraud.