2020 Election Commentary

[Shasarak]

Greetings!

What? Wait, Shasarak! Covering windows, obscuring observation of voting proceedings, and preventing opposition party observers to supervise and otherwise participate in elections isn't fair, honest, and transparent?

But the Leftist Democrats here insist that the 2020 Election has been just fine! "The most secure and safe election EVAR!!!"

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Exactly, why ask for proof that they are doing something wrong when they are acting so suspiciously right in front of your eyes.

Honest people would not do things like that.

[Shasarak]

Looks like Sydney Powell's star witness isn't just a fake Intelligence Officer, but a fake M.D. as well...

Speaking of fake MDs, I heard suggestions that they make Jill Bidan the Surgeon General.

Jill Biden never claimed to be an M.D., though? But, since you're so up in arms about phony credentials, Sebastian Gorka is that way.

Did Doctor Biden not claim to be an M.D.?  What an odd thing for a Doctor to have to do, to claim that they are a Doctor but not actually a "real" Doctor.

So a Doctor Lite?  An Almost Doctor? A Doctor of Education?  A Whats up, Doc?

[consolcwby]

Looks like Sydney Powell's star witness isn't just a fake Intelligence Officer, but a fake M.D. as well...

Speaking of fake MDs, I heard suggestions that they make Jill Bidan the Surgeon General.

Jill Biden never claimed to be an M.D., though? But, since you're so up in arms about phony credentials, Sebastian Gorka is that way.

Did Doctor Biden not claim to be an M.D.?  What an odd thing for a Doctor to have to do, to claim that they are a Doctor but not actually a "real" Doctor.

So a Doctor Lite?  An Almost Doctor? A Doctor of Education?  A Whats up, Doc?

YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD! Doctor Lite:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Insisting on being called "Doctor" when you don't heal people is, among most holders of doctorates, seen as a gauche, silly, cringey ego trip. Consider "Dr." Jill Biden, who doesn't even hold a Ph.D. but rather a lesser Ed.D., something of a joke in the academic world. President-elect Joe Biden once explained that his wife sought the degree purely for status reasons: "She said, 'I was so sick of the mail coming to Sen. and Mrs. Biden. I wanted to get mail addressed to Dr. and Sen. Biden.' That's the real reason she got her doctorate," Joe Biden has said.

Mrs. Biden wanted the credential for its own sake. As for its quality, well. She got it from the University of Delaware, whose ties to her husband, its most illustrious alumnus if you don't count Joe Flacco, run so deep that it has a school of public policy named after him. That the University of Delaware would have rejected her 2006 dissertation as sloppy, poorly written, non-academic, and barely fit for a middle-school Social Studies classroom (all of which it is) when her husband had been representing its state in the U.S. Senate for more than three decades was about as likely as Tom Hagen telling Vito Corleone that his wife is a fat sow on payday. The only risk to the University of Delaware was that it might strain its collective wrist in its rush to rubber-stamp her doctoral paper. Mrs. Biden could have turned in a quarter-a**ed excuse for a magazine article written at the level of Simple English Wikipedia and been heartily congratulated by the university for her towering mastery. Which is exactly what happened.

Jill Biden's dissertation is not an addition to the sum total of human knowledge. It is not a demonstration of expertise in its specific topic or its broad field. It is a gasping, wheezing, frail little Disney forest creature that begs you to notice the effort it makes to be the thing it is imitating while failing so pathetically that any witnesses to its ineptitude must feel compelled, out of manners alone, to drag it to the nearest podium and give it a participation trophy. Which is more or less what an Ed.D. is. It's a degree that only deeply unimpressive people feel confers the honorific of "Doctor." People who are actually smart understand that being in possession of a credential is no proof of intelligence.

As Joe Biden has frankly noted, Mrs. Biden sought the Dr. honorific to rebuild her amour propre. Much of the press plays along, addressing Jill Biden as "Dr. Biden" even when actual medical doctors are referred to without the honorific if they are not currently practicing. Eminent pediatric neurosurgeon and HUD secretary Ben Carson is now "Mr. Carson" to the New York Times, but the same paper refers to Mrs. Biden as "Dr. Biden." This practice appears to contradict the Times' style guide, which explains that the "Dr." title is used for non-physicians "only if it is germane to the holder's primary current occupation (academic, for example, or laboratory research)."

Mrs. Biden until recently taught English composition at NoVa, a small community college in Northern Virginia. To justify addressing her as "Dr." would require a generous view of what constitutes an "academic," and judging by the writing skills evinced by her students ("She very bad teacher and it is hard to pass class. I RECOMMEND NOT TAKE THIS PROFESSOR"), they emerged from her tutelage lacking mastery of even very basic grammar. As for the contents of the dissertation, which she cobbled together from a few secondary sources and some vapid interviews and questionnaires she sent around at the campus where she worked before her husband became vice president, Delaware Technical Community College, I'll go over them in detail in my next column.

From: https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/jill-bidens-doctorate-is-garbage-because-her-dissertation-is-garbage/

[Mistwell]

My degree says "Doctorate of Jurisprudence"

The only time I have ever called myself a Doctor is as an obvious joke, to one other lawyer who was making that same stupid joke. It would be very silly to actually call myself Doctor. I went to school for 3 extra years. That's not a doctor.

[consolcwby]

My degree says "Doctorate of Jurisprudence"

The only time I have ever called myself a Doctor is as an obvious joke, to one other lawyer who was making that same stupid joke. It would be very silly to actually call myself Doctor. I went to school for 3 extra years. That's not a doctor.

The HELL??! Are they stating to give these doctorate things away now? Will I find one in a box of CrackerJacks or around a stale piece of bubblegum?! Man! I swear, back in my day you'd get kicked out of college in you didn't toe the socialist line, or say that you loved your parents, or thought Jews were okay, or if you were Jewish! My, times have certainly changed! 

[rawma]

... you prove there was massive wrongdoing to change the election result, you don't prove that there was not.

A free and fair election does not do things like this:



so therefore you need to prove it was free and fair.

You are a month and a half late with this. 200+ observers from each party were present. Trump supporters tried the Brooks Brothers riot trick, but election officials are apparently now wise to that. The windows were covered because people outside were videotaping the counting, when absentee ballots with voter information on the envelopes were opened and the ballots showing how the voter voted were removed. You should respect the secret ballot.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/05/media/detroit-windows-covered-ballots-vote-center/index.html

I understand that you are having difficulty processing Trump's loss. Rehashing month old misinformation is not healthy. Joe Biden won the election.

[rawma]

My degree says "Doctorate of Jurisprudence"

The only time I have ever called myself a Doctor is as an obvious joke, to one other lawyer who was making that same stupid joke. It would be very silly to actually call myself Doctor. I went to school for 3 extra years. That's not a doctor.

It is not customary to refer to a JD as Doctor. Most lawyers would have this degree in the US, since most states require it for bar admission. (I expect that most law school professors would be called Doctor, even if JD is their only doctorate.) But lawyers do get to call themselves Esquire.

The distinction for both PhDs and EdDs is writing a dissertation, which is a big deal. It is customary for those who hold these degrees to be called Doctor, at least in academic positions. It is not inappropriate for Dr. Jill Biden to use that title.

[Mistwell]

My degree says "Doctorate of Jurisprudence"

The only time I have ever called myself a Doctor is as an obvious joke, to one other lawyer who was making that same stupid joke. It would be very silly to actually call myself Doctor. I went to school for 3 extra years. That's not a doctor.

It is not customary to refer to a JD as Doctor. Most lawyers would have this degree in the US, since most states require it for bar admission. (I expect that most law school professors would be called Doctor, even if JD is their only doctorate.) But lawyers do get to call themselves Esquire.

The distinction for both PhDs and EdDs is writing a dissertation, which is a big deal. It is customary for those who hold these degrees to be called Doctor, at least in academic positions. It is not inappropriate for Dr. Jill Biden to use that title.

Again, my degree says Doctorate of Jurisprudence, not Juris Doctorate. They are the same thing. I did have to write a big deal publishable paper by the way. Maybe that is why it was phrased as a Doctorate first and Jurisprudence second, maybe it's because it was one of the oldest law schools and they had an older tradition, I dunno.

Almost zero law school professors were called Doctor. The one I recall had a medical degree.

I was not speaking to Jill Biden. I am just speaking to the claim that all degrees which say Doctorate are the same for whether you call them Doctor.  They're not all the same treatment. 

[Pat]

Jill Biden never claimed to be an M.D., though? But, since you're so up in arms about phony credentials, Sebastian Gorka is that way.

Gorka is another example.

Make fun of him while you're making fun of the 46th First Doctor.

[rawma]

My degree says "Doctorate of Jurisprudence"

The only time I have ever called myself a Doctor is as an obvious joke, to one other lawyer who was making that same stupid joke. It would be very silly to actually call myself Doctor. I went to school for 3 extra years. That's not a doctor.

It is not customary to refer to a JD as Doctor. Most lawyers would have this degree in the US, since most states require it for bar admission. (I expect that most law school professors would be called Doctor, even if JD is their only doctorate.) But lawyers do get to call themselves Esquire.

The distinction for both PhDs and EdDs is writing a dissertation, which is a big deal. It is customary for those who hold these degrees to be called Doctor, at least in academic positions. It is not inappropriate for Dr. Jill Biden to use that title.

Again, my degree says Doctorate of Jurisprudence, not Juris Doctorate. They are the same thing. I did have to write a big deal publishable paper by the way. Maybe that is why it was phrased as a Doctorate first and Jurisprudence second, maybe it's because it was one of the oldest law schools and they had an older tradition, I dunno.

Almost zero law school professors were called Doctor. The one I recall had a medical degree.

I was not speaking to Jill Biden. I am just speaking to the claim that all degrees which say Doctorate are the same for whether you call them Doctor.  They're not all the same treatment.

That is all interesting information; thank you. I didn't think you were commenting on Jill Biden. I have not previously heard of dissertation equivalents in law degrees. I am a little surprised that law school faculty don't generally go by Doctor; do they use Professor?

I have more relatives with doctoral degrees other than JD (which I understood to be the same as Doctorate of Jurisprudence; my undergrad degree was AB rather than BA, but is the same thing) but it would be interesting to ask the one who got a law degree after a PhD about his experience.

[rawma]

Jill Biden never claimed to be an M.D., though? But, since you're so up in arms about phony credentials, Sebastian Gorka is that way.

Gorka is another example.

Make fun of him while you're making fun of the 46th First Doctor.

That would be an odd Doctor Who episode, if it doesn't already exist. I always thought the Master was a villain because of resentment that he never got past ABD.

[jhkim]

Merry Christmas, everyone. I hope those who celebrate it were able to enjoy the day in some way.

A free and fair election does not do things like this:



so therefore you need to prove it was free and fair.

You are a month and a half late with this. 200+ observers from each party were present. Trump supporters tried the Brooks Brothers riot trick, but election officials are apparently now wise to that. The windows were covered because people outside were videotaping the counting, when absentee ballots with voter information on the envelopes were opened and the ballots showing how the voter voted were removed. You should respect the secret ballot.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/05/media/detroit-windows-covered-ballots-vote-center/index.html

Exactly. A free and fair election must include some level of privacy. There should be a limited number of certified witnesses, but giving open access to the public to all the voting process is potentially bringing about mob rule and intimidation. Indeed, this year a number of election officials have been subject to death threats. The White House has condemned such threats, like the Atlanta area worker who has been forced into hiding over death threats after video was released of him throwing away a page of instructions, and was accused of throwing away a ballot.

https://nypost.com/2020/11/07/falsely-accused-election-worker-forced-to-go-into-hiding/

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/528402-white-house-condemns-threats-against-election-workers

This sort of doxxing and threats are Twitter Mob Justice. While I will grant that U.S. courts may get things wrong, I think the track record of Twitter Mobs is far far worse -- and I think abandoning the courts to instead judge guilt and innocence by Twitter Mob is just making things more unjust.

In general, I think a whole lot of the election-rigging argument is relying on the "we have so *many* allegations" rather than on the strength of any of them. This is exactly the Twitter Mob mentality. As different claims are proven wrong, those claims are just abandoned and instead they jump to other claims. Like the Keshavarz-Nia allegation that included a cited statistics from non-existent "Edison County MI" that doesn't exist. The Michigan lawsuit testimony from Russell Ramsland includes data from a number of non-existent Michigan counties. I've checked the court documents on this.

None of the specific allegations I've reviewed have corroboration. Different people making different allegations of fraud don't add up to a stronger case -- they're still two weak cases.

[jhkim]

Honestly, I think the whole "Jill Biden is not a Doctor!" is just as ridiculous as claiming Sebastian Gorka is not a Doctor. Yes, they are both doctors, both have PH.D's. Yes, neither one is a *medical doctor*--their respective credentials are in other fields--and this I think may be one of the reasons medical doctors have "Dr. John Smith, M.D." after their names. After reading some of these articles about medical commissions, newspaper editing standards in Canada, whatever, claiming to not call PH.D's "Doctor" and hospitals making particular distinctions about staff--*shrugs* I don't know. Maybe I'm wrong, though at my university, students, administrators, and faculty alike routinely made references to "Yes, this Philosophy class is taught by Dr. Robert Smith" ...

So much of this just seems petty to me. People that have PH.D's have attended school for 8 years or more, and have earned respect for their work. They are no less educated than a medical doctor, though have focused their academic efforts and expertise on a different field other than medicine. I think that both Dr. Jill Biden and Dr. Sebastian Gorka would likely agree with me.

Thanks, SHARK. I think like many things in English, the usage of the "Dr." honorific is inconsistent in practice. Some people with doctoral degrees use it, some don't. It's just one of those things. I can see someone arguing that we should move more towards consistency -- but that shouldn't be by attacking people like Dr. Biden or Dr. Gorka. They're justified in using it, because there are a lot of people who do use it that way.

I agree it's a petty thing to argue over, rather than the substance of political positions.

(For disclosure: I have a PhD in physics. I rarely use the title, but if I do use it, I would get annoyed at someone who called me out for doing so, since it is correct.)

[SHARK]

Greetings!

So, the claims of many witnesses testifying under Affidavit--that they saw fraud, that GOP observers were sent home, obstructed from proper participation and supervision, with many also being kept 20, 30, 60 feet or more away--so they couldn't check for a fucking thing--all of that is just bullshit, right?

All of these people's testimonies, all of the videos showing fraud and "irregularities" that's all just conspiracy theory bullshit, right?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[jhkim]

So, the claims of many witnesses testifying under Affidavit--that they saw fraud, that GOP observers were sent home, obstructed from proper participation and supervision, with many also being kept 20, 30, 60 feet or more away--so they couldn't check for a fucking thing--all of that is just bullshit, right?

All of these people's testimonies, all of the videos showing fraud and "irregularities" that's all just conspiracy theory bullshit, right?

I can't speak for all the evidence, because I haven't had a chance to review all of it. But in every case that I've reviewed, the evidence came down to an uncorroborated he-said-she-said at best. For example, the video of State Farm Arena in Georgia video was narrated over with claims that it was showing fraud -- but at this point, I believe that narration to be bullshit. The boxes under the table were not surreptitious suitcases, but rather official ballot bins, that were placed there in full view of the media and observers. Official investigators reviewed the tapes for the entire day, and found no evidence of fraud.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-9jFuieH_U
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/georgia-mystery-ballots-investigation-poll-watchers/2020/12/07/id/1000385/

The video narration claims that the Republican observers were lured away with a story about a water leak -- but there has been no affidavits from those observers to back this up. One can claim that both the poll workers and the Republican investigators are conspiring -- but after the official investigation, Trump's legal team has not had any substantial response. If they had it, they could have submitted affidavits of the observers who were ostensibly turned away or other witnesses to dispute the investigators -- but instead there has been nothing.

With no witness corroboration of the video narration claims, this is bullshit.