Great Republican Idea: What If 2000 Rural CO Voters Got Twice As Many 'Votes' As 761,000 People In Denver?
The Electoral College so nice, they want to do it twice.
The state of Colorado has a problem, at least if you're a Republican seeking high office: In the past 50 years, the state has only elected one Republican as governor (Bill Owens, who served from 1999 to 2007). But one of the GOP candidates for governor this year, Greg Lopez, has a great idea that he thinks could fix that little difficulty, mostly by putting in place a kind of state electoral college, in which rural counties' voters would have far more power than voters in cities. Forget "one person, one vote," because it's far fairer if you don't count all votes equally.
Don't stare at us like that. It's not our idea, it's Lopez's.
You might also be unsurprised to know that Lopez, the former mayor of Parker, Colorado, thinks Donald Trump really won the 2020 election but had it stolen from him. Just because Democrats far outnumber Republicans statewide shouldn't mean they really represent Coloradans.
Yeah, You've Seen This Weirdo Before. And The Reporter Who Destroyed Him
You may remember Lopez from his insane evasions in an interview earlier this month with Denver TV journo Kyle Clark, in which Lopez refused to own up to his very funny homophobic joke about Gov. Jared Polis (D), who is gay. Lopez had said to a Republican crowd, “I think it’s time we had a real first lady, don’t you?” The crowd ate that up, because Polis is married to a dude, and isn't that just hilarious? Pressed to explain exactly what he'd meant by a "real first lady," Lopez told Clark he simply was talking about what a wonderful gal his wife is, you see? They've been married 34 years!
Clark wasn't having it, no thank you, and drily replied, "I think that there’s a chance that you think I and the folks watching are dumber than we are."
Who Needs Tyranny Of The Majority When Tyranny Of The Minority Is More Fun?
Now Clark is back with the lowdown on Lopez's state electoral college idea, which a "political tracker" recorded when Lopez outlined it during a May 15 campaign appearance. It's really the bestest idea, as long as you're willing to throw out the idea that every citizen's vote should count equally — and it should not, since that hasn't helped Republicans. We like the part where he openly says he supports "doing away with the popular vote" just right there in plain English. We've bolded it below so you won't miss it.
“One of the things that I’m going to do, and I’ve already put this plan together, is, as governor, I’m going to introduce a conversation about doing away with the popular vote for statewide elected officials and doing an electoral college vote for statewide elected officials,” Lopez said.
Lopez said his electoral college plan would weight counties’ votes based on their voter turnout percentage to encourage turnout.
“I’ve already got the plan in place,” Lopez said. “The most that any county can get is 11 electoral college votes. The least that a county can get is three.”
You can see the logic: Republicans keep losing the popular vote for president, but they sometimes win the Electoral College anyway, so clearly the electoral vote is fair and the popular vote has to be suspect.
Here's video from KUSA/KTVD, which explains exactly how extremely the scheme would skew voting in Colorado. "Cockamamie " doesn't even begin to describe it.
Lopez's campaign wouldn't agree to talk to the TV station about the plan unless Clark would agree to another sit-down interview with Lopez at his campaign headquarters. Gosh, considering the fact that Lopez became a national laughingstock after that earlier interview, we can only assume he and his campaign are masochists. (We kid. The homophobia and misogyny no doubt brought in all sorts of attention and money from rich GOP donors.)
Oh No, Not Math!
So instead, Clark and his team decided to approximate how the scheme might have worked in the 2018 election that put Polis in office. Using the rough criteria Lopez outlined, they distributed between three and 11 electoral votes per county based on county turnout in the governor's race. The rubric completely disregarded the population size of each county since Lopez said he's getting rid of undemocratic ideas like the "popular vote."
The results were pretty impressive. Instead of winning the 2018 election for governor by 10 points — the actual results — Polis would have been blown out of the water by Republican Walker Stapleton. In mere reality, Polis won 53.4 percent to Stapleton's 42.8 percent. But an electoral system like Lopez wants would have "swung that race for Republicans by nearly 30 percentage points, resulting in the equivalent of an 18 percentage point victory for Stapleton over Polis." Some details:
Colorado’s rural, conservative counties had seven of the 10 highest voter turnout percentages in the 2018 race for governor. Those counties had an average of 1,077 ballots cast in the election.
A 9NEWS analysis estimated that, under Lopez’s plan, Polis would have received 181 electoral votes to Stapleton’s 263.
And because Lopez's system would apparently include no weighting for population size, his electoral college would be even more lopsided than the federal one, which at least includes some consideration of state population by including states' House seats. The federal system still gives small states disproportionate power, but wowie, look at this hypothetical outcome in Colorado. We've added boldface to emphasize the population disparities:
Lopez’s weighting system would have given the 2,013 combined voters in Hinsdale, Kiowa and Mineral counties a total of 33 electoral votes, more than double the 14 electoral votes of Denver, Arapahoe and Adams counties’ combined 761,873 voters.
Well that seems fair. You want a little more representation, Denver, you'll have to improve your voter turnout so maybe someday you'll have equal political power to a county with 3,000 voters.
'One Person, One Vote' Is Not Even In The Bible
At that May 15 campaign appearance, Lopez explains why this scheme would be waaaaay better than merely letting the tyrannical depraved liberal majority in urban areas have their votes count equally to those of the God-fearing voters in rural areas:
“It’s not about one-person, one-vote. It’s about true representation.”
As we keep saying, this is what you get when you subscribe to the most extreme versions of the John Birch Society's insistence that America isn't a democracy, it's a republic: Not only is democracy bad, anything that even allows too much majority influence is bad, too, so to truly avoid what the Founders feared was "the tyranny of the majority," it's probably best to let numerical minorities engineer the system to keep themselves in power. Representation is all fine and well, but the less it's tainted by democracy, the better for the Republic.
Happily, U of Denver political science prof Sara Chatfield told Clark in an interview that in the extremely unlikely event Lopez could become governor and persuade voters to pass it as a constitutional amendment, it's so glaringly unconstitutional that it wouldn't stand a chance in court. And wouldn't you know it, the case that established one person, one vote as the standard came out of an earlier attempt to disenfranchise minorities!
Chafield pointed to the 1964 Supreme Court decision in Reynolds v. Sims striking down Alabama’s plan to give one state Senate seat to each county.
“The Supreme Court struck that down on the principle of one-person, one-vote. So I think that case, although it’s a little different, demonstrates that just because something is in the U.S. Constitution doesn’t mean it’s actually democratic or constitutional at the state level,” Chatfield said.
Mind you, while it's an entirely hypothetical notion for Colorado, we can see a smaller, already red state like Idaho doing it just to make sure scary urban liberal coastal elites in Boise don't get too much power in the state Lege.
This Guy's FULL Of Bad Ideas!
Lopez's campaign website says nothing about this state electoral college idea, although its
"issues" page does promise Lopez would issue an executive order that would effectively end automatic voter registration. The site explains it's actually a vital moral issue, because "It is wrong for the state government to force a citizen to register to vote; that is an individual choice that should not be imposed by the government." His ideas on choices are flexible; Lopez is fine with banning abortion with no exceptions, not even for the life or health of the pregnant person.
Also, in that earlier interview with Clark, Lopez explained he wants to end Colorado's statewide vote-by-mail system, because voting is too easy and people should show their commitment to citizenship by standing in line. Here's the video, cued up to that bit of brilliance:
It's about making sure people feel they're providing their civic duty, that they're standing in line because they're proud Americans. A lot of people fought for the right to stand in line! You know, we stand in line for concerts, we stand in line for baseball games and football games. Why can't we stand in line to vote? We don't ask people to do this every week, we ask them to do it every two years.
Lopez said he believed that when voting is more inconvenient, people will actually be better informed about the issues, somehow. He also doesn't buy the idea that standing in line could be a burden for people who don't have a lot of time to stand in line, because "where there's a will, there's a way," and people will obviously just have to make the time if they want to exercise their franchise. Indeed, he explained, if more people had to stand in line to vote, it would "send a message to future generations that this is our civic duty."
After all, Martin Luther King simply wanted the right to vote. He never fought for voting to be easy, and indeed, maybe the best way to honor his dream is to make sure people get clubbed and hit with firehoses before they can vote. That can be their way to prove their willingness to have some skin — and hair, blood, bone fragments, and bits of brain matter — in the game.
[ KUSA-KTVD / Photo: Greg Lopez on Facebook]
Yr Wonkette is funded entirely by reader donations. If you can, please give $5 or $10 a month to help us keep you informed. And all donors are equal! We won't even limit how often you can comment by how much you give! (Hey, Rebecca, I have a great idea...)
Tucker's 'Great Replacement' Either Totally Fine Or Doesn't Exist Or HEY WHAT ABOUT RACHEL MADDOW, LIBS?
The explanations keep coming.
As we've noted, right-wing proponents of the "Great Replacement" conspiracy theory have been trying awfully hard to explain that they have no moral culpability for Saturday's racist mass shooting of 13 people in Buffalo, New York. It's a problem for for them, since the shooter's manifesto obsesses at length about "replacement," an international Jewish conspiracy seeking to genocide white people through immigration and through relatively lower white birth rates. (I can remember my mother fretting about the birth rate thing way back in the 1970s, too). The argument goes that complex demographic changes are actually being engineered to end white people's majority status in the population, which of course would be the end of America.
Wingnuts who've pushed the "Great Replacement" lie have tried to distance themselves from the shooter, claiming that something else caused the massacre (furries, or maybe the COVID lockdowns), or more typically, doubling down on the paranoia about immigration while still insisting it's true. But they're going to great lengths to insist they've never advocated violence, they've merely warned of a literal invasion by foreign hordes making war against America, lawlessly destroying our way of life, and turning the country into "a third-world hellhole" (literally part of the title of a book by Ann Coulter).
So yeah, a bit more on that, because while this "Great Replacement" stuff is bullshit, it's bullshit that's driving much of what passes for the Republican Party's agenda. Ever since that Kenyan guy became president, they want "their" country back.
Wait! Tucker's 'Great Replacement' Isn't The Killer's 'Great Replacement'!
In an elegant variation on the theme denying any similarities between rightwing immigration panic and the shooter's ideology, Daily Wire columnist Hank Berrien explained that you just have to understand they're totally different things!
Berrien notes a New York Times story that
cited the gunman’s alleged support for so-called “replacement theory,” an anti-semitic conspiracy theory that claims Jews are importing minorities to change the country’s racial makeup.
And while the gunman may have written about the "Great Replacement," it has absolutely nothing to do with perfectly valid patriotic "claims that Democrats favor amnesty for illegal immigrants in order to change the voting demographics of the country, which [Tucker] Carlson has asserted." That's different, so libs shouldn't "conflate" the two. One is about evil Jews trying to change America's racial makeup, while Tucker is only talking about voting blocs, and that has nothing to do with race.
We suppose that might win some awards for hair-splitting, were it not for the tiny detail that Carlson goes far beyond just talking about voting, and explicitly discusses the supposed plot in racial terms. As the Times recently detailed, Carlson has referenced the idea some 400 times, and while he does sometimes frame it as a scheme to change the voting population, he constantly uses scary language about ruling elites who want to replace real Americans — that's "YOU," the Fox News viewer — with "third-world immigrants." And he's constantly emphasizing that those nasty Democrats are stealing the USA by "trying to replace the current electorate, the voters now casting ballots, with new people, more obedient voters from the Third World." Here, a short, partial compilation, which is only one minute long and feels like forever. (Caution: includes Tucker's hysterical laughter):
Tucker Carlson pushing Great Replacement Theory, all in one place, courtesy of the @MehdiHasanShow on @MSNBC. \n\nWatch/share/be disgusted:pic.twitter.com/uwOeYkWHSW— Mehdi Hasan (@Mehdi Hasan) 1652663302
Again and again, we're told one of the biggest threats about these "third world" immigrants is that they're "more compliant" than red-blooded American voters. We guess they think those voters are simpletons who will dance for their puppetmaster (probably George Soros). Gosh, no racism in that characterization.
And again, there's no plot here. Democrats are sympathetic to migrants and refugees because we're liberal saps who still believe America is best when it provides refuge to those huddled masses yearning to breathe free and all that, not because we expect a political payoff. But it's awfully hard for right-wingers to see anything as not motivated by seeking a partisan edge, or even a nefarious plot to steal elections -- cough, cough, projection! -- so when we talk about asylum and social justice and all that, they just know in they hearts we have to be lying, because humans never help others without expecting something in return.
Get real.
Didn't Rachel Maddow Also Inspire A Shooting? (No, She Did Not)
In one of the weirder sideshows to the shooting, a whole bunch of wingnuts on Twitter wondered why leftists are so insistent on smearing Tucker just because his racist rhetoric sounds a lot like the shooter's racist rhetoric, even though the shooter didn't watch Tucker. After all, the lefty who shot up that baseball practice in 2017, nearly killing GOP Rep. Steve Scalise, was a big fan of Rachel Maddow. But those hypocritical leftists never accused Maddow of inciting that shooting! Sean Hannity said blaming Carlson was just "intellectually lazy and intellectually dishonest”:
“What you’re looking at here, is the face of evil. That’s what this is. This isn’t about politics, it is about evil,” Hannity said, going on to point out that members of the GOP didn’t blame Rachel Maddow or the Democrats for the shooting that injured House Minority Whip Steve Scalise in 2017 —even though the shooter was a Sanders supporter and a Maddow watcher.
Couple things here.
1) The fuck they didn't. Newt Gingrich blamed a "pattern" of "increasing hostility on the left" for telling people "It’s OK to consider assassinating Trump," and Don Junior tweeted that the shooting was clearly inspired by that production of Julius Caesar in which Caesar looked like Trump. Others said Sanders was at fault, because hadn't he talked about a political revolution? That monster.
2) Neither Sanders nor Maddow ever advanced anything remotely parallel to the toxic "Great Replacement" crap that both the shooter and Carlson pushed, although we suppose their excuse might be that the baseball practice gunman didn't write a manifesto.
Tucker Explains Shooter Wasn't 'Political' Somehow
On his own show Monday night (we didn't watch and you can't make us), Carlson dismissed the shooter's long written rant as not really a manifesto, and not even "political," apparently because it lacked the intellectual heft of good political writing like Edmund Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France or Donald Trump's Disquisition on What You Can Get Away With When You're a Celebrity.
The Washington Post explains:
“What he wrote does not add up to a manifesto,” Carlson said, noting that what [Payton] Gendron allegedly wrote was racist. “It is not a blueprint for a new extremist political movement, much less the inspiration for racist revolution. Anyone who claims that it is lying or hasn’t read it.” [...]
Carlson did not directly mention the racist theory during the monologue at the top of his show. The host, who denounced racism and described the alleged document from Gendron, 18, as “a rambling pastiche of slogans and Internet memes, some of which flatly contradict one another,” said: “The document is not recognizably left-wing or right-wing; it’s not really political at all. The document is crazy.”
Egad! A mishmash of incoherent crap? Sounds like a Trump interview, honestly. But Carlson knew who the real victims were: Right-wing pundits, and also YOU, the Fox Viewer: "So what is hate speech? Well, it’s speech that our leaders hate." See what he did there?
“So because a mentally ill teenager murdered strangers, you cannot be allowed to express your political views out loud. That’s what they’re telling you. That’s what they’ve wanted to tell you for a long time, but Saturday’s massacre gives them a pretext, a justification.”
In other words, we're right back to the standard Tucker Carlson victimhood narrative, because the powerful elites are still coming for you, and you need to stay angry forever. The real threat isn't armed racists, or racist propaganda stirring up resentment. No, it's those elites trying to silence the racists who are telling you to arm yourself against the dusky hordes who are trying to steal your nation.
Postcript
Last night, Tucker explained, in typical Tucker fashion, that he isn't even sure what this "Great Replacement" thingie is, but he's definitely sure the Democratic Party formulates immigration policy in order to help it win elections, and that this is just true because Democrats are just constantly saying this out loud. At this point Tucker played clips of Democrats saying out loud that demographic change exists, which only proves Tucker's point if you think demographic change is a reason to shit your white man pants.
At the end of the package, he exclaimed, "So you play clips of them saying it and you're the deranged conspiracy nut!"
Also racist, Tucker. Don't forget "racist."
[Daily Wire / New York Times / Hannity / NBC News / WaPo / LAT]
Yr Wonkette is funded entirely by reader donations. If you can, please help out with a monthly $5 or $10 donation so we can keep trying to make sense of all this madness with you.
Steve Bannon Says His Kinder, Gentler Racist Nativism Different From Buffalo Shooter's Icky Murder-y Kind
If it quacks like a milkshake duck...
In the wake of the revelation that the 18-year-old white supremacist shooter in Buffalo was brain-poisoned by the Great Replacement Theory lie, Steve Bannon is flooding the zone with an epic quantity of shit.
"He’s Azov, a gay guy, he’s got all these insignias. He comes across – he said he’s a left-wing authoritarian, an eco-authoritarian," he babbled to Rudy Giuliani on Monday. "It’s in the manifesto, which they won’t release. I don’t know, just release it, it’s not gonna warp people’s mind. People can make decisions."
Speculating on motivations, Steve Bannon claimed the Buffalo shooter was \u201ca gay guy\u201d and asked where the shooter was attending church.pic.twitter.com/d6VK0PbFBu— PatriotTakes \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 (@PatriotTakes \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8) 1652730424
Okay, first of all, Peyton Gendron's screed is a simple Google search away for anyone who chooses to read it. Is Bannon pissed that a mass shooter is being cancel-cultured by responsible media outlets who don't want to inspire the next massacre while giving free publicity to the bad ideas that inspired the current one? We don't know, but he's been flogging vile nativist ideas himself for years. And anyone who did read this demon's scribblings would immediately understand that, shitposting aside, he's not a gay eco-terrorist Ukrainian right-wing paramilitary trooper.
FFS, the man carried a gun with a racial epithet scrawled on it into a store he chose specifically because its clientele was predominantly Black, and shouted racist slurs as he went on a killing spree.
Azov? Fuck right off.
"Parents got to be on top of stuff. Why are the parents that – is this kid going to church? Is he in church?” Bannon wondered, as if being heavily churched has ever stopped a racist mass shooter before. Then he seamlessly pivoted to chastising the media for "inappropriately" blaming Tucker Carlson, who mainstreamed the very ideas about white replacement that inspired this attack.
Steve Bannon claims the media is \u201cinappropriately\u201d focused on Tucker Carlson in the wake of the Buffalo white supremacist shooting.pic.twitter.com/4dyROPBcYU— PatriotTakes \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 (@PatriotTakes \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8) 1652728242
"This situation up in Buffalo stinks to high heaven, and of course the mainstream media's focused on the wrong thing," Bannon tut-tutted. As if the problem is the media's impropriety, not the 10 people dead because the country is awash in toxic racism.
Now watch this asshole try to distinguish his brand of poison from the low rent, generic version flogged by the racist killer.
Steve Bannon claims the "replacement theory" is a distraction after it was allegedly cited by the Buffalo shooter. The racist theory sprang from a book that Bannon has promoted.\n\n"We're not going to back off," he insisted today. "We are ascendant!"pic.twitter.com/V3H9MG7El2— David Edwards (@David Edwards) 1652713758
"We are inclusive nationalists, right?" he said, invoking "Hispanics in the Rio Grande Valley" and "African Americans in droves who are understanding the lies and misrepresentations of the Democratic party."
"We're winning. This is about the sovereignty of the United States and the citizens of the United States," he rambled, before going on a riff about ceding control of the country to globalists at the World Health Organization. Oh, hey, you know who else didn't like (((globalists?)))
Bannon credited his "inclusive nationalism and participatory populism" with the 80-to-100 seat gain he thinks the GOP will make in November. Although, we can't help but notice that the GOP's plan to achieve this relies on both a massive gerrymander and making sure that broad swathes of the population cannot participate in elections.
"We're not going to stop, we are ascendant," ranted the man who used to work at the White House and who now vlogs into a microphone all day, just 18 months after his party's standard-bearer was soundly rejected by the American people.
Look, it's all shit right now, no doubt. But Bannon's little freakout is because the media is finally learning to talk about his "movement" accurately. Because the bogeyman of the week is GRT, not CRT. Because nobody outside of Fox News is talking about a lone wolf — they're talking about young men getting radicalized by Bannon and Carlson and their ilk. Because mealy-mouthed euphemisms like "racially tinged" and "controversial" are getting replaced by "racism" and "white supremacist."
It's not going to happen all at once — shit, it took 'em four years to start saying Trump lied — but it is happening. Just ask Elise Stefanik. And that little tantrum there was Bannon trying desperately to regain control of the narrative.
No. Fucking. Way.
OPEN THREAD.
[Joe My God / Crooks and Liars]
Follow Liz Dye on Twitter!
Click the widget to keep your Wonkette ad-free and feisty. And if you're ordering from Amazon, use this link, because reasons.
Ben Shapiro's Brain Trust: Replacement Theory True, So That Can't Have Caused Mass Shooting
Also, what about those lockdowns? They probably did it.
Rightwing pundits got busy Monday on the very important project of distancing themselves and their racist panic over immigration from the ideas espoused — and put into action Saturday — by the 18-year-old white supremacist who shot 13 people in a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, killing 10 of them. In what's become a mandatory feature of racist mass shootings, the shooter posted an online manifesto explaining why he had to kill innocent shoppers to save white culture, complete with racist memes and nonsense shitposting, like claiming he loves the environment and considers his political orientation as "authoritarian left wing," which righties have dutifully cited as proof that the massacre was clearly caused by Elizabeth Warren or possibly Antifa, as if there's a difference.
Read More:
Racist Kills Ten People In Hopes Of Convincing Nation To Not ‘Replace’ Him
Elise Stefanik Can’t Outrun Her Racist Great Replacement Rants
New Zealand Shooter's Manifesto: Sh*tposting For The Whites
Who Is Mass-Murdering Everyone All The Time? 'Diversity.'
And just like the other racist mass murderers, the Buffalo murderer said he was acting to stop the "great replacement" of white people by immigrants and minorities, a racist conspiracy theory that's just the latest variation on the centuries-old white anxiety that white supremacy is doomed, and must be preserved at any cost. In the most far-Right versions, it's a devious Jewish plot, because what good is a devious plot that's not driven by the Jews? The goal of these nefarious plotters is to "import" brown immigrants, and also to make white people eventually go extinct by having to share their America with people who aren't white.
In its slightly more genteel versions, pushed by more mainstream rightwing sources like Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, and others, the explicitly antisemitic language may be reduced to dogwhistles so the plot is blamed on "elites," "globalists," or "George Soros," or it may be left out altogether to blame Democrats (the distinction almost doesn't matter, since Dems are of course tools of the elites, the globalists and George Soros).
Naturally, folks on the right who've been pushing "Great Replacement" drivel are furiously distancing themselves from the shooter, some by positing alternative theories (It was furries caused the shooting!) or by insisting that their own Great Replacement rhetoric is totally not to blame for the shooting, because they didn't turn up in the manifesto's Works Cited list.
You know we've reached a whole new level of hair splitting when people pushing racist conspiracy theories say their hands are clean because while they and the shooter are both spouting the same toxic crap, the shooter never personally referenced them. And while it's true that there's no evidence the shooter ever watched Carlson, that's hardly a defense of pushing the very same rhetoric that motivated the shooter. Hooray, Tucker isn't responsible for this horrific shooting. Maybe he's working to incite the next one.
Matt Walsh: But My Paranoia Is REAL!
For example, take Matt Walsh (please!), one of the second-tier pundits at Daily Wire, AKA Ben Shapiro's Internet Whine-A-Torium. Last summer, Walsh indignantly insisted that the "Great Replacement" IS TOO a thing that is real and is a deliberate Democratic plot, and how dare anyone say it's a creation of far-right racists! The he talked loudly and volubly about how you're not allowed to talk about that, and while no one stopped him, a lot of people said he was defending a racist trope, and that's totally the same as censorship.
Naturally enough, Walsh reacted to accurate media reports that the "Great Replacement" is a racist conspiracy theory by indignantly insisting all over again that it IS TOO a thing that is real and is a deliberate Democratic plot, and how dare anyone say it's a creation of far-right racists! And also time is a flat circle. Video and transcript via Media Matters:
[This] — I was going to call him a kid but he's 18 years-old — this man's ideology is a mess — he's, again, a lunatic — all over the place, he does mention the so-called great replacement theory. And this is what they're trying to hang around the neck of Tucker Carlson, Fox News, really any conservative, myself included. Because Tucker Carlson and other conservatives have in the past pointed out that the Democrats have been very open about the fact that, you know, they want to minimize what they call whiteness in America. And they want to bring in voters, you know, from other countries.
That is actually a lie, but do go on.
They don't want voter ID laws, you know, they want to be able to bring in the voters and have them vote because they know they're going to be voting Democrat. So, they want to replace, especially white male voters, with voters who they think are going to be beholden to them.
Also a lie: we don't like voter ID when it's used to exclude otherwise qualified people from voting, and there's no "voter fraud" crisis to start with. We want people to vote legally. That's it! As for "bringing in voters," again, no, that would be bullshit. We want to help people escape war, oppression, gangs, and people trying to kill them, because we're just monsters that way, shame on us. We actually understand that people are individuals and may not automatically vote one way or another. Also, as a white male, I can say with certainty that my vote will never go to a Republican. Walsh went on lying:
Now, this isn't a conspiracy theory. There's nothing wild or speculative about it. It's just a fact. And one of the ways you know that it's a fact is the left and the media -- The New York Times, CNN -- they've been very open about it, many times.
Walsh continued in that vein, complaining that discussions about the dangers of white supremacy equal a plot to eliminate white people, and so on, and then I fwowed up at all the lies.
Also, Lockdowns Were The Real Shooter
Walsh tweeted that maybe we need to investigate how it was really the pandemic lockdowns that are to blame, because the shooter wrote that he found 4chan racism while he was bored and out of school. This is a great theory, since no teens ever go online when in-person school is in session.
If we're reading this lunatic's "manifesto" and taking it seriously then what about the part where he says he was radicalized from spending all his time online during the COVID lockdowns? I guess we're just glossing over that part. Not the conversation the media wants to have.— Matt Walsh (@Matt Walsh) 1652650614
Teen murders 10 people, rants extensively about how the Jews are replacing him with Black people and immigrants, so let's look far more closely at the single line about the lockdown. By that logic, we should lock up Candace Owens for the New Zealand massacre. (We should instead ignore her because she's A IDIOT.)
In conclusion, Matt Walsh wants you to know his hands are clean and he sleeps fine at night, because he has definitely not personally incited any racist mass shootings, the end.
[Media Matters / NBC News / Joe. My. God.]
Yr Wonkette is funded entirely by reader donations. If you can, please give $5 or $10 a month so we can replace idiocy with truth and fart jokes!
