76 Comments
Jul 20, 2022·edited Jul 20, 2022

I was a little confused about this episode. You had a round table of non-republicans trying to figure out what republicans are thinking? Why don’t you ask republicans? Also, the whole table giggling at jokes about how “crazy” or “stupid” a candidate is, by extension, makes the person who voted for them feel that you also think they are both “crazy” and “stupid.” I’m neither D nor R, but I can easily see that. I don’t know why reporters can’t seem to understand why people don’t trust them. Try being kind, you never know, it might work.

Expand full comment

In the minds of left-wing people, left-wing people get to decide what everyone's (their own and their opponents') real thought-processes are. No one else has any say.

Expand full comment

It’s so sad we can’t all come together. I don’t think the politicians, on either side, have any interest in anything other than their financial portfolios. I would so love to hear a reporter say, “I understand why you might think that, let me look into it.” Instead of just insulting anyone who disagrees with their particular party line. There’s so many good ideas and sensible policies out there, but ultimately compromise doesn’t keep the contributions flowing.

Expand full comment

I have to agree that this was unusually slanted from a Bari conversation. I’m not a republican. But even though these folks were very sane. There was very obviously a sane perspective from the other side missing. It felt like there was no real other perspective. Just not total haters and sane people in general. But there has to be some very measured sane a rational people that Bari could have got on to defend the other side other than seemingly give it lip service. This is one of the few conversations that did not make me feel like it was balanced and representing.

Granted Bari tried to put the devils advocate pov out there a few times but it Again seemed like the participants did not really answer the devils advocate criticism but more pivoted towards general criticism of how the Democrats and their approach to things generally were an overall thing that might bite them in the ass in the end.

As someone who has not expect a ton of time obsessing over January 6. Meaning none whatsoever and I have my opinion that doesn’t really matter here. This is the second time I have listen to an entire conversation that Berry is put on and felt like I did not get any sort of balanced arguments. I would be horrified to think that is because Barry is “All in“ and decided on the January 6 thing. But the vitriol surrounding it has made me not wanna listen to commentary from either side. I subscribe to this because I want to hear both sides. And both this conversation and the one she had with Liz Cheney, even though I understand that she really tried to get Liz Cheney to say anything and she never did, I still feel like I have been left out of any sort of real good conversation from people on both sides.

Not often I will say that I’m disappointed in a conversation from Bari but this is one of them.. 😰

Expand full comment

Thank goodness for you all and your comments. I thought I was going insane, wondering why a reasonable perspective questioning the election results was not put forward.

Expand full comment

I agree totally. (And I got it 😄)

Expand full comment

And it sucks seemingly we can’t edit (dictated) messages here. But hopefully the meaning gets through. 🤪. Crap I was so disappointed by this conversation.

Expand full comment

Exactly! Well said.

Expand full comment
Jul 21, 2022·edited Jul 21, 2022

There are two general categories of "stolen election" claims, and we do ourselves a disservice by conflating them.

The first is the sort advanced by Democrats in 2000: A claim that vote counting was illegitimate. People voted illegally or legal votes weren't counted, or the counters counted wrong, or ballots were confusing. Something like that.

The second is the sort advanced by Democrats in 2016: That voters were misinformed and voted contrary to how they would have voted if they were better informed.

There are a host of reasons to be concerned about both types of impropriety in 2020. Election laws were changed (often substantially) by illegal processes (not legislative action) in ways that plainly made elections less secure, and afterwards those who approved of the results copy-pasted "Most secure election ever" into their social media feeds even as downtown areas removed the boards from their windows that had been installed over fears of those same people rioting in the event of the opposite result. The thing about wrecking ballot chain-of-custody is that it creates unfalsifiability around legitimacy concerns. There is no evidence that a given ballot is legitimate and no evidence that it is illegitimate, so the question of overall legitimacy depends on who the burden of proof is placed on. Not coincidentally, in the case of the 2020 election, the party that has advanced "guilty until proven innocent" in a host of other areas has decided that "innocent until proven guilty" must still apply to election fraud allegations.

The "misinformation" concern is harder to refute, in that the same people who declared that $40,000 in Facebook ad spend by a handful of Russians swung the entire 2016 election are now insisting that there was nothing wrong with a coordinated institutional suppression of a slew of unflattering stories about Joe Biden, the most prominent of which involved his son Hunter's activities. Institutions also regularly flagrantly lied about news stories and declared true statements by the incumbent president to be lies (for example, "We'll have a vaccine by the end of the year (2020)" was regularly "fact-checked" as false for contradicting the "expert consensus" that there would be no vaccine until late 2021).

What is sad is that those complaining about illegitimate voting process changes, lack of ballot chain-of-custody, and institutional disinformation are all lumped together by Democrats with the most extreme "massive proven ballot fraud" allegations and wrapped in a "JANUARY SIXTH!!!!" bow as part of a politically-understandable but terribly immoral effort to dismiss them all completely. This is going to have serious long-term ramifications.

Expand full comment

Absolutely correct. But even the most open minded of those on the left can’t (or won’t) seem to see it.

Expand full comment
Jul 21, 2022·edited Jul 21, 2022

One would be fair to have another roundtable asking the same questions about the Democratic Party. After all, lawmakers in that party have proposed legislation to pack the Supreme Court, abolish the Electoral College, and change the US Senate.

Jonah Goldberg...ugh. I've met him. He is funny, but he is an establishment Republican and an elitist. He has more in common with Democrats than he has with the modern working class that is taking over the GOP.

There is no evidence that Joe Biden would have lost the election, but there is lots of evidence that the election was not fair.

https://outsidevoices.substack.com/p/author-of-the-mega-viral-thread-on

Here are the final two paragraphs from this story:

"From the perspective of Trump’s supporters, the entrenched bureaucracy and security state subverted their populist president from day one. The natural guardrails of the Fourth Estate were removed because the press was part of the operation. Election rules were changed in an unconstitutional manner that could only be challenged after the deed was done, when judges and officials would be playing chicken with a direct threat of burning cities. Political violence was legitimized and encouraged. Major newspapers and sitting presidents were banned from social media, while the opposition enjoyed free rein to promote stories that were discredited once it was too late to matter. Conservatives put these things together and concluded that, whatever happened on November 3, 2020, it was not a free and fair democratic election in any sense that would have had meaning before Donald J. Trump was a candidate.

Trump supporters were led down some rabbit holes. But they are absolutely right that the institutions and power centers of this country have been monopolized by a Regime that believes they are beneath representation, and will observe no limits to prevent them getting it. I encourage people on the Left to recognize the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity in front of them. You’re not going to agree with the conservatives on everything. But if in 2004 I had told you that the majority of the GOP voter base would soon be seeing the folly of the Iraq War, becoming skeptical of state surveillance, and beginning to see the need for action to help the poor and working classes, you’d have told me such a thing would transform the country. Take the opportunity. These people are not demons, and they are ready to listen in a way they haven’t in a long, long time."

Expand full comment

Thanks for pointing us to Darryl Coopers article which is a great description of how most republicans i know feel about the elites (DC and coasts), the media, and the election. It all started with the Russia-gate hoax. Most of us feel that what the elites did with the Russia hoax is a far greater danger to our "democracy" than Trump's lurching on Jan 6. The elites decided Trump should not have won and worked together to cripple his presidency. If the media (NYT for example) really want to understand why they are no longer trusted and why a majority of republicans and much of mainstream America support Trump even with all his flaws - read Cooper's article.

Expand full comment

I thought this was a decent roundtable with a more left/Democrat leaning panel than I would have preferred, but thought Jonah Goldberg brought the most level-headed arguments to the table.

I personally think the most egregious contributor to the "election denial" subject is the media, and when I heard there was a reporter from the NYT on the panel, I knew there wouldn't be a fair introspection of the media's role in this whole charade. I just want to point out that the viral Twitter thread from Daryl Cooper (@martyrmade) from July 8th, 2021, captured the general feeling and mood of this whole topic, and for it not to be discussed on this panel is a little bizarre IMHO. https://twitter.com/martyrmade/status/1413165168956088321?s=20&t=i_YN2X6EobzyDmbKeDXD1A

I honestly think most people have moved on with their lives in terms of "election denial" and the only reason people are STILL talking about it is the Jan. 6th production that is dragging on and on and on. Enough already, let us move on with our lives!

Expand full comment

Excellent point on the wildly popular martyrmade tweets. Those tweets got more to the root of the issue than this entire podcast episode.

Expand full comment

Bari, I enjoyed this podcast and thought maybe i could correct a few things. I was a delegate to the Texas GOP convention and witnessed some of the things you mentioned. The "eye-patch mccain" guy was tackled by other attendees and his opinions were not at all shared by other attendees; he's just some jerk that enjoys recording himself being obnoxious around politicians - he did the same thing during Ted Cruz's speech, the audience was yelling at him to shutup and when he did, the Senator said "aren't you proud we have the first amendment?". Crenshaw is actually a nice person, a conservative, and not a RINO as obnoxious man said.

As far as the "Stop the Steal" resolution, imagine a room of 2500-3000 of the reddest of the red and someone works their way to a microphone and makes a motion to "Stop the Steal". Their friend takes the mic and says "I second the motion and move for a vote". The chairman of the convention repeats the motion and calls for voting by voice vote - "All in favor say Aye! Those opposed say "Nay" - The Ayes had it, but not by a lot. People tend to portray it as if it was legislation, but it's actually just a roomful of people venting their frustration because their opinions are generally derided and ridiculed by the professional classes.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the details. It's not quite what I would have pictured.

Expand full comment

Whether or not the 2020 election was stolen, the Dem move to institutionalize all the loose voting practices is going to be hell to pay. Every election will lack credibility, every candidate a fraud.

Expand full comment

Hint: it wasn't stolen. Every case that has been brought to court claiming this has been dismissed. Also, see J6 hearings.

Expand full comment

Referencing Jan 6 committee with its pre-determined narrative does not help your case. If election denial is based on refusing or cherry picking evidence , that committee is just another example.

Expand full comment

Some of those cases were rejected out of hand without review.

Expand full comment

They were reviewed and dismissed with prejudice. Courts don't just throw out civil suits without even looking at them.

Expand full comment

Yes they do. I've spent much of my legal career in litigation and it is not at all unusual for courts to dismiss cases without looking at the evidence. Indeed, at the initial pleadings stage, the courts base their rulings entirely on what is in the pleadings and ignore the evidence.

Expand full comment

So the courts are examining the pleadings, not just blindly throwing out cases, like I said

Expand full comment

no they weren't:

https://www.azag.gov/press-release/guillermina-fuentes-enters-guilty-plea-yuma-county-ballot-harvesting-case

https://www.azag.gov/press-release/alma-juarez-enters-guilty-plea-yuma-county-ballot-harvesting-case

https://www.wsj.com/articles/wisconsin-supreme-court-bans-ballot-drop-boxes-11657296118?mod=hp_lead_pos10

https://ussanews.com/2022/07/15/az-ag-candidate-calls-for-prosecution-of-mules-who-allegedly-illegally-delivered-ballots-to-drop-boxes-in-2020/

https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/georgia-opens-investigation-dems-violated-state-electioneering-law

https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-voting-missouri-government-and-politics-342663e72a921cb9a5f55657d87a0910

https://twitter.com/reallizusa/status/1517124616149417984

https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/12/judge-denies-request-for-restraining-order-to-block-destruction-of-michigan-election-data.html

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/man-arrested-dead-voters-pennsylvania

https://www.worldtribune.com/democrat-county-supervisor-in-virginia-indicted-on-multiple-felony-counts-of-voter-fraud/

been going on for years and years: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-congressman-charged-ballot-stuffing-bribery-and-obstruction

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/crime/former-pennsylvania-representative-pleads-guilty-to-election-fraud-charges

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/03/28/new_peer-reviewed_research_finds_evidence_of_2020_voter_fraud_147378.html#!

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/search?combine=&state=FL&year=&case_type=All&fraud_type=All

Expand full comment

The burden of proof lies with the accuser, and nothing you've cited here comes close to constituting proof that the election was stolen. Indeed, the courts have shut down countless cases of election fraud.

Do you keep a text document somewhere so you can post these, or did you go digging just now? At any rate, I'll address them all in turn.

https://www.azag.gov/press-release/guillermina-fuentes-enters-guilty-plea-yuma-county-ballot-harvesting-case

Two people pled guilty to delivering ballots for non-family members. Hardly a ststewide conspiracy, and certainly not enough to turn the tide in AZ, which Trump lost by 10,000+ votes. They would have had to have delivered this many fraudulent ballots.

https://www.azag.gov/press-release/alma-juarez-enters-guilty-plea-yuma-county-ballot-harvesting-case

This was covered in the above link.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/wisconsin-supreme-court-bans-ballot-drop-boxes-11657296118?mod=hp_lead_pos10

Non-sequitur. The Wisconsin Supreme Court banned drop boxes for future elections. This has no bearing on the 2020 presidential contest.

https://ussanews.com/2022/07/15/az-ag-candidate-calls-for-prosecution-of-mules-who-allegedly-illegally-delivered-ballots-to-drop-boxes-in-2020/

A republican election denier who is running for office calls for a prosecution, but it doesn't seem that any charges were actually brought. Clearly biased (and probably virus-laden) site that refers to people as 'mules,' a la D'Souza. I hope I didn't catch something from this site; it was difficult to back my browser out of it.

https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/georgia-opens-investigation-dems-violated-state-electioneering-law

Electioneering law saying no campaigning within a certain distance of a polling location may have been violated. Not good if true, but not really indicative of a conspiracy.

https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-voting-missouri-government-and-politics-342663e72a921cb9a5f55657d87a0910

Non-sequitur. This is about a voter if law (which I'm in favor of, btw) that will go into effect prior to midterms. Has no bearing whatsoever on 2020 election.

https://twitter.com/reallizusa/status/1517124616149417984

I watched this video and have no idea how the OP can claim she can see any ballots are unsigned.

https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/12/judge-denies-request-for-restraining-order-to-block-destruction-of-michigan-election-data.html

From the lead:

"Plaintiffs to a lawsuit filed Sunday in Michigan asked a federal judge to block a request issued by Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s office telling county clerks to destroy certain election data and software by Dec. 7.

U.S. District Judge Robert J. Jonker quickly denied the request for a restraining order Monday, citing a lack of timeliness, and failure to outline a clear complaint or properly certify some of the arguments made by plaintiffs who submitted affidavits with the lawsuit"

This proves my point--this case ass dismissed with prejudice because it lacked a 'clear complaint.'

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/man-arrested-dead-voters-pennsylvania

One man is charged with registering two dead relatives to vote. Again, there's no doubt that some fraud occurs every election, but one bad actor doesn't make a conspiracy.

https://www.worldtribune.com/democrat-county-supervisor-in-virginia-indicted-on-multiple-felony-counts-of-voter-fraud/

Non-sequitur. This is about some guy in Virginia for 2011, 2015, and 2019 local elections.

The rest are all non-sequitur as well. I guess people believe what they want.

Expand full comment

i accused no one, of anything; I merely spent about 15 minutes proving your statement categorically false.

Expand full comment

So you don't believe the election was stolen, good!

Expand full comment

Neither did I say that. I merely spent about 15 minutes proving your statement categorically false.

"Non-sequitur. The Wisconsin Supreme Court banned drop boxes for future elections. This has no bearing on the 2020 presidential contest."

The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that absentee ballot boxes were illegal in that election, and that ballot harvesting is also illegal: https://will-law.org/wisconsin-supreme-court-holds-absentee-ballot-drop-boxes-unlawful/

It isn't a non sequitur. It has every bearing on the 2020 contest; whether further court proceedings result, remains to be seen.

Expand full comment

Yes you did. "2,000 Mules" show exactly how uncontrolled drop boxes in six swing states stole the election.

The point is to not make the same mistakes again in the future.

Expand full comment

Whether the documentary is accurate or not (several legislatures appear to think it is, while the media apparently does not), it can't have a real bearing on elections until and unless, courts find it as valid evidence, and /or state Congresses pass legislation regarding its findings.

Expand full comment

And Fahrenheit 9/11 proves that the whole war on terror was an unjust case of corporate profiteering.

Expand full comment

Disappointing episode.

The wrong panel to honestly probe this topic.

Mischaracterizations of positions and actual falsehoods.

Perhaps if there were only a single person that actually believed the election was sus.

This was Bari vs the “balanced” panel.

Expand full comment

No, Bari agreed with the panel; that is why she picked them. As I wrote earlier, she needed someone like Daryll Cooper who understands why so many Republicans are dissatisfied with how the 2020 election is being reported.

Expand full comment

Courts in WI and PA just determined that the 2020 elections in their states were held in violation of state laws. The 2020 elections were administered in many districts by privately funded organizations with a vested interest in the outcome (Zuck-bucks), and there are numerous reported, ahem, irregularities in those districts: like trucks of ballots being delivered at midnight and being, ahem, counted while blocking the view of observers. The US cybersecurity office has recently announced that the voting machines, which were used in areas where, ahem, dramatic vote tally changes occurred, can be hacked. (But trust us, they haven't been hacked.)

The Russia hoax has been proven to be fraudulent and, in fact, those making accusations were involved in the behavior they accuse Trump of.

So, on one hand you have evidence and on the other hand you have claims that have been proven false.

If the 2020 elections were as secure, fair, and transparent as Dems say they are, why are the Dems pushing so damn hard for election reform ("let us count the votes, trust us").

I no longer trust election integrity.

Expand full comment

I am honestly on the fence overall about the 2020 election. There were some things that felt strange including the projections when I went to bed late vs what was shown the next morning. Some of the practices that went on during the cycle (ballot harvesting for one) and the lack of Id requirements in some places along with same day registration lead to a lack of faith in the process. Having said that what Big Tech did (and said they would do) along with the MSM (which is an arm of the Left really) skewed the results by their actions. Hunter’s laptop from hell is just one example. News media and individuals talking about the story were banned from SM and the rest of us were told nothing to see here folks just Russian Disinformation.

The truth is that both of those groups hate Trump to his core and have for years, hated his policies and continue to hate his voters besmirching them as being racist, dumb and even fascists. Does anyone think that using such inflammatory rhetoric is a good idea when nearly half of the electorate supports him or his policies?

Expand full comment

The problem the country faces is the loss of credibility of the old media outlets (the networks, cnn, nytimes, washpost, msnbc, etc). It takes time for people to understand that most if not nearly all journalists of integrity have left the old media and are working on sites like substack, and via podcasts. It is probably already true however that 18 months later, more people are now getting their news from the new sources than from the old media. The Greenwalds and the Rogans and Kirks and Weisses and the Taibbis, are generating enormous box office, at the direct expense of the old media.

The old outlets were caught lying so often, and so flagrantly, that people have simply stopped watching them. You can't tell the country that the President is a traitor, as CNN and MSNBC did for years; or that he used foreign aid for personal reasons, while video of Biden clearly using foreign aid for personal reasons is ignored and even publicly buried; or that capital policeman Brian Sicknick was bludgeoned to death with a fire extinguisher and then somehow not follow up on the biggest story in the world for months, only to then announce... "oh, that never occurred at all." Seriously? You couldn't find out about the biggest story on Earth? For months? "Mostly Peaceful Demonstrations" and "Let's Go Brandon" became memes of global proportions. Then censorship started around C19 and that was the last straw. These were such flagrant violations of the most bedrock, fundamental American sensibilities that yeah..... people turned off those outlets and never went back.

So when people saw the flagrant inconsistencies and unprecedented events happening before their eyes, and the same media that said "The President is a traitor," "Sicknick was bludgeoned," "Ukraine aid was an illegal act," "Smollett is innocent and so is Foxx, and you have to believe it or you're a racist,""Ritterhouse murdered innocent protestors"............... when that media said 'this is the most secure election in history" they simply were not to be believed.

People no longer believe the old media, because the old media lied in their faces for too long. Once people determine someone is a liar, the people turn away - always. And the exposed liar can never regain their standing in society.

Ratings are only one method of learning this, although they are indeed unbelievably low. Have some general conversations with people you know, not just your friends but associates, and you will find a broad shift to the new media outlets has already occurred. It will only accelerate.

Expand full comment

No one talks about how the write in ballot affected election integrity. It is not the fact that the election was lost it was the fact that the secret ballot is non-existent when one cast a absentee ballot. In fact, the right to lie about an election choice is inherent as part of our democratic processWhen one ballot is subject to family criticism ie when a spose looking at a the ballot, that right to lie has been tampered with. How many politicians who lost elections tell you that everyone on the street voted for them when in fact no one did.

Expand full comment

I could only stomach 45 minutes because I am desperately trying to branch out from only listening to be Shapiro.This was not a round table at all, just a collection of snobs agreeing with each other. Bogus and boring

Why bother

Expand full comment

At the 13 minute point, one speaker says that Republicans did not make any serious objections to changes in voting procedures, like the ones in PA, before the election. This is nonsense. I was reading lots of complaints about this. I was also reading how frustrated many of us on the right were at how our side was not objecting enough to these changes.

This is wrong. I will assume the speaker is just ignorant. I find it frustrating that he dismisses these complaints so easily. Screw him.

Expand full comment

You’re right, Hugh. I said the same in my comments above. But, I don’t say “screw him” . . . . I think how people are seeing events over the last six years is not simple. Why people now think as they do actually derives from a number of mental and emotional and ideological complexities.

While I was never one to seriously question the outcome of the election, I saw what people were concerned about and what they were assuming from what they witnessed, even if they made wrong conclusions. I did worry that things were going to get very ugly because people’s concerns (some quite warranted) were dismissed out of hand as “preposterous”. The people deserved better explanations and did not get them. Suddenly everyone bought into the notion that there was “no there there”. Some newscasters flipped on a dime from all in for Trump to denying any issue with the election--in ONE day. Those people no doubt feared for their jobs, if not their careers.

There were “theres there” to explain and I am certain that treated seriously, respectfully, and fully explained, many people would not today still be thinking the election was stolen. The concerns were not at all preposterous in the setting of broad changes to voting rules which democrats have been trying to do for years. A lot of people were objecting to changing rules and goal-posts and I don’t think it was all just about Covid but, true to form, the opposition latched right onto it as an excuse to have their way.

We also have to take into account--in terms of the backfire effect--Trump won the election because people were fed up with what the previous administration was doing. However popular as a likeable person Obama was, he wasn’t a good president. Then the minute Trump won, instead of the supposedly ‘deserving, anointed’ Hillary whose “turn” it was to occupy the WH (an absurd notion), the outraged left began creating false scandals launching everything they could to unseat him. Of course his supporters rose to fight for the guy who stood for them when the establishment did not.

As an aside, I probably come across as “right wing” because I am disappointed in this particular Common Sense discussion. I usually like Bari’s round-tables. I don’t think Trump was any great president either. I think he’s a big spending populist but he probably did not deserve a great deal of what was thrown at him. He also did some very good things that are being summarily and calculatingly undone.

But, I am independent and I try to stay sensible and above the politics. I observe the way the game has changed over many decades and I observe human psychology. If I’m siding with someone, it is sometimes the person on the left and sometimes the one on the right in any left-right battle. Solving our problems in this country or anywhere is, in my humble view, NEVER a matter of Left or Right. We, collectively, have aborted the promise of the gift of the Founders, and that is the biggest shame I’ve witnessed in my lifetime. I think many of our issues could have democratic and compromise solutions that would derive from employing our real democratic process as a representative republic. I’m an idealist because I believe we must have ideals to strive for. There is a flaw in our system somewhere that has permitted us to devolve to the depths we’re in today where each side is incapable of hearing the other, of understanding and of compromise. People are desperate to “win” instead of being desperate to do right by the WHOLE country. We are not capable of seeing our own scotomas and we are all mired into our own skewed and incomplete observations of reality. Each side is now lead by its extremes and each side views the other with disgust--any psychologist will tell you that’s an emotion that is impossible to move beyond.

To know this, all one has to do is consider what it would look like should Trump actually win back the office. I’m struggling to find an apt word for the image I have.

Expand full comment
Jul 22, 2022·edited Jul 22, 2022

Well, I AM a lawyer so I could just as easily have written "sue him" but that is more trouble than it's worth. Thanks for the in depth comment! I enjoyed reading it.

Expand full comment

I gave Jonah over ten years of time and purchased his wonderful "Liberal Fascism" only to find out he turned on the one guy who actually did what NRO preached for decades. I am paying for Bari and refuse to give NRO, Bulwark, Dispatch a dime for a reason - she stands for something. Jonah has 20 year wars on his resume'. As someone who has been to war for this country it isn't a good thing.

Trump gained 12M votes and 'lost'. Right. Molly Ball at Time told us so. Common sense, pun intended. Doing my part becoming and election judge.

Bari - You would be better served including Michael Anton, Chris Buskirk, Roger Kimball, or Ned Ryun in discussions such as this. Respectfully.

Expand full comment

add Molly Hemingway

Expand full comment

Absolutely! Great point.

Expand full comment

Better yet, add Daryll Cooper.

Expand full comment

How about David Horowitz and/or Brandon Straka? When you have a token conservative, it's good to have someone that conservatives think is conservative on the issue rather than liberals think is conservative.

Expand full comment

Absolutely! Both would be great, especially since they left the Leftist regimes...

Expand full comment

100% agree with you on Jonah. I almost didn't listen to the podcast when I heard he would be the "conservative" voice. Interestingly Bari seems to have a far better handle on voter mistrust than Jonah.

Expand full comment

Okay, you convinced me to listen. If anything, I have to do it for Bari :-D.

Expand full comment

I have yet to see any evidence that mail-in votes were verified. I think that there was massive fraud and the election was stolen. In a battle between the Party Of Evil and the Party Of Stupid the result was predictable once fraud was facilitated and not checked. America now has a President who is obviously cognitively impaired. The damage continues apace.

Expand full comment
founding

Denying elections is very en vogue right now. Along with referring to someone as a “science denier”. Both are done by both political parties which makes the finger pointing all the more amusing.

Expand full comment