Question 1): A rally calling for a “forensic audit” of the 2020 presidential election is scheduled for Tuesday (Oct. 12) at the state Capitol in Lansing, Michigan. From a strictly political viewpoint is there any reason prospective GOP 2022 candidates shouldn’t support this? Doing so would be a no-brainer… right?
Answer 1) Yes, I would be a no-brainer, but mouthing it as a sound-bite may not suffice. Any Republican candidate asked about this should be prepared to define “forensic” and talk intelligently about what such an “audit” means and why it shouldn’t represent a threat to anyone truly interested in election integrity.
***************************************************************
Question 2): If President Joe BIDEN’s sagging poll numbers are supposedly the big concern for Democrats, then why would Michigan’s Democrats, such as U.S. Rep. Elissa SLOTKIN (D-Holly), have wanted him to visit Howell last week?
Answer 2): It would seem as though Rep. Slotkin didn’t necessarily help herself by yoking herself to an unpopular president. A year from now, we can visualize Republican ads reminding voters of the close connection between the two, unless Biden unexpectedly surges in the polls. However, many elected officials take a traditional stance of ‘standing by’ their president, who, after all, is the national leader of the Democratic Party. Besides, Slotkin doesn’t know what her Congressional district is going to look like after reapportionment, and whether it means she will even run again or, if she does, whether she will win. If she disappears from Congress for whatever reason after 2022, she will likely be looking for another political job, such as might be offered her in the administration of — guess who? — Joe Biden. After all, working for the executive branch of the federal government is where she came from in the first place and where she might be more comfortable than where she is now.
**************************************************************
Question 3): At a hearing on legislation to shift marijuana caregivers into a regulatory market, opponents of the measure blatantly portrayed Steve LINDER, Executive Director of the Michigan Cannabis Manufacturers Association (MCMA), as being an evil lobbyist. Was this a sound strategy or one that’s more likely to backfire than succeed?
Answer 3): It’s unlikely to backfire, but the “Dr. Evil” attack on lobbyist Steve Linder wasn’t likely to help its perpetrators in any event. Linder’s opponents claim that he’s trying to tilt the playing field to allow “big marijuana” corporations to monopolize the market in a way that will ultimately harm patients relying on caregivers for medicine. The opponents of Linder’s legislation claim it’s a case of capitalistic greed v. altruistic compassion. Conversely, MCMA mouthpiece Linder argues that the legislation is simply sensible regulation v. the current anarchy. There’s an old argument that, if you don’t have the facts on your side, pound the table! That’s what Linder’s antagonists are doing, and what the Left does better than anyone — shame, demonize and vilify your opposition.
**************************************************************
Question 4): Why don’t entities, such as hospitals and schools, voice concerns over potential lawsuits brought by families of COVID-19 victims as justification for mask and/or vaccination mandates?
Answer 4): Fear of litigation is driving much of the debate on the response to the coronavirus and its variants. Hospitals and school districts don’t want to be sued by victims of COVID-19, whether they are patients or parents of students, because these victims were not required or mandated to mask up or get vaccinated and wound up getting sick or dying. Yet the hospitals and schools would prefer not to be the entities that are doing the mandating — they would rather some “higher up” like the Governor or a county or district health department be the “bad guys” who impose the mandate. That would help insulate the hospitals and schools from litigation and, at the same time, protect them from the brickbats that might rain down on them from irate parents opposed to mandates of any sort.
*******************************************************
Calling for a “forensic audit” has become a rallying slogan with about as much realistic chance of happening as the slogan “save the whales”. First, not sure if anyone can define what what it actually entails, and second, conservative republican state senator in charge of the investigation of the election, after finding not enough error to change the results, said, for some people the only result they will ever agree with, no matter what forensic or any other type of audit concludes is that their candidate won. As long as something is repeated over and over, it will eventually be true in the mind of the true believers.
Bill, your comment that the left shames, demonizes, and vilifies it’s opposition better than anyone is beneath you. You are fully aware of what the Republicans did with Hillary Clinton, knowing years back she would likely be a presidential candidate (how many Republican investigations of Benghazi compared to those after 9/11 and the bombing of the marines in Lebanon during the Reagan administration?). You have watched Donald Trump shaming, demonizing and vilifying just about all of his political opponents, Democrats and Republicans alike. And if those examples don’t convince you, spend some time on social media. I’m not saying the left is innocent, but there is no reason to hand them the trophy for their accomplishments and leave the right empty-handed.