If Trump wants to do one last good economic policy, he should put @JohnHCochrane on the Fed board with the sole mandate of implementing Narrow Banking, come hell or high water.
Actually, giving him a broad mandate would be better, but this would be a great place to start.
First, by using the Supreme Court original jurisdiction, it at least forces them to take a position on it. This can't just be slapped down by some no-name judge in Hawaii.
And if there's anybody with the social authority to overrule these states, it's the Supreme Court.
Second, this forces the media to do something they've studiously ignored - focus on actual serious allegations going on, not just ignoring the issue or cherrypicking the stupidest claims.
Hey @Elaijuh , you've been doing a great job writing about election issues in Philadelphia. Ross Douthat in the NYT today linked to this Revolver piece documenting significant anomalies in @MontcoPA . Have you thought about doing a story on it?
Montgomery also looks highly suspicious along this entirely separate measure of voter fraud, which is quite a coincidence, and would be worth including as part of the same analysis. revolver.news/2020/11/explos…
Ordinary citizens could really benefit from your leadership on this issue. I've tried repeatedly asking @kenlawrencejr and @MontcoPA about this stuff, but they won't answer me or even acknowledge the questions.
It's worth noting that for a county to look suspicious along multiple independent proxies for voter fraud is quite a coincidence, and seems worth investigating.
Hey @AGHamilton29 , I really hate to ask you to do work. But given you're the go-to debunker, and you linked to the Douthat piece, I notice you haven't written about the Revolver Montgomery piece Douthat links, which is here: revolver.news/2020/11/explos…
Public service announcement: Twitter is full of these troll accounts that pop up in every voter fraud thread to do a disingenuous "just asking questions" shtick. Hallmarks of their style are as follows.
This came out in Revolver recently. It’s a new twist on identifying voter fr**d: Instead of starting with weird vote patterns, find *other data* that look weird (here, voter birthdays), and then relate it to votes.
(1/N)
It’s surprisingly hard to generate fake birthdays without leaving some trace in the data. The piece considers two broad ways that pull in opposite directions. First, you’ll probably pick too many round numbers – 1st, 15th & 31st of the month, Jan and Dec etc.
(2/N)
So, you think, I’ll be clever. I’ll use a uniform distribution over months of the year. Bzzt! Months have different numbers of days. Okay, hmm. I’ll choose uniformly over days of the year. Bzzt! Wrong again. It turns out that actual birth data aren’t uniform here either.
(3/N)