Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

User talk:1990'sguy

2020-09-28T00:16:24Z

TemporarysockofLT: /* Welcome back! */

{{welcome}}

Thanks for adding your edits, hopefully you'll become a regular contributor. If I can help you out with anything let me know. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 19:45, 27 July 2016 (EDT)

:Thank you! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:49, 27 July 2016 (EDT)

Account promoted to skip the Captcha requirement. Thanks for your enlightening edits to [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia]].

Congratulations!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:37, 28 July 2016 (EDT)

:Thank you! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:45, 28 July 2016 (EDT)
::Congratulations and welcome. You should be aware that people who edit at both CP and WP with the same user name are sometimes harrassed at WP as a result. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 00:11, 29 July 2016 (EDT)
:::Thank you for the welcome and thanks for the heads up! I've already received some heat on Wikipedia for taking some unpopular positions and opposing the bias there, so it will be nothing new for me. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:36, 29 July 2016 (EDT)

----
I saw your helpful addition to the article on Murder of Seth Rich, so I thought I would visit your talk page. How long have you lasted on the WickedPedia? I would be surprised that you would last long there, as I have found the WickedPedia incredibly intolerant and censorious, a pseudo-aristocracy with dominating bullies, biased enough for me to consider it a candidate for the Big T award (T in the Calvinist TULIP); i.e, total depravity! LOL I don't think you can do much on Wikipedia without being part of a group of old boys or buddies who work together. ([[User:Thunkful2|Thunkful2]] ([[User talk:Thunkful2|talk]]) 19:26, 23 August 2016 (EDT))

:Did you mean my Wikipedia talk page? I have been editing Wikipedia for almost three years already. A big reason why I've lasted so long there is because many of the topics I edit are not particularly controversial. However, you are completely right in your description of Wikipedia. I have seen firsthand the massive (and very visible) intolerance and bias Wikipedia has against conservatives, Christians, and anything that contradicts secular and humanistic (pseudo)"scientific knowledge". I could probably write a book about all my criticisms of Wikipedia. I have been able to do some good work (I was able to bring the article "Electoral history of Ronald Reagan" to official "Good Article" status, and I created a few articles), but on other articles, like the Murder of Seth Rich, we cannot have much confidence on the quality and neutrality of those articles. I do applaud you, Thunkful2, for your excellent work on "Murder of Seth Rich". It's awesome that at least one person can accurately present this story! :) --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:35, 23 August 2016 (EDT)

----
I meant right here, this talk page -- I visited it after seeing your good edit. No, I haven't gone to your talk page on the WickedPedia. Thanks for the complement. ([[User:Thunkful2|Thunkful2]] ([[User talk:Thunkful2|talk]]) 10:45, 24 August 2016 (EDT))

:OK, got it. And thanks for your complement. :) --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:50, 24 August 2016 (EDT)

== References from Wikipedia ==

While it's not really plagiarism to copy a reference from WP, it just want to point out that you probably shouldn't do so unless you have read that source, and believe that it supports what is being said. If you are reading the books you are referencing, that's fine--I just can't tell. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:33, 8 September 2016 (EDT)
:Oh, that's a good point. I actually did not read those books, I just wanted to cite something so I wouldn't be adding unsourced info to the article. Should I remove those references anyway? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:36, 8 September 2016 (EDT)

::It is a good idea to find references to support unsourced statements, but it is a little deceptive to cite something you haven't read. To be entirely beyond reproach, removal probably would be best. At this point though, I honestly don't know if I'd bother. In my opinion, it's up to you. No one else has said anything, so it might be okay to leave them, I'm just not sure. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:51, 8 September 2016 (EDT)

:::OK. I will do my own research and find other sources that I can use instead. However, it's getting late, so I will deal with that tomorrow. Thanks for your help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:58, 8 September 2016 (EDT)

== Account promoted ==

Your account has been promoted to include blocking and overnight editing capability. Congratulations!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:30, 29 September 2016 (EDT)

:Congratulations! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 00:57, 29 September 2016 (EDT)

::Well done! [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] ([[User talk:AlanE|talk]]) 01:06, 29 September 2016 (EDT)

:::Thanks all! I really appreciate it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:21, 29 September 2016 (EDT)

::::Excellent! you did good keeping an eye on that vandal yesterday. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 14:52, 29 September 2016 (EDT)

:::::Thanks, Progressingamerica, I appreciate it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:42, 29 September 2016 (EDT)

==Reading the WSJ==
Re: [[Christoph Blocher]]

Typically, when I want to read a WSJ article that requires subscriber sign in is to Google the headline and access the web page from a search engine instead of directly. Most of the time this requires a clean browser tab, sometimes it needs to be done in a different browser. Rarely, it requires a cookie clearing. Just thought that information may be of help. This even works with articles that are years old.

As a last resort, see if its in the internet archive.(though, most articles I don't want that bad to keep trying) But they're all good procedures to know. Sometimes works for other news sites too, besides WSJ. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 00:00, 10 October 2016 (EDT)

:Thanks for the tip! That's what I will do. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:32, 10 October 2016 (EDT)

== Account promoted ==

Your account has been promoted to include upload and rollback features. Congratulations!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 17:26, 13 October 2016 (EDT)
:Thanks! I really appreciate it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:36, 13 October 2016 (EDT)
::Congratulations! Keep it up! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 19:31, 13 October 2016 (EDT)
:::Thanks David! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:43, 13 October 2016 (EDT)

== Move and unlock requests ==

You can post your move and unlock requests to [[User talk:Karajou]]. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:30, 13 October 2016 (EDT)
:Thanks for the tip! It's getting late, so I will do that tomorrow. I appreciate it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:37, 13 October 2016 (EDT)
::You don't actually need any privileges to do a move. You can cut-and-paste from one lemma to another. For purposes of copyright law, the edit summaries must make it clear where the incoming material comes from. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:54, 14 October 2016 (EDT)

== Karajou blocked a user who expressed views supporting the Presidential candidate who is not a sexual preditor. ==

People should not be judged in race on alleged sexuality. A proper critique of Karajou would be asking him about blocking a user who expressed views supporting the Presidential candidate who is not a sexual preditor.--[[User:Rodgerr|Rodgerr]] ([[User talk:Rodgerr|talk]]) 19:04, 14 October 2016 (EDT)

:If you think you have been judged unfairly, you could have just emailed Karajou or webmaster@conservapedia.com (see [[Conservapedia:Guidelines#Member Accounts]]). However, more than once, you decided to take the low route, calling him filthy, immature words [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Karajou&diff=1283494&oldid=1283491]. See [[Conservapedia:Avoid personal remarks]]. And why in the world did you do this? [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Coal_burning&curid=140922&diff=1283484&oldid=1283423] (for someone who apparently abhors Trump for the tape, your words seem just as bad) That, honestly, is shameful. I will note that the "Bringreaganback" account clearly violated [[Conservapedia:90/10 rule]]. Considering all this, it's quite clear you deserved the block. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:12, 14 October 2016 (EDT)

== Mainpageleft ==

In response to your good question about entries on [[Template:Mainpageleft|Mainpageleft]], currently there are about 112 featured entries there, which are "reshuffled" periodically. Do you have any suggestions about how that "team" of entries be improved, with respect to insight, influence, popularity, interest level, educational value, etc.? It's a terrific mix of topics now but there is always room for improvement, particularly as the issues and interest in certain topics by the public inevitably shifts over time. Thanks much for any suggestions you may have.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:46, 18 October 2016 (EDT)

:An example: "[[Underrated Sports Stars]]" is a solid entry, but should probably be replaced on [[Template:Mainpageleft|Mainpageleft]]. Do you have any favored, influential, insightful, potentially or already popular entry that you like, which you would recommend to replace it?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 12:55, 18 October 2016 (EDT)

::I do have a few suggestions. [[Murder of Seth Rich]] is probably the best suggestion, as it is very detailed and well sourced. Also, the Wikipedia article of the murder has been the victim of leftist bias (two times, within a month, editors have tried to delete the article, and with that failing, the article appears to have been stripped of much detail) which our article covers well. Other suggestions that I have are the [[Ark Encounter]] (a popular and influential attraction, and one that has been the victim of atheist and evolutionary bias, which the article covers), and [[Larry McDonald]] (a true patriot who stayed true to his principles, and his article actually covers the theories on his possible survival). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:22, 18 October 2016 (EDT)

== Account promoted again ==

Congratulations, your account has been promoted again, so that you can edit protected articles, and protect and unprotect articles. Very well done!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:05, 10 November 2016 (EST)
:Wow! Thank you very much, Mr. Schlafly! I really appreciate it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:19, 10 November 2016 (EST)
::Congratulations! I've had some problems with the "protect" privilege, but I hope it works for you! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 01:35, 12 November 2016 (EST)
:::Thanks! I hope so too! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:15, 12 November 2016 (EST)
::::Congratulations on yet another promotion. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 11:46, 12 November 2016 (EST)
:::::Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:46, 12 November 2016 (EST)

==Can't edit article==
Hi again, 1990'sguy, it's Ambassador. Is there any reason I can't edit the article on the [[Big Bang]]? To keep atheists from changing it, I suppose. If you have access to it, you might want to add the point about the Big Bang, due to planets and moons spinning backwards, contradicting the law of Conservation of angular momentum. Find out about it [http://www.creationwiki.org/Three_planets_and_several_moons_revolve_backwards_(Talk.Origins) here]. Thanks! [[User:Ambassador|Ambassador]] ([[User talk:Ambassador|talk]]) 19:56, 22 November 2016 (EST)
:Yes, the article is protected probably because of atheist/secularist/liberal vandalism. Unfortunately, I cannot edit it myself as I do not have full admin capabilities. I recommend asking an admin ([http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&username=&group=sysop&limit=100 list]) to unlock the article or add the information you want added. Or, you can go to [[Talk:Main Page|the main talk page]] and add your request there, where more people can see it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:08, 22 November 2016 (EST)

== Thank you! ==

Hello there, and thank you for editing the article on [[Islam and Christianity]]. --[[User:SWAJCAHL&S|SWAJCAHL&S]] ([[User talk:SWAJCAHL&S|talk]]) 09:13, 23 November 2016 (EST)
:No problem, and thank you for creating it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:14, 23 November 2016 (EST)

::And also thank you, for your help - and tips! - on [[Jared Kushner]]. I'll try to remember the ref's and cat's in the future. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] ([[User talk:Ed Poor|talk]]) 21:49, 23 November 2016 (EST)
:::Sounds great and you're welcome! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:05, 23 November 2016 (EST)

== Geocentric page ==

I added a bit on the talk page a while ago. [[User:PeterIceHockey|PeterIceHockey]] ([[User talk:PeterIceHockey|talk]]) 17:15, 3 December 2016 (EST)
:Do you mean on the section "Ptolemy's view of a stationary earth"? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:13, 3 December 2016 (EST)
::Sorry for the late reply but yes. It doesn't seemed to have created a new heading so I will add that now. [[User:PeterIceHockey|PeterIceHockey]] ([[User talk:PeterIceHockey|talk]]) 17:11, 5 December 2016 (EST)
:::I removed it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:21, 5 December 2016 (EST)

== This is a simple misunderstanding. Please be reasonable. ==

This is [[User:Amorrow]]. I had to dirty myself by creating a sockpuppet because you cut off every last channel of communication. The issues:
# SSN of dead people are release by the government of the USA. I made it clear that my father is dead. His name was William Knight Morrow. You can find his name and SSN, for instance, at [http://sortedbybirthdate.com/pages/19311104.html this page]. It is public, not private.
# You could have removed that link and let it go at that. I do not require notification of such actions. I do not care about that link very much. I put it there simply as a convenience.
Is the matter resolved? If so, then please unblock me or let me know here what remains unresolved.--[[User:Amorrow2|Amorrow2]] ([[User talk:Amorrow2|talk]]) 20:44, 3 December 2016 (EST)

:I am discussing the issue on [[User talk:DavidB4]]. You are welcome to join in. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:48, 3 December 2016 (EST)
::You are unblocked. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:46, 3 December 2016 (EST)

Hello um 1990sguy Im not a spammer or troll I just want to edit this page so I can mod the Alexa device to read out conservapedia instead of wickedpedia.
:First off, you need talk page permission if you're going to make massive changes on one of CP's most important articles. I re-inserted some of your edits, but you need talk page permission to go further and change the article's very tone and point of view. Second, are you a sock of Amorrow? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:58, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::I am almost certainly not apart of this sock of amorrow, what is an Amorrow anyway 1990s?--[[User:Reevestehsnek|Reevestehsnek]] ([[User talk:Reevestehsnek|talk]] 14:58, 8 November 2018 (EST)
:::Amorrow is the user who started the discussion you're commenting in. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:04, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::::Reeves, if your going to troll, you need an upgrade. Don't be so amatuerish about it. Show us something new and witty so we can develop appropriate countermeasures. You're obviously not stupid. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 15:31, 8 November 2018 (EST)
:::::Not a Troll, just following guidelines to not start a new section unless it hasn't been posted--[[User:Reevestehsnek|Reevestehsnek]] ([[User talk:Reevestehsnek|talk]] 16:09, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::::::Like I am legit confused, During these last few Hours I get the feeling that you 1990s guy either think Im trying to wreck youre words or that I'm a troll. I also get the feeling that I am extremely unwelcome. Like is all this because I'm black. Because if that's the case Ill leave this site like real pronto.--[[User:Reevestehsnek|Reevestehsnek]] ([[User talk:Reevestehsnek|talk]] 16:26, 8 November 2018 (EST)
:::::::You're confusing me with RobS, who also commented right above. I did not accuse you of trolling. If you feel unwelcome, it's probably because you're new, and you are not familiar with CP's rules. Also, CP is an '''extremely''' high target of vandalism, so we act the same way for '''every''' new user to vet them. Your skin color (which nobody knows) has nothing to do with it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:58, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::::::::Also, we '''recommend''' that you make a new section on a talk page. We discourage commenting on a two-year-old section about a completely different topic. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:11, 8 November 2018 (EST)

==Pitch hitting==

Thanks for the ref [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Donald_Trump&oldid=1293435]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:34, 18 December 2016 (EST)
:You're welcome. Always happy to help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:15, 18 December 2016 (EST)

==Trump==
You're not telling me it's just a coincidence, are you? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:44, 23 December 2016 (EST)

:Seriously? It is extremely unlikely that this passage, which is about the Second Coming of Christ, has anything to do with Donald Trump. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:46, 23 December 2016 (EST)
::Dang :( Thought I'd had my first ever conservative insight. Must be the morphine. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:56, 23 December 2016 (EST)
:::I think this has more to do with biblical [[hermeneutics]] than conservatism. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:00, 23 December 2016 (EST)

== Merry Christmas ==

[[Image:Merry Christmas.gif|cebter|260px]]
{{clear}}
Thank you for all your contributions to Conservaoedia as far your web article content.

Merry Christmas! And have a happy New Year's Day. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:37, 24 December 2016 (EST)

:Thank you very much, Conservative, and the same to you as well! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:43, 24 December 2016 (EST)

== [[St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre]] ==

I suggest doing the redirect in the opposite direction for two reasons. First, it preserves the history and visits to the pre-existing entry. Second, it leaves intact the "Saint" spelled out, which is a stronger and more effective title than the secularized abbreviation. I'd be happy to change the direction of the redirect, if you agree. Regardless, thanks for your efforts!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:01, 27 December 2016 (EST)

:Yes please, Mr. Schlafly, that would be great if you would move it. Just as long as the article shows up as being created by me on the "New Pages" feed. I didn't know that this article already existed, but I worked hard on it and I think that my article is of higher quality by any objective measure. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:39, 28 December 2016 (EST)

==European immigration==
I was thinking of doing an article on the [[European immigration]] problem (don't want to call 'European immigration crisis', yet). Americans are woefully ignorant of what's happening in Europe, and we're looking at doing perhaps the biggest change in Immigration law since 1952. In Europe, whole new political parties have been spawned because of the establishment parties failure to deal with the problems. In 20 years, the German mi!itary may be majority Muslim which would impact the future of the NATO alliance. Better get started now in educating the American public on changing demographics and how this may affect America's role as a Superpower, assuming it still is by then.

Would you care to collaborate? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''#NeverHillary'']] 01:39, 29 December 2016 (EST)

:Of course, I'll be happy to help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:39, 29 December 2016 (EST)
::Do you think we should add a subsection under UK about Brexit and to what extent that was motivated by immigration? Also, I'd like to include something about the Schengen Agreement. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''#NeverHillary'']] 16:46, 29 December 2016 (EST)
:::Both of those are great ideas. The "freedom of movement" EU policy played a large part in the referendum and its aftermath. People are tired of unlimited immigration.
:::As for the Schengen area, people can go anywhere they want in Europe without worrying about border security (and before, it was quite tough crossing the border I've heard). The agreement is an essential part of the EU plan to reach full political unification. It really has nothing to do with economics. Also, criminals and terrorists can easily cross the border. The recent Berlin attacker was caught in Italy. He crossed at least two borders without being caught. Imagine if he tried doing that without the agreement. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:53, 29 December 2016 (EST)
:::::Same as most of suspects in 1200 reported sexual assault cases New Years Eve in Cologne. Something like only 7 or 22 arrests have ever been made, while most of the other identified suspects are reported to have fled the country.[[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''#NeverHillary'']] 17:06, 29 December 2016 (EST)

== Father's SSN ==

I created [[Social Security Death Index]]. After I add some ref's, I hope that we can revisit the notion of me declaring what my father's SSN is.

Just to mention where I got this idea from, it is from the web site anusha.com . Sloan has lived an erratic and at times immoral life, but he is just below the level of genius in raw talent. I refer to him as an "accidental adventurer". Please see thermo4thermo.org/sam_sloan.html for some of his life-adventures.
I am not promoting his lifestyle, but he is my publisher for my upcoming book. His web site is a mess. It has about 3000 pages but just a mess of cross-references. The home page is very, very long. You can look at pages like www.anusha.com/pafc147.htm . He also has pages like www.anusha.com/uncles-p.htm . His memory is almost perfect. Near Total Recall. Anyway, I hope we can engage in dialog about my father's SSN.--[[User:Amorrow|Amorrow]] ([[User talk:Amorrow|talk]]) 22:11, 3 January 2017 (EST)
==Hate crime==
Dear 1990'sguy, I am not trying to get into an edit war with you, but I believe that you are misreading the hate crime laws. They do not address "hate speech," just violence or other criminal acts against target groups that receive a lot of hate. I suggest that you do further research, and I hope that you will come to the same conclusion. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 20:31, 7 January 2017 (EST)
:For clarification, are you telling me that hate crime laws do not cover "hate speech"? Regardless, I think we should mention that slowly (but steadily) speaking out for biblical Christian principles (opposition to homosexual marriage, saying Islam is a false religion, etc.) is being seen as "hate speech" and vulnerable to being criminalized. See this recent story[https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/simon-turpin/2016/01/08/northern-ireland-pastor-not-guilty-criticising-islam/] and please note the recent attempts to censor Christian sermons in Houston (I don't know if other cities did the same). Censorship of Christian and conservative opinions is growing, and I could a few (but probably unrelated to hate crimes) examples. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:09, 7 January 2017 (EST)
::Also, while you can keep you additions, would you please restore the [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Hate_crime&curid=3861&diff=1298155&oldid=1298153 material you deleted in this edit] (particularly those three completely deleted paragraphs)? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:11, 7 January 2017 (EST)
:::Thank you for fixing the dead link and finding an additional source. You are exactly right. Hate crime and hate speech are completely different. All Conservatives disapprove of speech codes, "safe spaces policy" and political correctness. The First Amendment is clear that regulation of speech must be neutral as to the message. The person(s) who wrote the [[Hate crime]] article years ago got a bit tangled up. Liberals want hate speech codes, and Conservatives oppose them. Both Liberals and Conservatives have voted to enact true hate crime laws to protect religious freedom and to address hate violence on the basis of race. Some Conservatives argue that the list of hate targets in those laws should not include "sexual orientation," but that argument does not belong in a section discussing protecting religion.
:::I took out the two paragraphs because they were repetitive, out-of-place and not germaine. Why not add them to [[Hate speech]]? Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 21:39, 7 January 2017 (EST)
::::Thank you for clarifying and for moving the content. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:00, 7 January 2017 (EST)
:::::You are welcome. Our discussion here was a bit time delayed. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 22:02, 7 January 2017 (EST)
If you want to include the legislative history, it should explain which bill that was finally adopted that is being discussed and how the bill that was adopted differs from the earlier bills. The people that worked on this article years ago were obviously opposed to a series of bills and were making arguments on why a bill would be bad. Their narative is out of date. We have a number of state and federal hate crime laws on the books and we need to describe what exists, give facts and statistics about how the laws work, and include some commentary on whether the law has been applied fairly. If you want to expand the history section beyond the two sentences that I have explaining how the federal law expanded the role of the FBI, please do so. But the fact that certain people sponsored bills that did not pass before a bill did pass is not helpful unless you explain what changes were made or how the early efforts illumniates our understanding of the bill that passed. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 00:50, 13 January 2017 (EST)
:If these proposed bills became law, we should definitely include this (even if we word it differently). We should do this in order to inform the public about leftist laws and to show that they didn't always exist. Unfortunately, I am quite busy right now, so I cannot do anything about this at the moment. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:49, 13 January 2017 (EST)
:::1990sguy, these bills did '''not''' become law. A similar bill later became law. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 01:10, 14 January 2017 (EST)
::Not to sidetrack your guys discussion, but let me point out (cause the media hasn't) we have just witnessed something very rare and unusual in the US. Traditionally, because of state sovereignty, the states prosecute murder cases and federal government's role is restricted, for most of our history, to capital cases in the US military. In the 20th century federal crimes like murdering the president, or terrorism on federal property causing death ([[Timothy McVeigh]]), were added. This guy, [http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/12/us/dylann-roof-death-penalty-explainer/ Dylann Roof], has just been sentenced to death for violating peoples civil rights with a hate crime enhancement, and ''not for murder''. The federal government does not have the legal authority to try this as a murder case. In fact, Roof probably never will be tried for murder cause the State of South Carolina isn't gonna spend the time and money to do it after the feds are done. In my lifetime, I think this is only the fourth case like this I ever heard of, tho I'm sure there's been a few others. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Make Exxon Great Again]] 22:37, 13 January 2017 (EST)
:::Rob, this happened a lot in the 1960s. Civil rights workers would go South and were murdered and either the murder was not prosecuted or a local jury would acquit the accused. The FBI would then investigate and the US DOJ would successfully prosecute for civil rights violations in Federal Court. The question is whether there is enough of a commerce clause basis to allow for the passage of such federal crimes, and the courts have upheld them on the grounds that if the federal government did not prevent such intimidation, people would not feel safe crossing state lines. Also, many states have suspended or abolished the death penalty, while it remains available in federal court. State "sovereignty" is very limited and not ''actual'' sovereignty in the legal sense. To me, this is a more interesting aspect of the Hate crime article than whether or not the definition should be expanded to include "gender identity." [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 01:08, 14 January 2017 (EST)
::::I'm not sure it happened "a lot". There was the 'Mississippi Burning' case, where the local cops and others were charged with civil rights violations, but no one served more than a six year sentence. This is why "hate crime" legislation was added later, cause sentences were too light for a "civil rights violation resulting in death". The problem in those days were all-white juries exonerating murder cases, so the feds invented a way they could prosecute killers. One guy was convicted in a state trial [http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/price&bowers/killen.htm 40 years later in 2005 of manslaughter,] but he wasn't the trigger man. No one has ever been charged with the actual killings.
::::Then there was Salt Lake City case of a civil rights violation resulting in death in 1978, but Utah was never part of the Confederacy, was not put under federal scrutiny in the Voting Rights Act, nor has a history of all-white jurries exonersting whites accused of murdering blacks.

::::In the 1990s, Brian Beckwith was convicted of violating Medgar Evers civil rights by killing him in the 1970s.

::::In the 90s Timothy McVeigh was the first person executed by the federal government since, like 1956. But this was a terrorism charge resulting in death, not a civil rights violation, AFAIK. ([https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3azq6b/eli5how_timothy_mcveigh_only_got_convicted_of_8/ McVeigh was only charged with 8 counts of murder, although 168 were killed]). Since McVeigh, there's been maybe one or two other cases of people executed by the federal government.
::::Bottomline, the federal hate crime enhancement was added cause, while the feds proved they could get a conviction where the state failed to act, the penalty was too low. Since its inception, it's hard to find a single case that the law was used for what it was designed for. There is no evidence whatsoever that South Carolina would not prosecute Dylann Roos, or an all-white jury would have exonerated him if the feds failed to intrude. South Carolina has lost its right to govern itself, its sovereignty. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Make Exxon Great Again]] 06:32, 14 January 2017 (EST)
:::::If this is true, then it definitely should be added. It would give yet another ignored example of massive governmental expansion and movement towards socialism. JDano, if the 2009 proposal did not become law, then what did the actual law consist of? If the bill that was listed on the article did not become law, then there is no point in including it. However, a legislative history of successful bills would be good. However, I am still quite busy, so I will not attempt to do anything about this at the moment. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:49, 14 January 2017 (EST)

==Contest==
I will provide the details you seek when i get some time. You were in the top 5. --Jpatt 10:19, 16 January 2017 (EST)
:Thank you for the reply Jpatt! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:40, 16 January 2017 (EST)

== discuession ==

I am continuing the discussion on my talk page.--[[User:Amorrow|Amorrow]] ([[User talk:Amorrow|talk]]) 10:39, 22 January 2017 (EST)

==Question==
What would be the best word to describe Eurosceptic's opponents? Eurocentric? Pan European? Some other? I don't like globalist in this context. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Make Exxon Great Again]] 12:42, 28 January 2017 (EST)
:I would say either "Europeanists," "Europhiles," or "Euro-Federalists" are the best. They either seem to be the most used terms. Of those three, I would personally opt for the first. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:00, 28 January 2017 (EST)

== Ban editing ==

Hi, I've noticed you sometimes change blocks by other admins to increase the time or make in infinite. I appreciate your intentions, but just thought I would point out a couple things. Firstly, the blocking admin generally has the final say over the block they have imposed. For example, if a person want to dispute the ban, they are to go to the blocking admin, and that admin decides whether to revoke the ban or not (as can be seen [[Conservapedia:Quick_reference#If_you_get_blocked|here]]). Since you are not revoking a block, it's probably not as big of an issue, but it still seems to be proper etiquette. Of course, full admins have authority over assistants such as you and I, so they have the right to direct revise of revoke blocks we make. 
Secondly, While it makes good sense to block those people forever, it doesn't really work that way. A ban applies to the username, and the IP from which they edited if the option is selected--nothing more. Vandals almost always use servers to redirect their connection, however, so that their true IP is never seen by CP. This means that when we block those users, we are really just blocking the server they were using. This is a good thing too, but the problem is that these servers are usually assigned new IPs periodically, so the block no longer applies--now the blocked IP is unassigned. Since most people in the western world still use IPv4, there are not that many spare IP addresses, so the IP is soon assigned to someone else. Now some innocent person is using an IP which for all eternity has been blocked on CP. They probably will never even know, but if we set infinite blocks enough, the chances of that happening regularly increase continuously. I know some people here do use infinite block regularly, but in my opinion its a logistical problem. This is why I almost always set a time limit, or block only the username infinitely, and leave the IP unblocked (which I prefer not to do).
Thanks for your ongoing efforts! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 22:05, 31 January 2017 (EST)
:Yikes, I should have thought of that. The thought of indefinitely blocking innocent people from CP certainly is not a good thing. If you haven't reverted by block change, feel free to undo it. I'm too busy right now to do it myself. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:11, 31 January 2017 (EST)

::The chances of that happening from a couple blocks are pretty low, but it can add up. Anyway, no harm done. I just thought I'd mention it. Thanks! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 22:24, 31 January 2017 (EST)

:::I apologize for adding to a discussion which is over a year old. However, DMorris straightened me out about this, and I wanted to belatedly set the record straight. When a user is blocked, the username/account is blocked for a specified amount of time, but the IP address is only blocked for 24 hours, unless it is banned separately. Autoblock will put a 24-hour ban on all IPs used by the banned account, though I'm not sure if it also blocks IPs which log into the banned account at a later time...I believe it does. Therefore, it seems we do not need to worry about the last point I made, as I was mistaken. Once DMorris corrected me, I did some research and testing, which confirmed what he told me. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 00:03, 28 March 2019 (EDT)

::::Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:23, 28 March 2019 (EDT)

== expand ==

[[Gainful employment]]. Yes. I dare you to.--[[User:Amorrow|Amorrow]] ([[User talk:Amorrow|talk]]) 08:32, 4 February 2017 (EST)
:Why? What's the purpose of you messaging me? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:25, 4 February 2017 (EST)

==[[Abortion]] article==
It's open for you to make your suggested additions. As to the Leif Ericson image, what needs to happen is a new image uploaded in its place. I'll try to find one later. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 13:18, 6 February 2017 (EST)
:New Leif image uploaded and added to article. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 12:56, 7 February 2017 (EST)
::Thank you. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:02, 7 February 2017 (EST)

== Addiction article and TAR ==

Hello again, Regarding the [[Addiction]] article and specifically its categories, I agree with JDano. Let me attempt to explain: 

"TAR" is short for [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] a former user and assistant SysOp here at Conservapedia. People have differing opinions of him, but mine is that he did offer some valuable contributions, but also did not understand and did not learn the rules of CP. Among some other issues, he tended to add many "See also" links to articles which were not sufficiently relevant and did the same with categories. Thus, when editors refer to "TAR" they are usually talking about this debris, which should not exist. TheAmericanRedoubt (TAR) has since stopped editing here, and his account has been deleted. However, some of the links and categories he inserted still exists, and make things look messy. For this reason, a number of editors (including myself) try to clean up these issues and restore a little more order. The guide page [[Conservapedia:How to create and maintain high-quality articles]] was the direct result of TAR's methods. 
Regarding the categories specifically, it's best to maintain a "tree" structure. A page should not connect to categories which also contain subcategories it links to. Also, it should link only to categories which contain it, not categories which the page topic can contain. In other words, a page "drug" should be in the category "medicines" but not in a category "antibiotics". 
I hope this clarifies a bit. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 00:42, 13 February 2017 (EST)

:Please allow me to apologize for my impatience with the "addiction" article. You accidentally stepped into the remains of a hornets' nest. TAR added lots of utterly irrelevant see-also's and categories, in what can only be described as an attempt to turn this wiki into survivalist-pedia, or perhaps James-Wesley-Rawles-pedia. He offended a huge number of people with his implications that we were all supposed to stockpile bullets, batteries, and other survivalist stuff (I could look it up but it's too nauseating) and move to a "redoubt" in Idaho or similar place while we wait for the apocalypse. We were also all supposed to be into some kind of crackpot Indian alternative medicine. (I think it was called "ayurvedic" or something like that; once again too nauseating.) The whole wiki was in an enormous uproar for a few months. (And Cons, who really doesn't subscribe to that stuff, nevertheless stirred up the pot by pretending to be in email contact with the guy.)
:So if you see suspicious see-also's or categories, especially with codewords like "nanny state" or "gun-grabbing", be aware this might be detritus from TAR. I support the second amendment, but I don't support putting all this survivalist garbage into an article on fire hydrants.
:[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 01:36, 13 February 2017 (EST)
::It has taken a huge amount of work to undo TAR's damage. I suppose that you think that there is a bias against any change he had made, and there is probably some truth to that. He did not understand that our categories have a tree structure. Instead, he thought of categories as a word association test. Putting in excess categories and excessive red links makes Conservapedia less appealing to users and lowers our google search engine rankings. In theory, every article could be in every category, because there is some plausible connection between any two subjects. If we had a separate article on "Drug Addiction" then it could have categories like [[:Category:Illegal Drugs]] or [[:Category:Drugs]]. The problem is that [[:Category:Illegal Drugs]] is a subcategory of [[:Category:Drugs]] ''breaking up the category tree with an infinite loop.'' Here the Addiction article is on a much higher level that discusses video games, etc. So, it is not useful to a high school student looking for information about illegal drugs, in my opinion. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 05:46, 13 February 2017 (EST)

:::Thank you all for your explanations. Considering these things, I will try not to get in the way next time this clean up occurs. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:13, 13 February 2017 (EST)
== Thanks! ==

You helped make [http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/conservapedia.com THIS] happen.

I have never seen a non-profit website go from below 100,000 rank to nearly a 50,000 Alexa ranking in about a year. And Andy payed zero dollars for internet marketing services during this period.

And there is no sign of a nearing web traffic plateau. My guess is that Trump supporters/Trump era and the resulting political waves significantly explains the boost in traffic.

Trump supporters seem very loyal so the traffic boost could be long lasting. It also seems like there is a reawakening of right-wing politics/nationalism that will be long lasting. And right-wing populism and "[[best of the public]]" go together like peanut butter and jelly. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:30, 13 February 2017 (EST)

:You're welcome, and thank ''you'' for all your edits! I'm happy to help improve the quality of Conservapedia. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:56, 13 February 2017 (EST)
==Quick project==
Dear Guy:
Our state articles list the members of Congress from each state, but they have not be updated for 2016. If five editors could update 10 states each, we would be done quickly. Could you please take a look at [[Conservapedia:Community Portal#Political directory]]? Thanks in advance, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 16:13, 15 February 2017 (EST)

Thank you for your help with the project and with People's Party. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 23:02, 21 February 2017 (EST)

== Tip ==

Thanks for your terrific work. One tip: the licensing information should be expressly included in the uploads. I added it here: [[File:EU_member_states.png]]. Thanks again for your edits and uploads.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:27, 7 March 2017 (EST)
:Thank you for the tip. I will remember to add the information next time. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:34, 7 March 2017 (EST)

==[[Template:Book]]==
Try working on it now. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 10:48, 11 March 2017 (EST)

== Questions ==

A few months ago, you told me to ask you any questions I had, so here goes:
*When recategorizing the massive and messy [Category:Authors] by nationality, I found two authors, [[Theo Hobson]] and [[Carl Sagan]], whom I could not recategorize as [Category:American Authors]. Could you change them for me?
*When fixing the [[Francois Rabelais]] cedilla mess, I set up a redirect. Has anyone ever made a loop out of redirects? If so, what happened? I'm scared to try it.
*Lastly, where is my attention now best sent - expanding the author articles, improving our coverage of science and mathematics, or maybe tackling another recat job, like [Category:Music]?

:1) Concerning [[Theo Hobson]] and [[Carl Sagan]], those articles are protected, and as an assistant sysop, I do not have the ability to edit them. I recommend asking someone like [[User:Karajou]] or CP's owner, [[User:Aschlafly]] to either unlock the articles to allow you to fix the category or to have them change the cat themselves. I've made many similar requests to them and they will be happy to help.

:2) I have not heard of someone doing that before. I personally don't think anything bad would happen if someone did try it, as you can still access the actual redirect page to remove the loop.

:3) Honestly, all three choices are great. If I were you, I would probably choose to expand the articles already created so that the average reader would find them more interesting and worthwhile, rather than just seeing a stub. After that, I would personally move on to work on another category, so that CP is better-organized. Then after that, I would do math and science, which is (as far as I can tell) on a different theme than your other work. This is my personal preference, but if you would prefer doing it in a different order feel free! You have been very helpful to CP, and I appreciate your work. Keep it up! :) --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:20, 14 March 2017 (EDT)

::Hi, just a quick note: A redirect loop shouldn't be a problem. I think the user is only redirected once, so after that they see the second redirect page. Redirect loops, double redirects, and dead redirects should all be avoided when possible. Thanks for your contributions! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 20:23, 14 March 2017 (EDT)

:::You are entirely correct, DavidB4; I just tried a loop with soda and pop (and removed it). Typing one would give you the page for the other, and an option to redirect. I'll proceed to expand the author pages now. Feel free to removed this section to abridge the talk page.--[[User:Abcqwe|Abcqwe]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 15:58, 15 March 2017 (EDT)

== Could you please write this article? ==

Could you please write this important article: [[Atheism and ethics]]?

I may ask another writer or tow to contribute to it also. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:07, 18 March 2017 (EDT)

:Yes, I think I will be able to find some time to do it. Unfortunately, I have other things on my to-do list (even for CP), but this article is important, and I will try to find time to help. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:10, 18 March 2017 (EDT)

::OK. Thanks. I think [[User:Pokeria1]] will be assisting you. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:55, 18 March 2017 (EDT)

=== Sources to help you write an article ===

*[https://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/04/ethics-for-atheists/# Would human life be sacred in an atheist world?]

*[http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/atheists_more_immoral.html Atheism Doesn't Lead to Immoral Behavior - Or Does It?]

*[http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/atheism_determinism_morality.html Does Atheism (Determinism) Negatively Impact Morality?]

*[http://apologetics-notes.comereason.org/2015/03/atheism-ethics-and-immorality.html Atheism, Ethics, and Immorality]

*[https://www.thinkingchristian.net/posts/2016/01/good-nothing-make-atheist-ethics-better-christian/ Being Good “For Nothing” — Does That Make Atheist Ethics Better Than Christian?]

*[http://www.reasonablefaith.org/questions-on-atheism-ethics-and-marital-conflict Questions on Atheism, Ethics, and Marital Conflict]

*[http://creation.com/atheism#atheism-and-ethics Atheism and ethics]

Secular sources:

*[http://www.iep.utm.edu/n-atheis/#H5 Secular Morality]

*[http://www.iep.utm.edu/n-atheis/#H4 The Moral Evaluation of Religion]

Additional sources:

*[http://www.paulcopan.com/articles/pdf/God-naturalism-morality.pdf God, Naturalism, and the Foundations of Morality] by Paul Copan
*[http://www.equip.org/articles/atheists-and-the-quest-for-objective-morality/ Atheists and the Quest for Objective Morality] by Chad Meister
*[http://themelios.thegospelcoalition.org/article/the-amorality-of-atheism The amorality of atheim] by Rob Smith
*[http://www.reasonablefaith.org/can-we-be-good-without-godCan Can we be good without God?] by William Lane Craig]
*[http://creation.com/atheism#atheism-and-ethics Atheism and ethics and morality] by Ken Ammi
*[http://www.doesgodexist.org/NovDec06/AtheisticExplanations.html Atheist explanations of morality and common sense]
*[http://whatswrongwiththeworld.net/2015/09/does_being_an_atheist_interfer.html Does being an atheist interfere with being moral?] by Lydia McGrew
*[http://americanvision.org/2742/nietzsche-slaps-down-dawkins-on-the-illusion-of-atheist-morality/ Nietzsche slaps down Dawkins on the illusion of atheist morality] by Dr. Joel McDurmon

== quick note ==

Would you be interested in email communication with me? My email is userconservative135@gmail.com

Please let me know if you are interested. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:54, 18 March 2017 (EDT)

:Yes, that would be great! I've been thinking for some time of setting up a CP email address account, and I'll do that within the next couple of days. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:29, 18 March 2017 (EDT)
::OK. That sounds good. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:02, 19 March 2017 (EDT)
:::Here it is: 1990sguysdg@gmail.com --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:46, 21 March 2017 (EDT)
I just sent you an email. Let me know if you got it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:10, 21 March 2017 (EDT)
::I wrote another response to your email. Please check your email box. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 05:05, 22 March 2017 (EDT)
:::I got your latest email and responded to it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:41, 22 March 2017 (EDT)

== If you are interested, another article that needs to be created ==

If you are interested, another article that needs to be created: [[Secular ethics]]

Sources about this topic:

*[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_ethics Secular ethics]

*[http://www.iep.utm.edu/n-atheis/#H5 Secular Morality]

*[http://www.iep.utm.edu/n-atheis/#H4 The Moral Evaluation of Religion]

Thanks. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:11, 20 March 2017 (EDT)

=== A couple more article suggestions related to atheism and morality ===

Also, here are a few more articles that need to be written about atheism and morality:

*[[Evolutionary ethics]], Wikipedia has an article on it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_ethics

*[[Ethical naturalism]], Wikipedia has an article on it at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_naturalism

*[[Ethical subjectivism]], Wikipedia has an article on this subject at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_subjectivism

Thanks for your assistance on the [[Atheism and ethics]] article. It was much appreciated. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:21, 22 March 2017 (EDT)

== The Project I invited you to participate in plus ==

Here is the project I invited you to participate in:

*[[Conservapedia:Atheism Project]]

It should be easy to find relevant online material in order to create some of the articles. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:19, 22 March 2017 (EDT)
:Thank you, Conservative, for your suggestions. I will begin on some of these soon. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:53, 22 March 2017 (EDT)
::I sent you an email. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:57, 24 March 2017 (EDT)

== Blocking user "reformed" ==

Well, I've got to say that vandalizing the user page of someone with block authority is '''really''' stupid.

But I take issue with your claim that he was an "obvious sock". As one who has been blocked a number of times on completely bogus socking charges, I take that stuff seriously. (The blocking was generally done by someone (now deceased) who had "checkuser" privileges and therefore had good tools for detecting socks, but did not understand how internet addresses work.)

It is not at all obvious to me, as one who has a lot of experience at CP, that he was a sock. He was a vandal, and you should block him for that.

Oh, dear. Now I see that there's a big storm of this stuff going on. And, yes, these guys, or at least some of them, are probably socks of each other. And at least one of them is using the name "obvioussock", just to taunt you. And one says he used to be a washing machine in his previous life.

My goodness! I think you are being trolled! :-) :-) And no, I had nothing to do with this. Just block them. It will blow over soon.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 12:54, 25 March 2017 (EDT)

:Thank you for your message. :) Due to the fact that "reformed" was created right after I blocked two users and vandalized my user page, I assumed that it was a clear sock of one or both of them. However, as it was not clear to you and possibly others, I changed the block settings to just include vandalism. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:06, 25 March 2017 (EDT)

==Screw up==
Sorry, I'm working with a tablet, and it's a piece of garbage. I didn't intentionally remove your comments. Sorry. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]] 15:31, 25 March 2017 (EDT)
:Assuming you're referring to those at [[Talk:Main Page]], apology accepted. It can happen to the best of us. They were other user's edits, however. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:33, 25 March 2017 (EDT)

== Thank you ==

For your reverts yesterday on my userpage, saw the sock puppet master was not finished with his trolling. [[User:YortKeldher|YortKeldher]] ([[User talk:YortKeldher|talk]]) 07:37, 26 March 2017 (EDT)
:You're welcome. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:54, 26 March 2017 (EDT)

== Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Vaccination ==

Thank you for your improvements to [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Vaccination]]. [[User:Desmonduk|Desmonduk]] ([[User talk:Desmonduk|talk]]) 16:13, 29 March 2017 (EDT)
:You're welcome. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:30, 29 March 2017 (EDT)

== small request ==

I sent you a message at the last place we communicated. Can you please read that message? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:59, 6 April 2017 (EDT)
:I sent you the information I promised. It is located at the place we last communicated. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:36, 6 April 2017 (EDT)
::Sent you message. Please check place we last communicated. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
:::I sent you a quick note to the place we last communicated. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:51, 18 April 2017 (EDT)
::::Could you please go to the place we last communicated? It is regarding another matter. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])

==Photo size==
With a large photo, there is much more word wrap in the table of contents, which makes it even longer. We need a wide table of contents. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 19:08, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
:I've checked and double-checked, and I see no way how the larger-sized photo does anything to the table of contents. And I'm using a standard Google Chrome, 100% zoom screen. Could it be your search engine/zoom? I don't see any reason why the larger image is a problem in any way. I think it looks better, regardless. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:06, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
:::On Firefox the TOC is longer due to word wrap. You can get other pictures to help fill the space, but the space will be shorter if the TOC is wider. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 23:19, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
I am getting a lot of 500 errors. I will wait for you to finish, and then I will go back and apply my changes. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 11:07, 11 April 2017 (EDT)
:I have done my changes. But please, when making those changes, please do ''not'' revert changes I have made, particularly changes that I have already reverted you multiple times. I'm tired of these disputes. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:09, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

== IRC ==

Hello, 
After some discussion (on [[User_talk:DavidB4#Conservapedia_IRC_channel|my talk page]] and [[User_talk:Aschlafly#IRC|Andy's]]) it has been decided that I start an [[Internet Relay Chat]] channel for Conservapedia, since our old one has been dead since 2009. It is now registered and somewhat set up. I don't know if you use IRC or are interested in doing so, but anyone with block privileges on Conservapedia can also get block privileges on the new IRC channel. Unfortunately, IRC accounts are deleted after 30 days of being unused, so unless you plan on using the IRC at least once a month, there is probably not much point in registering. In any case, feel free to try it out--if you account gets deleted, we can always make another one later. If you are interested, please let me know! 
The IRC channel is: #conservapedia @irc.accessIRC.net 
Let me know if you have any questions or need anything else, also! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:33, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

:Thank you for your response. I have never used or really even heard of IRC prior before now (or, more accurately, before you and Andy started talking about it). What is the purpose of IRC? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:47, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

::It is perhaps the oldest form of instant messaging. It is basically a chat room, where people can join and idle or actively chat. Visitors can ask members questions, and members can collaborate. There is even file sharing, if that would be useful. I'm going to be writing a how-to-use guide to explain the actual usage better. 
::Most people use software clients, which they install (or run portably, which a whole different story), but web clients are also available, such as [https://kiwiirc.com/client?settings=7c7240c62a5d4861a8ad0ba697929f39 this one]. With the web client, you can just pick a name and connect, without installing anything. Also, since IRC has been around so long, software for it is compatible with almost anything. All desktop and most mobile operating systems support it. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:55, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

:::Thanks for the info! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:24, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

== Re: Vandal ==

Already took care of that and left a note for [[User talk:Teapublican|Teapublican]] on his talk page. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 00:09, 20 April 2017 (EDT)
:Thank you. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:08, 20 April 2017 (EDT)

== Recent item on maintalk -- congratulations! ==

Sorry, I just couldn't resist making fun of you there. I immediately recognized the Breitbart article, as one that I had seen shortly before. And then I saw that it was you. No hard feelings, I hope. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:22, 24 April 2017 (EDT)
:None at all. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:37, 24 April 2017 (EDT)

::Congratulations! The [[March for Science]] article is a ''really good article''. And you made it so. (Well, with a little prodding from me.) It sets out, straightforwardly, what was going on, and it doesn't descend into namecalling. I realize that you probably have very strong disagreements with what most of those people were doing, but you kept it professional.

::Really good articles, especially on potential "hot button" issues of politics, aren't all that common. Now maybe I will make another attempt to return the [[Pussy Riot]] article to the good state it was in back when I expanded it in 2014, before it got messed up with the implication that anyone who opposes murderous thug tyrant Vladimir Putin must be a "leftist", "elitist", or "social justice warrior". For which I was blocked, in blatant violation of the rules of this site. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 14:25, 26 April 2017 (EDT)

:::Thank you for the compliment! Unfortunately, the router I'm using blocked the "Pussy Riot" article because of the first word in the title, so I cannot comment on that at all. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:00, 26 April 2017 (EDT)

::::How sad. I have created the redirect [[Nadezhda Tolokonnikova]] in case that helps. But it probably won't. You had no trouble typing the "P" word above, so I guess it's a problem of your router not going to a page with that word in the title. Maybe I should have named the page with its Cyrillc letters: "Пусси Райот". Well, you're not missing anything of cosmic importance. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 16:42, 26 April 2017 (EDT)

:::::The redirect actually did work. Thanks! The article does not appear to have a high quality (at least in the aesthetic sense), so changes would probably be beneficial, but if you're going to make changes, I would like to remind you to be cautious and not to contradict CP's POV. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:17, 26 April 2017 (EDT)

:::In case you forgot, Sam <s>(and how fast it appears that happens with you)</s>, it was ''you'' who violated the rules of this site by putting a liberal POV into that article (among others, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/SamHB per your history]) in the first place, then insistently readding it after your edit was reverted and you were warned about violating CP policy and about starting fights with other editors. You really should take the advice you're being given here and not continue violating CP policy. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 21:59, 26 April 2017 (EDT)

A few things:
*Today is my 9th anniversary at Conservapedia!
*I can assure everyone that I am very familiar with, and well versed in, the rules, commandments, guidelines, customs, and habits of CP. I am also familiar with the many, many, many discussions of these points that have taken place over the years.
*@Northwest: this is the expected response.
*@1990's guy: this is ''not'' the response I expected. I'm chagrined that you think the article is of low quality. Especially since you know how to write high quality articles.
I'm serious. I was proud of that article as originally written/expanded by me. I thought it laid out the facts accurately, and avoided name-calling and such. Exactly like the March for Science article. Please look at the article (preferably the [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Pussy_Riot&oldid=1328015] version, before name-calling got put in) and fix it up as you see fit. The name-calling consisted, among other things, of saying that those people around the world who took an interest in the case were "elitists" and "social justice warriors on the left". The latter term is straight out of Huffington Post and their ilk. It is a term of bleeding hearts in America, and not used widely elsewhere. In any case, one doesn't need to be an SJW to oppose murderous thug tyrant Vladimir Putin. In fact, given the recent falling out between President Trump and Putin, the accepted orthodoxy here at CP might be swinging away from support for the murderous thug. I hope so.

Please improve the article.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 11:28, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

:My problem is not with content; it is with organization, layout, aesthetics, etc. There are no subsections, which at least show the reader how the article is organized; it is just many paragraphs. Such articles do not appeal to the reader. IMO, it feels like reading a textbook. If it is just a few paragraphs, it is fine, but thus article has ten paragraphs. Adding a few headers and possibly an image would be beneficial (and I realized just as I wrote this that the March for Science article is approaching that length as well, so I probably either should just keep my mouth shut or add headers there as well). I did not mean to insult or degrade your work, and I apologize for giving that impression. BTW, happy 9th anniversary! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:46, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

:Sam - by your response, you're only proving what I said about your tactics and your history here right. You claim to be "very familiar with, and well versed in, the rules, commandments, guidelines, customs, and habits of CP", but you only pay lip service to them here while your actions on CP over the years (and even now) are showing that you simply choose to disregard them for the sake of pushing liberal POV on this site and to start fights with those who don't share your viewpoint. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 18:08, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

== Bill Nye ==

Could you please contact me by email at sam4557@gmail.com? I think we can make a really good article out of this. I have a number of criticisms of his behavior--my opinion of him has gone down a whole lot over the last few weeks, and I think I have some insights about this that I'd like to bounce off of you. I know that you and I disagree totally about evolution and creationism, but we can put together a good article stating the facts. We can stay away from the name-calling that so many articles contain, and avoid things like "so-and-so falsely believes that ..."

This is ''not'' about Pussy Riot, ''not'' about Conservapedia politics, and ''not'' about you-know-who. I just want to bounce some ideas off of you about Bill Nye and see if we can put together a really nice article.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 01:00, 4 May 2017 (EDT)

== Expanded article, footnote did not support genocide/racist abortions adequately ==

I greatly expanded this article [[Abortion and eugenics]]. The footnote in the liberal article was not supporting or at the very least inadequately supporting racist/genocidal abortion policies of [[Margaret Sanger]], etc.

Specifically, I skimmed the article as far as the footnoted article and it did not appear to strongly support such a big claim like abortion/genocide, etc. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:26, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

==Something isn't right here==
... Ohhh I know what it is. ''Margaret Thatcher'' is on the list of liberals. ''Margaret. Thatcher.'' The bastion of conservatism. A favourite of Reagan. How in the ''world'' did she make the liberal list? [[User:Koidevelopment|Vive]] [[User talk:Koidevelopment|Liberté!]] 09:14, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:Wasn't me who added her. She was not as conservative as people think she is, as she did vote in favor of legalizing abortion and homosexuality. But, that said, it would probably be better without mentioning her, to avoid people focusing on her mention in the article. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:24, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

::She might not have been a perfect conservative, but I still think she probably doesn't belong on that list. Of course, if you go back 80 years and read writings and speeches from liberals of the day, they sound downright conservative now. Still, she did defend liberty and much of conservatism. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 13:18, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:::Lady Thatcher's criticism of Simon Callow's performance in ''Amadeaus'' made her homophobic, I thought. Being homophobic wouldn't preclude one from being liberal however, [[Bill Moyers]] and Louis Black for example. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''The coup plotters won, for now'']] 15:31, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
I assume that adding the liberalism template to the [[Episcopal Church]] article was improper? I would like to know what the proper usage of this template is for future reference. TEC is one of, if not the most liberal Christian denomination in the US these days, sadly. I do apologize for this improper usage, as I am a new editor. --[[User:Anglican|Anglican]] ([[User talk:Anglican|talk]]) 15:00, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:Hello Anglican! I removed the template because I thought the article was outside the scope of the "liberal" template. What I mean is that the template links to liberal traits, but not necessarily to liberal organizations. I think the category is good for the article, but not template. I hope this helps! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:11, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
::That makes sense. Thank you for your patience. It's sad what has happened to the Episcopal Church in recent years. --[[User:Anglican|Anglican]] ([[User talk:Anglican|talk]]) 15:14, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:::You're welcome, and I agree. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:18, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

== User: Karajou sent me and others an email saying he didn't like CP's article on liberalism. So... ==

User: Karajou sent me and others an email saying he didn't like CP's article on [[liberalism]].

The article needs major improvements.

I am not going to work on it due to time restraints. I spent a lot of time improving the [[liberal]] article.

I would use the same approach used with the liberal article. Clearly delineate liberalism from socialism/fascism because they are very substantially different (for example, Sweden vs. Communist China vs. Nazi Germany). But mention how the gap between the ideologies has narrowed in the United States. I don't keep up with European politics to know the situation there as far as the gap other than knowing that China has become more capitalistic. European countries commonly have more major political parties in a country so the situation is more difficult to keep tabs on. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:33, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

:I posted the below information on RobS' talk page and thought I would share it with you also. You can go to RobS' talk page to see his response to me.

::I would work on the liberalism article. But also create 2-3 sub-articles: [[American liberalism]] and [[Western liberalism]] and [[European liberalism]]. The [[American liberalism]] article is just a one sentence stub article.

::I suggest a [[Western liberalism]] article due to the Canadians, Australia, NZ, and South Africa. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:09, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:::Since the Brits and Canadians have the most influence in the Anglosphere on the USA, you might want to create a [[British liberalism]] article and a [[Canadian liberalism]] article too.

:::Its too bad all this wasn't done before given that CP is a political website. I was largely focused on [[atheism]] which is a dying ideology. This had an indirect relation to liberalism given the prominence of the [[secular left]] on liberal/leftist politics. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:17, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

== Re: American liberalism ==

I copied and pasted some of the [[liberal]] article into the [[American liberalism]] article.

Generally speaking, ideally you want the material in the section for main article linking to a sub-article to have substantially different content. In this case, you want the [[American liberalism]] article to have different content than the "American liberalism" section of the [[liberal]] article.

So if you want to reword and/or add material to the [[American liberalism]] article the would be excellent. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:17, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

== Opinion on renaming an article ==

I wanted your opinion on an idea of mines to rename one of our articles on Conservapedia before taking it to an admin or someone with the ability to actually change the name of a page.

The current page [[Exodus of Israel]], I think, should be renamed to [[The Exodus]], where [[Exodus of Israel]] should simply be a redirect to that page. Not many users would think of typing 'Exodus of Israel' to get to a page on 'The Exodus', and 'The Exodus' is just much simpler. As it is, [[The Exodus]] is currently a redirect to [[Exodus of Israel]]. I think it should be the other way around. Your thoughts?[[User:Korvex|Korvex]] ([[User talk:Korvex|talk]]) 13:34, 10 May 2017 (EDT)
:No, I think it is better the way it is. My main reason is that having titles along the lines of "The...." does not sound encyclopedic. The current name, I believe, is more high quality for that reason. Now, it is true that many users might not think of typing "Exodus of Israel," but if they type "[[Exodus]]," they'll run into the disambiguation page and find the actual article. Also, I'm not sure that many people would think of typing "The Exodus." To sum it up, I think the current title is better and give the article a more encyclopedic feel, but you're welcome to ask another editor what they think. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:59, 10 May 2017 (EDT)
Thanks for the thoughts. Wikipedia currently uses 'The Exodus', and I find that it simply looks better, as a title, then 'Exodus of Israel'. Secondly, I also consider it more likely for someone to type in 'The Exodus' then 'Exodus of Israel'.[[User:Korvex|Korvex]] ([[User talk:Korvex|talk]]) 15:59, 10 May 2017 (EDT)
:Once again, if you want to ask another editor for their opinion, like DavidB4, feel free to do so. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:20, 10 May 2017 (EDT)
Thanks for your opinion. One thing though, do you know who can get this template locked?

At this point, all relevant pages have been created, and therefore this template no longer will ever need any more editing as it is complete. So the best thing to do is to get it locked to avoid any vandalism problems in the future. Just to note, before I came on, it was already locked, even though it still had many problems. Now that the template is fixed, the best thing to do is to get it locked. [[User:Korvex|Korvex]] ([[User talk:Korvex|talk]]) 20:57, 12 May 2017 (EDT)
:I recommend asking [[User:Aschlafly]] or [[User:Karajou]]. They have protection powers. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:15, 12 May 2017 (EDT)
==Block length==
Thanks for your alert blocks. But one year is a long time for a block. IP addresses often change in a shorter period. You might consider 3 months as a better block duration in many cases.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:25, 17 May 2017 (EDT)
:OK. I'll see to that. Should I change the blocks I just did? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:26, 17 May 2017 (EDT)
::I just went ahead and changed them. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:41, 17 May 2017 (EDT)

== Congratulations on Donald Trump accomplishments ==

Hey, I just checked Google. While that movie award comes up first when "Donald Trump achievements," is Googled, and you are the first result after, you get nice results with certain other phrases:
*Donald Trump accomplishments - third link, no box
*Trump achievements - first link, no box
*Trump accomplishments - fourth link, no box
*Donald Trump achievements and failures - fourth link, no box
While Conservative's essays come up first when their exact titles are Googled, bear in mind that these phrases are Googled more frequently.
Congratulations on the publicity, 1990sguy!--[[User:Abcqwe|Nathan]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 08:07, 25 May 2017 (EST)

:Great job, it is well deserved! - -[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])
::Thanks, Nathan and DavidB, I appreciate it! It seems I chose the right article to create, in terms of gaining page views. For a while, when one searched the exact title of my article, that silly award was not at the top of the article, and in its place was a box with a picture of Trump linking to my article. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:24, 25 May 2017 (EDT)
== Can you chat briefly? ==

Can we chat briefly? Can you please go to place I sent you messages before? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:16, 3 June 2017 (EDT)
== Here is the the article ==

*[[Liberal vs. libertarian]]

Thanks. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:54, 3 June 2017 (EDT)

== It's been great ==

You've been helpful since I you first welcomed me here - me, someone who had never used wikitext or HTML in his life and never believed in a young Earth. You've really made me consider that viewpoint, and you've done it with a brilliant personal appeal, far better than User:Conservative ever has.--[[User:Abcqwe|Nathan]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 16:34, 4 June 2017 (EDT)

==Europe's childless leaders==
Where do you think [http://dcwhispers.com/rather-odd-troubling-fact-european-leaders/ we can squeeze this in] [[European migrant crisis]]? In the Intro or elsewhere? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 02:13, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
:I think that would be a good idea. We could also, possibly, add it to the [[European Union]] article, and maybe [[Globalism]] or [[Liberal]], as these leaders advocate for left-wing globalist policies. Are you able to find other sources that note this fact? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:53, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
::I think this also illustrates liberal European values. They support mass immigration of peoples who do not share their culture while they themselves have no children. They are committing national/cultural suicide. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:15, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

== The reason I removed Ted Nugent from Notable Texans ==

Because Ted Nugent is actually from Michigan. Sorry that I forgot to add an explanation. ([[User:King Conservative|King Conservative]] ([[User talk:King Conservative|talk]]) 13:37, 17 June 2017 (EDT)King Conservative)
:I removed him from the list. Thanks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:16, 17 June 2017 (EDT)

==Template tweak==

Hi, guy! Thanks for the {{tl|See also}} in [[Neil Gorsuch]]. That template works better. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 08:53, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
:You're welcome, always happy to help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:58, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
==Nasty edit summaries==
Dear 1990sguy: Please stop writing inflammatory edit summaries. There is no need to make false personal attacks on other editors. As for Breitbart, each reference is evaluated individually on its own merits. If it is news reporting, I welcome it. However, some references are clearly opinion-editorial pieces that criticize other news stories instead of offering any independent news gathering. Some authors there are editorial-opinion writers rather than news reporters. Also, when I check a source and see photos of immodestly dressed women with "wardrobe malfunction" captions or women wearing tight T-shirts imprinted with "no silicone", I am less inclined to use those sources, given our family-friendly approach. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 15:31, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
:Conservapedia has no requirement that only news reporter sources can be used for mews sources. For example, many excellent conservative editorial pieces link to a news story or quote a news story while providing excellent commentary.

:The mainstream press. which is very liberal, have a lot more reporters and they still have some foreign bureaus if I am not mistaken. Then you have Fox which only has a fraction of the combined viewership of ABC, CBS, and NBC.

:To be overly reliant on news sources merely from websites who have reporters is not a good policy.

:Yes, there are conservative news organizations such as CNS News. But I don't think we should limit ourselves to merely using conservative news organizations as far as news sources.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:54, 28 June 2017 (EDT)

::I agree with Conservative on this. We can use conservative news sources, even if the articles appear to be editorializing. This is a conservative encyclopedia, after all. Why should we adopt editing policies that give liberal MSM sources an unfair advantage? How then can we differentiate ourselves from Wikipedia? I am not opposed to citing MSM sources (I do it myself), but we should give precedence to conservative sources, which do not have leftist bias. Yes, Breitbart has silly ads, but I care more about the content of the article than the ads. There are many Breitbart writers who support conservative, Christian pro-family policies. Are there any at CNN or the NYT?

::JDano, yes, my edit summaries were inflammatory. I probably should have acted cooler when dealing with you, and for that, I apologize. Your behavior, constantly reverting and adding changes that I genuinely believe to contain leftist bias without going to the talk page until you've been reverted several times, is not constructive. I do believe your changes are undermining our status as a conservative alternative to Wikipedia. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 02:50, 29 June 2017 (EDT)

== re: JDano and you getting "horse throwing" mad ==

In the recent edit changes, I saw you use all caps in your description of your edit. It was for the [[Travel ban]] article.

This tells me that you are starting to get "horse throwing" mad.

If it becomes necessary, you can impose a [[Conservapedia:Topic bans|Conservapedia:Topic ban]] to JDano since you have blocking rights. You can make it applicable to certain articles or certain article categories. Probably a certain article would be best as a shot across his bow.

If JDano also has blocking rights, you can get Karajou/Aschlafly to impose such a ban. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:29, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
:P.S. I don't know if you are correct in this matter. And I don't have time to mediate. I am just offering you a suggestion since I have experienced JDano being unreasonable at times. Also, the majority of Conservapedians/Republicans/conservatives are more fans of Trump than Lindsey Graham. JDano appears to be in the Graham camp. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:37, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
::Please see my comment in the section immediately above. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 02:51, 29 June 2017 (EDT)

== JDano has a topical ban imposed on him for the "travel ban" article. ==

I just posted this message to JDano's talk page:

"You are not allowed to edit the [[travel ban]] article anymore. I am imposing a [[Conservapedia:Topic bans|Conservapedia:Topic ban]] on you for this article.

By the way, Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in terms of its Muslim population. The travel ban of the Trump administration does not include Indonesia."[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:13, 28 June 2017 (EDT)

== JDano has a topical ban imposed on him for the fake news article ==

I posted this on JDano's talk page:

"The [[fake news]] article was locked/protected. It seems as if the root cause of the page being locked was an edit war involving yourself.

You are no longer allowed to edit the fake news article. I am imposing a Conservapedia topic ban on you for this article. See: [[Conservapedia:Topic bans|Conservapedia:Topic ban]]

I hope additional topic bans are not imposed on you by people with block rights." [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:23, 28 June 2017 (EDT)

== Socks of JamesWilson ==

Socks of this clown should receive five year bans. He is a malicious provocateur, and he singlehandedly destroyed another website as well as leading dozens of people off this site. Show this schlemiel no mercy. --[[User:RonaldB|RonaldB]] ([[User talk:RonaldB|talk]]) 14:16, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
:I don't see why we should be giving long blocks to this guy. He's clearly using multiple ip addresses. These addresses will probably get passed to one or more people who have no intention of vandalizing CP. DavidB4 explained by long blocks are not a good idea on my talk page: [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:1990%27sguy&diff=1304184&oldid=1303142] However, I will not challenge your lengthening of that block or any other. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:20, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
::Maybe you do have a point because he has created a few different accounts in the past day or so. All I'm saying is that lightening up on him isn't going to work. My late friend George let this guy off easy, and he destroyed an entire community. I've had plenty of experience with this guy in the past to know his MO, and he's fanatically obsessed with Taylor Swift and "avenging" others because they "ruined" his articles. --[[User:RonaldB|RonaldB]] ([[User talk:RonaldB|talk]]) 14:28, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
:::That's fair. This guy is clearly bad news. Regardless of what block lengths we give him (and I can see some sense in making them longer), we should try not to accidently prevent innocent people from viewing CP. Thanks for your help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:30, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
::::How do we know that this editor is a "sock" of JamesWilson? Has anyone checked the IP user logs? The Taylor Swift connection could be a false-flag operation. If George and James got into an edit-war on a different website, that would not be relevant here. Let's judge each editor separately until they can be linked by evidence. Are all of the problem users created in the past few days created from the same or very similar IP addresses? Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 15:27, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
:::::He put "Sad case!- James Wilson" in the edit summary of all of his vandalism, and it was the same stuff he's always done. If he says it's him, I'm just gonna assume it's him. Dont give this guy the benefit of the doubt. He's had plenty enough breaks here and elsewhere. --[[User:RonaldB|RonaldB]] ([[User talk:RonaldB|talk]]) 16:03, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
:::::@JDano: Yes, I think it clearly is JamesWilson. His vandalism is very repetitive -- he even vandalizes the user pages of the same users. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:52, 4 July 2017 (EDT)
*FYI, even if an account is blocked indefinitely, the autoblock on the IPs is only for twenty-four hours. If the IP block was for as long as the account's block, checkusers wouldn't have to put separate blocks on persistent vandals' IP addresses. [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] ([[User talk:DMorris|talk]]) 18:26, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
==Articles==
Since I've written a few articles on Christianity, please feel free to edit them to conform to the views of Conservapedia if necessary. Admittedly, writing about Christianity as a Jew can be a bit difficult at times. --[[User:RonaldB|Ronald]] ([[User talk:RonaldB|talk]]) 14:35, 5 July 2017 (EDT)
:I have not seen any factual problems with the articles you created. However, I do recommend that you add categories of the religion you are writing about to those articles. For example, that you add "Category:Christianity" to [[Secular Christianity]] and "Category:Judaism" to [[Secular Judaism]]. The people who practice these are not Jews (religiously speaking) or Christians, but the articles are relevant to those religions.

:Also, I recommend that you add at least one source to the articles you create. Adding sources to articles is Commandment #2 in [[Conservapedia:Commandments]], and it makes the articles better for readers. They know where you are getting your information from, and they can read further if they are interested. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:51, 6 July 2017 (EDT)

== Changing my username ==

I don't know if Andy saw my request on his talk page. Did he skip it or didn't see it? --[[User:KommissarReb|KommissarReb]] ([[User talk:KommissarReb|talk]]) 9:18, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
:I don't know. Sometimes he does that, but when I message him again he usually replies. I recommend commenting again, letting him know how much you want your username changed, and asking him to respond. I think we will do it, but only if you absolutely want it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:49, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
::I read [[User_talk:Aschlafly#Inquiry|the back and forth]] with the guy you probably were referring to on Andy's page. Andy seemed pretty reluctant to change the RonaldB's name for most of the discussion.. Is the process of changing someone's username complex or difficult to do, or did he just want to make sure that the guy wasn't being wishy-washy about the change? I was a little sheepish about asking him again because I don't want to seem annoying. --[[User:KommissarReb|KommissarReb]] ([[User talk:KommissarReb|talk]]) 5:07, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
:::I think CP admins generally prefer simply creating a new account. The user who made the other request was not the original person using the account. The original person let him take over the account. I can see why Andy wanted him to create a new account. I recommend you politely letting him know how much you want your username changed, and why, and asking him to respond, regardless of his answer. I think that would be a good move on your part. It would show how serious you are with this request. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:06, 11 July 2017 (EDT)

== Re: Trump ==

I think Donald Trump is going to get stuck with the blame for the economic bubble created by the Obama administration and the Federal Reserve.[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHwtkIpgAnA]

In addition, TrumpCare probably will not work because it is keeping the "precondition clause" of ObamaCare due to its popularity. People will often not buy health insurance until they are sick. So the health care system will not be viable. Car insurance companies could not be profitable if people could buy their car insurance after their car accident in order to replace their car. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:00, 11 July 2017 (EDT)

:You are probably right on both of those things. The first point would be the fault of the Obama Administration, and the second by the establishment GOP Congress. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:05, 11 July 2017 (EDT)

Got it, thanks for letting me know. --[[User:OneTrueConservative|OneTrueConservative]] ([[User talk:OneTrueConservative|talk]]) 00:12, 12 July 2017 (EDT)
:You're welcome. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:21, 12 July 2017 (EDT)
== Expansion of right-wing material on the internet ==

*[https://www.axios.com/the-partisan-explosion-of-digital-news-2279022772.html The recent explosion of right-wing news sites]

*[https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3dy7vb/why-the-right-is-dominating-youtube Why the Right Is Dominating YouTube] - Vice News

*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HndA5MoxK08 Why the Right is Dominating YouTube (A Response to Vice)]

*[https://www.nctv.nl/binaries/psychological-effects-of-right-wing-and-islamic-extremist-internet-videos_tcm31-30177.pdf Psychological effects of right-wing and Islamic extremist videos] - Netherlands and German report

I know Twitter bans and shadow bans right-wingers.

I haven't looked at the latter two items, but right-wingers gaining momentum on the internet is an interesting development. With nationalism gaining ground in Europe and 21st century [[desecularization]] occurring, the trend is bound to continue. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])

===Scriptural Geology===
Scriptural Geologists published in the USA as well. CRSQ published my review of David Lord "Geognosy" (that has other citations as well). [my magazines are in
storage but the year was 2000-2004.] Another recent CRSQ review was Gordon's 1878 book that mentioned USA Scriptural Geologist Martyn Payne.
:Thanks, Snoopy2, for your addition! I noted this fact, briefly in the article, in "The scriptural geologists" section. I knew that most of the Scriptural Geologists were British, and I did not have the time or knowledge of them to go into much more detail. Thanks for your help! Please remember to sign your posts in the future. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:06, 31 July 2017 (EDT)

== important message for you ==

I sent you an important message to the last place we communicated.

I also have some good news for you. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:10, 13 July 2017 (EDT)

== BLOCK THIS GUY!!!!!!!! ==

BLOCK THIS GUY!!!!!!!!

== Block duration ==

Thanks for your great blocks but they should generally not exceed 6 months in duration. By then the IP address is typically being used by someone else.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:27, 27 July 2017 (EDT)
:OK. I will keep that in mind. I will change this vandal's block. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:46, 27 July 2017 (EDT)

== "Denkmal der Schande" ==

Björn Höcke nannte das Holocaust-Mahnmal ein "Denkmal der Schande". Zudem sprach er von einer "dämlichen Bewältigungspolitik" und forderte eine "erinnerungspolitische Wende um 180 Grad". Hinterher behauptete Höcke, er hätte den Holocaust als Schande bezeichnet. Wenn man sich nun seine Rede genau anschaut, kann er nur das Denkmal als Schande bezeichnet haben. Höcke hat offen NS-Gedankengut offenbart und dies auch gewollt. Er ist ein Agent des BRD-Systems, die zum Ziel haben, die AfD unwählbar zu machen. Dasselbe haben sie schon mit der NPD gemacht (in den 90er Jahren). Ich find's ja auch schade, dass die AfD unterwandert wurde und nicht mehr wählbar ist. Auch ich habe große Hoffnungen in sie gesetzt. Aber spätestens seit dem letzten Parteitag ist sie unwählbar, die Neo-Nazis gewannen die Oberhand, Gauland wurde Spitzenkandidat. Solange Petry keine neue Partei gründet, müssen Rechtschaffene bei der Bundestagswahl das geringste Übel wählen (z.B. die Freien Wähler oder die BüSo). Aber die AfD ist klar von NS-Agenten unterwandert und ich schrieb noch mehr in den Artikel, also lassen Sie mich zumindest Höckes Rede einfügen, dann kann sich jeder selber ein Bild machen. MfG --[[User:Elessar|Elessar]] ([[User talk:Elessar|talk]]) 10:16, 1 August 2017 (EDT)
:Grüetzi Elessar, CP ist ein Englisher website, so es ist besser wann wir in English schreiben. Ich denke dass die meisten leute heir sprechen kein Deutsch. Danke. Wass ich sage ist sehr kontrovers in Deutschland, aber, Ich probiere ein klares und gutes antwort zum geben:

:First off, many political parties have their crazy members. I know that UKIP explicitly disavows racism, but it has had some members who have said some silly things. I definitely do ''not'' believe the GOP in the U.S. is racist, but David Duke considers himself a Republican (and every other Republican disavows him). Even the Swiss People's Party in my country (I am also a U.S. citizen) has some members who have said racist things. Just because parties have members like this does not necessarily mean that the entire party is racist or whatever. In the case of Höcke's speech, Petry (the party leader, as you know) condemned what he said, or at least criticized him.

:Second, I know the mindset that the German have today. They are still ashamed for what they did during World War II, and they are still focused on trying to make restitution. Personally, I think it is good that they have repented, but they miss the fact that there are two extremes: one extreme is what the Nazis did, the other is being so ashamed bad things one did that they essentially hate their country. We see this with liberals in the United States. I think the German mindset is too far in the second extreme -- and no, I am anywhere close to being a racist or Nazi. Patriotism and nationalism can be very good things, as long as they are handled correctly and are not an excuse to persecute others. The German people, I think, are trying to extinguish them, and they have accused people, even those in the middle of those two extremes, as being Nazis.

:Let me also make clear that I have not read much about Björn Höcke's speech, other than what you provided and what his English Wikipedia article states, so I cannot comment on his entire speech and his entire character. He may very well be what you say he is. However, what I read about his speech and about him actually seems reasonable. Many peoples all over the world have done many evil things -- slavery in the U.S. and the other European colonies, the Islamic slave trade, religious persecution in Rome and the communist nations, the several genocides in history, etc. However, it is not constructive for cultures to focus on these events. It is good to remember them and repent of them, but not to obsess about them. There is much more to German history than World War II, just as there is more to U.S. history than slavery. Why can't we build monuments celebrating the positive things about our cultures and our people? It is cultural suicide not to do so. While we should not forget the bad events, we should focus on the good events and remain proud as a people in order to remain strong. This seems to me what Höcke is getting at. Am I wrong?

:Reading his Wikipedia article, I came accross this quote: "Die Syrer, die zu uns kommen, haben immer noch Syrien. Wenn wir – durch die Syrer – unser Deutschland verloren haben, dann haben wir keine Heimat mehr." I can see how in Germany this is very controversial, but I think in most other countries, this is quite reasonable. It may not be a bad thing if Syrians come, but it would mean that the German people would be in danger of disappearing, at least in a cultural sense. If someone values this (as most people of all ethnicies and nationalities do -- just ask the Poles or Hungarians), they will strongly oppose immigration.

:Am I wrong in what I am saying? Am I misrepresenting Höcke? I would appreciate some dialogue. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:18, 1 August 2017 (EDT)

::No, you aren't wrong and I too was never questioning that the "eternal fault" (electing Hitler/WW2) which is propagated by German liberals is bullshit. I only mean that Höcke was not only saying that, but he also clearly favorized the Holocaust by calling for an "erinnerungspolitische Wende um 180 Grad" and calling the Holocaust monument a "Denkmal der Schande". This speech was much criticized by Jewish organizations in Germany and Höcke was forbidden to visit Concentration Camp Memorials. He's not a single exemption, but there are unfortunately already lots of neo-Nazis or neo-Nazi sympathizers in the AfD who are all defending Höcke's speech, including Spitzenkandidat Alexander Gauland. Party leader Petry was forced by them not to participate. These (real) neo-Nazis are system agents who are overrunning the AfD like they did decades ago with the NPD in order to make these parties uneligible by conservative voters. But of course many liberals call all ''real'' conservatives "neo-Nazis" which there is nonsense. But Höcke is really a neo-Nazi and anti-semite and should be excluded together with his inner-party defenders. --[[User:Elessar|Elessar]] ([[User talk:Elessar|talk]]) 14:05, 1 August 2017 (EDT)

:::I don't understand how the "erinnerungspolitische Wende um 180 Grad" shows that Höcke is a neo-Nazi. It seems to be saying that German policy on these matters needs to change, which I also think is reasonable. The culture of shame in Germany must end -- when will Egypt build a monument mourning the Islamic slave trade, and when will Turkey build a monument mourning the Armenian Genocide? That's what I think he is saying. Am I wrong? Please explain.

:::While I am a strong supporter of Israel, I do think that many Jewish organizations in Europe and the United States are politically left-wing -- unlike the current Israeli government. The fact that they opposed Höcke's speech is unsurprising, even if he is not a neo-Nazi. Most European/American Jews support the ruling establishment's views on who is extreme and who is "moderate." And besides, Jewish organizations have their own interests. It's reasonable for them to defend monuments mourning a genocide of their own people, regardless of whether having such a monument, or at least the mindset behind it, is a good thing or not.

:::It seems to me that you are making a jump from noting what Höcke is saying to calling him a neo-Nazi. A lot of what he is saying seems reasonable, even if it is better that he watches what he says more closely, and I don't see how these comments make them neo-Nazis (I do see, however, how such comments are far outside the current German mainstream, and that they make such parties less attractive to moderate Germans). It seems to me that Höcke is a nationalist who is angry at the culture of shame in his country, which is probably the reason why it is being flooded with immigrants and weakened by the EU. Many conservatives said silly things (that sounded extremely racist) about Obama when he was U.S. President, even though those people would have voted for conservative blacks (Ben Carson, Allen West, Herman Cain) or Hispanics (Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz) in a heartbeat. Could it be that this is what Höcke is doing?

:::My last thing I want to say in this comment is not related to the above. I would like to remind you that CP is a family-friendly encyclopedia, and I think this policy also applies to talk pages. I request that you thus refrain from spelling out cuss words when making comments. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:35, 1 August 2017 (EDT)

::::Sorry about the term "b***" but I'm as angry as you about the "eternal fault" dogma. And you are completely right with most (including the Jews being too liberal in Europe), but in my opinion the quote "erinnerungspolitische Wende um 180 Grad" is like he wanted to say "The Holocaust was nothing bad" or "not so bad" or so. Like it would be Holocaust relativation. Maybe Höcke really didn't mean anything bad in his speech but then he's simply uncaring of what he says because he damages his party with such unclear statements. --[[User:Elessar|Elessar]] ([[User talk:Elessar|talk]]) 16:34, 1 August 2017 (EDT)

:::::As we disagree on his speech (even though I do think your last comment was very reasonable), I chose to move the info to another place in the article and re-word it. If you have any problems with how I re-worded it, we can discuss that as well. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:05, 1 August 2017 (EDT)

::::::Björn Höcke said in whole this: "Wir Deutschen – und ich rede jetzt nicht von euch Patrioten, die sich hier heute versammelt haben – wir Deutschen, also unser Volk, sind das einzige Volk der Welt, das sich ein Denkmal der Schande in das Herz seiner Hauptstadt gepflanzt hat." This means, not German patriots but the other Germans (liberals e.g.) have founded the Holocaust monument which he calls a Denkmal der Schande. Which means, according to him true German patriots wouldn't have built the Holocaust monument, which can be interpreted as he's pro-Holocaust. The same interpretation is open in his other quote "Wir brauchen eine erinnerungspolitische Wende um 180 Grad". Maybe he didn't want to relativate the Holocaust but he should watch out what he says, especially if his party wants to enter a coalition. A coalition with establishment parties wouldn't be bad as long as the AfD maintains its goals and gets many of them into a government program. --[[User:Elessar|Elessar]] ([[User talk:Elessar|talk]]) 01:37, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

:::::::I can see now how people think the speech was sympathizing with Nazis -- the Holocaust and WWII is a touchy topic, especially for Germans. However, I still see how what he is saying is reasonable. Turkey, for example, is not going to build a monument for the Armenian Genocide anytime soon, Russia is not going to build a monument for the many Baltic peoples they killed during WWII, and Japan is not going to build any monument for the millions of people they killed, including concentration camp prisoners.

:::::::I do know that there are two AfD factions: one that has a goal of becoming a coalition party, and the other that wants to remain an anti-establishment party. Höcke is clearly part of the latter, while Petry is in the former. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:31, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

::::::::The AfD can remain an anti-establishment party and anyway be part of a government coalition, like the Austrian [[FPÖ]] which also seeks being part in coalitions (and already is in two states) and remains loyal to all of its positions. --[[User:Elessar|Elessar]] ([[User talk:Elessar|talk]]) 14:09, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

:::::::::Fair enough, but you get the point: there are two factions in the party on the best way foreward for the party. One of them support coalition agreements and the other side is less pragmatic in this regard. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:23, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

==Brexit==
Hi - not sure why you changed my edits on the BREXIT page - I tried to provide an accurate account of what is happening and what is being reported by many news outlets --unsigned comment by HORSEMAN
:Hello "HORSEMAN", I removed the info about the potential referendums because this was just speculation that died down. I also thought that some of your wording (such as the "full complexity and impacts of BREXIT become apparent" and by removing the mention of the EU being obstructionist) seemed to insert a left-of-center bias into the article. CP is a conservative encyclopedia, and we align firmly with Brexit and Euroskepticism. However, I will see if I can re-add some of your wording. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:31, 10 August 2017 (EDT)
::Another problem is that for the part about the proposed payments and EU citizen rights, you did not provide sources. The existing info already had a source, and you changed the info while keeping the source. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:35, 10 August 2017 (EDT)
:::Hi Again, would this link suffice http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-17-2001_en.htm It is the definitive statement from the EU negotiating team and sets out the negotiating agenda. Thanks Horseman
::::You can definitely cite the source, but do you also have third party sources as well? I see nothing in the EU source about the monetary amount of the settlement. We prefer sources with conservative editorial stances. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:57, 10 August 2017 (EDT)
:::::Is this syitable, I don't pay for Telegraph articles so only have this link. Thanks Horseman
::::::The Telegraph is one of numerous conservative news organizations. Besides, their non-commentary articles are free for viewing. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:13, 10 August 2017 (EDT)

==[[Margaret Sanger]] revision that you undid==
Hi 1990'sguy,

Is there a way to reword what I wrote in such a way that it could be considered "encyclopedic"?

Thanks,
[[User:Bluedogdemocrat|Bluedogdemocrat]] ([[User talk:Bluedogdemocrat|talk]]) 22:59, 18 August 2017 (EDT)
:You could write "Planned Parenthood eventually expanded to support the form of murder known as abortion." Something like that. We should keep the wording encyclopedic, as this is not a blog or anything like that. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:05, 18 August 2017 (EDT)

== Re: Block of TimJim ==

Sorry about that, I wasn't aware you had already blocked TimJim when I blocked him, so I reset the block length back to that of your original block. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 22:45, 19 August 2017 (EDT)

== Article move request ==

Hi I'd be happy to move those articles you are requesting, but as you know, I cannot avoid the creation of redirects. Let me know if you want this, but hopefully you can get it done the right way. It's also probably easier to ask for a move than a delete. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 17:43, 21 August 2017 (EDT)
:I appreciate your offer, David, but I think it would be better if I keep it simple for Andy, rather than explain that the articles were moved and that he only has to delete the redirect -- having one person do it is more simple. Thanks anyway! :) --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:46, 21 August 2017 (EDT)
::Agreed...okay. I didn't want to cut in and disrupt things, but just thought I'd offer. Cheers! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 17:49, 21 August 2017 (EDT)
:::I do appreciate your offer, David. Thanks! It looks like Andy just moved the articles. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:50, 21 August 2017 (EDT)

==Contact==
You can email me at wirepaladin36@gmail.com [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 11:22, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

==snoopy2==
1990s guy, I just want to verify u could read the Theistic ev. entry and 1994 film clip on my user talk. any comments?
:I could watch it, but would you please explain what it's about in a little more detail? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:55, 11 December 2017 (EST)

== Maybe I was too pessimistic. Good news ==

'''Why [[Democrats]] Should Be''' Losing Sleep Over Generation Z.[https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleystahl/2017/08/11/why-democrats-should-be-losing-sleep-over-generation-z/]

Bye for now. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:47, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
:Thanks for the article. Bye for now. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:48, 5 September 2017 (EDT)

== File comparison tool ==

Did Cons ever get back to you with the comparison tool? I'm curious about it, and whether it does a good job of checking for copied content. The problems that it appears to solve are different from the problems of comparison tools used in software development. I'm curious about whether it uses line hashing, sentence hashing, word group hashing, and things like that. I'd like to try it out, and not just at CP. In fact, probably not at all for CP; I'm not interested in who plagiarizes what at CP, though, when I am, I use other techniques to catch people. I'm just curious as to whether those other techniques have been automated.

It's puzzling that Cons deleted the screenshot, as though he ''wants'' people to believe he's a liar, though I don't think he is.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 14:57, 12 September 2017 (EDT)
:I can assure you that the tool exists. I have not tried it yet and thus cannot answer your question. I have no reason to try it as JDano's essays were deleted, so I recommend that you ask Conservative directly these things. Maybe he will share it with you. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:23, 12 September 2017 (EDT)

::Great!! I'm still very much interested in it. Is it a "cloud app"? Is it a downloadable app that I can run locally on my own computer? Can you send me a URL?
::By the way, the standard wiki comparison of your last edit to the [[Guy Verhofstadt]] article, just as a random example, shows how bad text comparers can be. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 17:40, 13 September 2017 (EDT)
:::You are going to have to ask Conservative for the details of the tool -- he told me not to give it away to anyone, and while I personally have no problem with sharing it with you, I shouldn't go against what he said. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:43, 13 September 2017 (EDT)
::::Well, this is really weird. Cons seems to be trying to censor the internet itself, hiding the location of this tool. And he seems to think that only you can be trusted with it. He said "I will share this tool with 1990sguy [...] so he can evaluate your [JDano's] efforts in an objective way." I of course took this as a challenge. A Google search for "similar page checker tool" gets a number of hits. Ignoring the ones that cost a lot of money, and those that attempt to check a given page against the entire internet, narrowed it down to a few. This one: [https://www.duplichecker.com/similar-page-checker.php] seems to be the right thing. It's a "cloud app" rather than an installable program, but I can put up with that. It has the same appearance—color and layout—as the screenshot that Cons posted and removed. I ran it on the versions of this page before and after your recent reply to me, and it said they were 100% the same. I'm not particularly happy about that, but the additional text was only about 0.3 percent of the total, so I suppose I can accept that. Then I ran it on versions that differ in length by 10% (the 100K version and the 110K version.) It said they were 98% similar. Not good. But I still might find it to be a useful tool. There are pages not relating to JDano that could benefit from such an analysis.

::::I will probably check in with Cons on this, once he stays away from CP for 10 days.

::::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:39, 13 September 2017 (EDT)

==Getting help==
I am trying to fix the stuff on the Corporate bullies page. Am still learning my way around on how to use things. Think I am starting to get it though. The Georgia 2016 stuff has a lot of info and I am in the process of editing it, though it's going to take a while (at least 20 or more minutes. I'm trying though. (BTW, if I wasn't supposed to edit here, sorry. I don't know how to reply to your remark otherwise.) [[User:PatriotMongoose|PatriotMongoose]] ([[User talk:PatriotMongoose|talk]]) 22:31, 15 September 2017 (EDT)
:It's OK to edit here. I recommend that you read CP's guidelines, and probably more importantly, that you read [[Help:How to edit a website like Conservapedia]]. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:34, 15 September 2017 (EDT)

==Fabulous block and reverts==

Fabulous block and reverts this afternoon!!!! Well done!!!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 18:51, 21 September 2017 (EDT)
:Thanks, Andy! :) --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:52, 21 September 2017 (EDT)

== re: JohnZ ==

User: JohnZ fails to recognize that my interest to be a referee to protect a marginal online sparring partner (whose greatest achievement was his dogged stubbornness to ignore facts/evidence) was largely protected by his edits to main space articles and my desire for an online sparring partner.

His rudeness to other editors and his desire to barely skate by with his main space edits certainly did not help matters. In addition, given the [[decline of the atheist movement]] and it now being a hopeless cause destined to ever increasing irrelevance, my desire for an atheist online sparring partner is non-existent at this point given my current/future priorities.

If he wants to create two quality, well-sourced original articles of at least 2,00 words on these topics [[Anti-religious Soviet Union propaganda]] and [[Christian persecution in communist China]] to restore his other editing privileges, that is what is required.

He would also have to pledge to refrain from hurling insults to other editors (idiot, etc.). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:01, 3 November 2017 (EDT)

:Hopefully he'll do it. We've given him these opportunities before and he rejected them. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:18, 3 November 2017 (EDT)
::I made a minor adjustment to his requirements for fully restoring his editing privileges in case someone creates articles on those subjects.

::Secondly, ardent secular leftists generally always double down regardless of any contrary facts/evidence presented to them. Of course, you never know what is going to happen. The Apostle Paul went from being one of Christianity's chief opponents to being its greatest champion. He will just need to be open minded.

::It is very widely recognized that there is and has been religious persecution in communist China and that there was anti-religious propaganda in the former Soviet Union. So I am giving him ample opportunity to show that he is not a close-minded individual given to hurling insults. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:31, 3 November 2017 (EDT)

I would say no to this for a couple reasons. The first is his blatant disrespect of everyone here, and he has shown that multiple times. The gist of it is a pretense of superiority over us, as if it is mandatory that we listen to him; he stated a short time ago that some of us are idiots for not engaging him in conversation. Which I might add is his kind of conversation.

The second reason is that he's a leftist brand of liberal from Great Britain, which means we cannot change his way of thinking whatsoever. Unfortunately for someone who is that close-minded he is going to go into lock-step with every other like-minded individual in his country, which would mean the loss of the United Kingdom as a political entity within a few years time. In his case, he is more concerned with picking a fight with the users of a small American conservative website then he is with what he and his kind are allowing to happen in Britain, namely the Islamic takeover. As a leftist, he probably feels he can get along with them in the name of diversity and multiculturalism, but when all is said and done he will either be forced on his hands and knees with his butt high in the air, or he'll have his head chopped off.

Unfortunately, some people think they're so better than others that they've blinded themselves to what they're actually doing. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 04:35, 4 November 2017 (EDT)
:Karajou, if you look at my comment to his talk page, you will see that I am giving him an opportunity to show that he can be open-minded and reasonable by writing on two topics related to atheistic communism persecution of Christians/religious (namely [[Christian persecution in communist China]] and [[Anti-religious propaganda in the Soviet Union]]) via two quality articles of at least 2,000 words.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 05:38, 4 November 2017 (EDT)

== Anti-Christian bias in Wikipedia ==

Hello 1990'sguy. Am I being hypersensitive or is Wikipedia's anti-Christian bias increasing? For example, the recent dispute about content at Answers in Genesis.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AAnswers_in_Genesis&type=revision&diff=810473662&oldid=810471171] I see also that User:Synthetic Woolly Mammoth[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Synthetic_Woolly_Mammoth] has just been blocked, allegedly for being a sockpuppet of Biscuittin, but more likely because he has been speaking up in support of some Christian editors. [[User:Desmonduk|Desmonduk]] ([[User talk:Desmonduk|talk]]) 05:27, 20 November 2017 (EST)
:I know another editor who has extensively edited topics related to Christianity and atheism on WP, and he told me that the ati-Christian bias on the site was much worse back around 2012. The militant atheists don't have as much power as they did back then. However, the anti-Christian bias obviously is still very bad, especially on YEC topics, which I have been dealing with for years already. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:20, 20 November 2017 (EST)

== Block length ==

Thanks for your alert block of new user "CPishilarious", but I'm going to change the block duration from 2 years to 1 month. Long blocks are disfavored on wikis because they block the IP address as well as the user. The IP address could be a library or other general access IP address, or the user could move or be a college student, or the user could have a change of heart. But thanks again for your quick action.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:11, 20 November 2017 (EST)
:OK, and you're welcome. I have seen blocked vandals come back with their same accounts after their blocks expire, so I wanted to protect against that. But I will shorten blocks like these in the future. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:54, 21 November 2017 (EST)
::Thanks so much for your alert block this morning, but again the block duration is too long. Another user could be trying to use that same IP address within a few months, or the user himself could have a change of heart. I'll shorten it to 4 months. Thanks!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:25, 4 December 2017 (EST)
:::Andy, it feels like I'm the only editor you're messaging about block length, ''even though my blocks are much shorter than most other editors.'' For example, just yesterday, I blocked two accounts for six months for having a silly username and for (relatively) non-serious vandalism, but shortly later, DMorris reset the blocks for 5 years. See here: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Bernieman][http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Hillary_clinton] If you're going (for good reason) to message me for my blocks, please do the same for the other editors who prefer even longer blocks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:33, 4 December 2017 (EST)
:::But yes, I will still shorten my blocks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:36, 4 December 2017 (EST)

== Suggested article ==

Here is an article suggestion:

*[[Donald Trump and evangelicals]]

I think there would be public interest in such an article. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:20, 9 December 2017 (EST)
:Thanks. If I get time, I will start this article. I will add it to my list of articles to create. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:16, 9 December 2017 (EST)

== Two things ==

For one, why do you not have email enabled? Secondly, consider longer blocks for these obviously malicious accounts. You can block an account for infinity and the autoblock on the IP still only lasts 24 hours. There is no reason for these sleeper accounts to come back to life three months later. [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] ([[User talk:DMorris|talk]]) 16:19, 13 December 2017 (EST)

:In his defense, he was doing longer blocks until [[User_talk:1990'sguy#Block_length|Andy started asking him not too]], then [[User_talk:1990'sguy#Block_length_2|reminded him again]]. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 16:25, 13 December 2017 (EST)

::Yes, for crying out loud, why am I the only one being criticized for my block lengths? If I make my block lengths long, Andy posts on my talk page, and if I make my block lengths shorter, DMorris posts on my talk page.

::DMorris, please talk to Andy about this. I will continue making my blocks on the shorter side until your differing opinions are sorted out.

::About my email, I have my email address posted on my user page. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:46, 13 December 2017 (EST)

== Articles of the year: 2017 - your article is being featured on the main page (left side) ==

*[[Donald Trump achievements]]

*[[European migrant crisis]]

*[[Atheists and genetic mutations]]

Keep up the good work.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
:Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:12, 24 December 2017 (EST)

== Nationalism v Globalism ==

I went ahead and added a link to the Gardner article on the Nationalism v Globalism article for you. I figured since we were referencing it, it would be good to see the original article too.--[[User:Whizkid|Whizkid]] ([[User talk:Whizkid|talk]]) 23:52, 7 January 2018 (EST)
:Thanks! I already saw and added it to other articles where I mentioned Gardner. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:53, 7 January 2018 (EST)

==Homeschooling==
I deleted the paragraph on Texas requirements (which I originally added) since it was duplicative of the information I added from HSLDA (which covers all 50 states) regarding state requirements. I left the New Hampshire one since it involved a court imposing its will on a family in violation of state law.

I'm glad you liked my original work, but after finding something better and covering more than just one state, I amended my original work. Though after your comments, I revised it to explain that another state court (Texas) made homeschooling far easier than before. [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 17:22, 29 January 2018 (EST)

:Thanks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:27, 29 January 2018 (EST)

==Deep State==
I will agree with your removal of the word "theory", but I did add the phrase "(or are believed to control)" because there are many conservative Christians who are not totally convinced that the deep state really exists. I believe my edits will be a happy medium between those who hold to the deep state view and those who do not. [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 15:11, 30 January 2018 (EST)
:I kept most of your "is believed/considered" wording (except for the first sentence, which is unnecessary as the first sentence already makes clear that "deep state" is a term and not necessarily reality. I found most of your other changes to be too wordy and unnecessary, so I reverted some of it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:04, 30 January 2018 (EST)
::I looked at your revisions and all you did was revert to your original article, with a few minor edits to try to convince me that you really took my suggestions into consideration. Basically what you did to the article is like putting wood filler and new paint on a house with termite rot. I've dealt with folks like you over on "the other site", who think that once they write an article, it's perfect and can't accept any changes to it. I'm not going to waste time with this one any more; clearly you're trying to espouse tinfoil hat conspiracy theory under the guise of "Christian conservatism". [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 09:22, 31 January 2018 (EST)
:::Much of your changes involved inserting parenthetical notes, which I think made the article more bloated than it had to be. The "or are believed to control" phrase in the first sentence was simply unnecessary and overemphasized your disbelief in the deep state. The part about Wall Street was cited to a good research article, so I don't think we need the "is believed" language for that. But I will still see if I can incorporate more of your edits.
:::About the existence of the deep state, it and the drive for one-world government are things that should be common and uncontroversial knowledge -- but people (both supporters and detractors) "conspiracize" these things and that's how accusations of me wearing a tinfoil hat come about. Look at the evidence -- most of our society (except theologically conservative Christians, most of them probably being premillennialist) accept the Idea of Progress, adopted during the Enlightenment Era. They believe that humanity is progressing for the better, and that this will lead to a one-world utopia with world peace and freedom for humanity (read Kant, for example). Thus, they believe that national identity, subsidiarity, and national sovereignty are growing useless and antiquated and actually are impediments to this utopia. This flows into their policies -- advancing international organizations, taking away national sovereignty, etc. As for the deep state, just look at the whole DOJ/FBI stuff going on right now, or the fact that Republicans and Democrats hire administration personnel from the same group of organizations -- CFR, Trilateral, etc.
:::The garbage that there is some secret conspiracy by liberals to take over the world, that their motives are malevolent, that they want to do evil, that this is a short-term project, and that the Illuminati is involved with all this -- this is all garbage perfectly fit for "the other site". In reality, the drive for a one-world utopia is one of the fundamental philosophical views in our culture, and liberals openly see it as natural/normal/benign (and they're in it for the long haul). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:04, 31 January 2018 (EST)

== Suggested Name Change for [[Christmas and Easter Catholic]] ==
I propose changing this to "Christmas and Easter Christian", since the phenomenon of persons attending church on those days is by no means limited to Catholics. [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 16:17, 30 January 2018 (EST)
:I disagree. I recommend that a separate article entitled "Christmas and Easter Christian" be created -- C&E Catholicism is a notable concept on its own right, enough to have its own article. I think an article on C&E Christianity in general would be a good addition. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:07, 30 January 2018 (EST)
::What's the difference? Both are the same phenomenon -- "so-called" Christian believers who attend only during those two holidays (or weddings and funerals). The current article is fine, it just needs to be revised to not pick on one branch of Christianity. [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 09:17, 31 January 2018 (EST)
:::I've heard Roman Catholics specifically mentioned much more than other Christians when hearing about this "phenomenon." But I will ask another editor of his opinion on this. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:32, 31 January 2018 (EST)

==Campaign promises==
Hello,

The thought occurred to me that Wikipedia does not normally catalog campaign promises.(It never has, that I have seen) Elections there follow a formula of "what did they actually do after getting elected" and election results - which is both boring and completely useless, because we have a big problem with people running for office one way and then governing another way. This leaves a glaring hole of accountability with all of our politicians and it also offers us an opportunity to distinguish ourselves from Wikipedia. What do you think about this? I made a few changes [[Bruce Rauner|here]] as an example start. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 15:00, 4 February 2018 (EST)
:I think your suggestion is a great idea -- we have too many politicians who make really great promises during election campaigns, but they later act like they never even made those promises. When Rauner and his GOP primary opponent (Jeanne Ives) sat down with the ''Chicago Tribune'' editorial board a few days ago, Rauner said that he never promised he would veto a major pro-abortion bill that he ultimately signed (he actually explicitly promised he would multiple times).[http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/01/30/jeanne-ives-crushes-gop-gov-bruce-rauner-illinois-candidates-meet-first-time/][http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/01/31/conservative-jeanne-ives-rips-il-gov-bruce-rauner-abortion-flip-flop/]
:I can also think of Sen. Thom Tillis of NC who campaigned against amnesty in 2014 and is now advocating for a "conservative" amnesty bill (though it's inferior to the Goodlatte bill).
:I support your suggestion. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:11, 4 February 2018 (EST)

== FPÖ ==

Hi, I just wanted to ask you why you have removed [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Freedom_Party_of_Austria&diff=1403167&oldid=1403166 my entry] on the article of the Freedom Party of Austria. The [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kreisky%E2%80%93Peter%E2%80%93Wiesenthal_affair Kreisky–Peter–Wiesenthal affair] is an important event in the history of this party that should not be discreeted.--[[User:JoeyJ|JoeyJ]] ([[User talk:JoeyJ|talk]]) 09:41, 7 February 2018 (EST)
:First off, the info was inserted right in the middle of a paragraph discussing the FPO's ideological development and alliance with the SPO. Your info was out of place.
:Second, the info was unduly wordy. I am sick of seeing the media and leftists do everything in their power to tie right-wing conservative parties like the FPO to Nazi Germany, such as by unduly emphasizing those aspects of the parties and calling them "far-right", "extreme right", "ultra-right", etc. By American conservative standards, these parties are actually quite moderate, and for those of us who realize that Nazism is a vastly overrated threat (placed alongside climate change by the Left), such parties have clearly moved away from their pasts.
:I don't want our articles to accept the left-wing narratives of these right-wing populist parties. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:50, 7 February 2018 (EST)
::Well, all the informations I have put in the article were confirmed with trustworthy sources. [[Simon Wiesenthal]] who accused the FPÖ leader Friedrich Peter of being part in a unit which committed massacres against jews, was himself a Conservative. Wiesenthal supported the (at that time very conservative) Austrian People's Party. So it is not easy to label his accusations as "left-wing narratives". I am also pretty sure that the Conservative government of Israel does not spread "left-wing propaganda" if they criticize the party for its charged history. Instead of simply removing facts from the article, you might emphasize how the FPÖ moved away from its past.--[[User:JoeyJ|JoeyJ]] ([[User talk:JoeyJ|talk]]) 10:01, 7 February 2018 (EST)
:::Israel is a Jewish state, so issues related to the Holocaust are sensitive to them. But as much as I support Israel and its right-wing government, Israel's position toward the FPO is irrational, and they are unduly obsessed with Nazism like Western Europe is. Israel's opinion on the FPO means very little because of the context -- it's easy to offend Israel on matters like this.
:::About Wiesenthal, I don't know anything about him, but him supporting the OVP does not mean much to me. If the party were "very conservative", why did it support the EU, Maastricht Treaty, Schengen Agreement, etc.
:::And yes, these are the narratives promoted by the Left, the establishment, and the media. These are the same people who were comparing Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler during the election campaign and who tried to smear Breitbart News as anti-Semite (despite loads of evidence to the contrary), among many other cases. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:17, 7 February 2018 (EST)
::::Just because these "narratives" are promoted by the Left it does not mean that they are wrong. I can ensure you that Simon Wiesenthal was never a supporter of left-wing policies. As I already told you it would be better to emphasize the current measures by Strache to reappraise the controversial history of this party instead of denying it.--[[User:JoeyJ|JoeyJ]] ([[User talk:JoeyJ|talk]]) 11:20, 8 February 2018 (EST)
:::::They're wrong -- they overemphasize every small and petty incident related to parties like the FPO that allude to Nazi Germany. Their point in doing so is to make it seem like that if we elect these people/parties into power (including Donald Trump), we'll be repeating 1933 all over again and will usher in the end of freedom in Europe -- never mind that Germany is still enforcing the Nazi ban on homeschooling, or that many Western European countries have free speech restrictions even on topics like Islam and homosexuality, or etc. Conservapedia will not go along with the media -- we acknowledge that parties like the FPO are conservative and/or right-wing (not "far-right" or "neo-Nazi") and the best choice in order to protect/expand freedom and protect European culture/patriotism. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:58, 8 February 2018 (EST)

== request ==

Can you create this article: [[Donald Trump's major achievements]]? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:39, 9 February 2018 (EST)
:This seems like a good idea, and I will do it. I won't do it immediately, since I have a lot of other things to do, but I will create it soon. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:54, 9 February 2018 (EST)
::OK. Thanks. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:18, 9 February 2018 (EST)

I'm very sorry about the article. If it make you feel like a advertisement. However, everything that is state is true. Thank you for your understanding. Pleased assist by make any corrections. That you think is necessary. When your time is most convenient.

Your brother in Christ,
Luke
:Thanks for your message, but the article I deleted is not acceptable for Conservapedia. There is nothing I can do to change that, unless you receive coverage from good sources (Breitbart, Fox, etc.). I'm keeping the other article for now, since it's one I can imagine keeping, but I'm discussing it with other editors to see what to ultimately do about it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:00, 21 February 2018 (EST)

Could you add some categories to my page please? [[User:Willow Smith|Willow Smith]] ([[User talk:Willow Smith|talk]]) 11:26, 22 February 2018 (EST)

==Response to your complaints==
From what appears EVERY time someone creates a new page or edits an existing one:

"Please note that all contributions to Conservapedia may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here."

If the real rule is "any contributions by Conservapedia administrators -- no matter how good, bad, or ugly they may be -- are fixed for all time and never to be altered", then make that the rule. But don't invite someone to improve things, then complain because they do. [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 10:26, 6 March 2018 (EST)
:Your bolding does not improve things. Also, nobody reverted your turning pages into redirects -- it's just a good idea to let people know before making major unilateral changes. If your complaint is that I'm messaging you about these things, then you have no real complaint at all. If you make edits here, you (like I was, and still am to an extent) are bound to be messaged about these things, which other editors do with the intention of improving others' editing. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:37, 6 March 2018 (EST)

::Additionally, administrators and editors alike must watch the activity of others, especially newer editors. A few people have the hobby of trying to vandalize CP in any way possible, so excuse us if we sound cynical or obstinate, but some "new users" are actually just the same vandals as always. Since we don't really know you yet, we do our best to assume good intent, but can't afford to ignore what seems to be odd behavior.
::I'm sure you'll do fine, if you just listen to the recommendations of others and keep improving content. Thank you for your efforts, and for understanding! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 17:16, 6 March 2018 (EST)

==Thank you for the intro==
Just wanted to say thank you for the welcome! PS--Do you know what an eagle does when a storm approaches? [[User:Bcarlin|Bcarlin]] ([[User talk:Bcarlin|talk]]) 20:34, 21 March 2018 (EDT)

== Double standard article is now unprotected ==
1990sguy, I unprotected the [[Double standard]] article.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:16, 3 April 2018 (EDT)
:Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:43, 3 April 2018 (EDT)

== Regarding the Whale article ==

Hello,
I would like to know what caused you to revert my edits to the Whale article, and what I could do in the future to avoid this.--[[User:Cetacean|Cetacean]] ([[User talk:Cetacean|talk]]) 23:23, 23 April 2018 (EDT)
:First off, I did not revert everything -- not even close. I reverted what appeared to be unnecessary wordiness on your part, along with your insertion of evolutionist-favored terms ("evolutionary biologists" instead of "evolutionists"--believe it or not, but people who believe in a young Earth can be evolutionary biologists too). If you keep your wording as concise as possible and if you choose your wording while keeping in mind that this is a conservative-Christian encyclopedia (thus, using terms favored by conservatives and Christians), then you won't be reverted. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:10, 23 April 2018 (EDT)
::OK, thanks for letting me know. I'll keep that in mind. I think I was correct about Darwin's views, though - could I reinstate that part?--[[User:Cetacean|Cetacean]] ([[User talk:Cetacean|talk]]) 23:23, 23 April 2018 (EDT)
:::Fine, but only if you change that part. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:27, 23 April 2018 (EDT)
::::Done. Thank you!--[[User:Cetacean|Cetacean]] ([[User talk:Cetacean|talk]]) 23:40, 23 April 2018 (EDT)
== Thanks for your edits ==

Thanks for cleaning up the edits to [[Biblical scientific foreknowledge]]. I was planning to do likewise.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:13, 24 April 2018 (EDT)
:You're welcome, happy to help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:15, 24 April 2018 (EDT)

== Ummm... how? ==

Ok... if not supernatural then how is evolution a folklore genre? I don't understand... Do you go to your doctor... Do you believe in evidence based medicine? If so, are you aware that many medicines and treatment methods are derived from experiment on animals... In your viewpoint why? If animals are COMPLETELY unrelated to us IN ANY WAY... then what is the point of experimenting and more importantly, why do those experiments help us develop pills and treatment of diseases? Why do the animals most close to us suffer from related diseases? Why do chimps suffer from HIV and not cockroaches? Just coincidence that our nearest relative is the one who suffers from problems more close to us? --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 00:01, 25 April 2018 (EDT)

== Things for you to note ==

Ok... thanks... I feel like there are a couple of things you have to know about potholer54... First, he DOES NOT discuss the political regulations on climate change (https://youtu.be/MTJQPyTVtNA?t=10) in other words, he maintains that political part of the debate (whether conservative or not) is NOT his business. Also, he has criticized leftists for blowing up the effects of climate change (he has frequently said that science does not support earth being destroyed by climate change since in history there have been higher CO2 levels)... these are the reasons why I felt that my wording was correct, but I will not start arguing. Do as you wish. I only ask that if you modify my article please try expanding it (there are enough stubs and short articles here), and cite sources. Even if the sources would not be considered legitimate (by other's standards), citing the sources makes the article look good. I see too many articles, where the writer goes on and on without citing a single source.

About evolution. I do NOT agree with everything here. But I understand your mission. And I understand that people here feel differently and it is NOT my mission to undermine your work. I simply add and create pages which I think Conservapedia lacks, and I try to write from neutral point of view (more experienced people can edit it to sound more conservative, I do not want to seem like a troll).

I did as you commanded. I know the wiki that shall not be named is not welcome here, but I wanted people to have another way to contact me. Anyways, it is removed
--[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 19:09, 26 April 2018 (EDT)
:Responded on your talk page. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:26, 26 April 2018 (EDT)

1)Yes... there are several instances of him trying to take the politics out of it... I'll send them later

2)When you say he "criticizes skepticism" as opposed to "denialism" the reader may have the impression that potholer is against being skeptical when in fact he is against what he considers to be denialsim... He is pro free speech, he welcomes questions, I have even spoken with him at length months ago. That is why I wrote what I wrote.

3)That's ok. While my interests change very unpredictably and rapidly, recently I am more interested in history, pseudohistory and archaeology, pseudoarchaeology articles.

4)I understand... I will obey. But just for curiosity, can I know where does that rule originate from? I have read the Guidelines and the Commandments and I did not see any mention of the site which calls itself that which it thinks Conservapedia is not? I do obey, and I respect, but just for interest, where is that rule documented and what is the purpose (since you seem to tolerate other anti-Conservapedia wikis like Lieberapedia) --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 20:48, 26 April 2018 (EDT)

:Responded again on your talk page. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:31, 26 April 2018 (EDT)

::OK... Is there a way for me to add images (illustrations) to my articles? How do I do that and what is CP policy on that? Are google images, wiki images ok? --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 21:43, 26 April 2018 (EDT)
:::You can post requests at [[Conservapedia:Image upload requests]]. User:DavidB4 usually uploads the requests. If the image has a license that allows us to use it, we can upload it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:53, 26 April 2018 (EDT)

== Blocked me ==

Hey...
1)I thought that the ban meant that I was actually banned, meaning the site would prevent me from editing, so when I saw that I could edit, I thought it was ok... I did not know that you meant I should stay away from those topics. I simply thought the article used to many words, so I made it simple and more encyclopedic.

2)Your addition to my article is also written, don't get me wrong, a little too simply. I understand that editors here do not accept the scientific consensus on evolution, but at least you can write it more encyclopedically, like you state that scientists say that humans turned from dumb to intelligent and turned to farmers... That sounds like something a 12 year old would write... Can't you make it sound more scientific. I mean, disagree with it, but at least a)represent it correctly b)write it in a grown-up manner...

3)Why did you delete my "Gay Nazis" article... From what I understand, that is pseudo historical and Hitler hated gays and persecuted them?

By the way, thanks for a reasonable block time... I thought I might be blocked for another two years without a chance to explain myself --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 18:26, 27 April 2018 (EDT)
:1) Topic bans mean you're not allowed to edit a topic, not that you don't have the ability to do so. Besides, regardless of your apparent misunderstanding, you removed content that you disagreed with, something I told you repeatedly not to do.
:2) Disapproving of my wording isn't a good reason to remove the entire thing, especially considering that it is one of the few examples in the article that secularists hate. Besides, we're supposed to give reasonably simple explanations when writing (see [[Conservapedia:Guidelines#Style]]). My explanation is what the "scientific/historical consensus" essentially holds, and if that's the case, there's no reason to make it read like it was copied out of a prestigious journal. But regardless, I will see if there's any wording that I could change.
:3) It cited two explicitly left-wing sources that use this example to advocate for social-leftist policies and to criticize modern American conservatives. Surely there must be more apolitical sources out there about this? Also, regardless, it's good not to confuse Adolf Hitler's opposition to homosexuality (and the policies that came out of that) with homosexuality's presence in the Nazi Party. What I mean is that some high-ranking people in the Nazi Party, who helped found and build up the party (most notably Ernst Röhm), were homosexuals, and it's more complicated than "Nazis hated homosexuals."
:4) You're welcome. But also a warning: if you don't improve (and I hope you do improve), I will progressively increase the block lengths. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:55, 27 April 2018 (EDT)

::Ok, fine... But out of curiosity, does everyone on this site share your views on evolution, black holes, relativity, atheists etc? Is this site representative of Conservative (and/or Christian) values in general or a very specific type of sense? Do mainstream conservatives reference this site as an authority? And also, is there a rule (formal) where this has to be YEC or strictly Christian? Or is it an unspoken rule? Or does it depend on editors? I'm not trying to step on anyone's toes, I am genuinely interested. One more thing, you told me that I could NOT become an admin/sysop because there were very few, yet you clearly have more authority than me. You block and unblock me at will... How can I get that authority? Thanks! --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 23:39, 27 April 2018 (EDT)
:::No, not everyone shares CP's views on these issues -- in fact, we've had some liberals and atheists edit CP on relatively good terms. However, most editors here (including myself, though I'm agnostic on the relativity info and opposed to the CBP) share the vast majority of CP's stated views. As the owner of CP, Andy obviously has the right to choose what it says.
:::CP is representative of, for lack of a better term, what I would call "full conservatism", rather than cafeteria conservatism, where people pick and choose what parts of conservatism they support and what they don't. There are many people (especially in Europe, but also here) who say they are conservative but share many views and even many underlying presuppositions of the globalist Left. CP is pretty consistent with our support for limited/small government and staying true to the values of the founding fathers.
:::It really depends on who you mean when you say "mainstream conservative" -- that's a slippery term that can mean different things.
:::I'm not an admin -- I'm technically an assistant admin, since I have many but not all sysop rights. Even getting those took a while, and it's all at Andy's discretion. If you become a good editor who respects CP's perspective and does not challenge them in any way, you'll probably get some rights eventually. But you were just blocked twice, and you're still having problems learning how to edit CP without undermining its perspective -- I don't think you should count on being promoted anytime soon -- focus on other things here for now. CP has a significantly stricter sysop policy than "the other website", and for good reason -- we're the target of parodists and other people who regularly seek to vandalize and undermine us, and we want to ensure that we don't have to deal with a parodist sysop or anything like that. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:09, 28 April 2018 (EDT)

== Sorry ==

Sorry, you'll have to explain that more... What do I not do? --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 15:58, 28 April 2018 (EDT)

== Left Wing Sources ==

Hi... I do not usually look at the political leanings... I cite sources which I am SURE state something that is verifiable... Though, SPLC might be left leaning, I am SURE they can get Richard Spencer's birth date right... So I cited as a source for his birth date... The RWW, was a YOUTUBE video, that is the one I found first, I don't cite them to support left leaning politics, just facts that are verifiable by ANY honest person... I repeat SPLC might be left, but I am sure they can get a BIRTH DATE correctly! So that is what I cited, but do as you please! --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 16:22, 28 April 2018 (EDT)
:Surely, there are better sources that give Spencer's birthdate than SPLC. Also, those sources are not merely "left-leaning" (that designation more properly belongs to something like "The Atlantic") -- they are far-left partisan interest groups. They have no business being here. As a conservative encyclopedia, it makes sense to predominantly rely on conservative sources (or, at least, apolitical sources). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:27, 28 April 2018 (EDT)

== Arguing With You ==

Lol.. You are trying to get me to argue about evolution... but the problem is that if I do that I (and ONLY I, ie NOT both of us) will get blocked... It's kinda dirty that you on one hand basically provoke me to argument and if I do respond to your arguments you have the authority to block me... Assuming, this time you really were interested and WILL NOT block me for simply RESPONDING TO WHAT YOU TOLD ME... It is my humble opinion, based on what you have said here, you do not understand what The Theory of Evolution actually is... You seem to think that evolution says that monkeys turned human and that macro evolution means that a new organism appears over time, although macro evolution is THE SAME as micro evolution only on a larger time scale (yes as simple as that)... You have made it clear NOT to correct these errors (ERRORS) so I respect conservapedia rules... I respect what you told me and I keep away from stuff that we disagree on and keep contributing what I can in good faith...

Last time we got into this argument, I pointed out a really good and simple thing... I told you how we can see the familial pattern and the animals closer to us suffer more ailments like us... I also pointed out that experiments on animals closer to us help us find treatment, this was a good point to think about... Instead you chose to ignore it... So I did NOT want to get blocked, so I simply let it go (again, respecting your opinions)... Yet you show NONE of this respect calling 200 years of research "junk science" simply because you have been unable to process this information... @Karajou is YEC too and he thinks that evolution is fake, but he does not push it, and he is not calling me out on "believing" (or understanding, as I prefer) evolution... He simply keeps what he believes to himself... I can respect that!

I am ready to respond if you have questions... But only if I am guaranteed not to get blocked like last time (after I RESPONDED to QUESTIONS addressed to me FOR 2 years)! --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 20:40, 30 April 2018 (EDT)

:On a side note, I happen to know of a CP user who openly created a RW account. They were immediately interrogated on evolution as well.
:To the main issue, though, microevolution is not the same as macroevolution. You should really do some research on the subject. There is a significant difference between a change in fur length, and a change in species. That and other issues I disagree with you aside, I don't think you will or should get blocked simply for stating your opinion. As long as you continue to respect our polices regarding mainspace articles, you should be safe. (I don't know the details of the block, but I suspect there was more going on than just an angry response to your opposing opinion.)
:Anyway, I'm cutting in on this conversation, and I should really just let 1990'sguy speak for himself. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 22:00, 30 April 2018 (EDT)

::@Kingdamian1: I am '''not''' trying to argue with you about evolution. First off, I explicitly tried to end the discussion on Andy's talk page because I didn't want to use it arguing about political positions. Also, I was more focused on your political positions. We all know what you believe on evolution. I was tempted to ask clarifying questions about your ''political'' views, but I thought it wasn't worth it.
::Also, I actually don't care whether you believe in evolution. What I care about is the fact that you are apparently unable to put away your bias when editing CP. Your edits on the [[Potholer54]], [[Pseudohistory]], and [[Macroevolution]] inserted pro-evolution bias into CP (and keep in mind that your first edit after joining was creating a debate page on evolution where the first sentence insulted CP). As I noted elsewhere, you inserted bias on other topics in your edits. I don't care about your personal views on any of this (there are several CP users who believe in evolution) -- the fact that you are struggling to make your editing compatible with CP's point of view is a problem. Hopefully, you're learning.
::Claiming that I'm "''unable to process this information''" on evolution shows how little you actually know about me, and it's not a good strategy for staying on this site. I've thought a lot about this issue, and its strengthened my belief that the Bible is authoritative in all it says and that science affirms it as true (rather than Ephesians 6:14).
::DavidB4's comment above is correct, and to clarify to him, Kingdamian1 was blocked (by Karajou and me) for more than simply giving an opposing opinion. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:18, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
I CLEARLY have it on my page that I am a LIBERTARIAN... according to Conservapedia, that is what you would consider conservative, you keep telling me I admitted I was NOT conservative, where Conservapedia COUNTS Libertarianism as conservative... About evolution, I do NOT think you do not think about the subject, I think you look at it FROM A SINGLE point of view. I suspect that your view about evolution comes from strictly YEC... The first of your many mistakes, is saying that evolution=atheism, when in fact, OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of religious people agree with evolution. If you really are honest and interest in BOTH sides and NOT JUST ONE... there are MANY videos you can watch...

I have these 2 videos I usually recommend as they are NOT boring and fun and also explain things in easy to understand terms...
If you are truly interested in BOTH sides, try to seat through these two videos. Watch them in order (1st and then 2nd) as one is kind of answering the rebuttal that followed (the rebuttal you may have in mind when watching the first one)... If you can sit through both of them calmly without getting agitated (They are NOT boring and easy to understand, filled with humor), please, get back to me and tell me (after watching BOTH completely) how has your view changed about what evolution actually is!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RnygS7opCA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-ilMYc5xdQ

--[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 23:59, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
:KingDamian, you are bringing back an argument that has been refuted again and again and again. I've seen the videos you posted, and all it does is once more post an assumption that we must accept evolution as true based upon the word of a scientist who said so. So I'm going to ask you once, and I expect a straight up or down YES or NO answer, and it's based on the horse line at the end of video 2: DID YOU PHYSICALLY SEE THE ''EOHIPPUS'' CHANGE INTO THE ''EQUUS''? Keep in mind that I will not accept as an answer anyone pointing to the fossils themselves and saying we must assume a change took place. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 00:21, 1 May 2018 (EDT)

::Hi... No I have not seen it... But do you realize that if I had that would be THE SINGLE MOST POTENT evidence against evolution? Do you realize that? If I had actually observed the change that would be the single best evidence against evolution NOT for it... AGAINST IT! Do I make myself clear? --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 00:26, 1 May 2018 (EDT)
:::And there you go. You haven't seen it happen. And neither has every single scientist who ever lived; they didn't see it happen either. And we have to sit here and take their word - and your's, I might add - that evolution did take place because they eyeballed a bunch of fossils and ''said'' a change took place? We have to ''assume'' the change happened because these guys put these fossils in a nice little line-up? This website will not accept evolution based on hearsay evidence; we will call evolution what it actually is - JUNK SCIENCE; and we will post direct evidence that contradicts what these supporters say about it. Do I make myself clear? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 00:49, 1 May 2018 (EDT)

I am not here to argue... I like CP... I think you are worthy of a response, so please don't block me, Brian. Evolution has not been observed? Did you watch it from beginning to end? Evolution Has been observed... What you asked me was if we had observed a SPECIFIC species change over millions of years with my eyes... no I have not. But I have not observed ancient English evolve into modern english either, i have not observed Latin change into Italian either... and you have not observed George Washington s life... so according to your logic, all of this must be junk science too Kingdamian1 (talk) 02:30, 1 May 2018 (EDT)
:No, evolution has not been observed; you are arguing, and you have been arguing since day one, when you know full well where we stand on the subject. It's stopping now. And I'm not going to stand for someone who demands we look at pretty pictures just to get us to believe in an assumption; we might as well assume a monkey evolved from a living room wall because Little Billy drew one on it with his crayons. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 07:18, 1 May 2018 (EDT)
::I agree with Karajou and DavidB4 (on his own talk page). Kingdamian1, your comments show you think I'm some "low-information" person who lives in a bubble who will immediately change my mind once I'm "enlightened" (emphasis on the scare quotes) -- your assumption is complete BS (it shows you have no clue who I am). I tried to end a discussion on Andy's talk page and you brought it up again on my talk page (and I didn't even have to be present for it to heat up). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:32, 1 May 2018 (EDT)
:::Also, I just saw [http://www.psypost.org/2018/04/scientific-reasoning-ability-not-predict-acceptance-evolution-among-religious-individuals-study-finds-51082 this study published in a scientific journal] (by evolutionists, with an evolutionist perspective) that admits that there's no correlation between one's level of education or intelligence and their acceptance of evolution. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:21, 1 May 2018 (EDT)
::::Here's a link to an article responding to the "You don't understand real evolution" argument: [https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2015/09/24/do-we-have-misconceptions-about-evolution/] AiG Also has many articles on the many "proofs" of Evolution that have been used ad Nauseum to attack creationism, such as this one about bacteria: [https://answersingenesis.org/natural-selection/antibiotic-resistance/is-antibiotic-resistance-proof-of-evolution/] Here's and article explaining why the changes that are actually observed are not even really "evolution": [https://answersingenesis.org/natural-selection/is-natural-selection-the-same-thing-as-evolution/] And here's a comprehensive list of some of the most common attacks against Creationist assertions: [http://creationwiki.org/Index_to_Creationist_Claims_(Talk.Origins)]

::::The thing is, Creationists are very well aware of the weapons used against them by Evolutionists and one of the biggest mistakes evolutionists make is assuming that Evolutionists know some critical piece of information that is a "knockout punch" to Creationism, when in reality, Creationists are very well aware of these assertions and have written many articles responding to them. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 23:55, 20 May 2018 (EDT)

One more thing. As Frank Turek, one of the foremost Christian apologists, says "Science doesn't say anything, scientists do." Whenever anyone says "Science says that..." what it should really be is "based on their interpretations of certain observations, scientists conclude..." When people say "Science says..." they are committing the fallacy of reification. A detailed explanation can be found here: [https://answersingenesis.org/logic/the-fallacy-of-reification/] Despite KingDamian1's claims that he is "not trolling" he has carried a rather rude and condescending tone typical of those who attack Creationism. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 13:16, 21 May 2018 (EDT)

:As User:Kingdamian1 is a new user, I feel like he/she should given another chance, rather than indeffed. After all, he/she seems really interested in improving Conservapedia and creating articles here, as evidenced from his/her multiple comments even on Wikipedia, requesting his unblock and his/her desire to change. Would there be any objections to me unblocking him/her, with him/her understanding that he/she is topic-banned from any science-related articles (since this seems to be the reason other editors are upset with him/her)? I hope this helps. With regards, [[User:Anupam|Anupam]][[User talk:Anupam|Talk]] 04:07, 23 May 2018 (EDT)
::We gave him a chance, and he had more than NPOV problems (which were in and of themselves annoying, since it was my role to check his articles). I was really annoyed at his expectation that he could be instantly promoted to adminship status (and his apparent desperation at it, since he messaged several editors several times about it), when it is very hard and takes a long time even to become an assistant admin. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:35, 23 May 2018 (EDT)

== Question ==

How do you ping someone? (i responded to you on my talk page) [[User:Qw23|Qw23]] ([[User talk:Qw23|talk]]) 17:21, 8 May 2018 (EDT)
:I don't think CP has a ping option. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:23, 8 May 2018 (EDT)

== Hi ==

I'm new to this project and I do need help with this sentence:
{{Quote|[[Mike Pompeo]] and the Trump administration helped secure the release of Kim Dong Chul, Kim Hak Song and Tony Kim from North Korea.{{cite news|author=Andrew O'Reilly|coauthors=Elizabeth Llorente|title=Trump administration finds success in bringing home detained Americans|url=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/05/09/trump-administration-finds-success-in-bringing-home-detained-americans.html|work=[[Associated Press (AP)|Associated Press]]|publisher=[[Fox News Channel|Fox News]]|date=9 May 2018}} The three men described their “deep appreciation” for the Trump administration for help freeing them.{{Cite news|last=Dorell|first=Oren|title='God Bless America': Freed American prisoners thankful after being released from North Korea|url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/05/09/north-korea-kim-jong-un-free-3-american-citizens/582094002/|publisher=[[USA Today]]|date=9 May 2018|accessdate=10 May 2018|quote=We thank God, and all our families and friends who prayed for us and for our return}}</ref>}}

I believe it should go under [[Donald Trump achievements: Foreign policy]] but for 2018, which section do you believe it fits best under? Also, how do sources work here? --[[User:MaddieJ|MaddieJ]] ([[User talk:MaddieJ|talk]]) 15:14, 11 May 2018 (EDT)
:I already added this to the article, but I will look through your sources to see if more can be added. References could be surrounded by ref tags, like this : <code><nowiki><ref>[citation]</ref></nowiki></code> --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:29, 11 May 2018 (EDT)
::Hi [[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] I just want to let you know I'm glad I'm learning how to edit here. I just recently added the ISIS statements on [[Justin Trudeau]] and also mentioned [[Maxime Waters]] on this edit [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=2017_left-wing_violence&diff=prev&oldid=1422057]. I will allow you to monitor me if any edit I do is good or bad, and I will message you if I need anything. Regards.
--[[User:MaddieJ|MaddieJ]] ([[User talk:MaddieJ|talk]]) 10:03, 15 May 2018 (EDT)
:OK, thanks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:01, 15 May 2018 (EDT)

== A Message for that British Troll ==

Just in case (s)he makes another sock account, (s)he should know that campaign finance laws are unfair and D'Souza was directly targeted because of his unpopular opinions. Also, in the case of Roy Moore, there is only accusations and hearsay. That troll must also ignore the things that Leftist politicians did:

Bill Clinton: raped, molested and abused several women.

Hillary Clinton: Deflected responsibility for Bengazi, kept emails on her own private servers illegally, and covered up her husband's illicit affairs.

And I'm sure you could name more. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 09:21, 24 June 2018 (EDT)

== Conservapedia's Opinion on Joseph McCarthy ==

Hello,
I noticed that you reverted my edit to the Joseph McCarthy page. I made the edit to align with the views expressed in a news story I saw in the main page that described McCarthy as "two of a kind" with Robert Mueller. I feel that Conservapedia should be consistent, so I would appreciate it if the news story was removed/replaced, or the McCarthy article was changed.--[[User:Cetacean|Cetacean]] ([[User talk:Cetacean|talk]]) 18:35, 16 May 2018 (EDT)
:I added sources from a reliable conservative source backing up the article. Besides, the sentence as it is now is more neutrally-worded than your wording (I think even the person who posted the news blurb could agree with it). Bottom line: the article is fine, but it's not worth fighting what is a good analogy (considering that we have many leftist readers who hate McCarthy) on the news feed. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:48, 16 May 2018 (EDT)

== About draft ==

I just replied to your email. Its for here, not for Wikipedia. --MaddieJ 14:45, 18 May 2018 (EDT)

== [[Brian and Ed Krassenstein]] ==

I created the article [[Brian and Ed Krassenstein]]. If you would like to do improvements and better grammar to it, feel free to do so. --[[User:MaddieJ|MaddieJ]] ([[User talk:MaddieJ|talk]]) 14:38, 20 May 2018 (EDT)

== Barack Obama's achievements ==

See: [[Essay: President Barack Obama's achievements]]

It required a lot less work than your article [[Donald Trump achievements]]. :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:59, 29 May 2018 (EDT)

:Ha! And the little that Obama actually did is being wiped away by President Trump right as we speak! :) --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:22, 29 May 2018 (EDT)

==Finland==
I didnt find a way to send a message here so i assume, once its a wiki, that im supposed to edit this page when i want to contact you. Im not sure if i comment on the articles talk page, would it inform you?
I wanted to ask you about your edits of Finland's article, noticed few grammar mistakes that you corrected but didnt get why the day of independence cant be on the page? Then wanted to mention hat the the Lapps is a same name as Sami, so its like mention the same ethnic group twice.
Then i wondered why the population of the capital city shouldnt be mentioned?
The name of party Perussuomalaiset is in english "the Finns Party" not "True Finns".
There is also few smaller issues i will come back to them later. So would be nice to have a talk about these. Thanks. -Karjalainen

:First off, thank you for editing, and for messaging me here! The problem with the date of independence is that the infobox does not have a parameter (at least that I'm aware of) for the date of independence. This means that if you add the date of independence like what you did, the infobox will not actually show it to whoever is reading.

:I was not aware that the Lapps and Sami are the same. I will fix this. I will also fix the part about the Finns Party, since you're also right on this.

:I just didn't think it was necessary to list the population of Helsinki, especially since the population keeps changing and few editors are available to change it. But, if you want to add the population on the [[Helsinki]] article, you are free to do so.

:I noticed that you updated the economic information using Euros, rather than dollars. The reason why I changed it back is that most Conservapedia readers live in the United States, and the dollar is obviously what they use (and they probably don't know the exchange rate). We can mention the numbers in Euros, but we should also use dollars. Since I don't know the exchange rate, I did not add both.

:I hope all this helps! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:05, 22 July 2018 (EDT)

Thanks for answering.
I dont know if this info can be found but is CP based on the MediaWiki platfom? If yes, is it being updated when never versions come out?
Scrolling around some tutorial pages i found a template of countries where i took that "established" tag from, why does it exist if it doesnt show?
How do you edit the sources? I wanted to add but i dont see the other sources listed there?
Is there any plans to add to CP also other languages?
Is there a way to add both mi2/km2 or $/€ ? Would be nice to attrack also non-american readers and make this website even bigger and popular, maybe one day to replace wikipedia as the biggest.
I will write the issues concerning Finland on the talk page of Finland, please refer to there. -Karjalainen
:Sorry for the belated response. CP is based on the MediaWiki platform, but we use a different infobox than Wikipedia -- we didn't just copy and paste their infobox. We do update it, but I don't know how often.
:You can add sources by putting them in in between a tag like this <code><nowiki><ref>[source]</ref></nowiki></code>
:There are no plans to make CP in a different language that I am aware of, but I recommend asking Andy Schlafly, the site's owner here: [[User talk:Aschlafly]].
:Unfortunately, I do not know how to add both mi2/km2 or $/€ to the infobox.
:I will take a look at your message on the Finland talk page. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:23, 26 July 2018 (EDT)

== Five solas ==

Hearty thanks, 1990'sguy, for your assist with [[Five Solas]]! --[[User:Dataclarifier|Dataclarifier]] ([[User talk:Dataclarifier|talk]]) 14:44, 29 July 2018 (EDT)
:You're welcome! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:24, 29 July 2018 (EDT)
== requested article: Trumponomics ==

Article request: [[Trumponomics]]. It would be a nice complementary article to our [[Obamunism]] article. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:40, 5 August 2018 (EDT)
:I'll see what I can do. The [[Donald Trump achievements: Economic policy and labor]] (along with the trade sub-article) give a pretty good overview of his economic policies and the effects of those policies. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:48, 5 August 2018 (EDT)

==Contact==
I don't have yours, either. Use this: nobs315@gmail.com [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 23:07, 15 August 2018 (EDT)
:Mine is on my user page. You can verify there. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:18, 15 August 2018 (EDT)
==Capital Punishment==
By quoting Genesis 9:5 you are confusing what God is permitted to do versus what man may do and how man is to conduct himself in relation to his fellow man. It is also inaccurate to write that Jesus had nothing to say on the subject of capital punishment when he directly called into question the teaching of "eye for an eye."[[User:Tulip Festival|Tulip Festival]] ([[User talk:Tulip Festival|talk]]) 19:02, 17 August 2018 (EDT)
:No, Genesis 9:5-6 clearly says that the just punishment for taking a human life is that one's own life be taken. The proportionate and just punishment for murder is not jail time, nor community service. You're confusing what the Bible says regarding personal conduct and governmental policy, which is not personal. I recommend you read these two links: [https://www.gotquestions.org/death-penalty.html][https://answersingenesis.org/culture/the-death-penalty-wdjb-not-wwjd/] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:15, 17 August 2018 (EDT)

== HTTP -->HTTPS update ==

As you probably saw, I have moved this list to: [[User:DavidB4-bot/HTTPS URL update project]]. Thank you for your additions to the list...my apologies for adding your entries to the new page under may name. I hope you don't mind. Please feel free to continue adding to that list. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:45, 10 September 2018 (EDT)
:Thanks, and thanks for creating this list! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:49, 10 September 2018 (EDT)

== i try ==

More than a single sentence? Okay I can try. [[User:Knockforpeace|Knockforpeace]] ([[User talk:Knockforpeace|talk]]) 19:29, 15 September 2018 (EDT)
::Sorry i have a disorder. I will try to add more. [[User:Knockforpeace|Knockforpeace]] ([[User talk:Knockforpeace|talk]]) 19:39, 15 September 2018 (EDT)
:::See [[Conservapedia:How to create and maintain high-quality articles]] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:41, 15 September 2018 (EDT)
::::Tutoring avalible? By you? [[User:Knockforpeace|Knockforpeace]] ([[User talk:Knockforpeace|talk]]) 19:45, 15 September 2018 (EDT)
:::::Read and follow all of the links provided at the very top of this talk page. That will help you. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:09, 15 September 2018 (EDT)

== Logician account ==

It wasn’t a troll. Could you unblock it? Also, I removed Russell and Whitehead’s Principia Mathematica because it’s supposedly recommended reading. Thing is though that it’s such dense and complicated symbolic logic that no one would actually be able to understand it. It shouldn’t be recommended reading. Anyway, thanks. [[User:Anaxagoras|Anaxagoras]] ([[User talk:Anaxagoras|talk]]) 12:36, 20 September 2018 (EDT)
:I will unblock the account (though I will procedurally block the "Anaxagoras" one), but do not remove the Principia Mathematica book. It may be dense and complicated, and it may be to the extent that laypeople can't understand it, but it should remain for those who can understand it and who will find it useful. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:50, 20 September 2018 (EDT)

== Re: [[Kavanaugh smear]] article name change ==

A high proportion of CP's readers lean left. I changed the title because I thought the new title would engender less cognitive resistance to these readers and therefore be more likely to change their mind. In addition, I thought the new title sounded more encyclopedic.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:01, 23 September 2018 (EDT)
:That's understandable, but the article is not about opposition to Kavanaugh in general, it's specifically about the accusations made against him by left-wing people (as opposed to people criticizing him with his judicial philosophy being the stated reason). I'm not opposed to the page being moved, but it would be a title that makes it clear that the article is specifically about the attempted rape allegations against him. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:37, 23 September 2018 (EDT)
::The allegations against him are a joke. It is a reflection that the Democrats are a sad joke. All the corroborating witnesses say the events never happened.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:14, 24 September 2018 (EDT)
::::Exactly -- they're politically-motivated character assassination, nothing more. Thus, "Kavanaugh smear" is an appropriate title for the article. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:24, 24 September 2018 (EDT)

:::I have chimed in [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Kavanaugh_smear&curid=150814&diff=1450439&oldid=1450438 here]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 10:28, 24 September 2018 (EDT)

== Re: Switzerland vs. Britain ==

I believe you have visited Switzerland.

Below is a post I made to some left leaning atheists/evolutionists.

Gentlemen,

Don't think I haven't noticed your silence on Swiss trains being more timelier than British trains. What's your excuse for British trains being less timelier than Swiss trains?

Just admit it. The [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2013/06/switzerland-beacon-of-european.html industrious and wealthy Swiss], who have one of the highest rates of creationism in Europe, have a better, wealthier and more efficient society than post Darwinism Britain.

By the way, deny that Britain is the fountainhead of Darwinism and lose all credibility!

=== Main page right post in question ===

'''The British recently had a hard''' time getting their trains to run on time.[https://www.bbc.com/news/business-45572736]

According to [[Wikipedia]], "The Swiss rail network is noteworthy for its density, its coordination between services, its integration with other modes of transport, timeliness and a thriving domestic and trans-alp freight system."

Why can't [[Britain]], the fountainhead of [[Darwinism]], compete with [[Switzerland]] which is known for having one of the highest rates of [[creationism]] [[per capita]] in Europe?[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2013/06/switzerland-beacon-of-european.html][[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:01, 23 September 2018 (EDT)

:I have dual Swiss citizenship, so yes, I have visited the country multiple times. For the record, some (not many, though) of my relatives there are biblical creationists. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:37, 23 September 2018 (EDT)

==Formatting of quotes==

Thanks for the {{tl|cquote}} thing - I had forgotten that template. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 09:15, 26 September 2018 (EDT)
:You're welcome -- happy to help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:21, 26 September 2018 (EDT)

== Trumpiantexan is a vandal ==

There's a Vandal called "Trumpiantexan" [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 18:53, 16 October 2018 (EDT)

== Why you said this so.. ==

...'' I don't know if his pro-Marx comments actually make him a communist. He's your typical globalist/liberal European uniparty elite.'' It is not mine definition but more a true fact. Regards, [[User:YortKeldher|YortKeldher]] ([[User talk:YortKeldher|talk]]) 11:15, 20 October 2018 (EDT)
:Most liberal/globalist European elites think the same way Juncker does. It would not be a good idea to label them all as communists. They have many of the same goals as communists, but there is some nuance between them (for example, different different tactics/methods, and Juncker and many of his friends are part of "liberal" or "center-right" parties, and seem to like big corporations). Either the "liberal" and "globalist" categories are enough (since liberals and globalists have many similarities with Marxists, like Juncker), or a new category is needed. I prefer the former, as it doesn't imply that liberalism and globalism are too different from Marxism and communism (different strands of the same thing, and the existing categories take the nuances into account). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:00, 20 October 2018 (EDT)

== Cesar Sayoc Article==
Wouldn’t a person with prudent ethics be willing to discuss whether or not a new article should be deleted prior to deleting said article? Cesar Sayoc is dominating the headlines of America yet you say he is a ‘nobody’? Based on your reasoning the [[Lee Harvey Oswald]] article should be deleted immediately.--[[User:JLind|JLind]] ([[User talk:JLind|talk]]) 17:01, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
:Lee Harvey Oswald has historical significance -- and fortunately, we get the facts right, that he was a left-wing Marxist (a fact many on the Left like to ignore). The Cesar Sayoc guy may be dominating headlines (of the left-wing mainstream media and the Left, which want to capitalize on this single incident of a mentally ill man and put a rug over the [[Left-wing violence in the Trump era|many examples of leftist violence in the past couple years]]) at the moment, but his 15 minutes of fame will soon end and his 58-year jail sentence will soon begin. I let the other administrators know of the dispute over this page, and they will decide soon. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:08, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
::I got the facts right in the Sayoc article, I hope you are not implying otherwise. I’d like to think the Best of the Public could create an article free from liberal bias. Alas, it looks like the readers of Conservapedia will have to suffice with the liberal slant since you are keen to prevent this educational resource from telling the truth. Sad.--[[User:JLind|JLind]] ([[User talk:JLind|talk]]) 17:35, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
:::All the facts except that he wasn't a bomber. ''Per the Associated Press'': {{quotebox|7:50 p.m. A law enforcement official says tests have determined that a powder found inside an envelope delivered to CNN along with a pipe bomb was harmless. The official wasn’t authorized to discuss the investigation publicly and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity. New York City’s police commissioner said earlier Wednesday that the package sent to CNN’s offices in Manhattan contained a live explosive and an envelope containing white powder. The FBI said the package was similar to explosives sent to former President Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, former Attorney General Eric Holder and billionaire George Soros. The package sent to CNN was addressed to former CIA Director John Brennan, a frequent guest on the channel. The official says that parcel contained no note or claim of responsibility. — Tom Hays Associated Press, October 24, 2018}} [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 17:41, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
::A man sends bombs through the mail, and in your opinion, he is not a bomber? The director of the FBI is quoted as saying the devices were ‘…not hoax devices’. What, exactly, is your definition of a bomber?--[[User:JLind|JLind]] ([[User talk:JLind|talk]]) 18:17, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
:::They were too hoax devices. You have terrible reading comprehension. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 01:44, 28 October 2018 (EDT)

Why did you block me? All I did was state the obvious fact that Joe Manchin is a DINO. he voted to confirm Kavanaugh, confirm Gorsuch, and supports the coal industry. He's even more right-wing than Lisa Murkowski! [[User:Libertarianmoderate2|Libertarianmoderate2]] ([[User talk:Libertarianmoderate2|talk]]) 17:50, 28 October 2018 (EDT)
:Manchin lives in a state that voted for Trump by 40 points, and he knows it. He's appealing to the people of his state so he doesn't alienate them. Take a broader view, rather than look at the narrow set of issues where he made a big deal of supporting right-of-center people on -- for example, notice how he's voted against many of Trump's conservative circuit court nominees and several cabinet nominees. Also, when there were narrow votes for any nominee or bill, Manchin voted with Democrats -- he only voted with Republicans when his vote wasn't anywhere close to affecting the vote's outcome. And his support for Planned Parenthood is pretty extreme for a red-state Democrat who has claimed to be pro-life. I stand entirely by my reverts, and CP has never considered Murkowski a conservative, AFAIK. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:44, 28 October 2018 (EDT)
::And look at his record with the 2A -- he has a "D" rating from the NRA, a moderate (as opposed to GOA) pro-gun organization -- several Democrats even have better ratings than him.
::In short, Manchin only votes with conservatives in high profile votes when his vote is not a deciding factor in whether the bill/nominee will pass. He's not a conservative, and he's in line with the Democrat Party. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:54, 28 October 2018 (EDT)

Sorry about that. In the meantime, I'm a very skilled wiki writer who wrote for Wikivoyage for a while, and my skills are exactly what this site needs. I hope you can overlook this disagreement. [[User:Libertarianmoderate2|Libertarianmoderate2]] ([[User talk:Libertarianmoderate2|talk]]) 19:58, 29 October 2018 (EDT)

==Pinging==
I tried to ping you, but it didn't work. I typed {d{Ping|1990'sguy}d} (remove the d's, I added them here so it comes out as text). [[User:Libertarianmoderate2|Libertarianmoderate2]] ([[User talk:Libertarianmoderate2|talk]]) 20:26, 29 October 2018 (EDT)

== Troll ==

Eleonóra Dubiczki is defacing the page on Rightpedia. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 14:47, 3 November 2018 (EDT)
:There's another one named Fiala, probably a sock of the same person. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 14:50, 3 November 2018 (EDT)

==UN migrant treaty==
We're gonna need a [[UN Migrant Treaty]] page. To begin, we need a thumbnail sketch what it is, then a list whose all opposed. Do you have any info to help start? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 15:46, 22 November 2018 (EST)
:Yes -- or [[UN Global Compact on Migration]] or something like that. Several countries have already said they will leave, so it will take some effort to track them all down. I can help. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:46, 22 November 2018 (EST)
::Coincidentally, I found this article giving a good list: [https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/11/22/world-follows-trumps-lead-nations-abandon-legal-framework-building-un-migration-pact/] I can create and/or expand the article, if you want. I think the biggest issue will be what the title should be. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:50, 22 November 2018 (EST)
:::I'd suggest UN Migrant Treaty, then bolden the formal title; its already being discussed as "the [[migrant treaty]]". Moves & redirects can be done as needed. But both the [[European migrant crisis]] and [[2018 Migrant caravan]] already need minor subsections or references to it. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 19:53, 22 November 2018 (EST)
::::I started it. I will do more work tomorrow, if I have time. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:56, 22 November 2018 (EST)

==Wanna chat?==
Hey, I'm curious if I could get to know you. I like your edits. [[User:AnnBelleAldaco96|AnnBelleAldaco96]] ([[User talk:AnnBelleAldaco96|talk]]) 22:00, 28 November 2018 (EST)

:You can either contact me through my CP email address or through this talk page. I won't reveal/discuss personal/private info about myself (obviously), but I'd be happy to talk. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:32, 28 November 2018 (EST)

== Does CP hate video games? ==

I think the tone of the video games article is a little too critical. If you truly are a 1990's guy, then you probably grew up with video games too. You probably also remember the controversy of video game violence back in the 90s too (perhaps there should be a section in the article on that). Ironically, the members of Congress who pushed for potential legislation were two Democrat senators, Joe Lieberman and Herb Kohl. I was, along with my fellow kids of the 90s, booing and jeering at the old people who knew nothing about video games criticizing our hobby. There is a reason why the article "Essay:Greatest Conservative Video Games" exists. Most of the people who criticize video games are older people who didn't grow up with them. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 11:15, 29 November 2018 (EST)

:To be clear, the 1990s was the decade I was born in, so unfortunately, I don't have firsthand knowledge of the controversies of that decade. I played some video games, though not as much as other people, and only on my Gameboy and Nintendo DS, and I lost all interest by the time I turned, roughly, 13.

:I have nothing against video games in and of themselves, and I still think positively of some of the games I played. However, I think many of the criticisms of video games -- such as encouraging obesity and staying indoors rather than going outside -- are valid. Also, video game addition appears to be a real problem: [https://www.foxnews.com/tech/girl-9-sent-to-rehab-after-refusing-to-stop-playing-fortnite-wetting-herself][https://www.foxnews.com/health/compulsive-video-game-playing-now-qualifies-as-mental-health-condition] Those problems probably aren't inherent to video games, though -- they can and are used in good, harmless ways too, as I have experienced. That said, it's not a topic that I have strong feelings on.

:About the article itself, it is Andy's choice to have the article the way it is. There is nothing I can do about it -- it would have to be something you would have to discuss with him if it should be changed. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:20, 29 November 2018 (EST)

== Explaination of edits to the page regarding Thomas Aquinas and theft ==

Did Aquinas endorse theft?

Without the full quote from the Summa Theologica it would appear so, However:
Whether it is lawful to steal through stress of need?
Objection 1: It would seem unlawful to steal through stress of need. For penance is not imposed except on one who has sinned. Now it is stated (Extra, De furtis, Cap. Si quis): "If anyone, through stress of hunger or nakedness, steal food, clothing or beast, he shall do penance for three weeks." Therefore it is not lawful to steal through stress of need.

Objection 2: Further, the Philosopher says (Ethic. ii, 6) that "there are some actions whose very name implies wickedness," and among these he reckons theft. Now that which is wicked in itself may not be done for a good end. Therefore a man cannot lawfully steal in order to remedy a need.

Objection 3: Further, a man should love his neighbor as himself. Now, according to Augustine (Contra Mendac. vii), it is unlawful to steal in order to succor one's neighbor by giving him an alms. Therefore neither is it lawful to steal in order to remedy one's own needs.

On the contrary, In cases of need all things are common property, so that there would seem to be no sin in taking another's property, for need has made it common.

I answer that, Things which are of human right cannot derogate from natural right or Divine right. Now according to the natural order established by Divine Providence, inferior things are ordained for the purpose of succoring man's needs by their means. Wherefore the division and appropriation of things which are based on human law, do not preclude the fact that man's needs have to be remedied by means of these very things. Hence whatever certain people have in superabundance is due, by natural law, to the purpose of succoring the poor. For this reason Ambrose [*Loc. cit., A[2], OBJ[3]] says, and his words are embodied in the Decretals (Dist. xlvii, can. Sicut ii): "It is the hungry man's bread that you withhold, the naked man's cloak that you store away, the money that you bury in the earth is the price of the poor man's ransom and freedom."

Since, however, there are many who are in need, while it is impossible for all to be succored by means of the same thing, each one is entrusted with the stewardship of his own things, so that out of them he may come to the aid of those who are in need. Nevertheless, if the need be so manifest and urgent, that it is evident that the present need must be remedied by whatever means be at hand (for instance when a person is in some imminent danger, and there is no other possible remedy), then it is lawful for a man to succor his own need by means of another's property, by taking it either openly or secretly: nor is this properly speaking theft or robbery.

Reply to Objection 1: This decretal considers cases where there is no urgent need.

Reply to Objection 2: It is not theft, properly speaking, to take secretly and use another's property in a case of extreme need: because that which he takes for the support of his life becomes his own property by reason of that need.

Reply to Objection 3: In a case of a like need a man may also take secretly another's property in order to succor his neighbor in need.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/sum322.htm

"In cases of need all things are common property, so that there would seem to be no sin in taking another's property, for need has made it common" is not in the Summa Theogica and is therefore inaccurate and misleading. The quote should be:

"It is not theft, properly speaking, to take secretly and use another's property in a case of extreme need: because that which he takes for the support of his life becomes his own property by reason of that need."

I will therefore change the quote to the correct quotation. {{unsigned|JPConservative}}

:Look again -- both quotes are there, and they're quoted accurately. The article is correct in saying that Aquinas does not take a strong position on property rights as other conservatives (including John Locke, the intellectual father of the founding fathers) held. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:39, 11 December 2018 (EST)

The quotes used misses out that Thomas Aquinas was referring to those who might die of starvation, not merely out of need. The original quotes in the article imply that he supported "Socialism" which is not so. Aquinas did take a strong stand on property rights, he made one exception, those who face death can take some food (and by implication, water & clothing.) This is the interpretation that the Catholic Church uses and is supported by the majority of Thomists. {{unsigned|JPConservative}}

:Once again, the quote mentioning hunger was already quoted in the paragraph. Also, the paragraph doesn't say that he supported socialism, but that it represented a slippery slope. Either way, his position is weaker than that of some other intellectuals who wrote on property rights. I might (possibly) be OK with a single short sentence/phrase saying that overall he supported property rights, if you can back it up, but the specific info you're citing does not back it up. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:03, 11 December 2018 (EST)

Yes hunger is mentioned, but the meaning has been distorted, I can assure you that having studied the Summa Theologica in a monastery guided by a Thomist professor that the section on Politic Philosophy is wrong. It is not a correct interpretation of Aquinas's political views. Thomas Aquinas clearly upholds property rights in the Summa Theologica:

I answer that, Two things are competent to man in respect of exterior things. One is the power to procure and dispense them, and in this regard it is lawful for man to possess property. Moreover this is necessary to human life for three reasons. First because every man is more careful to procure what is for himself alone than that which is common to many or to all: since each one would shirk the labor and leave to another that which concerns the community, as happens where there is a great number of servants. Secondly, because human affairs are conducted in more orderly fashion if each man is charged with taking care of some particular thing himself, whereas there would be confusion if everyone had to look after any one thing indeterminately. Thirdly, because a more peaceful state is ensured to man if each one is contented with his own. Hence it is to be observed that quarrels arise more frequently where there is no division of the things possessed.

The second thing that is competent to man with regard to external things is their use. In this respect man ought to possess external things, not as his own, but as common, so that, to wit, he is ready to communicate them to others in their need. Hence the Apostle says (1 Tim. 6:17, 18): "Charge the rich of this world . . . to give easily, to communicate to others," etc.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/sum322.htm

Yes, I can back up my claims. The quoted I cited are from authorized sites. I have used the quotes as written and provided links, so please explain how I am wrong?

Here is additional proof that Thomas Aquinas upheld property rights https://tifwe.org/five-insights-about-private-property-from-aquinas/
{{unsigned|JPConservative}}

I have added further material to refute the idea that the writings of Thomas Aquinas can be used to support Socialism. If you edit or remove it, please first demonstrate that I am wrong. Thank you & God Blessings be with you.

==just an idea...==
What do you think of coining the term [[anti-constitutionalist]] to describe people who oppose constitutionalists? People who oppose free speech, gun rights, due process, etc. There certainly are a lot of them in the upcoming session of Congress.

First, we'd need a working definition, then a list of members with their stated positions. The idea may catch on. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 23:52, 12 December 2018 (EST)

:I like it. What do you think of a definition along the lines of "someone who opposes the rights contained in the Constitution, and by extension, the United States as envisioned by the founding fathers"? This is just a draft proposal, the wording wouldn't be final. Maybe we should note that the Constitution reflects a classical liberal philosophy, showing that these "liberals" reject liberalism? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:06, 13 December 2018 (EST)
::Yes. In various articles [[Justice Kavanaugh]] is refered to as a constitutionalist, so I suspect we'll be hearing more of term in the future.

::Now, advocates for Amending the Constitution wouldn't automatically fall into this category. People who want to abolish the Electoral College or hold a constitutional convention, for example - if that is their single issue. I'm thinking of people who want outright repeal of the 2nd Amendment, advocate free speech suppression and censorship, disrespect due process and the presumption of innocence as in the Kavanaugh and Judge Moore cases, or ignore the 4th Amendment violations of the FBI & DOJ. Anyone who holds two or more of these positions could be considered an anti-constitutionalist.

::One more thing, I've discovered that whoever is among the first to create a page with a new term entering the public lexicon, Google algorithms favor and can hold a high ranking for years. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 00:26, 13 December 2018 (EST)

:::About the Electoral College and Con Con distinction, it think that's fair, and it would be good to at least make a distinction between the two. We would need to make this clear to readers, though. That said, one could argue that wanting to change the Constitution on something as important as the Electoral College also a rejection of the U.S. as envisioned by the founding fathers. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:46, 13 December 2018 (EST)
::::That's right. That's why I'm thinking two or more. Somebody who wants to abolidh the electoral college and repeal gun rights, then refuses due process and presumption of innocence, and is okay with illegal domestic spying, is an anti-constitutionalist. Throw in support for [[Medicare for All]] and they call themselves a progressive or Democratic Socialist, it's pretty clear they want to tear down the two party system. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 21:34, 13 December 2018 (EST)
::::We shouldn't spell out our criteria on the page before naming names, and if we put everybody on the list who belongs, it would be too long and nobody would read it. We simply need a paragraph or two or three to define in philosophical terms what makes someone opposed to our system of government, and then in the next section spell out a few leaders what positions they've taken to supoort the label, Pelosi, Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez, and other high profile figures we can cite. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 21:40, 13 December 2018 (EST)
:::::The draft below looks great -- and it accurately describes the modern Left. Is "collective responsibility" (#6) the left's counter to states' rights? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 06:26, 14 December 2018 (EST)
::::::On number 6 that's right. I don't recall the exact language on Form 1040 related to the Obamacare individual mandate. I should dig it out and tweak it.
::::::Anyway we got enough to get started. It'll change over time. We should be on the look out for buzzwords and phrases that help define an Anti-Constitutionalist.
::::::As the 2020 election approaches, rather than a long list on the page, we can just create a Category. And the beauty of this idea is, in keeping with liberalism, they don't have to adhere to a strict set of principles, all they have to do is exhibit a few characteristics. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 16:16, 14 December 2018 (EST)

===Pattern===
I googled around and found most definitions of constitutionalist are cut n pastes of each other. Some have lists of principles, but remember, anti-constitutionalists have no principles, they have characteristics. To be an anti-constitutionalist, you don't have to conform or adhere to a list of principles, you just have to resemble a few characteristics.

This came ftom the Urban Dictionary. So all we need to do is tweak the language away from it's original documents or meaning into something other, or it's opposite:

Constitutionalist
1. An individual that shares the views of the political theories of John Locke and the founders of the American republic, that government can and should be legally limited in its powers, and that its authority or legitimacy depends on its observing these limitations.

2. An individual who believes in the basic standards and ideals are to be consistent with an overriding rule of law or ethics.

The 7 principles of a Constitutionalist:

1. Life: For all human beings, from conception to natural death;

2. Liberty: Freedom of conscience and actions for the self-governed individual;

3. Family: One husband and one wife with their children as divinely instituted;

4. Property: Each individual's right to own and steward personal property without government burden;

5. Constitution: and Bill of Rights interpreted according to the actual intent of the Founding Fathers;

6. States' Rights: Everything not specifically delegated by the Constitution to the federal government, nor prohibited by the Constitution to the states, is reserved to the states or to the people;

7. American Sovereignty: American government committed to the protection of the borders, trade, and common defense of Americans, and not entangled in foreign alliances.

===Draft 1===
Here's a start. Now remember. we sort of want to use their own langusge, logic, meaning, and reasoning, so when they read it, they're looking in a mirror. Characteristic #2 needs some work. Feel free to change or suggest anything.

Anti-Constitutionalists

Persons who reject the views of the political theories of [[John Locke]] and the founding fathers of the American republic, that government can and should be limited in its powers. Anti-Constitutionalists believe in the supremacy of federal power over individual rights.

2. Persons who believe in the basic standards and ideals are to be consistent with [[progressive]] values and the rule of law.

The 7 characteristics of many anti-constitutionalists:

1. Life: For all human beings, and a [[pro-abortion|right to choice]].

2. Liberty: Freedom of conscience and actions to suppress [[fascist]] ideals;

3. Family: Equal rights to marry anyone among 58 known genders;

4. Diversity: Out of one, many.

5. Constitution: Outdated and written by white male slaveghlolders;

6. Collective Responsibilty: A duty not a choice;

7. Sovereignty: The universal power, authority, and kinship of the human species.

==Can you unblock me please?, I want to improve Dirty War pg==

Got your message loud and clear and want to keep creating pages for Conservapedia but only under 1 account name. Thanks again.--[[User:Raymondo|Raymondo]] ([[User talk:Raymondo|talk]]) 08:56, 13 December 2018 (EST)
:The account you used to write on my talk page is unblocked. You can use that one. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:34, 13 December 2018 (EST)

Thanks for unblocking me, greatly appreciated.--[[User:Raymondo|Raymondo]] ([[User talk:Raymondo|talk]]) 07:53, 25 December 2018 (EST)

Hello again, can we change the following page title [[Battles of Mount Kent and Top Malo House]] to [[Battle of Mount Kent and Top Malo House]], remove the "s" from battles, once again thanking you very much and all the best in the new year.--[[User:Raymondo|Raymondo]] ([[User talk:Raymondo|talk]]) 20:17, 25 December 2018 (EST)
:Hello, please request this change at [[User talk:DavidB4]], as I currently do not have move powers. He will move the page for you. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:25, 25 December 2018 (EST)

::Done as requested: [[Battle of Mount Kent and Top Malo House]] --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 01:14, 26 December 2018 (EST)

== Appeal ==

Hi. I noticed I can't edit anything to appeal my block [[Special:Contribs/Edenfaithful|here]]. I'm sorry if you thought my edits were trolling; they weren't. AOC does actually want a government-enforced redistribution of wealth via her universal basic income ideas and other concepts. I won't use this account to do anything other than appeal; it's not meant to be harmful. I want to contribute. [[User:Tempacctformessage|Tempacctformessage]] ([[User talk:Tempacctformessage|talk]]) 13:38, 25 December 2018 (EST)
:I have unblocked your account. In the future, please do not make any edits that could be seen as trolling or parody -- your edits on AOC may have been true, but this is an encyclopedia -- all wording should be encyclopedic. If you're going to add particularly strong language like that, it should at least be cited by a good conservative news source. Otherwise, it's personal commentary, which should stay on your user page or an "essay" page. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:37, 25 December 2018 (EST)

== Internet control ==

Hello, 
I have a random question which I was wondering if you might know the answer to. When Obama was in office, he released control of the Internet to the W3C (an international organization). In the opinion of many conservatives including myself, this was a big mistake. I since heard in vague terms that Trump had somehow put a stop to the transfer and retained at least partial control. However, my research attempts have turned up little of value. Do you know if this is something Trump has done, and if so, to what extent? Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 19:00, 8 January 2019 (EST)
:I remember noting that there was a bit of a controversy between Ted Cruz and the Commerce Department nominee most in charge of this topic area, but the nominee agreed to "look into it" (whatever that means): [http://thehill.com/policy/technology/359325-trump-pick-confirmed-to-telecommunications-federal-agency 1],[https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/23/trump-commerce-pick-internet-oversight-reversal-305178 2],[http://thehill.com/policy/technology/370426-trump-commerce-pick-told-lawmakers-he-would-look-at-reversing-obama-move-on 3] I looked into it further, and found these opinion articles ([http://netpolicynews.com/index.php/89-r/997-trump-wants-u-s-to-take-over-internet-governance-like-putin 1],[https://lawreview.unl.edu/Should-the-U.S.-Reclaim-Control-of-the-Internet 2]), which indicate that nothing was done, though I also found [https://regmedia.co.uk/2018/06/05/ntia-internet-policy-noi-jun18.pdf this notice in the Federal Register] where the Commerce Department asked what should be done with the transfer. The government is looking into it, but so far, I have not found anything saying that an official policy change has been enacted.
:I am very interested in this, and I think whatever decision the government makes, it will be relevant to the [[Donald Trump achievements]] series -- so if you find anything else, or if the government makes a decision in the future, please let me know. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:27, 8 January 2019 (EST)

::"Looking into it...." I feel so much better now. I thought I probably would have heard something if action had been taken, but figured I'd check with you. I will keep my ears, and if I hear anything, will let you know. I expect it would be relevant to the achievements pages, hopefully in a positive way. Thank you for the information! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 19:33, 8 January 2019 (EST)
:::I suppose I must admit that one of the main arguments from the left is true...we were not evenly allocating IP addresses. However, if we invented the internet, do we really need to evenly distribute them? Using Network Address Translation, IPv4 has worked quite well. As we began running out of addresses even then, IPv6 was set up in some parts of the world, which gives us MANY more addresses to work with. Should everyone be switched over to IPv6? Yes, probably. However, just giving away all control of the internet to an organization which may as well be a U.N. of sorts can't be a good solution. I also hope the W3C doesn't start setting up new root servers in more...questionable locations. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 19:39, 8 January 2019 (EST)
::::The Left and globalists don't want the U.S. to be dominant, independent/sovereign, or self-sufficient, so that explains why they chose to give away our control of the internet to a "fair" international organization that socialist, Islamic, anti-American, and autocratic governments can control just as much, if not more, than our country. Globalists and the Left would prefer that the U.S. just follows along with the "rules-based international order" rather than take leadership and go its own way. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:36, 8 January 2019 (EST)

== Seraphim 2 ==

What led you to believe this is a sock account? [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] ([[User talk:DMorris|talk]]) 15:48, 23 January 2019 (EST)
:It was created during a vandalism spree, and once or twice, the vandal(s) created two accounts simultaneously and started vandalizing through both of them. This account was created at the same time as another account (can't remember which one) which began continuing the vandalism, appearing to follow the trend. Thus, I blocked the other account and then blocked this one before (I assumed) it started vandalizing. If it doesn't seem suspicious to you, then please unblock it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:04, 23 January 2019 (EST)
::I would try to avoid doing that in absence of evidence because there have been cases on other wikis when innocent parties have been blocked like this, but I'm not going to undo the block at this time. [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] ([[User talk:DMorris|talk]]) 17:23, 23 January 2019 (EST)

== Your wiki work on Trump was alluded to in a web article ==

Your wiki work on Trump was alluded to in a web article. See: http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2018/11/losing-dignity-still-losing/

It is a pretty well read website as can be seen here: https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/quadrant.org.au

I found out about the citation using this free tool: https://muckrack.com [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:53, 29 January 2019 (EST)

:Great -- it's an indirect allusion, but it works. Have you seen these mentions of my [[Donald Trump achievements]] article? [https://stonecoldtruth.com/despite-continuous-attacks-trump-getting-the-job-done/ One from Roger Stone] and [https://twitter.com/mitchellvii/status/881978883771445248 another by Bill Mitchell], who Trump has retweeted in the past. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:52, 29 January 2019 (EST)
::Thanks for sharing with me those mentions of your article.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:47, 29 January 2019 (EST)

== Lou Dobbs ==

Hey, 1990's guy, check out [[Lou Dobbs]]' Conservapedia article: He himself claims he is an "independent populist". Lots of people who do news reporting and support Trump call themselves independent like [[Jedidiah Bila]], [[Alex Jones]] or were Democrat, like [[Harlan Hill]]. We really ought to respect their wishes, don't you think? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 00:11, 8 February 2019 (EST)
:First off, self-descriptions are meaningless. Dobbs can call himself whatever he wants, but it's his actual positions that matter -- and those positions are, without a doubt, conservative. There are many [[token conservative]]s who align 80-100% with globalist Democrats but still call themselves "conservative" -- but we shouldn't add them to your essay because of what they call themselves.
:Also, you may be confusing political party affiliation with political philosophy -- Dobbs isn't a Republican (maybe he rejoined, IDK), but he left because of the Bush Administration's liberal policies on issues such as immigration. It's his political views that matter, not his political party, and Dobbs's positions are conservative, meaning we can safely call him a conservative. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:27, 8 February 2019 (EST)
::I'm a bit embarrassed that I took Lou Dobbs' self-description "independent" to mean non-conservative instead of non-Republican, so not only is what you say correct, but it turns out I've never even heard him deny he's a conservative, here or elsewhere. I don't know if you know this, but coincidentally, I added Lou Dobbs' name to the TCOT list myself in April 2017. But I removed it the same day because of the "independent" label I saw mentioned in his Conservapedia entry soon after I had added his name to the list.

::I'm still concerned, though—Lou Dobbs lives in the liberal stronghold, New York City, and there are cowards that live there who can be vicious if they think they have an easy target.

::Here's something else that's funny; [[Jedidiah Bila]] also called herself an independent (in November 2016) and also lives in New York City. And I delisted her for the very same reasons I used for removing Lou Dobbs' name. I just now checked to see if I could find whether she ever called herself a conservative or just an independent, and, long story short, she labelled herself as conservative in September 2017!

::So, in a way, your diligence has rescued Jedidiah Bila from obscurity in the "conservative world"! But I'm still interested in what you think about Lou Dobbs. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 02:20, 9 February 2019 (EST)
:::Basically, there are two types of Republicans, National Republicans involved in federal issues, and Independent Republicans - people involved in local and state issues, like school board elections and legislative races. The IRs are moreless divorced from the federal issues, usually because they just aren't interested in what the RNC is doing, occassionally over a policy dispute. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 04:07, 9 February 2019 (EST)
::::Dobbs is a TV host -- he has to live in New York City (or nearby) as a result. He has company though, with Trump, Hannity, and others. I think it's obvious Tucker Carlson is a conservative, but he lives in Washington, D.C., where only 4% of the population voted for Trump. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:29, 9 February 2019 (EST)

==ESchlafly==

I get the name "Schlafly" being suspect, but Andy doesn't have a monopoly on it. I say assume good faith for now, unless a senior admin says otherwise. [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] ([[User talk:DMorris|talk]]) 20:41, 12 February 2019 (EST)
:Fair enough. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:54, 12 February 2019 (EST)

::Technically, the username is "ESchafly," which is slightly different anyway. In any case, for an apparently good faith editor, perhaps autoblock should be disabled if they are blocked on grounds of their username alone. Anyway, I was also suspicious...no harm done. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 13:51, 13 February 2019 (EST)

==Thank you==
Thank you for tidying my attempt at an external link in the article on the [[British Psychological Society]]. It is appreciated. [[User:Carltonio|Carltonio]] ([[User talk:Carltonio|talk]]) 12:33, 18 March 2019 (EDT)
:You're welcome. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:57, 18 March 2019 (EDT)

== Christchurch: terrorism? ==

Hi there! Thanks for your frequent positive contributions to Conservapedia. I'm new here so still trying to learn the ropes.

I feel like the use of "Direct Action" in the leading paragraph of the [[New Zealand mosque shooting]] article, rather than "terrorism", is euphemstic and betrays the principles put forth on [[Conservapedia:How_Conservapedia_Differs_from_Wikipedia]]. Would a similar change be appropriate on the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]] page? {{unsigned|Liberalnutjob}}
:I'm not opposed to labeling it a terrorist attack -- the article uses the term several times, including through some edits I made to the article. I'm not sure the CP article you linked is particularly relevant here since the Wikipedia article does call it a terrorist attack in the intro (just as we do in the body).

:I recommend you message [[User talk:RobSmith]], who is the main author of the article and who inserted the "direct action" link in the intro. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:17, 6 April 2019 (EDT)

==Hello!==
:Hey dude! I know you from Wikipedia! I'm here for anti-vandalism work. I am an administrator from [http://deletionpedia.org/en/Special:UserRights/DW Deletionpedia.org]. [[User:DW|DW]] ([[User talk:DW|talk]]) 13:29, 9 April 2019 (EDT)
::Hello -- what is your Wikipedia account name, if you don't mind me asking? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:57, 9 April 2019 (EDT)
== Please create these articles ==

1990'sguy, please create these article and I will tell you why later:

*[[Top 10 achievements of Donald Trump]]

*[[Donald Trump achievements before presidency]]

*[[List of Trump's accomplishments in 2019]]

*[[List of Trump's accomplishments in 2018]]

*[[Donald Trump achievements in his life]]

Also, if this article can be improved, please do it: [[Trump administration]]

I hope this helps.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:52, 10 April 2019 (EDT)

:I will try to create at least some of these when I get time. The two "life achievements" articles seem like good ideas, though the 2018 and 2019 articles would be problematic, particularly with fitting them into my article series which is not based on year. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:36, 10 April 2019 (EDT)

== Unnecessary? ==

My prefix to [[liberal]], describing that kind of person as a United States resident, was included because it's an exclusively U.S. term. In other countries, liberals are known by other names, such as the Labor party in the UK. My edit was not unnecessary, and I would appreciate it if you could please let it stand.

I took a similar issue with the statement that "most individuals are overweight" in every article dealing with obesity. Nationally, this is true, but, globally, it is false. There are more Asians than there are Americans in the world, and 2 billion of them are starving, outnumbering America's obese population 10 to 1. {{unsigned|MacTavish}}

:I oppose changing it back, and there's a big difference between the exact definition of certain terminology and health statistics.

:Labour Party is a political party, and CP's "liberal" page refers to the ideology. I travel to (continental) Europe frequently, and the word "liberal" is increasingly meaning the same thing as in the U.S. while "conservative" increasingly means something similar to the U.S.

:More importantly, the CP article clearly defines what a liberal is, and that's what matters. Every political term like this has multiple meanings, depending on who's doing the explaining. The best solution to the problem of the same words having many different meanings is to clearly define the word and create articles such as the [[classical liberalism]] or [[liberal conservatism]] articles. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:59, 15 April 2019 (EDT)

== Bible ==

I note that you believe that "As unpopular it is to believe this in our present culture, I know that the Bible contains absolutely no errors or mistakes". Last night I was listening to an interesting talk on the radio about [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+8%3A3-11&version=ESV John 8:3-11], and this has led me to pondering this morning [https://www.openbible.info/topics/stoning_to_death what the Bible has to say about stoning people to death]. My question is how can anyone, in light of this, believe that the Bible is always to be taken literally? I accept that the Bible contains invaluable spiritual truths but I also consider that it is the creation of fallible human beings. I believe that such barbarous practices as stoning someone to death, for blasphemy, sexual misconduct, and breaking the Sabbath, is a reflection of the values of an early pastoral society and not God's word. To be honest with you I find ''any'' type of dogmatic belief deeply disturbing. I note that the Conservapedia article takes a moderate line on the [[Bible]]: "The Bible is the most logical, insightful and influential collection of books and letters ever written", and doesn't claim that it's the word of God.

Because of our recent "conversations" you seemed to be the most obvious person to ask this question. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 13:15, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

:First off, the Bible contains a unified narrative free of contradictions and errors. The human writers were men of their times (Solomon's wives, Noah's drunkenness), but God is the true author of the Bible and none of his commands are wrong or "barbarous." The Mosaic Law was directly commanded by God and is not some reflection of early pastoral society values (I will also say that stoning is ''not'' merely an "early pastoral society" value--the urban Greeks did it, Acts 14:19, and modern urban Brunei and other Islamic countries are doing it).

:You need to understand the Mosaic Law and its place in God's plan to redeem humanity. God revealed Himself first to the Israelites, and in preparing them for the Promised Land, he gave them the Mosaic Law. The Mosaic Law was good and holy (Romans 7:12) -- so good that the Israelites found they, sinful humans, couldn't even follow it correctly. Yes, some of the punishments for various sins include stoning, but remember, "the wages of sin is death" (Romans 6:23). The better question than "why did God command this" is "why didn't God command this for everybody and for every sin". Instead, by giving the law to the Israelites, God showed them they couldn't save themselves. They needed a savior--Jesus Christ. Also, see Deuteronomy 17:6 -- two or three witnesses were required to be stoned.

:Jesus didn't abolish the law, he fulfilled it. I recommend reading the Book of Hebrews -- because of Christ's sacrificing Himself on the cross (great timing in asking your question), we no longer need to make animal sacrifices or follow the civic parts of the law (which include stoning)--that doesn't make the law "barbaric" though. Also, in John 8, Jesus did not condemn stoning outright. The Jews did not have witnesses nor did they have the guilty man with them either to stone, contrary to the law's requirements.[https://www.gotquestions.org/without-sin-cast-first-stone.html]

:I hope this helps. Ask me other questions if you'd like. I also highly recommend [https://www.gotquestions.org/ GotQuestion.org] for other Christianity-related questions. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:47, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

::Many thanks for taking the time to answer me. Sorry to be argumentative, but I'm still confused, because on one hand you seem to be suggesting that Christ would have supported stoning the adulteress to death if the man had also been arrested, and there had been two witnesses? But on the other hand you also seem to suggest that, because Christ rose from the dead, Mosaic law no longer needed be applied. and that following the Resurrection stoning someone to death was no longer lawful?

::Surely Christans are right in believing that stoning a rebellious child, or someone who collects firewood on a Sunday, or because they are sexually involved with someone of the same sex is no longer the word of God? That ''now'' such practices are dated –"barbaric"? That Christ brought a new message from God, one that is entirely different from what Moses received? A message in which charity and forgiveness is far more important than punishment. That we should focus first on our own failures rather than those of others: "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her”. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 15:41, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
:::The gospel was preached to Israel in the wilderness (Hebrews 4:2). Israel was given the choice between Law and Grace. Law can only condemn, Grace saves. Israel chose Law ("Moses told us to stone such a one").
:::There are other such examples in the Bible where people (or man, to use the politically incorrect parlance), made choices with long-term consequences that God did not ordain, such as when Jethro (Moses' father-in-law) gave advice to [[community organizer|organize]] the people into captains of tens and captains of hundreds, etc., or when God advised against Israel having a King who would "multiply horses," (i.e. build a military industrial complex) and Solomon proceeded to do exactly that. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 15:56, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

:::: Thanks [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]. So how should 21st century man operate? You generalize, whereas I asked specific questions. Do fundamentalist Christians believe that Christ's Resurrection changed Mosaic law, or should we , if possible, return to it. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 16:52, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
:::::If you're going to continue editing here, it's important you realise the management considers the adultress story to be a [[Essay:Adulteress Story|liberal insertion]]. Buckle in! [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 16:56, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
::::::Mosaic Law never intended to save. It is still operable for those who reject Grace. And faith in the Resurrection always provided grace - knowing that whatsoever he promised, he was able to deliver (Romans 4:21) - even before Jesus' birth, death, and resurrection. Law always only applies to the lost, and not blood washed believers in Christ.
::::::Now, Christians are admonished to act in such a way as to be an example to non-believers (to do otherwise is not acting in love); however it is not determinative of a person's standing in Christ or eternal salvation, and to preach otherwise, that is to say salvation is determined by works, is the spirit of anti-Christ. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 17:02, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

:::::::I would not so much say that Israel chose the law, as it was a matter of that being all there was. The law taught a great deal about the nature of God, the depravity of men, and the seriousness of sin, among other lessons. The law was given to state how, from at least an outward sense, mankind should behave in order to keep God's perfect law. Under the law, certain sins were deserving of death--this was to show the seriousness of transgression. It is easy for us to look at some sin and say, "Well, it was only one small sin. Everyone makes mistakes, so just give him/her a break! It's not THAT serious!" However, we are judging with sentimentality from the perspective of a sinner. Only God can judge righteously from the perspective of perfection.
:::::::This rule did not really go away, either. Certainly we don't execute people for "minor" sins, but James said that "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10). One singe sin is enough to make us less than perfect, which makes us utterly filthy and unacceptable to God, much as a single act of defiance made an old testament Jew unacceptable to the congregation. God has given us a way out through His Son, but without that, we will face a judgement worse than stoning for a single act of sin (which is itself defiance against the one truly holy God). Only because of Jesus' shed blood can we be forgiven these sins, and made as though we are perfect, by Jesus' merit. The Hebrews didn't seem to know that Jesus was coming as a sacrifice, rather than a king, but yet they sacrificed animals to gain forgiveness for their sins, looking forward to Jesus' sacrifice.
:::::::In regard to the adulteress specifically, There has been a great deal of debate by people more intelligent than I. Under mosaic law, she was guilty, but it seems that either she was forgiven under the new law and no longer deserving of death, or she should have justly been stoned, but the congregation failed to do so(or the witnesses failed to testify against her properly), due to Jesus' words. In either case, Jesus sends her away alive. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 17:11, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

::::::::In response to Timber's followup question, the Mosaic Law is just, but it's impossible to follow. That's why Jesus died on the cross -- so we can actually have a path to salvation, one by God's grace through faith and not by works.

::::::::However, this doesn't mean that the message of the law is "entirely different" from Christ -- in fact, the total opposite. The law pointed people to Christ, that it's impossible to follow it and that they need Jesus. Also, through sacrifices, God provided a way for the Jews' sins to be forgiven. By dying on the cross, our past, present, and future sins are forgiven if we trust in Christ, without need for sacrifices. God will judge everyone in the end, but right now, we live in the age of grace, and the Mosaic Law has been fulfilled through Christ. '''Also,''' the Mosaic Law was never intended to be required of all people everywhere -- only the Israelites before Christ.

::::::::If I'm understanding [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:1990%27sguy&curid=139936&diff=1517413&oldid=1517408 Rob] correctly, I agree that many actions by people in the Bible are not condoned by God, but the Mosaic Law isn't one of them. It came from God to set the Israelites apart from other nations (Exodus 19:5) and reveal their sinfulness to them (Galatians 3:19; Romans 3:20), among other reasons.

::::::::For the record, I believe the adultress story is a valid part of the Bible. Others here disagree. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:15, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
:::::::::Moses spoke to Lord face to face as a man speaketh to his friend (Exodus 33:11) and "found grace in thy sight" (Exodus 33:13); the New Testament says "No man hath seen God at anytime" (John 1:27). Now, unless you think there are contradictions in the Bible, one has to explain Hebrews 12:14 (without holiness no one will see the Lord) and more specifically, 1 Cor. 2:13, "comparing spiritual things with spiritual".
:::::::::In conclusion, (a) Moses was saved; (b) the Law of Moses could not save then, and it can not save now; (c) Christ has existed from everlasting to everlasting, before the foundations of the earth were laid; (d) ye are not under law, but under grace. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 17:36, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
:::::::::Roman Catholic theology explains the difference between the Perfect Will of God and the Permissive Will of God (for example, God allowing David to marry Bethsheba after David committed adultery and murdered her husband). And while the Mosaic Law may be an expression of the Perfect Will of God, it nevertheless still cannot save. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 17:44, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

Many thanks that makes things much clearer. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 19:29, 19 April 2019 (EDT) I greatly appreciate that you both have offered such a thorough explanation. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 19:31, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

== Cyrus ==
Hi 1990'sguy,

I don't think we need flashy photos of anti-Christian celebrities, which promote their lifestyles to our kids. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] ([[User talk:DouglasA|talk]]) 13:54, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

:I'll ask Andy about this. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:58, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

::We could get a less "flashy" photo I suppose, but we are here to educate people of all ages. While I may not approve of her lifestyle, I don't really see an problem with including it, since this helps to educate our readers. It is not at all uncommon for use to include photos of people on pages talking about them. And actually, this "flashy" photo may be well suited, since it demonstrates that she is all about the show. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 14:27, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
:::This is becoming a real problem for CP, since deviant sex seems to be the Democratic party's key plank in the 2020 elections. Ignoring their issues is fraught with problems. They must be tastefully addressed; and we shouldn't pass up the opportunity to straighten out readers. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 16:09, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

== Edit war ==

Hi 1990'sguy, you have twice blocked me for edit warring. I don't like being quarrelsome but with due respect to your seniority I don't think you really understand what edit warring is. My reverts had an explanation and yours did not. You tended to ignore
the Conservapedia Guidelines. Also you didn't issue any warning, or suggest starting a discussion. I have edited on Wikipedia for several years and have a clean record there, I'd also note, the highly undemocratic exercise of administrative power here. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 16:24, 21 April 2019 (EDT)

:The fact is the Barack Obama article has been the way it is for years, and several editors (RobS and Pokeria, for example) support it, at least overall, and oppose your changes. Also, you admit you're not a conservative. And you think you can just come in and unilaterally make edits that others oppose? That's not how it works here. Continuing to revert will only get you indefinitely banned -- I hope you realize I'm being extremely gracious by only giving short blocks.

:Also, CP makes no apology for not being "democratic." We're a conservative encyclopedia with a conservative point of view, which includes support for natural law and republicanism over mob-rule democracy that Aristotle, the Ancient Roman Republicans, and the U.S. founding fathers opposed. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:57, 21 April 2019 (EDT)

::::Thanks -[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]]. I have no quarrel with this site's extreme right wing ideology but I do quarrel with its failure at times to implement its own policy of truth and verifiablity and the way some editors use of gossip and dubious sources. Also most of the editors I have dealt with recently are very slippery politicians–that is they avoid answering any comment or question. By the way the Barack Obama article is contradictory. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 18:18, 21 April 2019 (EDT) Additionally most edits made by you and others do not have an explanation. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 18:25, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
:::::ach ach <choke> WaPo, NYT & CNN aren't dubious sources? they don't use gossip? Liberal commie scholars and Marxist PhD's aren't dubious sources? As to edit summaries, you gotta earn your stripes. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 18:46, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
:::::C'mon. Be reasonable and realistic. The ''NYT'' White House correspondent thinks ''Edelweiss'' is a Nazi anthem. Never in my life has there been such an open opportunity for citizen journalists as right now. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 18:49, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
::::::@Timber: I'm not particularly interested in the Barack Obama dispute -- what I care about is avoiding edit warring and making sure we give due treatment to material which has been in the articles for a long time. Thus, the content should be discussed on the talk page. On Wikipedia, not having a consensus for changes similar to yours is good enough explanation for reverting, so CP isn't actually too much different. Regarding the behavior of other editors, you might just be experiencing their differing personalities, that's all. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:51, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
:::::::@1990'sguy, he's not learning his lesson, I've given him a long block, not just for the edit warring, but also for his pretentious attitude, especially on this edit summary: [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Michelle_Obama&diff=1518377&oldid=1518376] [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 19:18, 21 April 2019 (EDT)

::Personally, I have no objection to moving the sections on natural born citizenship to [[Early life and career of Barack Hussein Obama]] where it can be debated or sources challenged. The lesson here is, work somebody else put much time into should not be overwritten just cause some liberal communist doesn't like it or it isn't sanctioned by [[fake news]] [[mainstream media]] sources. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 17:08, 21 April 2019 (EDT)

:::@RobS: It might be worth considering moving some of that content into the [[Early life and career of Barack Hussein Obama]] article. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:14, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
::::Let Timber do it, and we can seriously vet sources and wording on the Talk page there. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 17:16, 21 April 2019 (EDT)

== Look at this edit ==

Please look at this edit: [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia&diff=1519161&oldid=1516763 1990'sguy and Conservapedia]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:39, 24 April 2019 (EDT)
:Thanks, Conservative, I really appreciate it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:57, 24 April 2019 (EDT)
::That's great, I only wish the essays I made about Christian virtues could get this kind of notability. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 14:26, 24 April 2019 (EDT)
:::I recommend linking them in the "See also" sections of relevant articles and continuing to work on them. That might make Andy or Cons more likely to promote them on the main page. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:38, 24 April 2019 (EDT)

== What happened to you user page? ==

Your page was vaped by [[User:Conservative]], on or about April 22. It was then recreated as a blank page, also by Cons, on April 23. Do you know anything about this? I recall that you had a lot of interesting things to say on your user page. Do you have a backup copy? Alas, I don't normally checkpoint other people's user pages, so I don't have a copy. (Though I do have a checkpoint copy of your talk page.) [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 12:51, 26 April 2019 (EDT)
:I asked Cons to do it -- don't worry, I have all the information saved, and I could recreate it if I want. I thought I should be more "low-key" on wikis, and I did the same to my Wikipedia user page (which I also have a copy of). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:34, 26 April 2019 (EDT)

== Question. ==

Hello. Is it possible to write about artists? {{unsigned|RinatMilow}}

:You may write about what you want on the following conditions:
:#Everything is sourced with reliable sources -- no exceptions
:#This is a conservative encyclopedia, so nothing from a non-conservative perspective, wherever applicable
:#Absolutely no plagiarism, including from Wikipedia
:#Know all of CP's rules and guidelines (you can find them at the top of my talk page)
:I hope this helps. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:28, 4 May 2019 (EDT)

I wrote an article,tried to do it right.

[[User:RinatMilow|RinatMilow]]
:This website does not do self-promotion. You can write about artists like Picasso, Dali, Michaelangelo, etc, but I noticed that you're doing promoting yourself on this (deleted) and other websites. Not here. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 11:00, 4 May 2019 (EDT)

I don't promote anything anywhere where to me what to write, it is especially my personal right. I'm not upset. I'm not upset that the article didn't fit.
[[User:RinatMilow|RinatMilow]]

== Donald Trump's achievements keep rolling in ==

'''The ''[[New York Times]]'' FINALLY Admits:''' The World is Turning [[Nationalism|Nationalist]] [[Populism|Populist]].[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQOgUVsUQJQ]

The ''New York Times'' article admitted that this statement of [[Donald Trump]] was prophetic: "We gonna win so much you may even get tired of winning and you'll say please, please Mr. President, It's too much winning! We can't take it anymore!"[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:34, 27 May 2019 (EDT)

:Trump has been very successful as a president so far, especially considering that Republicans opposed much of his agenda in 2017/2018 and the divided Congress now. The EU elections went well -- the League outperformed exit polls by a lot, becoming the largest party in Italy and tied as the largest in the EU Parliament, and the Brexit Party also won more seats than predictions I saw beforehand. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:43, 27 May 2019 (EDT)

::The Greens continue to gain, at the expense of Social Democrats. This is reflective of a younger, climate orientated group of socialists, just as radical, more single issue oriented and naive, trying to throw off the history established Socialist parties. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 16:06, 27 May 2019 (EDT)

== Article suggestion ==

Consider creating this article: [[Donald Trump achievements: Religious freedom]][[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:08, 1 July 2019 (EDT)
:It might be a good split-up article. All religious freedom achievements are currently at [[Donald Trump achievements: Religious liberty, gender issues, and other social policies]]. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:19, 1 July 2019 (EDT)
::I might split the article into [[Donald Trump achievements: Religious freedom and LGBTQ]] and [[Donald Trump achievements: Healthcare, welfare, housing, and affirmative action]] -- I might have to rework the article titles, among other changes, before I actually implement this. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:27, 1 July 2019 (EDT)

§== Could you delete this file? ==

I uploaded this file from the mobile version of the website and the title messed up, could you remove the pic? I already uploaded the correct one. [[:File:' 'Copied from' '- https---commons-wikimedia-org-wiki-File-Luis Pardo Villalón - Armada de Chile-png--br--' 'Original source' '- http---www-armada-cl-custom-pilotopardo-pilotopardo-html--br--' 'License' '- Th 2019-07-01 04-37.png|file]] --[[User:Capitalist.Chile|Capitalist.Chile]] ([[User talk:Capitalist.Chile|talk]]) 16:38, 4 July 2019 (EDT)
:Done! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:10, 4 July 2019 (EDT)

== Salute to America ==

'Salute to America' articele - this was not a copy of Wikipedia, but independent research. Your deletion is merely censorship. too bad for conservapedia. I was on a roll... [[User:Let us eat lettuce|Let us eat lettuce]] ([[User talk:Let us eat lettuce|talk]]) 18:30, 6 July 2019 (EDT)

:That's a ridiculous response that will get you no respect from conservatives. I cross-checked [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salute_to_America&oldid=905110556 the Wikipedia article], and you indeed copied the article (not the whole thing but only a condensed version. Your wording changes were far too minor to not consider it plagiarism. You also cited the same sources (from the MSM, by the way) for the same sentences.
:If you create an original article, citing conservative media sources (you know, the kind of information that will actually get censored on Wikipedia and other leftist websites), it won't get deleted. Another admin already deleted a previous article of yours for plagiarism, and I already (and kindly) warned you. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:36, 6 July 2019 (EDT)
::Okay, you're "right". but my research was original. maybe the same sources, is all. [[User:Let us eat lettuce|Let us eat lettuce]] ([[User talk:Let us eat lettuce|talk]]) 18:47, 6 July 2019 (EDT)
:::The second version is even worse than the first (for a different reason). It's a stub; the wording is sloppy, poor, and vague; and you didn't cite any sources. If you cannot create a quality article citing multiple conservative media sources (Breitbart, TNA, Daily Caller, Daily Wire, Free Beacon, etc.) without having to consult Wikipedia or plagiarizing, you probably shouldn't create articles.
:::You saw my message on your talk page, as well as the welcome template with the various links. We're giving you multiple chances to improve. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:15, 6 July 2019 (EDT)
::::Don't make up rules. There is nothing that requires the use of "conservative media sources" in either the [[Conservapedia:Commandments|commandments]], the [[Conservapedia:Guidelines|guidelines]], the [[Conservapedia:Editing article and talk pages|manual of style]], or the [[Conservapedia:How to create and maintain high-quality articles|general guidance on "high-quality" articles]].

::::Your preferences are not policy. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 08:25, 7 July 2019 (EDT)
:::::The 1990'sguy just deleted the article without contributing a thing. On the article talk page, I had encouraged others to collaborate. Not much collaboration here. [[User:Let us eat lettuce|Let us eat lettuce]] ([[User talk:Let us eat lettuce|talk]]) 08:37, 7 July 2019 (EDT)
::::::JohnZ, you don't get to decide what Conservapedia policy is (especially not if you're trying to force liberal POV again as you usually do). That's for the admins to decide, not you. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 08:38, 7 July 2019 (EDT)
:::::::@Let us eat lettuce: "encouraging others to collaborate" does not equal making others write 99% of an article (because it was a tiny, vague stub), or making a great effort to completely revamp the article because it was plagiarized.
:::::::@JohnZ: I never said citing from the conservative media is a website requirement, but it's necessary if you want to create a quality article from a conservative point of view. And keep in mind that I told this to an editor who copied from Wikipedia, including, but not only, the citations (many new users do this, and I gave advice on how to write a good article). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:39, 7 July 2019 (EDT)
::::::::I don't get it anyway. What's the purpose of creating a Salute to America article? Is he going to create separate articles for every Forth of July celebration since 1776? Is there not enough news happening this Summer to write about? Is there not enough [[Trump news]] to write on?
::::::::If someone wants to trash Trump, be it on Wikipedia or here, don't be so lame and obvious about it. Get creative. Use some subtlety, ambiguity, and imagination. Goosestepping to liberal fascist talking points won't get you there. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 13:13, 7 July 2019 (EDT)

==Nitpicking I know but==
Boris Johnson is not as yet The Prime Minister of the UK.--[[User:Chewy Suarez|Chewy Suarez]] ([[User talk:Chewy Suarez|talk]]) 13:48, 23 July 2019 (EDT)
:I know -- his term starts tomorrow (really, in only a few hours now), but CP is a small wiki with few editors, so it's good to make all the necessary edits at once, and he'll become PM is so short a time from now that it really doesn't matter. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:51, 23 July 2019 (EDT)

==Too fast on the trigger==
A couple of new editors have contributed some useful, albeit problematic, content. By reverting them instantly you may be scaring them off from participating further. My suggestion: try letting things develop and/or engage with them to develop proper editing skills. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 13:53, 28 July 2019 (EDT)

Most wikis have adopted a Don't Bite the Newbies policy. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 13:59, 28 July 2019 (EDT)

:That's fair. That said, I don't want being friendly to newcomers to compromise CP's quality. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:10, 28 July 2019 (EDT)

::Well, we need the newcomers to help improve quality. CP has nearly 50,000 articles now, and all could use some level of maintenance or improvement. We need to be more welcoming to newcomers and recognize there are different levels of editing skills. People volunteering their time should be treated with respect, engaged, and recruited into specific tasks to help improve the project. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]

:::I agree, but if they create an account and immediately start changing the POV of articles, plagiarize from Wikipedia, or make other unencyclopedic edits, we need to let them know. It's a two-way street -- we need to be welcoming, but the new user needs to be willing to learn and grow (I've seen new users unwilling to do that). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:21, 28 July 2019 (EDT)
::::This is where the rule of thumb, ''Discuss first, then revert'' comes in. Granted, there are users who insert commie agitprop that needs to be reverted instantly without discussion. Citations formatted from Wikipedia can be useful, the content needs to be reviewed. It's not a blanket rule. It's the speed at which a newbie is engaged that is intimidating (I'd recommend [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221367707_Don't_bite_the_newbies_How_reverts_affect_the_quantity_and_quality_of_Wikipedia_work perusing]).
::::Here's were the subject matter a user is working on applies. If the user shows interest in conservative subjects, for instance, they may be only 14 years old and their understanding of conservativism is not fully developed. But they have enthusiasm for the subject. Being reverted can have a devastating effect. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 14:37, 28 July 2019 (EDT)
:::::I won't argue over this any further -- it's not worth arguing over. I will try not to "bite" new users and to be more engaging with them -- that said, I hope you and Conservative don't go too far in the other direction. We can't go so far in that direction that edits that clearly violate CP guidelines and reduce its quality are tolerated purely to avoid offending someone. The user should be treated respectfully and kindly, but they should also be expected to learn from their mistakes and change their editing, if there is a problem. It's a two-way street. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:00, 28 July 2019 (EDT)

== Added post ==

Hi 1990'sguy, just wanted to say thank you for your suggestions about my articles: I'll keep them in mind in the future.

I know many of my contributions are rather boring ones, but my hope is to not just write about what I know, but create articles superior to their WP counterparts. Whatever helps steer more viewers this direction. -Teakin88
:You're welcome! I agree that your articles are better than Wikipedia's, and I think you've been a big help to CP. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:58, 29 July 2019 (EDT)
==Cornell University==
What portions of the article do you believe were copied? They seem completely different to me. Thanks, [[User:GChang|GChang]] ([[User talk:GChang|talk]]) 15:12, 2 August 2019 (EDT)
:See [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Cornell_University&diff=prev&oldid=1546023#Organization this] vs. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cornell_University&oldid=906741697#Organization_and_administration this] -- you clearly copied (as in, you knowingly took -- plagiarized -- content on WP and added it to CP). Rearranging certain paragraphs doesn't undo that fact that it's blatant plagarism. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:17, 2 August 2019 (EDT)
::I have made a side by side comparison at [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User%3AGChang%2FCU&diff=1546189&oldid=1546188]. I will hold off on editing until you identify what material constitutes impermissible copying from Wikipedia. Some of what I did was based on past editing of Conservapedia, and not from Wikipedia. By the way, footnotes and facts are not copyrighted. Most sentences as well as the overall structure of the article is completely different. Outline what you find to be copying and I will avoid those areas. Thank you. [[User:GChang|GChang]] ([[User talk:GChang|talk]]) 18:26, 2 August 2019 (EDT)
:::Stop making sandbox pages when they're unnecessary. I have the permalinks above. The first four paragraphs on your CP version plus the sixth paragraph are identical to the paragraphs in that section of the Wikipedia article. You didn't even change the wikilinks from the WP page (hence the large number of red links on the CP page), though not including those red links wouldn't change the fact it's plagiarism. Changing the paragraphs' order or combining them -- as you did -- also doesn't change the fact that it's plagiarism. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:44, 2 August 2019 (EDT)
::::I made the sandbox changes so that you can see all of the differences. I don't see how they would be viewed as the same. [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User%3AGChang%2FCU&diff=1546189&oldid=1546188] Please look it over and give some feedback. Thanks, [[User:GChang|GChang]] ([[User talk:GChang|talk]]) 12:15, 17 August 2019 (EDT)

== Minuteman has blocked me over Fredogate (Chris Cuomo) page, can someone help? ==

Can someone please help so I can improve the page I started? I've been blocked by Minuteman for creating the Fredogate page. No explanation was given and I find his censoring very frustrating since this incident some media personalities call Fredogate, is widely covered in youtube.--[[User:Bearbrau|Bearbrau]] ([[User talk:Bearbrau|talk]]) 19:19, 14 August 2019 (EDT)

:You are unblocked. Minuteman is a bot (not a human editor), and its block was accidental. You apparently made some edit that fit within the bot's computerized criteria for making blocks. The bot's human owner unblocked you, and the fact you're writing on my talk page shows that you've already been unblocked. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:27, 14 August 2019 (EDT)

== Slovakia ==
Hello, I saw your edits on [[Slovakia]]. Thank you for taking time to correct my edits but I need to say I don't think writing "Slovakia (...) formed in 1993" is accurate.
*First, Slovakia is a name ascribed to the territory historically occupied by (mainly) Slovaks (slightly smaller than the territory of present-day Slovakia), so I think we should make that distinction somewhere in the beginning of the article. Thus, Slovakia (as a historical region) formed much earlier then 1990s.
*Secondly, Slovak Republic was legally created on January 1, 1969 as the Slovak Socialist Republic, then part of communist "federation" (it was not true federation, of course, but it was considered a separate legal entity), then turned from being a communist to democratic state in 1990 with its name constitutionally changed to Slovak Republic on March 1, 1990. On January 1, 1993, Slovak Republic as well as Czech Republic become independent states with Czechoslovak Republic no longer in existence.--[[User:RobSteff|RobSteff]] ([[User talk:RobSteff|talk]]) 18:08, 18 August 2019 (EDT)

:I changed it. Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:27, 18 August 2019 (EDT)

::Thank you!--[[User:RobSteff|RobSteff]] ([[User talk:RobSteff|talk]]) 13:57, 19 August 2019 (EDT)

== 700,000+ page views for Donald Trump achievements ==

700,000+ page views for Donald Trump achievements. Congratulations! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:20, 19 August 2019 (EDT)

:Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 06:52, 20 August 2019 (EDT)

== Great work in fixing those links! ==

Great work in fixing the Declaration of Independence links!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:46, 24 August 2019 (EDT)
:Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:48, 24 August 2019 (EDT)

== Template on Nationalism ==

Do you think a template on nationalism, as a counterweight to the template on globalism, would work well?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:06, 1 September 2019 (EDT)
:I think it would be helpful -- it could include links to articles like [[Border wall]], [[Economic nationalism]], [[Self-governance]], [[sovereignty]], [[National conservatism]], [[Euroskepticism]], [[Patriotism]], [[Subsidiarity]], [[Founding Fathers]], and [[U.S. Constitution]], among others. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:25, 1 September 2019 (EDT)

== The Dixiecrat, Conservative Democrat, and Reagan Democrat Pages ==

'''"Dixiecrat was the informal term for Southern Democrats who in 1948 refused to support President Harry S. Truman for reelection because he was too liberal on racial issues."'''

Shouldn't it say because he was too conservative on racial issues since it was the '''liberal''' Democrats who were against civil rights?
:Truman desegrated the Armed Forces in 1947, so this one appears correct.

Oh. Because I thought that it was conservatives who were for desegregation and liberals who were for segregation. That's why I had a hard time understanding why it said Truman was too liberal on racial issues since the liberals were segregationists.
:Believe it or not, there are liberal segregationists. It is not a demarcation line between liberal and conservative.
::The phrase "because he was '''too liberal''' on racial issues" kind of got me and I thought it was insisting that liberals were for desegregation and conservatives weren't.
:::The 1947 desegregation order marks a turning point in the liberal movement, but many liberals and alleged "liberals" (white folks riding the Democrat, anti-Republican welfare state and gravy train) remained segregationists, or at least racists.
::::This point deserves expanding on cause of recent developments: Many whites who wear the "liberal" label do so for government goodies, not social equality of blacks. We see it right now in support of various democrat candidates. Biden is buoyed by the black vote right now, and Biden ''is not'' promising a basketful of government goodies. Sanders, Warren, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker and Buttigieg are all promising wholesale government goodies, and getting the support of white "alleged liberals" - not blacks. Being "liberal" with other people's money, and being for civil rights and social equality, '''are not''' synonymous. Blacks know this more than anyone.

::::This was true during the [[New Deal Coalition]], the [[Great Society]], and today. Handing out food stamps to whites as well as blacks is not slave reparations, although since Great Society times whites who didn't qualify for food stamps viewed it as such. Or the creation of the [[Department of Housing and Urban Development]] in 1964, was viewed than as a poverty program for dispossessed blacks, yet today most of the funding goes to whites. Black's view white liberals as dishonest leeches, who plunder resources supposedly earmarked for them. The only thing they have in common is opposing Republicans who want to cut and balance the budget.

::::Blacks today are indeed the conservative, moderate, or centrist wing of the Democrat party, while white liberals are the [[far left]], handing the election to Trump. It will be one more grievance Blacks have against white Democrat liberals when it is all over. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 13:59, 22 September 2019 (EDT)

Doesn't this:

'''"The Dixiecrats went back to the Democrats, where they came into increasingly more conflict with the liberal sections of the party, and eventually abandoned the Democratic Party for the Republican Party after the presidency of Lyndon Johnson."'''

play into the liberal narrative that the racist conservatives switched parties and Dixiecrats were conservatives when in fact they were racist southern liberals?
:That's a misreading, but one this one needs some touching up. As is, it's a basic restatement of the [[fake news]] media, academia, and DNC false narrative of a Southern Strategy; Dixiecrat was basically a one-hit-wonder in 1948, when Democrats were divided 3 ways, Progressives, Dixiecrats, and Regular Democrats. What page is this on?

That's on the [[Dixiecrat]] page.

I also have a hard time understanding the Time Magazine picture from 1968 on [[Curtis LeMay]] when it says "Revolt of the '''Right'''."
:Curtis LeMay was George Wallace's VP pick in 1968; he was also [[Robert MacNamara]]'s (JFK & LBJ's defense secretary) boss during the Korean War. His nickname was the "Mad Bomber". Both Nixon & Humphrey were running as "Peace candidates". I don't recall Le May's politics off the top of my head, though I'm fairly certain he was not a Republican. Again, that's Prof. Jensen's work, and IMO, [[fake news]] from the 1960s intended to smear conservatives as warmongers, as usual (in fact, most conservatives are peaceniks and isolationists). We're in agreement, the page needs an overhaul.

On the [[Reagan Democrats]] page, this feeds into the narrative that the racists jumped ships:

'''"Most were working men and women who had come to feel that the Democratic party was no longer championing them, but favored blacks instead."'''
:i see nothing wrong with this statement; and it's corroborated by the Stan Greenberg poll cited here just prior to the 1992 election: [https://www.salon.com/2016/01/31/the_clintons_sordid_race_game_no_one_will_say_it_but_the_clintons_rise_was_premised_on_repudiating_black_voters/ The Clintons’ sordid race game: No one will say it, but the Clintons’ rise was premised on repudiating black voters], Corey Robin, ''Salon'', Jan 31, 2016.

On the [[Conservative Democrat]] page, it says:

'''"A few former Dixiecrats, including Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms, were early converts to the Republican Party, foreshadowing a long trend of conservatives leaving the Democrats and joining the Republicans that continued through the 1980s and 1990s."'''
:Good point; looks like Prof. Jensen's work; [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiprVX4os2Y Prof. Carol Swain of PragerU] refutes the notion three switched and says only one. And Helms association as a Dixiecrat I'd have to look into. There's much of Prof. Jensen's work I've been meaning to revise, beginning with [[New Deal Coalition]] and [[Conservative Coalition]] which carries a lot of the historical revisionist basis for the alleged GOP Southern Strategy.

I thought only 3 Dixiecrats ever switched. The rest remained Democrats until they died. There was no switch and the Dixiecrats were not conservatives. They were liberals. Can you please explain why these pages insist they were conservatives who were opposed to the liberals when it's us, the conservatives who were for civil rights and the liberals who were against it or clarify the edits on the pages made by DavidB4-bot? And on Joe Biden's page, it says '''a coalition of liberals and George Wallace supporters''' and I thought they were one and the same. --[[User:Classical Liberal|Classical Liberal]] ([[User talk:Classical Liberal|talk]]) 10:10, 21 September 2019 (CDT)
:Dixiecrats were racist Southern New Dealers; there were both conservatives and liberals among them. Most importantly, they were anti-Republican, a legacy of Reconstruction. And as Prof. Swain says, only one Senator ever switched. Strom Thurmond himself was a liberal.

I don't understand how conservatives could be among the Dixiecrats. Conservatives were against the New Deal.

:To understand the meaning of Dixiecrat, one should read the articles on 1948 and 1964 Democratic conventions, and the 1964 Mississippi Freedom Party. Johnson didn't want a replay of 1948 in 1964. Hubert Humphrey cut his teeth as a civil rights leader in his 1948 speech (as [[David Horowitz]] also was inspired). By 1964, the Dixiecrat movement was dead, and only Strom Thurmond - a Southern New Deal liberal - left the party to join the GOP). [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 15:22, 21 September 2019 (EDT)

:Thanks for letting me know about this. I'll see what we can do to improve CP's coverage on this topic. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:51, 21 September 2019 (EDT)

::Dixiecrat is basically one of the those journalistic terms that takes on its own life and lives on in infamy; in 1948 Truman, [[Henry Wallace]], and Strom Thurmond all claimed the mantle of Democrat; the press assigned labels to distinguish them.
::Strom Thurmond would be the first to deny he was a "Dixiecrat', given the definition journalists assigned to it. He'd argue he was Democrat, loyal to the Democrat party ideals and traditions.
::[[Cokie Roberts]], who just died and her obituary lauds her as a feminist pioneer in political journalism, reared as the daughter of a longtime Democrat Majority Leader, doesn't mention she was reared by her father [[Hale Boggs]] (signer of the [[Southern Manifesto]]) in the Dixiecrat tradition. Cokie Roberts, raised in a Dixiecrat household by parents who'' both'' served in the House (her mother succeeded her father), owed her entire success and career to the political education she received from her parents, and never rebelled against it.

::Which of coarse brings us to a discussion of Louisiana Democrat politics and its godfather, Huey "Every Man a King (except blacks)" Long, his place in the history of American Socialism, and his successors in Louisiana-style politics and demagoguery, notable among several, [[James Carville]]... [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 15:39, 21 September 2019 (EDT)
[[Image:Gop-plank.JPG|thumb|275px|1936 cartoon shows GOP building its platform from the conservative planks abandoned by the Democrats]]
:And I have one more question. On the [[Conservative]] page, is this picture accurate?
::I'm not exactly sure of Prof. Jensen's reasoning there; I'd say it is related to the Democrat Congress in 1931 turning down Herbert Hoover's relief efforts at the start of the Great Depression, paving the way to blaming Hoover for the Depression in the 1932 election. But some it can go back as far as the creation of the Federal Reserve Board after the 1912 elections, or even the Cross of Gold speech of William Jennings Bryan in 1896. "Sound Money" in that context refers to an anti-inflationist gold standard; I don't know when Democrats ever were "Sound Money" anti-inflationists, other than when they nixed Hoover's relief efforts or passed the Federal Reserve Act (but even there, that's debatable whether the Federal Reserve Act was inflationary or for maintaining a rigid gold standard).

::On the whole, I've debated with myself for years about removing some of Prof. Jensen's work, cause I regard him as a qualified historian. Only when I'm armed with the facts do I challenge some of his biases or excesses. And he does have a habit of using what I regard as biased fake news sources going back as far as 1936. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 21:55, 21 September 2019 (EDT)

Thank you for the info. I'm learning a lot from on here and I'm still learning. I'm just trying to get a better understanding is all. I love your and 1990'sguy's edits. Keep up the good work guys!
[[User:Classical Liberal|Classical Liberal]] ([[User talk: Classical Liberal|talk]]) 22:20, 21 September 2019 (CDT)
:Thank you, I appreciate it! And thanks for coming to my talk page to discuss it and get a better understanding! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 07:38, 22 September 2019 (EDT)

==Thank you==
Thank you for tidying up the link to [[Alister Hardy]] on the page on the [[Templeton Prize]]. [[User:Carltonio|Carltonio]] ([[User talk:Carltonio|talk]]) 11:41, 26 September 2019 (EDT)
:You're welcome! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:44, 26 September 2019 (EDT)

== Let's start off on a clean slate as far as User: BernieandTrumpfan==

I put the below post on the talk page of User: BernieandTrumpfan:

Tell you what. Let's just start off with a clean slate. I deleted my previous remarks. I don't forsee deleting any more of your content. I just thought the errors of fact in these articles were not by accident: [[Agnosticism, deism, and confusion]] and [[List of Social Darwinists]]. I will assume your edits are good faith henceforth plus 1990sguy said he would review your future edits.

I think I probably was too quick on the draw in determining some of your errant edits were made in bad faith (agnosticism has caused many people to become insane with the footnotes not supporting that, Yasser Arafat is a social Darwinist, etc.). My apologies if I made a mistake.

I will not restore those articles two articles above because they had some quality issues, but I did restore the mainspace articles/essays I could find. I turned [[Atheism and chaos]] into an essay.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 21:50, 1 October 2019 (EDT)
:I restored all but 2 of BernieandTrump fan articles/essays.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 09:26, 2 October 2019 (EDT)

== Ted Cruz edit ==
Calm down, please. At that time, I used the 'Stop Left Wing Newspeak' extension. It automatically changes some words. I reverted it immediately, and changed the preferences of the extension. Please do not lose your temper over a minor mistake. I am only trying to improve Conservapedia, and your unpleasant reaction has put me off a little. -- [[User:Toby Chester|Toby Chester]] ([[User talk:Toby Chester|talk]]) 01:40, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

==Something you might be able to use==
[[File:Trump-wage-growth-1.jpg |right|300px|thumb|Wage growth among low income workers has been double that of high income workers under President Trump. ''Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics'']]
You might be able o use this somewhere. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 22:51, 5 October 2019 (EDT)
:Will do! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:53, 5 October 2019 (EDT)
== Why right-wing populism will triumph ==

*[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-behind-the-rise-of-radicalism-here-are-some-theories/2019/10/09/d88f4c62-eac2-11e9-9c6d-436a0df4f31d_story.html What’s behind the rise of radicalism? Here are some theories] By Megan McArdle, ''Washington Post'', Oct. 9, 2019

*[https://quillette.com/2019/05/27/how-progressivism-enabled-the-rise-of-the-populist-right/ How Progressivism Enabled the Rise of the Populist Right], [[Eric Kaufmann]], ''Quillette'', 2019

*[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/08/shawn-rosenberg-democracy-228045 The Shocking Paper Predicting the End of Democracy], By RICK SHENKMAN, ''Politico'', September 08, 2019

*[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/08/10/the-rise-of-populism-shouldnt-have-surprised-anyone/ The rise of populism shouldn’t have surprised anyone], ''Washington Post'', 2017

*[https://www.businessinsider.com/global-recession-could-boost-far-right-populism-in-us-worldwide-2019-8 Trump rode an 'us versus them' populism all the way to the White House. A global recession could take it to dangerous levels], ''Business Insider'', 2019

*[https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/interview/civic-tech-expert-the-alliance-between-new-media-and-anti-establishment-forces-is-powerful/ Civic tech guru: Trump, Breitbart and populism are ‘the new normal’], 2017

I thought you might find these articles interesting.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 12:28, 28 October 2019 (EDT)

:Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:30, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
::It seems like the media elites are starting to come out of their denialism and are beginning to recognize that right-wing populism is not a temporary blip on the radar.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 12:34, 28 October 2019 (EDT)

== Fred Schiele ==

Thank you for correcting my mistakes in [[Fred Schiele]] article. Didn't notice the Louisiana people category. --[[User:Orb|Orb]] ([[User talk:Orb|talk]]) 13:41, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
:You're welcome. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:52, 3 November 2019 (EST)

==Thank you for the categorisations==
Thank you for adding the categorisations to the article I started on [[Erich von Daniken]]. I wonder whether this article could also be added to the category "Pseudoscience"? After all, in the article [[Pseudoscience]], the ancient astronaut theory is listed as a pseudo-science! [[User:Carltonio|Carltonio]] ([[User talk:Carltonio|talk]]) 16:35, 3 November 2019 (EST)
:Sure, that might be appropriate. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:52, 3 November 2019 (EST)
== Congratulations! ==
Congratulations, your account has been promoted to Sysop! Please feel free to post to the Main page from time to time.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 16:27, 11 November 2019 (EST)
:Thank you very much, Andy! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:34, 11 November 2019 (EST)
::Congratualations! And with political polarization occuring, perhaps you will develop a loyal opposition that will obsess over you!

::BY the way, maybe a [[Donald Trump 2020]] article would be a good article to create.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:59, 25 November 2019 (EST)
:::This is my favorite Sysop user page: https://www.conservapedia.com/User:BethanyS I just incorporated her GIF on my user page. I am a big fan of GIFs - especially [https://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:_The_transitional_animal_the_flying_kitty%3F THIS ONE]![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:08, 25 November 2019 (EST)

==Question==
Hi, I'm new and I'd like to ask a question or two. I want to help document knowledge without liberal or atheist interference.

First question: How can I add a page? I'd like to add a page to document liberal uncivil behavior.
:There are already pages on [[Liberal bigotry]], [[Liberal intolerance]], and [[Liberalism and racism]]. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 21:15, 19 November 2019 (EST)

Second, and last: How long does it take to become a Sysop, to stop far-left trolls from harming Conservapedia? I'm willing to put in a lot of effort.
:Make enough substantive edits long enough and prove yourself to be a true conservative, and you will get blocking rights. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 21:15, 19 November 2019 (EST)

Thanks.--[[User:Ay|Ay]] ([[User talk:Ay|talk]]) 20:13, 19 November 2019 (EST)

:It took me over three years, 45,000 edits, and ~100-150 article creations to be promoted to admin. It also requires integrity (no sock accounts) and always using sources when adding info. Also, remember that this is an encyclopedia, so don't use hyperbolic or over-the-top language. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:28, 19 November 2019 (EST)

== I hope you agree with this edit I made to one of your articles ==

I hope you agree with [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Donald_Trump_achievements:_Foreign_policy_(2019)&curid=151805&diff=1599943&oldid=1599936 THIS EDIT] I made to one of your articles.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:43, 27 November 2019 (EST)

:I disagree. No matter what, this is a significant action, so no matter what we do, it should either be listed as an achievement or failure. I've seen both supportive and critical articles on this from strongly conservative sources (Breitbart, The New American, etc.). Both sides (conservatives, specifically) have made convincing arguments. Thus, I prefer to give the "pro" side the benefit of the doubt to avoid inflating the "failure" section of the sub-article.

:Also, I don't think the fact that the other countries won't like the policy should matter to us. Trump's foreign policy doctrine is America First, so by definition, other countries won't like some U.S. policies (NATO, Paris agreement, immigration, foreign aid, etc.). Thus, that fact alone isn't very important. Also, some sources I read noted the policy is rather modest in scope.

:A good argument against the policy is that the U.S. is engaging in liberal-leaning neocon "human rights" promotion. That's a very valid argument, and some of the sources I cited noted this argument. Also, I believe homosexuality is a sinful practice that is contrary to Scripture (Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10).

:With good arguments for and against -- and with the policy being significant either way -- I'd prefer to keep it in the "achievements" section rather than put it in the "failure" section. I think it has to be in one or the other. Because this is a notable policy change, I strongly think we must keep it in the article no matter what.

:I hope this clarifies my position on this. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:42, 27 November 2019 (EST)

::Also, if you look further down, I listed the achievements of how Pompeo refused to fly the homosexual flag over U.S. embassies, and how he created a natural law commission (homosexuality is counter to natural law). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:23, 27 November 2019 (EST)
:::For 200+ years the USA was anti-homosexuality in its laws. I am assuming the founding fathers didn't have a right to engage in homosexuality in the Constitution. So it is essentially is a states rights issue constitutionally.

:::Here is what The Nation claims is true: "Take the scholarship on the colonial era, with which Eskridge begins his account. During the 1600s, the American colonies adopted sodomy (or “buggery”) laws that prohibited bestiality as well as anal sex between either a man and a woman or between two men. (New Haven Colony was rare in including sexual acts between women as part of its sodomy prohibition.) Punishment–which included death–was draconian, but the laws were very rarely enforced. Historians know of less than ten executions for sodomy throughout the seventeenth century. Of those few, almost all involved assault or sex with animals. These laws were not directed in any particular way toward homosexuality. Indeed, they couldn’t be–the idea that there was a type of person who was a homosexual didn’t even emerge until the late nineteenth century."[https://www.thenation.com/article/we-colonials-sodomy-laws-america/]

:::I was told by someone fairly knowledgeable about this topic of homosexuality that the research shows the more society is against homosexuality, the less there is of it. This makes sense because even Kinsey admitted that homosexuality among Orthodox Jews is rare. And there was a culture in New Guinea where they didn't even know homosexuality existed until the Western missionaries told them about homosexuality. From Conservapedia's [[Religious Upbringing and Culture Affects Rates of Homosexuality]] article: "However, in another group of Dani who were genetically related, homosexuality was totally unknown. Missionaries report that when they were translating the Bible into Dani for this group, their tribal assistants, who knew their own culture intimately, were nonplused by references to homosexuality in Romans 1; they did not understand the concept."

:::And the fruit of a society being more tolerant of homosexuality is not good (Diseases, gender imbalances in terms of marriageable people, etc. ). And in the Western World and in Asian developed countries, the fertility rates is below replacement levels and homosexuality is certainly not helping this problem. Graying populations is going to create big problems in terms of caring for the aged, pension plans, societies being less productive, Muslim terrorism if countries open the floodgates of Muslim immigration due to labor shortages, etc.

:::So it is very hard to call decriminalization an achievement. About the only thing you can say is that it frees up police resources.

:::Personally, since the Bible says in Romans 1 that he gives men/women over to a depraved mind who fail to acknowledge Him and some engage in homosexuality, you can regard homosexuality as a quasi type of punishment. To explain what I mean, here is what a pastor said, "From the foregoing man has fallen into a debased state, and God's yearning is to teach, guide and bestow his abundant mercy so that he is reconciled back to Him, by seeing and coming into His covenant. Therefore to "give man up" is to withdraw His teaching, guidance, and mercy and allow man continue in his wickedness"[https://ebible.com/questions/197-what-does-it-mean-that-god-will-give-them-over-to-a-debased-mind][[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:48, 27 November 2019 (EST)

::::I agree with everything you said above. The problem is that every now and then, there's a Trump Administration policy announcement that's in a gray area, where it's very hard to decide whether it should be listed as an achievement or a failure because generally strong conservatives whose opinions I respect disagree with each other. Because they're significant actions, there's no way that I will just ignore the action, so I need to decide whether to list it as a success or failure. When I decide this question, I try to note that not all consistent conservatives agreed with each other.

::::I also liked how the information debunked leftist homosexual activists' hysterical claims about the Trump Administration's policies.

::::Do you think I should move the information into a "failure" section? It will stay in the article no matter what because it's a significant action, but I'm open to listing it as a failure. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:04, 27 November 2019 (EST)
As far as American conservatives coming down on both sides of the fence, I would say that American conservatism has largely been a failure on social conservatism side (abortion, education, etc.). So a conservatism that doesn't conserve isn't conservative at all. It is argued that many conservatives weren't willing to fight and sully their uniforms and flew the flag of surrender quickly in term of social conservatism. Many people are so-called conservatives because they want respectability and social approval, so they quickly cave when opposition comes. Now [[Phyllis Schlafly]] was willing to get into the political trenches and fight for what she believed, but this wasn't true of American conservatism as a whole from 1960s up until Trump. But now you can see that Trump has given many conservatives a fighting spirit. Eventually, given their higher fertility rates, conservatives will likely win the culture war in the USA. But there has been a long period of defeatism. The problem essentially is that the label of "conservative" is ill-defined so people who are not conservative can easily call themselves conservative.

I just found out that sodomy laws didn't appear to exist in European countries such as England, Germany, France until after 1500. There were obviously Christians before 1500 so to call sodomy laws conservative in terms of Western Civilization would be a stretch. My guess is that the Reformation was a big influence in terms of countries eventually passing sodomy laws. And the spread of theologically conservative Protestantism does tend to cause countries/societies to be less tolerant of homosexuality. I know the Russian Orthodox church influenced Russia to be anti-homosexuality in its laws, but I don't know what the other Eastern Orthodox countries are like.

On the whole, since the most truly conservative portion of mankind's history was the garden of Eden before the fall, I would list the decriminalization of homosexuality as a failure! There was no homosexuality before the fall! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:21, 27 November 2019 (EST)
:I do think that social conservatives did a respectable job in fighting abortion pre-Trump after Roe vs. Wade was passed, but Trump appointing another conservative to SCOTUS could put them over the finish line on the abortion issue.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:24, 27 November 2019 (EST)
::I think the biggest reason why social conservatives lost so many battles was the advent of the baby boomers. You had a lot of prosperous young people by historical standards and many of them abandoned God. And so the sexual revolution, cultural Marxism, etc. came into American society. But again, conservatives are having more babies post the advent of the pill and so eventually conservatives could win the culture war. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:28, 27 November 2019 (EST)
:::I moved the information into a failure section. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:52, 27 November 2019 (EST)
:::Also, if you have other good sources I can cite in those entries, please let me know. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:03, 28 November 2019 (EST)
Thanks! By the way, ranking #3 for Donald Trump achievement is certainly an accomplishment. The White House website ranks #1 and #2 for that search result. And as Hillary found out, it is tough to compete with Trump so coming in 3rd place is pretty good!

Here is a suggestion. Why don't you take the failures out of the Donald Trump achievement articles. The failures are non-relevant to those articles. And given the current political polarization, I doubt someone going to a Donald Trump achievement article wants failures listed in the article. I think at most you should put in the fact that some victories were partial victories. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:09, 28 November 2019 (EST)

:I won't take the failures out, and they are relevant. One can't fully analyze and assess the Trump Administration's successes and achievements without also knowing it's failures. It gives a broader picture from a conservative perspective. People didn't think much about Reagan's illegal alien amnesty bill signing in 1986, but that failure has come back to hurt the U.S. and (partially) his legacy. We cannot whitewash that failure from his presidency, and we should not ignore any Trump Administration failure (but the vast majority of the administration's actions have been achievements, as the articles show).

:I already note in most of the failure sections that many of them were not the fault of Trump himself but rather of Congress and lower-ranking administration officials who didn't fully share his agenda. I'll consider also noting that some of them were partial victories. I want my article series to be comprehensive. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:18, 28 November 2019 (EST)
My guess is that Trump's failures are often the result of Paul Ryan being an impendiment for awhile such as the late building of the expansion border wall.

In addition, the Mueller probe and the impeachment farce were kind of like [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1dKsmV3fIU the hedgerows] that slowed down the Allies advancement for awhile after D-Day. Imagine what Trump would have gotten accomplished if he picked Bill Barr as his first attorney general instead of Jeffrey Sessions.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:41, 28 November 2019 (EST)
:I will see what I can do to make the "failure" section less of a distraction, but it needs to stay no matter what because it's relevant and provides context. Also, I think personnel has been Trump's biggest mistake as president -- many people in his administration opposed his conservative agenda and tried to turn him into another Bush. However, Trump has had many more successes/achievements than failures and setbacks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:14, 28 November 2019 (EST)
::Anne Coulter said Trump hiring the wrong people was one of his shortcomings. I don't know why this is happening.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:40, 28 November 2019 (EST)
I just read this:

"There are many reasons behind the sluggish hiring.

On Capitol Hill, Republicans blame Democrats for slow-walking nominees.

"They've continuously forced procedural hurdles on nominees for no reason other than to stall confirmations, launching more filibusters against this president's cabinet than any other in history," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last month.

To be sure, one cause of the slowdown stems from systemic problems in the Washington nomination process.

The White House is subjecting candidates to rigorous vetting -- one person familiar with the process described it as "brutal." They say the process has discouraged a number of candidates, especially those coming from the banking industry with deep financial ties.

"It was bad enough during the Obama administration, but it has gotten worse, and worse, and worse," said one banking lawyer, who noted he knew at least two people who dropped out of the process because of the tougher scrutiny."[https://money.cnn.com/2017/06/07/news/economy/trump-staffing-vacancies/index.html]

I am guessing given the heat put on Trump personnel by the media, some job candidates decline to be hired.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:50, 28 November 2019 (EST)
:Here is an satirical article which describes what I mentioned above: [https://babylonbee.com/news/conservative-slams-liberals-for-supporting-policies-hell-support-five-years-from-now Conservative Slams Liberal Policies He'll Support Five Years From Now].

:Many conservatives are too easily cowed by spurioous charges of being a racist, etc. etc. and cave into liberal demands. In short, many conservatives crave social approval and respect rather than being moored by biblical principles. I saw an interview of British conservatives and they said they now support views that they totally rejected several years ago and the reason was obvious. They craved the approval of men and had no firm principles.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:03, 28 November 2019 (EST)

::It seems that conservatives (overall) are less bold than leftists when it comes to pressing forward with their agenda. A leftist will come to power, make many significant changes, and then when a conservative replaces them, they only partially revert those changes. The cycle then repeats itself. I'm glad that Trump has been more aggressive in pressing with his agenda than other Republican presidents like the Bushes.

::Many of the setbacks Trump has seen during his presidency are more accurately described as "setbacks" rather than "failures." They are still relevant to someone wanting to evaluate how effective his presidency was at advancing conservative principles, so I revised the articles accordingly. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:38, 29 November 2019 (EST)
:::Your Trump articles are very informative. If Trump wins by a very razor thin margin, I will credit you with putting him over the top![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:31, 29 November 2019 (EST)

== Check the online place where we chat ==

Please check the online place where we chat. I will be online there now. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:02, 29 November 2019 (EST)
:I saw. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:19, 29 November 2019 (EST)

== Nice headline! ==

Very nice headline! Please feel free to post more headlines in the future.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:02, 8 December 2019 (EST)
:Thank you, Andy! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:11, 9 December 2019 (EST)

== Finding accurate sources to help explain cases of children who claim to remember past lives ==

Just wondering, since you seem to know how everything works in Conservapedia and can find accurate sources to back information, do you know any reliable sources that can provide a rational explanation for the multiple cases of children who claimed to remember past lives? This seems like an interesting topic for the [[Reincarnation]] page that I'm possibly adding more information to, and I'm hoping to find a scientific reason to make sense of all the obscure cases. Or are all these just individual cases of parental abuse in the seeking of publicity? Thanks! -[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]

:Reincarnation isn't a topic that I haven't studied very deeply, but here are some good sources from some good websites that I recommend: [https://www.gotquestions.org/past-lives-reincarnation.html 1],[https://answersingenesis.org/world-religions/new-age-movement-pantheism-monism/ 2] I would also check [https://carm.org/ carm.org] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:22, 24 December 2019 (EST)

::Thank you! -[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]

Nice unblock! MERRY CHRISTMAS!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:39, 25 December 2019 (EST)
:Thank you Andy, and Merry Christmas to you too! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:46, 25 December 2019 (EST)

== I'm Only Curious ==

I had heard that many ancient Egyptian pharaohs were in deed overweight due to their diets and sedentary lifestyles. I was told that the same applies to most Roman emperors, medieval royalty, and historical dictators. Additionally, I also remember hearing that being overweight was long a status symbol in history. I had also heard that they had quite the meat, carbohydrate, honey, dairy, and candy based diets. Is that true? If not, what were their diets mostly high in? ([[User:King Conservative|King Conservative]] ([[User talk:King Conservative|talk]]) 17:52, 11 January 2020 (EST)King Conservative)

:What does that have to do with government regulation of what you can eat? The government making a legal statute requiring people to eat healthy is as bad (from a liberty standpoint) as a legal statute requiring people to go to McDonald's three times a day. It's good to eat healthy, but it shouldn't be something imposed upon people by the government. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:56, 11 January 2020 (EST)

== About earning user rights ==

How can I, as a editor, earn [[conservapedia:user rights|user rights]]? For instance, in the future, I'd like to have the edit and upload flags. How do you earn those two and how many edits are required in order for that to happen? --[[User:AHills6|'''A''']][[User talk:AHills6|'''Hills''']][[Special:Contributions/AHills6|'''6''']] 21:43, 13 February 2020 (EST)

:I'm not 1990'sguy, but I don't think we have any officially published criteria for specific promotions. Generally, these privileges are granted senior editors who have contributed a significant amount. Just make good, high-quality contributions, and they will probably come eventually. Until then, you can request image uploads here: [[CP:IUR]]. We are processing them rather slowly right now, but we'll get to your requests eventually. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 22:00, 13 February 2020 (EST)
::Thank you for your help [[user:DavidB4|DavidB4]]. --[[User:AHills6|'''A''']][[User talk:AHills6|'''Hills''']][[Special:Contributions/AHills6|'''6''']] 22:04, 13 February 2020 (EST)

== 2019 Chilean State of Emergency ==

Thanks for all the material and pictures, after taking a break I'm back and think it's time to change the title of the page to 2019-20 Violent Chilean Protests (Chile Awakes Movement) to counter the leftist lies that have branded this episode simply as Peaceful Protests and for this Conservapedia page to appear in the top 10 google results along with Wikipedia's '2019–20 Chilean protests'
--[[User:Bearbrau|Bearbrau]] ([[User talk:Bearbrau|talk]]) 17:19, 25 February 2020 (EST)

== Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Mike Bloomberg, and Ted Turner ==

Do you think any of those four people have connections to organized crime syndicates? If so, why and if not, why not? ([[User:King Conservative|King Conservative]] ([[User talk:King Conservative|talk]]) 13:26, 10 April 2020 (EDT)King Conservative)

:I'm not 1990'sguy, but I would recommend you see [[Clinton body count|this page]] and [[Jeffrey Epstein|this page]] for some brief information on Clinton crimes. As for Bloomberg, I don't know too much, and I haven't done research into Ted Turner. Also, as for 1990'sguy, the user's last edits were almost three months ago ([[Special:Contributions/1990'sguy|see here]]). --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 13:37, 10 April 2020 (EDT)
: Ok. Thanks. ([[User:King Conservative|King Conservative]] ([[User talk:King Conservative|talk]]) 14:02, 10 April 2020 (EDT)King Conservative)

::You're welcome! If you ever have more questions, you can ask on my talk page if other editors aren't always frequently around on their talk pages. --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 14:05, 10 April 2020 (EDT)

:Reminder of Conservapdia Commandments 1, 2, and 5.
#Everything you post must be true and verifiable. Do not copy from Wikipedia[1] or elsewhere unless it was your original work.[2]
#Always cite[3] and give credit to your sources,[4] even if in the public domain.[5] When making citations from books, users are encouraged to find additional online sources that provide easy verification. Please check Google Books to see if this particular source is available in online form. If you are unfamiliar on how to place footnotes in a wiki, please see: Conservapedia:Footnotes - technical help
:5. Do not post personal opinion on an encyclopedia entry. Opinions can be posted on Talk:pages or on debate or discussion pages. Advertisements are prohibited.
:I think we're just being trolled in advance of the 2020 elections to discredit CP as a biased source. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 16:11, 10 April 2020 (EDT)

::Wait, did I do anything wrong, RobSmith? --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 16:16, 10 April 2020 (EDT)
:::No. Nothing wrong with being tolerant of others' views. But I have detected a pattern in recent weeks of trolling to paint CP as 'extreme' in certain viewpoints in advance of the 2020 elections. We have two examples just today of using categories, [[:Category:Men]] and [[:Category:Criminals]]. These categorizations of certain individuals are needlessly controversial.

:::[https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Michael_Cohen&diff=prev&oldid=1419238 See this past categorization], for example. (A} No one asserts that [[Michael Cohen]], a lifelong Democrat, is a conservative; (B} more importantly, I have good reason to suspect the miscategorization of certain individuals as being "Pro-2nd Amendment" is to make it easy to galvanize anti-2nd Amendment activists against Michael Cohen and others by simply clicking on the category link. There's no evidence anywhere I can find Michael Cohen ever spoke about the 2nd Amendment, pro or con. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 17:35, 10 April 2020 (EDT)

::::Oh yeah, I see your point, RobSmith. Also, just wondering, why did you mention something about a [[DNC]] attempt to promote division among Republicans after I requested creating [[Template:Republican establishment|this template]]? And speaking of promoting division, did you find it suspicious what [[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] was doing a while ago, labeling [[Nikki Haley]] and [[Ted Cruz]] as [[RINOs]]? And lastly, out of topic, but generally at least how many edits does it take to be granted extra tags? --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 18:22, 10 April 2020 (EDT)

==Main Page News==
Hi, the news on the main page talks about Jimmy Kimmel saying that he's a bigot because of Trump, but the video shows a statement where he doesn't talk about Trump at all. Fix please. [[User:Libcons|Libcons]] ([[User talk:Libcons|talk]]) 18:13, 24 June 2020 (EDT)

== Welcome back! ==

Welcome back 1990'sguy! —[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May Dataclarifier be well!]]''''' 14:20, 9 July 2020 (EDT)

hey! I'm not sure who to report this problem to but when editing on mobile the captcha question doesn't appear. the captcha text box does appear but it's impossible to see what the question is until I either use a laptop or the desktop version of chrome.. {{unsigned|Mikephshdj}}

Great to see you around again, 1990'sguy! How have you been doing? (by the way, I believe your previous reply here disappeared following some server errors) —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>Liberaltears</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Wednesday, 20:35, 22 September 2020 (EDT)
:Yes, I noticed -- the previous comments were removed for whatever reason. I'm doing well. I left because of an increase in my off-wiki workload, and now, with a more stable situation, I'll be slowly working to update some important articles (sadly, not the "Donald Trump achievements" series). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:52, 27 September 2020 (EDT)
::Oh, alright. For the Donald Trump achievements series, I'll mainly focus on the foreign policy part for this year. And it's good to hear that you're doing well! (by the way, I'm replying from a sock I account I just created a few hours ago because I can't log in from my normal one) [[User:TemporarysockofLT|TemporarysockofLT]] ([[User talk:TemporarysockofLT|talk]]) 19:58, 27 September 2020 (EDT)
:::The same thing happened to me -- I would have made these edits earlier, and that's why I created another "1990'sguy" account a few hours ago. Try changing your password on the old account and pressing the checkmark to stay logged in (on the same page where you type your new password). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:01, 27 September 2020 (EDT)
::::The problem is that the login process won't work; normally when logging in, once I enter in my username and the correct password, the top right should show links to my user page, talk page, etc. However, when I try doing so, the "Create account  Log in" links still show up as if I'm not logged in. If I press the back button and try logging in again, an error notice pops up saying that I need to enable cookies. Apparently it seems that creating accounts work despite logins not functioning properly. [[User:TemporarysockofLT|TemporarysockofLT]] ([[User talk:TemporarysockofLT|talk]]) 20:06, 27 September 2020 (EDT)
:::::That's the exact same problem I had -- instead of typing in your username and password, click on "forgot my password" button and do the process for changing it. Once you have created a new password, click the "stay logged in for 30 days" button and try to log in with the new password. Worked for me. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:11, 27 September 2020 (EDT)
::::::Hmm, interesting. I'll see if that works, and as of typing this sentence, I need to go, and won't be using this temporary sock account again. If I can't get back to my normal account, I may create another sock account in a few days for editing (assuming I have several hours of free time). Thank you 1990'sguy for your suggestion! [[User:TemporarysockofLT|TemporarysockofLT]] ([[User talk:TemporarysockofLT|talk]]) 20:16, 27 September 2020 (EDT)

Conservative of the Year 2020

2020-09-28T00:13:51Z

TemporarysockofLT: wording

#[[Kristi Noem]], Governor of [[South Dakota]], for standing strong against failed [[liberal]] approaches to the [[coronavirus]] crisis.
#Rep. [[Thomas Massie|Tom Massie]] (R-KY), for standing up against the bloated $2.2 trillion bailout and seeking a roll call vote rather than the cowardly House vote which enable Representatives to conceal their position. Rep. Massie then won by a landslide in his primary against a moderate challenger.
#President [[Jair Bolsonaro]], for holding [[Brazil]]ian fatalities from [[coronavirus]] below that in the [[United States]] despite having far few resources, by promoting the benefits of the inexpensive [[hydroxychloroquine]] as a successful early treatment.
#Senator [[Ron Johnson]] (R-WI) for attempting to end the interference by [[liberal]]s with effective early treatment of victims of [[COVID-19]].
#Senator [[Rand Paul]], for speaking out against and challenging [[Anthony Fauci]] as well as the totalitarian policies enacted amidst the [[CCP pandemic]].
#Congressman [[Andy Biggs]] (R-AZ), chairman of the [[Freedom Caucus]], for speaking out against the misguided policies of Fauci.<ref>https://secure.housefreedomfund.com/f5j67/s?c=50b0723247a359dd563d389977753806</ref>
#Senator [[Josh Hawley]] (R-MO), for quickly introducing a resolution to censure [[Chuck Schumer]] after his harsh comments on the steps of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] personally against two [[Trump]]-appointed judges. Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] rebuked Schumer for his comments, but Schumer did not apologize until Hawley introduced his censure resolution, which other senators then joined.
#President [[Donald Trump]].
#Dr. [[Vladimir Zelenko]] is a [[New York State]] physician who treated 350 (later exceeding 700) [[coronavirus]] patients in March of 2020 with 100% success using hydroxychloroquine, antibiotics and zinc.<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/doctor-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success], WND.com</ref><ref>[https://techstartups.com/2020/03/25/doctor-vladimir-zelenko-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success-using-hydroxychloroquine-sulfate/ Doctor Vladimir Zelenko: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success using Hydroxychloroquine Sulfate], Techstartups.com</ref><ref>[https://forward.com/news/national/442511/trump-coronavirus-fda/ A Jewish doctor’s off-label virus treatment is now being used in multiple states] by Ari Feldman and Helen Chernikoff</ref> There were no hospitilizations, intubations or deaths among Zelenko's 350 patients.<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/doctor-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success], WND.com</ref> Dr. Zelenko's coronavirus treatment is now being used in multiple states.<ref>[https://forward.com/news/national/442511/trump-coronavirus-fda/ A Jewish doctor’s off-label virus treatment is now being used in multiple states] by Ari Feldman and Helen Chernikoff</ref>
#Vice President [[Mike Pence]], for frequently promoting [[Christian]] and conservative values as [[vice president]] under Donald Trump.
#[[Conservapedia]] editor [[User:RobSmith|RobSmith]], for having worked extra hard covering the most important events here, from the [[CCP pandemic]] to the [[2020 Leftwing insurrection]].
#[[Tucker Carlson]], for standing up to the radical left-wing mob and for achieving the largest audience of any program in the history of cable news.<ref>https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/fox-news-q2-2020-ratings-tucker-carlson-averaged-4-3-million-viewers-in-the-8-p-m-hour-the-largest-audience-in-cable-news-history/446144/</ref>
#[[Sean Hannity]], for defending President Trump and promoting conservative principles.

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Conservative of the Year]]

Conservative of the Year 2020

2020-09-28T00:12:44Z

TemporarysockofLT: add Sen. Paul to the list

#[[Kristi Noem]], Governor of [[South Dakota]], for standing strong against failed [[liberal]] approaches to the [[coronavirus]] crisis.
#Rep. [[Thomas Massie|Tom Massie]] (R-KY), for standing up against the bloated $2.2 trillion bailout and seeking a roll call vote rather than the cowardly House vote which enable Representatives to conceal their position. Rep. Massie then won by a landslide in his primary against a moderate challenger.
#President [[Jair Bolsonaro]], for holding [[Brazil]]ian fatalities from [[coronavirus]] below that in the [[United States]] despite having far few resources, by promoting the benefits of the inexpensive [[hydroxychloroquine]] as a successful early treatment.
#Senator [[Ron Johnson]] (R-WI) for attempting to end the interference by [[liberal]]s with effective early treatment of victims of [[COVID-19]].
#Senator [[Rand Paul]], for speaking out against totalitarian policies amidst the [[CCP pandemic]] as well as [[Anthony Fauci]].
#Congressman [[Andy Biggs]] (R-AZ), chairman of the [[Freedom Caucus]], for speaking out against the misguided policies of Fauci.<ref>https://secure.housefreedomfund.com/f5j67/s?c=50b0723247a359dd563d389977753806</ref>
#Senator [[Josh Hawley]] (R-MO), for quickly introducing a resolution to censure [[Chuck Schumer]] after his harsh comments on the steps of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] personally against two [[Trump]]-appointed judges. Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] rebuked Schumer for his comments, but Schumer did not apologize until Hawley introduced his censure resolution, which other senators then joined.
#President [[Donald Trump]].
#Dr. [[Vladimir Zelenko]] is a [[New York State]] physician who treated 350 (later exceeding 700) [[coronavirus]] patients in March of 2020 with 100% success using hydroxychloroquine, antibiotics and zinc.<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/doctor-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success], WND.com</ref><ref>[https://techstartups.com/2020/03/25/doctor-vladimir-zelenko-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success-using-hydroxychloroquine-sulfate/ Doctor Vladimir Zelenko: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success using Hydroxychloroquine Sulfate], Techstartups.com</ref><ref>[https://forward.com/news/national/442511/trump-coronavirus-fda/ A Jewish doctor’s off-label virus treatment is now being used in multiple states] by Ari Feldman and Helen Chernikoff</ref> There were no hospitilizations, intubations or deaths among Zelenko's 350 patients.<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/doctor-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success], WND.com</ref> Dr. Zelenko's coronavirus treatment is now being used in multiple states.<ref>[https://forward.com/news/national/442511/trump-coronavirus-fda/ A Jewish doctor’s off-label virus treatment is now being used in multiple states] by Ari Feldman and Helen Chernikoff</ref>
#Vice President [[Mike Pence]], for frequently promoting [[Christian]] and conservative values as [[vice president]] under Donald Trump.
#[[Conservapedia]] editor [[User:RobSmith|RobSmith]], for having worked extra hard covering the most important events here, from the [[CCP pandemic]] to the [[2020 Leftwing insurrection]].
#[[Tucker Carlson]], for standing up to the radical left-wing mob and for achieving the largest audience of any program in the history of cable news.<ref>https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/fox-news-q2-2020-ratings-tucker-carlson-averaged-4-3-million-viewers-in-the-8-p-m-hour-the-largest-audience-in-cable-news-history/446144/</ref>
#[[Sean Hannity]], for defending President Trump and promoting conservative principles.

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Conservative of the Year]]

Conservative of the Year 2020

2020-09-28T00:10:35Z

TemporarysockofLT: re-order

#[[Kristi Noem]], Governor of [[South Dakota]], for standing strong against failed [[liberal]] approaches to the [[coronavirus]] crisis.
#Rep. [[Thomas Massie|Tom Massie]] (R-KY), for standing up against the bloated $2.2 trillion bailout and seeking a roll call vote rather than the cowardly House vote which enable Representatives to conceal their position. Rep. Massie then won by a landslide in his primary against a moderate challenger.
#President [[Jair Bolsonaro]], for holding [[Brazil]]ian fatalities from [[coronavirus]] below that in the [[United States]] despite having far few resources, by promoting the benefits of the inexpensive [[hydroxychloroquine]] as a successful early treatment.
#Senator [[Ron Johnson]] (R-WI) for attempting to end the interference by [[liberal]]s with effective early treatment of victims of [[COVID-19]].
#Congressman [[Andy Biggs]] (R-AZ), chairman of the [[Freedom Caucus]], for speaking out against the misguided policies of Anthony Fauci.<ref>https://secure.housefreedomfund.com/f5j67/s?c=50b0723247a359dd563d389977753806</ref>
#Senator [[Josh Hawley]] (R-MO), for quickly introducing a resolution to censure [[Chuck Schumer]] after his harsh comments on the steps of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] personally against two [[Trump]]-appointed judges. Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] rebuked Schumer for his comments, but Schumer did not apologize until Hawley introduced his censure resolution, which other senators then joined.
#President [[Donald Trump]].
#Dr. [[Vladimir Zelenko]] is a [[New York State]] physician who treated 350 (later exceeding 700) [[coronavirus]] patients in March of 2020 with 100% success using hydroxychloroquine, antibiotics and zinc.<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/doctor-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success], WND.com</ref><ref>[https://techstartups.com/2020/03/25/doctor-vladimir-zelenko-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success-using-hydroxychloroquine-sulfate/ Doctor Vladimir Zelenko: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success using Hydroxychloroquine Sulfate], Techstartups.com</ref><ref>[https://forward.com/news/national/442511/trump-coronavirus-fda/ A Jewish doctor’s off-label virus treatment is now being used in multiple states] by Ari Feldman and Helen Chernikoff</ref> There were no hospitilizations, intubations or deaths among Zelenko's 350 patients.<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/doctor-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success], WND.com</ref> Dr. Zelenko's coronavirus treatment is now being used in multiple states.<ref>[https://forward.com/news/national/442511/trump-coronavirus-fda/ A Jewish doctor’s off-label virus treatment is now being used in multiple states] by Ari Feldman and Helen Chernikoff</ref>
#Vice President [[Mike Pence]], for frequently promoting [[Christian]] and conservative values as [[vice president]] under Donald Trump.
#[[Conservapedia]] editor [[User:RobSmith|RobSmith]], for having worked extra hard covering the most important events here, from the [[CCP pandemic]] to the [[2020 Leftwing insurrection]].
#[[Tucker Carlson]], for standing up to the radical left-wing mob and for achieving the largest audience of any program in the history of cable news.<ref>https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/fox-news-q2-2020-ratings-tucker-carlson-averaged-4-3-million-viewers-in-the-8-p-m-hour-the-largest-audience-in-cable-news-history/446144/</ref>
#[[Sean Hannity]], for defending President Trump and promoting conservative principles.

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Conservative of the Year]]

User talk:1990'sguy

2020-09-28T00:06:37Z

TemporarysockofLT: /* Welcome back! */

User talk:1990'sguy

2020-09-27T23:59:41Z

TemporarysockofLT: /* Welcome back! */

User talk:1990'sguy

2020-09-27T23:58:34Z

TemporarysockofLT: /* Welcome back! */

{{welcome}}

Thanks for adding your edits, hopefully you'll become a regular contributor. If I can help you out with anything let me know. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 19:45, 27 July 2016 (EDT)

:Thank you! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:49, 27 July 2016 (EDT)

Account promoted to skip the Captcha requirement. Thanks for your enlightening edits to [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia]].

Congratulations!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:37, 28 July 2016 (EDT)

:Thank you! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:45, 28 July 2016 (EDT)
::Congratulations and welcome. You should be aware that people who edit at both CP and WP with the same user name are sometimes harrassed at WP as a result. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 00:11, 29 July 2016 (EDT)
:::Thank you for the welcome and thanks for the heads up! I've already received some heat on Wikipedia for taking some unpopular positions and opposing the bias there, so it will be nothing new for me. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:36, 29 July 2016 (EDT)

----
I saw your helpful addition to the article on Murder of Seth Rich, so I thought I would visit your talk page. How long have you lasted on the WickedPedia? I would be surprised that you would last long there, as I have found the WickedPedia incredibly intolerant and censorious, a pseudo-aristocracy with dominating bullies, biased enough for me to consider it a candidate for the Big T award (T in the Calvinist TULIP); i.e, total depravity! LOL I don't think you can do much on Wikipedia without being part of a group of old boys or buddies who work together. ([[User:Thunkful2|Thunkful2]] ([[User talk:Thunkful2|talk]]) 19:26, 23 August 2016 (EDT))

:Did you mean my Wikipedia talk page? I have been editing Wikipedia for almost three years already. A big reason why I've lasted so long there is because many of the topics I edit are not particularly controversial. However, you are completely right in your description of Wikipedia. I have seen firsthand the massive (and very visible) intolerance and bias Wikipedia has against conservatives, Christians, and anything that contradicts secular and humanistic (pseudo)"scientific knowledge". I could probably write a book about all my criticisms of Wikipedia. I have been able to do some good work (I was able to bring the article "Electoral history of Ronald Reagan" to official "Good Article" status, and I created a few articles), but on other articles, like the Murder of Seth Rich, we cannot have much confidence on the quality and neutrality of those articles. I do applaud you, Thunkful2, for your excellent work on "Murder of Seth Rich". It's awesome that at least one person can accurately present this story! :) --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:35, 23 August 2016 (EDT)

----
I meant right here, this talk page -- I visited it after seeing your good edit. No, I haven't gone to your talk page on the WickedPedia. Thanks for the complement. ([[User:Thunkful2|Thunkful2]] ([[User talk:Thunkful2|talk]]) 10:45, 24 August 2016 (EDT))

:OK, got it. And thanks for your complement. :) --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:50, 24 August 2016 (EDT)

== References from Wikipedia ==

While it's not really plagiarism to copy a reference from WP, it just want to point out that you probably shouldn't do so unless you have read that source, and believe that it supports what is being said. If you are reading the books you are referencing, that's fine--I just can't tell. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:33, 8 September 2016 (EDT)
:Oh, that's a good point. I actually did not read those books, I just wanted to cite something so I wouldn't be adding unsourced info to the article. Should I remove those references anyway? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:36, 8 September 2016 (EDT)

::It is a good idea to find references to support unsourced statements, but it is a little deceptive to cite something you haven't read. To be entirely beyond reproach, removal probably would be best. At this point though, I honestly don't know if I'd bother. In my opinion, it's up to you. No one else has said anything, so it might be okay to leave them, I'm just not sure. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:51, 8 September 2016 (EDT)

:::OK. I will do my own research and find other sources that I can use instead. However, it's getting late, so I will deal with that tomorrow. Thanks for your help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:58, 8 September 2016 (EDT)

== Account promoted ==

Your account has been promoted to include blocking and overnight editing capability. Congratulations!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:30, 29 September 2016 (EDT)

:Congratulations! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 00:57, 29 September 2016 (EDT)

::Well done! [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] ([[User talk:AlanE|talk]]) 01:06, 29 September 2016 (EDT)

:::Thanks all! I really appreciate it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:21, 29 September 2016 (EDT)

::::Excellent! you did good keeping an eye on that vandal yesterday. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 14:52, 29 September 2016 (EDT)

:::::Thanks, Progressingamerica, I appreciate it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:42, 29 September 2016 (EDT)

==Reading the WSJ==
Re: [[Christoph Blocher]]

Typically, when I want to read a WSJ article that requires subscriber sign in is to Google the headline and access the web page from a search engine instead of directly. Most of the time this requires a clean browser tab, sometimes it needs to be done in a different browser. Rarely, it requires a cookie clearing. Just thought that information may be of help. This even works with articles that are years old.

As a last resort, see if its in the internet archive.(though, most articles I don't want that bad to keep trying) But they're all good procedures to know. Sometimes works for other news sites too, besides WSJ. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 00:00, 10 October 2016 (EDT)

:Thanks for the tip! That's what I will do. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:32, 10 October 2016 (EDT)

== Account promoted ==

Your account has been promoted to include upload and rollback features. Congratulations!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 17:26, 13 October 2016 (EDT)
:Thanks! I really appreciate it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:36, 13 October 2016 (EDT)
::Congratulations! Keep it up! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 19:31, 13 October 2016 (EDT)
:::Thanks David! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:43, 13 October 2016 (EDT)

== Move and unlock requests ==

You can post your move and unlock requests to [[User talk:Karajou]]. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:30, 13 October 2016 (EDT)
:Thanks for the tip! It's getting late, so I will do that tomorrow. I appreciate it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:37, 13 October 2016 (EDT)
::You don't actually need any privileges to do a move. You can cut-and-paste from one lemma to another. For purposes of copyright law, the edit summaries must make it clear where the incoming material comes from. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:54, 14 October 2016 (EDT)

== Karajou blocked a user who expressed views supporting the Presidential candidate who is not a sexual preditor. ==

People should not be judged in race on alleged sexuality. A proper critique of Karajou would be asking him about blocking a user who expressed views supporting the Presidential candidate who is not a sexual preditor.--[[User:Rodgerr|Rodgerr]] ([[User talk:Rodgerr|talk]]) 19:04, 14 October 2016 (EDT)

:If you think you have been judged unfairly, you could have just emailed Karajou or webmaster@conservapedia.com (see [[Conservapedia:Guidelines#Member Accounts]]). However, more than once, you decided to take the low route, calling him filthy, immature words [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Karajou&diff=1283494&oldid=1283491]. See [[Conservapedia:Avoid personal remarks]]. And why in the world did you do this? [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Coal_burning&curid=140922&diff=1283484&oldid=1283423] (for someone who apparently abhors Trump for the tape, your words seem just as bad) That, honestly, is shameful. I will note that the "Bringreaganback" account clearly violated [[Conservapedia:90/10 rule]]. Considering all this, it's quite clear you deserved the block. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:12, 14 October 2016 (EDT)

== Mainpageleft ==

In response to your good question about entries on [[Template:Mainpageleft|Mainpageleft]], currently there are about 112 featured entries there, which are "reshuffled" periodically. Do you have any suggestions about how that "team" of entries be improved, with respect to insight, influence, popularity, interest level, educational value, etc.? It's a terrific mix of topics now but there is always room for improvement, particularly as the issues and interest in certain topics by the public inevitably shifts over time. Thanks much for any suggestions you may have.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:46, 18 October 2016 (EDT)

:An example: "[[Underrated Sports Stars]]" is a solid entry, but should probably be replaced on [[Template:Mainpageleft|Mainpageleft]]. Do you have any favored, influential, insightful, potentially or already popular entry that you like, which you would recommend to replace it?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 12:55, 18 October 2016 (EDT)

::I do have a few suggestions. [[Murder of Seth Rich]] is probably the best suggestion, as it is very detailed and well sourced. Also, the Wikipedia article of the murder has been the victim of leftist bias (two times, within a month, editors have tried to delete the article, and with that failing, the article appears to have been stripped of much detail) which our article covers well. Other suggestions that I have are the [[Ark Encounter]] (a popular and influential attraction, and one that has been the victim of atheist and evolutionary bias, which the article covers), and [[Larry McDonald]] (a true patriot who stayed true to his principles, and his article actually covers the theories on his possible survival). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:22, 18 October 2016 (EDT)

== Account promoted again ==

Congratulations, your account has been promoted again, so that you can edit protected articles, and protect and unprotect articles. Very well done!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:05, 10 November 2016 (EST)
:Wow! Thank you very much, Mr. Schlafly! I really appreciate it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:19, 10 November 2016 (EST)
::Congratulations! I've had some problems with the "protect" privilege, but I hope it works for you! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 01:35, 12 November 2016 (EST)
:::Thanks! I hope so too! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:15, 12 November 2016 (EST)
::::Congratulations on yet another promotion. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 11:46, 12 November 2016 (EST)
:::::Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:46, 12 November 2016 (EST)

==Can't edit article==
Hi again, 1990'sguy, it's Ambassador. Is there any reason I can't edit the article on the [[Big Bang]]? To keep atheists from changing it, I suppose. If you have access to it, you might want to add the point about the Big Bang, due to planets and moons spinning backwards, contradicting the law of Conservation of angular momentum. Find out about it [http://www.creationwiki.org/Three_planets_and_several_moons_revolve_backwards_(Talk.Origins) here]. Thanks! [[User:Ambassador|Ambassador]] ([[User talk:Ambassador|talk]]) 19:56, 22 November 2016 (EST)
:Yes, the article is protected probably because of atheist/secularist/liberal vandalism. Unfortunately, I cannot edit it myself as I do not have full admin capabilities. I recommend asking an admin ([http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&username=&group=sysop&limit=100 list]) to unlock the article or add the information you want added. Or, you can go to [[Talk:Main Page|the main talk page]] and add your request there, where more people can see it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:08, 22 November 2016 (EST)

== Thank you! ==

Hello there, and thank you for editing the article on [[Islam and Christianity]]. --[[User:SWAJCAHL&S|SWAJCAHL&S]] ([[User talk:SWAJCAHL&S|talk]]) 09:13, 23 November 2016 (EST)
:No problem, and thank you for creating it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:14, 23 November 2016 (EST)

::And also thank you, for your help - and tips! - on [[Jared Kushner]]. I'll try to remember the ref's and cat's in the future. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] ([[User talk:Ed Poor|talk]]) 21:49, 23 November 2016 (EST)
:::Sounds great and you're welcome! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:05, 23 November 2016 (EST)

== Geocentric page ==

I added a bit on the talk page a while ago. [[User:PeterIceHockey|PeterIceHockey]] ([[User talk:PeterIceHockey|talk]]) 17:15, 3 December 2016 (EST)
:Do you mean on the section "Ptolemy's view of a stationary earth"? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:13, 3 December 2016 (EST)
::Sorry for the late reply but yes. It doesn't seemed to have created a new heading so I will add that now. [[User:PeterIceHockey|PeterIceHockey]] ([[User talk:PeterIceHockey|talk]]) 17:11, 5 December 2016 (EST)
:::I removed it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:21, 5 December 2016 (EST)

== This is a simple misunderstanding. Please be reasonable. ==

This is [[User:Amorrow]]. I had to dirty myself by creating a sockpuppet because you cut off every last channel of communication. The issues:
# SSN of dead people are release by the government of the USA. I made it clear that my father is dead. His name was William Knight Morrow. You can find his name and SSN, for instance, at [http://sortedbybirthdate.com/pages/19311104.html this page]. It is public, not private.
# You could have removed that link and let it go at that. I do not require notification of such actions. I do not care about that link very much. I put it there simply as a convenience.
Is the matter resolved? If so, then please unblock me or let me know here what remains unresolved.--[[User:Amorrow2|Amorrow2]] ([[User talk:Amorrow2|talk]]) 20:44, 3 December 2016 (EST)

:I am discussing the issue on [[User talk:DavidB4]]. You are welcome to join in. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:48, 3 December 2016 (EST)
::You are unblocked. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:46, 3 December 2016 (EST)

Hello um 1990sguy Im not a spammer or troll I just want to edit this page so I can mod the Alexa device to read out conservapedia instead of wickedpedia.
:First off, you need talk page permission if you're going to make massive changes on one of CP's most important articles. I re-inserted some of your edits, but you need talk page permission to go further and change the article's very tone and point of view. Second, are you a sock of Amorrow? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:58, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::I am almost certainly not apart of this sock of amorrow, what is an Amorrow anyway 1990s?--[[User:Reevestehsnek|Reevestehsnek]] ([[User talk:Reevestehsnek|talk]] 14:58, 8 November 2018 (EST)
:::Amorrow is the user who started the discussion you're commenting in. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:04, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::::Reeves, if your going to troll, you need an upgrade. Don't be so amatuerish about it. Show us something new and witty so we can develop appropriate countermeasures. You're obviously not stupid. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 15:31, 8 November 2018 (EST)
:::::Not a Troll, just following guidelines to not start a new section unless it hasn't been posted--[[User:Reevestehsnek|Reevestehsnek]] ([[User talk:Reevestehsnek|talk]] 16:09, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::::::Like I am legit confused, During these last few Hours I get the feeling that you 1990s guy either think Im trying to wreck youre words or that I'm a troll. I also get the feeling that I am extremely unwelcome. Like is all this because I'm black. Because if that's the case Ill leave this site like real pronto.--[[User:Reevestehsnek|Reevestehsnek]] ([[User talk:Reevestehsnek|talk]] 16:26, 8 November 2018 (EST)
:::::::You're confusing me with RobS, who also commented right above. I did not accuse you of trolling. If you feel unwelcome, it's probably because you're new, and you are not familiar with CP's rules. Also, CP is an '''extremely''' high target of vandalism, so we act the same way for '''every''' new user to vet them. Your skin color (which nobody knows) has nothing to do with it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:58, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::::::::Also, we '''recommend''' that you make a new section on a talk page. We discourage commenting on a two-year-old section about a completely different topic. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:11, 8 November 2018 (EST)

==Pitch hitting==

Thanks for the ref [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Donald_Trump&oldid=1293435]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:34, 18 December 2016 (EST)
:You're welcome. Always happy to help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:15, 18 December 2016 (EST)

==Trump==
You're not telling me it's just a coincidence, are you? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:44, 23 December 2016 (EST)

:Seriously? It is extremely unlikely that this passage, which is about the Second Coming of Christ, has anything to do with Donald Trump. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:46, 23 December 2016 (EST)
::Dang :( Thought I'd had my first ever conservative insight. Must be the morphine. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:56, 23 December 2016 (EST)
:::I think this has more to do with biblical [[hermeneutics]] than conservatism. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:00, 23 December 2016 (EST)

== Merry Christmas ==

[[Image:Merry Christmas.gif|cebter|260px]]
{{clear}}
Thank you for all your contributions to Conservaoedia as far your web article content.

Merry Christmas! And have a happy New Year's Day. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:37, 24 December 2016 (EST)

:Thank you very much, Conservative, and the same to you as well! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:43, 24 December 2016 (EST)

== [[St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre]] ==

I suggest doing the redirect in the opposite direction for two reasons. First, it preserves the history and visits to the pre-existing entry. Second, it leaves intact the "Saint" spelled out, which is a stronger and more effective title than the secularized abbreviation. I'd be happy to change the direction of the redirect, if you agree. Regardless, thanks for your efforts!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:01, 27 December 2016 (EST)

:Yes please, Mr. Schlafly, that would be great if you would move it. Just as long as the article shows up as being created by me on the "New Pages" feed. I didn't know that this article already existed, but I worked hard on it and I think that my article is of higher quality by any objective measure. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:39, 28 December 2016 (EST)

==European immigration==
I was thinking of doing an article on the [[European immigration]] problem (don't want to call 'European immigration crisis', yet). Americans are woefully ignorant of what's happening in Europe, and we're looking at doing perhaps the biggest change in Immigration law since 1952. In Europe, whole new political parties have been spawned because of the establishment parties failure to deal with the problems. In 20 years, the German mi!itary may be majority Muslim which would impact the future of the NATO alliance. Better get started now in educating the American public on changing demographics and how this may affect America's role as a Superpower, assuming it still is by then.

Would you care to collaborate? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''#NeverHillary'']] 01:39, 29 December 2016 (EST)

:Of course, I'll be happy to help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:39, 29 December 2016 (EST)
::Do you think we should add a subsection under UK about Brexit and to what extent that was motivated by immigration? Also, I'd like to include something about the Schengen Agreement. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''#NeverHillary'']] 16:46, 29 December 2016 (EST)
:::Both of those are great ideas. The "freedom of movement" EU policy played a large part in the referendum and its aftermath. People are tired of unlimited immigration.
:::As for the Schengen area, people can go anywhere they want in Europe without worrying about border security (and before, it was quite tough crossing the border I've heard). The agreement is an essential part of the EU plan to reach full political unification. It really has nothing to do with economics. Also, criminals and terrorists can easily cross the border. The recent Berlin attacker was caught in Italy. He crossed at least two borders without being caught. Imagine if he tried doing that without the agreement. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:53, 29 December 2016 (EST)
:::::Same as most of suspects in 1200 reported sexual assault cases New Years Eve in Cologne. Something like only 7 or 22 arrests have ever been made, while most of the other identified suspects are reported to have fled the country.[[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''#NeverHillary'']] 17:06, 29 December 2016 (EST)

== Father's SSN ==

I created [[Social Security Death Index]]. After I add some ref's, I hope that we can revisit the notion of me declaring what my father's SSN is.

Just to mention where I got this idea from, it is from the web site anusha.com . Sloan has lived an erratic and at times immoral life, but he is just below the level of genius in raw talent. I refer to him as an "accidental adventurer". Please see thermo4thermo.org/sam_sloan.html for some of his life-adventures.
I am not promoting his lifestyle, but he is my publisher for my upcoming book. His web site is a mess. It has about 3000 pages but just a mess of cross-references. The home page is very, very long. You can look at pages like www.anusha.com/pafc147.htm . He also has pages like www.anusha.com/uncles-p.htm . His memory is almost perfect. Near Total Recall. Anyway, I hope we can engage in dialog about my father's SSN.--[[User:Amorrow|Amorrow]] ([[User talk:Amorrow|talk]]) 22:11, 3 January 2017 (EST)
==Hate crime==
Dear 1990'sguy, I am not trying to get into an edit war with you, but I believe that you are misreading the hate crime laws. They do not address "hate speech," just violence or other criminal acts against target groups that receive a lot of hate. I suggest that you do further research, and I hope that you will come to the same conclusion. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 20:31, 7 January 2017 (EST)
:For clarification, are you telling me that hate crime laws do not cover "hate speech"? Regardless, I think we should mention that slowly (but steadily) speaking out for biblical Christian principles (opposition to homosexual marriage, saying Islam is a false religion, etc.) is being seen as "hate speech" and vulnerable to being criminalized. See this recent story[https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/simon-turpin/2016/01/08/northern-ireland-pastor-not-guilty-criticising-islam/] and please note the recent attempts to censor Christian sermons in Houston (I don't know if other cities did the same). Censorship of Christian and conservative opinions is growing, and I could a few (but probably unrelated to hate crimes) examples. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:09, 7 January 2017 (EST)
::Also, while you can keep you additions, would you please restore the [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Hate_crime&curid=3861&diff=1298155&oldid=1298153 material you deleted in this edit] (particularly those three completely deleted paragraphs)? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:11, 7 January 2017 (EST)
:::Thank you for fixing the dead link and finding an additional source. You are exactly right. Hate crime and hate speech are completely different. All Conservatives disapprove of speech codes, "safe spaces policy" and political correctness. The First Amendment is clear that regulation of speech must be neutral as to the message. The person(s) who wrote the [[Hate crime]] article years ago got a bit tangled up. Liberals want hate speech codes, and Conservatives oppose them. Both Liberals and Conservatives have voted to enact true hate crime laws to protect religious freedom and to address hate violence on the basis of race. Some Conservatives argue that the list of hate targets in those laws should not include "sexual orientation," but that argument does not belong in a section discussing protecting religion.
:::I took out the two paragraphs because they were repetitive, out-of-place and not germaine. Why not add them to [[Hate speech]]? Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 21:39, 7 January 2017 (EST)
::::Thank you for clarifying and for moving the content. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:00, 7 January 2017 (EST)
:::::You are welcome. Our discussion here was a bit time delayed. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 22:02, 7 January 2017 (EST)
If you want to include the legislative history, it should explain which bill that was finally adopted that is being discussed and how the bill that was adopted differs from the earlier bills. The people that worked on this article years ago were obviously opposed to a series of bills and were making arguments on why a bill would be bad. Their narative is out of date. We have a number of state and federal hate crime laws on the books and we need to describe what exists, give facts and statistics about how the laws work, and include some commentary on whether the law has been applied fairly. If you want to expand the history section beyond the two sentences that I have explaining how the federal law expanded the role of the FBI, please do so. But the fact that certain people sponsored bills that did not pass before a bill did pass is not helpful unless you explain what changes were made or how the early efforts illumniates our understanding of the bill that passed. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 00:50, 13 January 2017 (EST)
:If these proposed bills became law, we should definitely include this (even if we word it differently). We should do this in order to inform the public about leftist laws and to show that they didn't always exist. Unfortunately, I am quite busy right now, so I cannot do anything about this at the moment. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:49, 13 January 2017 (EST)
:::1990sguy, these bills did '''not''' become law. A similar bill later became law. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 01:10, 14 January 2017 (EST)
::Not to sidetrack your guys discussion, but let me point out (cause the media hasn't) we have just witnessed something very rare and unusual in the US. Traditionally, because of state sovereignty, the states prosecute murder cases and federal government's role is restricted, for most of our history, to capital cases in the US military. In the 20th century federal crimes like murdering the president, or terrorism on federal property causing death ([[Timothy McVeigh]]), were added. This guy, [http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/12/us/dylann-roof-death-penalty-explainer/ Dylann Roof], has just been sentenced to death for violating peoples civil rights with a hate crime enhancement, and ''not for murder''. The federal government does not have the legal authority to try this as a murder case. In fact, Roof probably never will be tried for murder cause the State of South Carolina isn't gonna spend the time and money to do it after the feds are done. In my lifetime, I think this is only the fourth case like this I ever heard of, tho I'm sure there's been a few others. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Make Exxon Great Again]] 22:37, 13 January 2017 (EST)
:::Rob, this happened a lot in the 1960s. Civil rights workers would go South and were murdered and either the murder was not prosecuted or a local jury would acquit the accused. The FBI would then investigate and the US DOJ would successfully prosecute for civil rights violations in Federal Court. The question is whether there is enough of a commerce clause basis to allow for the passage of such federal crimes, and the courts have upheld them on the grounds that if the federal government did not prevent such intimidation, people would not feel safe crossing state lines. Also, many states have suspended or abolished the death penalty, while it remains available in federal court. State "sovereignty" is very limited and not ''actual'' sovereignty in the legal sense. To me, this is a more interesting aspect of the Hate crime article than whether or not the definition should be expanded to include "gender identity." [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 01:08, 14 January 2017 (EST)
::::I'm not sure it happened "a lot". There was the 'Mississippi Burning' case, where the local cops and others were charged with civil rights violations, but no one served more than a six year sentence. This is why "hate crime" legislation was added later, cause sentences were too light for a "civil rights violation resulting in death". The problem in those days were all-white juries exonerating murder cases, so the feds invented a way they could prosecute killers. One guy was convicted in a state trial [http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/price&bowers/killen.htm 40 years later in 2005 of manslaughter,] but he wasn't the trigger man. No one has ever been charged with the actual killings.
::::Then there was Salt Lake City case of a civil rights violation resulting in death in 1978, but Utah was never part of the Confederacy, was not put under federal scrutiny in the Voting Rights Act, nor has a history of all-white jurries exonersting whites accused of murdering blacks.

::::In the 1990s, Brian Beckwith was convicted of violating Medgar Evers civil rights by killing him in the 1970s.

::::In the 90s Timothy McVeigh was the first person executed by the federal government since, like 1956. But this was a terrorism charge resulting in death, not a civil rights violation, AFAIK. ([https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3azq6b/eli5how_timothy_mcveigh_only_got_convicted_of_8/ McVeigh was only charged with 8 counts of murder, although 168 were killed]). Since McVeigh, there's been maybe one or two other cases of people executed by the federal government.
::::Bottomline, the federal hate crime enhancement was added cause, while the feds proved they could get a conviction where the state failed to act, the penalty was too low. Since its inception, it's hard to find a single case that the law was used for what it was designed for. There is no evidence whatsoever that South Carolina would not prosecute Dylann Roos, or an all-white jury would have exonerated him if the feds failed to intrude. South Carolina has lost its right to govern itself, its sovereignty. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Make Exxon Great Again]] 06:32, 14 January 2017 (EST)
:::::If this is true, then it definitely should be added. It would give yet another ignored example of massive governmental expansion and movement towards socialism. JDano, if the 2009 proposal did not become law, then what did the actual law consist of? If the bill that was listed on the article did not become law, then there is no point in including it. However, a legislative history of successful bills would be good. However, I am still quite busy, so I will not attempt to do anything about this at the moment. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:49, 14 January 2017 (EST)

==Contest==
I will provide the details you seek when i get some time. You were in the top 5. --Jpatt 10:19, 16 January 2017 (EST)
:Thank you for the reply Jpatt! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:40, 16 January 2017 (EST)

== discuession ==

I am continuing the discussion on my talk page.--[[User:Amorrow|Amorrow]] ([[User talk:Amorrow|talk]]) 10:39, 22 January 2017 (EST)

==Question==
What would be the best word to describe Eurosceptic's opponents? Eurocentric? Pan European? Some other? I don't like globalist in this context. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Make Exxon Great Again]] 12:42, 28 January 2017 (EST)
:I would say either "Europeanists," "Europhiles," or "Euro-Federalists" are the best. They either seem to be the most used terms. Of those three, I would personally opt for the first. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:00, 28 January 2017 (EST)

== Ban editing ==

Hi, I've noticed you sometimes change blocks by other admins to increase the time or make in infinite. I appreciate your intentions, but just thought I would point out a couple things. Firstly, the blocking admin generally has the final say over the block they have imposed. For example, if a person want to dispute the ban, they are to go to the blocking admin, and that admin decides whether to revoke the ban or not (as can be seen [[Conservapedia:Quick_reference#If_you_get_blocked|here]]). Since you are not revoking a block, it's probably not as big of an issue, but it still seems to be proper etiquette. Of course, full admins have authority over assistants such as you and I, so they have the right to direct revise of revoke blocks we make. 
Secondly, While it makes good sense to block those people forever, it doesn't really work that way. A ban applies to the username, and the IP from which they edited if the option is selected--nothing more. Vandals almost always use servers to redirect their connection, however, so that their true IP is never seen by CP. This means that when we block those users, we are really just blocking the server they were using. This is a good thing too, but the problem is that these servers are usually assigned new IPs periodically, so the block no longer applies--now the blocked IP is unassigned. Since most people in the western world still use IPv4, there are not that many spare IP addresses, so the IP is soon assigned to someone else. Now some innocent person is using an IP which for all eternity has been blocked on CP. They probably will never even know, but if we set infinite blocks enough, the chances of that happening regularly increase continuously. I know some people here do use infinite block regularly, but in my opinion its a logistical problem. This is why I almost always set a time limit, or block only the username infinitely, and leave the IP unblocked (which I prefer not to do).
Thanks for your ongoing efforts! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 22:05, 31 January 2017 (EST)
:Yikes, I should have thought of that. The thought of indefinitely blocking innocent people from CP certainly is not a good thing. If you haven't reverted by block change, feel free to undo it. I'm too busy right now to do it myself. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:11, 31 January 2017 (EST)

::The chances of that happening from a couple blocks are pretty low, but it can add up. Anyway, no harm done. I just thought I'd mention it. Thanks! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 22:24, 31 January 2017 (EST)

:::I apologize for adding to a discussion which is over a year old. However, DMorris straightened me out about this, and I wanted to belatedly set the record straight. When a user is blocked, the username/account is blocked for a specified amount of time, but the IP address is only blocked for 24 hours, unless it is banned separately. Autoblock will put a 24-hour ban on all IPs used by the banned account, though I'm not sure if it also blocks IPs which log into the banned account at a later time...I believe it does. Therefore, it seems we do not need to worry about the last point I made, as I was mistaken. Once DMorris corrected me, I did some research and testing, which confirmed what he told me. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 00:03, 28 March 2019 (EDT)

::::Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:23, 28 March 2019 (EDT)

== expand ==

[[Gainful employment]]. Yes. I dare you to.--[[User:Amorrow|Amorrow]] ([[User talk:Amorrow|talk]]) 08:32, 4 February 2017 (EST)
:Why? What's the purpose of you messaging me? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:25, 4 February 2017 (EST)

==[[Abortion]] article==
It's open for you to make your suggested additions. As to the Leif Ericson image, what needs to happen is a new image uploaded in its place. I'll try to find one later. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 13:18, 6 February 2017 (EST)
:New Leif image uploaded and added to article. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 12:56, 7 February 2017 (EST)
::Thank you. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:02, 7 February 2017 (EST)

== Addiction article and TAR ==

Hello again, Regarding the [[Addiction]] article and specifically its categories, I agree with JDano. Let me attempt to explain: 

"TAR" is short for [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] a former user and assistant SysOp here at Conservapedia. People have differing opinions of him, but mine is that he did offer some valuable contributions, but also did not understand and did not learn the rules of CP. Among some other issues, he tended to add many "See also" links to articles which were not sufficiently relevant and did the same with categories. Thus, when editors refer to "TAR" they are usually talking about this debris, which should not exist. TheAmericanRedoubt (TAR) has since stopped editing here, and his account has been deleted. However, some of the links and categories he inserted still exists, and make things look messy. For this reason, a number of editors (including myself) try to clean up these issues and restore a little more order. The guide page [[Conservapedia:How to create and maintain high-quality articles]] was the direct result of TAR's methods. 
Regarding the categories specifically, it's best to maintain a "tree" structure. A page should not connect to categories which also contain subcategories it links to. Also, it should link only to categories which contain it, not categories which the page topic can contain. In other words, a page "drug" should be in the category "medicines" but not in a category "antibiotics". 
I hope this clarifies a bit. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 00:42, 13 February 2017 (EST)

:Please allow me to apologize for my impatience with the "addiction" article. You accidentally stepped into the remains of a hornets' nest. TAR added lots of utterly irrelevant see-also's and categories, in what can only be described as an attempt to turn this wiki into survivalist-pedia, or perhaps James-Wesley-Rawles-pedia. He offended a huge number of people with his implications that we were all supposed to stockpile bullets, batteries, and other survivalist stuff (I could look it up but it's too nauseating) and move to a "redoubt" in Idaho or similar place while we wait for the apocalypse. We were also all supposed to be into some kind of crackpot Indian alternative medicine. (I think it was called "ayurvedic" or something like that; once again too nauseating.) The whole wiki was in an enormous uproar for a few months. (And Cons, who really doesn't subscribe to that stuff, nevertheless stirred up the pot by pretending to be in email contact with the guy.)
:So if you see suspicious see-also's or categories, especially with codewords like "nanny state" or "gun-grabbing", be aware this might be detritus from TAR. I support the second amendment, but I don't support putting all this survivalist garbage into an article on fire hydrants.
:[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 01:36, 13 February 2017 (EST)
::It has taken a huge amount of work to undo TAR's damage. I suppose that you think that there is a bias against any change he had made, and there is probably some truth to that. He did not understand that our categories have a tree structure. Instead, he thought of categories as a word association test. Putting in excess categories and excessive red links makes Conservapedia less appealing to users and lowers our google search engine rankings. In theory, every article could be in every category, because there is some plausible connection between any two subjects. If we had a separate article on "Drug Addiction" then it could have categories like [[:Category:Illegal Drugs]] or [[:Category:Drugs]]. The problem is that [[:Category:Illegal Drugs]] is a subcategory of [[:Category:Drugs]] ''breaking up the category tree with an infinite loop.'' Here the Addiction article is on a much higher level that discusses video games, etc. So, it is not useful to a high school student looking for information about illegal drugs, in my opinion. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 05:46, 13 February 2017 (EST)

:::Thank you all for your explanations. Considering these things, I will try not to get in the way next time this clean up occurs. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:13, 13 February 2017 (EST)
== Thanks! ==

You helped make [http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/conservapedia.com THIS] happen.

I have never seen a non-profit website go from below 100,000 rank to nearly a 50,000 Alexa ranking in about a year. And Andy payed zero dollars for internet marketing services during this period.

And there is no sign of a nearing web traffic plateau. My guess is that Trump supporters/Trump era and the resulting political waves significantly explains the boost in traffic.

Trump supporters seem very loyal so the traffic boost could be long lasting. It also seems like there is a reawakening of right-wing politics/nationalism that will be long lasting. And right-wing populism and "[[best of the public]]" go together like peanut butter and jelly. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:30, 13 February 2017 (EST)

:You're welcome, and thank ''you'' for all your edits! I'm happy to help improve the quality of Conservapedia. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:56, 13 February 2017 (EST)
==Quick project==
Dear Guy:
Our state articles list the members of Congress from each state, but they have not be updated for 2016. If five editors could update 10 states each, we would be done quickly. Could you please take a look at [[Conservapedia:Community Portal#Political directory]]? Thanks in advance, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 16:13, 15 February 2017 (EST)

Thank you for your help with the project and with People's Party. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 23:02, 21 February 2017 (EST)

== Tip ==

Thanks for your terrific work. One tip: the licensing information should be expressly included in the uploads. I added it here: [[File:EU_member_states.png]]. Thanks again for your edits and uploads.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:27, 7 March 2017 (EST)
:Thank you for the tip. I will remember to add the information next time. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:34, 7 March 2017 (EST)

==[[Template:Book]]==
Try working on it now. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 10:48, 11 March 2017 (EST)

== Questions ==

A few months ago, you told me to ask you any questions I had, so here goes:
*When recategorizing the massive and messy [Category:Authors] by nationality, I found two authors, [[Theo Hobson]] and [[Carl Sagan]], whom I could not recategorize as [Category:American Authors]. Could you change them for me?
*When fixing the [[Francois Rabelais]] cedilla mess, I set up a redirect. Has anyone ever made a loop out of redirects? If so, what happened? I'm scared to try it.
*Lastly, where is my attention now best sent - expanding the author articles, improving our coverage of science and mathematics, or maybe tackling another recat job, like [Category:Music]?

:1) Concerning [[Theo Hobson]] and [[Carl Sagan]], those articles are protected, and as an assistant sysop, I do not have the ability to edit them. I recommend asking someone like [[User:Karajou]] or CP's owner, [[User:Aschlafly]] to either unlock the articles to allow you to fix the category or to have them change the cat themselves. I've made many similar requests to them and they will be happy to help.

:2) I have not heard of someone doing that before. I personally don't think anything bad would happen if someone did try it, as you can still access the actual redirect page to remove the loop.

:3) Honestly, all three choices are great. If I were you, I would probably choose to expand the articles already created so that the average reader would find them more interesting and worthwhile, rather than just seeing a stub. After that, I would personally move on to work on another category, so that CP is better-organized. Then after that, I would do math and science, which is (as far as I can tell) on a different theme than your other work. This is my personal preference, but if you would prefer doing it in a different order feel free! You have been very helpful to CP, and I appreciate your work. Keep it up! :) --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:20, 14 March 2017 (EDT)

::Hi, just a quick note: A redirect loop shouldn't be a problem. I think the user is only redirected once, so after that they see the second redirect page. Redirect loops, double redirects, and dead redirects should all be avoided when possible. Thanks for your contributions! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 20:23, 14 March 2017 (EDT)

:::You are entirely correct, DavidB4; I just tried a loop with soda and pop (and removed it). Typing one would give you the page for the other, and an option to redirect. I'll proceed to expand the author pages now. Feel free to removed this section to abridge the talk page.--[[User:Abcqwe|Abcqwe]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 15:58, 15 March 2017 (EDT)

== Could you please write this article? ==

Could you please write this important article: [[Atheism and ethics]]?

I may ask another writer or tow to contribute to it also. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:07, 18 March 2017 (EDT)

:Yes, I think I will be able to find some time to do it. Unfortunately, I have other things on my to-do list (even for CP), but this article is important, and I will try to find time to help. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:10, 18 March 2017 (EDT)

::OK. Thanks. I think [[User:Pokeria1]] will be assisting you. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:55, 18 March 2017 (EDT)

=== Sources to help you write an article ===

*[https://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/04/ethics-for-atheists/# Would human life be sacred in an atheist world?]

*[http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/atheists_more_immoral.html Atheism Doesn't Lead to Immoral Behavior - Or Does It?]

*[http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/atheism_determinism_morality.html Does Atheism (Determinism) Negatively Impact Morality?]

*[http://apologetics-notes.comereason.org/2015/03/atheism-ethics-and-immorality.html Atheism, Ethics, and Immorality]

*[https://www.thinkingchristian.net/posts/2016/01/good-nothing-make-atheist-ethics-better-christian/ Being Good “For Nothing” — Does That Make Atheist Ethics Better Than Christian?]

*[http://www.reasonablefaith.org/questions-on-atheism-ethics-and-marital-conflict Questions on Atheism, Ethics, and Marital Conflict]

*[http://creation.com/atheism#atheism-and-ethics Atheism and ethics]

Secular sources:

*[http://www.iep.utm.edu/n-atheis/#H5 Secular Morality]

*[http://www.iep.utm.edu/n-atheis/#H4 The Moral Evaluation of Religion]

Additional sources:

*[http://www.paulcopan.com/articles/pdf/God-naturalism-morality.pdf God, Naturalism, and the Foundations of Morality] by Paul Copan
*[http://www.equip.org/articles/atheists-and-the-quest-for-objective-morality/ Atheists and the Quest for Objective Morality] by Chad Meister
*[http://themelios.thegospelcoalition.org/article/the-amorality-of-atheism The amorality of atheim] by Rob Smith
*[http://www.reasonablefaith.org/can-we-be-good-without-godCan Can we be good without God?] by William Lane Craig]
*[http://creation.com/atheism#atheism-and-ethics Atheism and ethics and morality] by Ken Ammi
*[http://www.doesgodexist.org/NovDec06/AtheisticExplanations.html Atheist explanations of morality and common sense]
*[http://whatswrongwiththeworld.net/2015/09/does_being_an_atheist_interfer.html Does being an atheist interfere with being moral?] by Lydia McGrew
*[http://americanvision.org/2742/nietzsche-slaps-down-dawkins-on-the-illusion-of-atheist-morality/ Nietzsche slaps down Dawkins on the illusion of atheist morality] by Dr. Joel McDurmon

== quick note ==

Would you be interested in email communication with me? My email is userconservative135@gmail.com

Please let me know if you are interested. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:54, 18 March 2017 (EDT)

:Yes, that would be great! I've been thinking for some time of setting up a CP email address account, and I'll do that within the next couple of days. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:29, 18 March 2017 (EDT)
::OK. That sounds good. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:02, 19 March 2017 (EDT)
:::Here it is: 1990sguysdg@gmail.com --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:46, 21 March 2017 (EDT)
I just sent you an email. Let me know if you got it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:10, 21 March 2017 (EDT)
::I wrote another response to your email. Please check your email box. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 05:05, 22 March 2017 (EDT)
:::I got your latest email and responded to it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:41, 22 March 2017 (EDT)

== If you are interested, another article that needs to be created ==

If you are interested, another article that needs to be created: [[Secular ethics]]

Sources about this topic:

*[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_ethics Secular ethics]

*[http://www.iep.utm.edu/n-atheis/#H5 Secular Morality]

*[http://www.iep.utm.edu/n-atheis/#H4 The Moral Evaluation of Religion]

Thanks. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:11, 20 March 2017 (EDT)

=== A couple more article suggestions related to atheism and morality ===

Also, here are a few more articles that need to be written about atheism and morality:

*[[Evolutionary ethics]], Wikipedia has an article on it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_ethics

*[[Ethical naturalism]], Wikipedia has an article on it at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_naturalism

*[[Ethical subjectivism]], Wikipedia has an article on this subject at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_subjectivism

Thanks for your assistance on the [[Atheism and ethics]] article. It was much appreciated. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:21, 22 March 2017 (EDT)

== The Project I invited you to participate in plus ==

Here is the project I invited you to participate in:

*[[Conservapedia:Atheism Project]]

It should be easy to find relevant online material in order to create some of the articles. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:19, 22 March 2017 (EDT)
:Thank you, Conservative, for your suggestions. I will begin on some of these soon. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:53, 22 March 2017 (EDT)
::I sent you an email. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:57, 24 March 2017 (EDT)

== Blocking user "reformed" ==

Well, I've got to say that vandalizing the user page of someone with block authority is '''really''' stupid.

But I take issue with your claim that he was an "obvious sock". As one who has been blocked a number of times on completely bogus socking charges, I take that stuff seriously. (The blocking was generally done by someone (now deceased) who had "checkuser" privileges and therefore had good tools for detecting socks, but did not understand how internet addresses work.)

It is not at all obvious to me, as one who has a lot of experience at CP, that he was a sock. He was a vandal, and you should block him for that.

Oh, dear. Now I see that there's a big storm of this stuff going on. And, yes, these guys, or at least some of them, are probably socks of each other. And at least one of them is using the name "obvioussock", just to taunt you. And one says he used to be a washing machine in his previous life.

My goodness! I think you are being trolled! :-) :-) And no, I had nothing to do with this. Just block them. It will blow over soon.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 12:54, 25 March 2017 (EDT)

:Thank you for your message. :) Due to the fact that "reformed" was created right after I blocked two users and vandalized my user page, I assumed that it was a clear sock of one or both of them. However, as it was not clear to you and possibly others, I changed the block settings to just include vandalism. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:06, 25 March 2017 (EDT)

==Screw up==
Sorry, I'm working with a tablet, and it's a piece of garbage. I didn't intentionally remove your comments. Sorry. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]] 15:31, 25 March 2017 (EDT)
:Assuming you're referring to those at [[Talk:Main Page]], apology accepted. It can happen to the best of us. They were other user's edits, however. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:33, 25 March 2017 (EDT)

== Thank you ==

For your reverts yesterday on my userpage, saw the sock puppet master was not finished with his trolling. [[User:YortKeldher|YortKeldher]] ([[User talk:YortKeldher|talk]]) 07:37, 26 March 2017 (EDT)
:You're welcome. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:54, 26 March 2017 (EDT)

== Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Vaccination ==

Thank you for your improvements to [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Vaccination]]. [[User:Desmonduk|Desmonduk]] ([[User talk:Desmonduk|talk]]) 16:13, 29 March 2017 (EDT)
:You're welcome. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:30, 29 March 2017 (EDT)

== small request ==

I sent you a message at the last place we communicated. Can you please read that message? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:59, 6 April 2017 (EDT)
:I sent you the information I promised. It is located at the place we last communicated. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:36, 6 April 2017 (EDT)
::Sent you message. Please check place we last communicated. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
:::I sent you a quick note to the place we last communicated. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:51, 18 April 2017 (EDT)
::::Could you please go to the place we last communicated? It is regarding another matter. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])

==Photo size==
With a large photo, there is much more word wrap in the table of contents, which makes it even longer. We need a wide table of contents. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 19:08, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
:I've checked and double-checked, and I see no way how the larger-sized photo does anything to the table of contents. And I'm using a standard Google Chrome, 100% zoom screen. Could it be your search engine/zoom? I don't see any reason why the larger image is a problem in any way. I think it looks better, regardless. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:06, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
:::On Firefox the TOC is longer due to word wrap. You can get other pictures to help fill the space, but the space will be shorter if the TOC is wider. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 23:19, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
I am getting a lot of 500 errors. I will wait for you to finish, and then I will go back and apply my changes. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 11:07, 11 April 2017 (EDT)
:I have done my changes. But please, when making those changes, please do ''not'' revert changes I have made, particularly changes that I have already reverted you multiple times. I'm tired of these disputes. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:09, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

== IRC ==

Hello, 
After some discussion (on [[User_talk:DavidB4#Conservapedia_IRC_channel|my talk page]] and [[User_talk:Aschlafly#IRC|Andy's]]) it has been decided that I start an [[Internet Relay Chat]] channel for Conservapedia, since our old one has been dead since 2009. It is now registered and somewhat set up. I don't know if you use IRC or are interested in doing so, but anyone with block privileges on Conservapedia can also get block privileges on the new IRC channel. Unfortunately, IRC accounts are deleted after 30 days of being unused, so unless you plan on using the IRC at least once a month, there is probably not much point in registering. In any case, feel free to try it out--if you account gets deleted, we can always make another one later. If you are interested, please let me know! 
The IRC channel is: #conservapedia @irc.accessIRC.net 
Let me know if you have any questions or need anything else, also! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:33, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

:Thank you for your response. I have never used or really even heard of IRC prior before now (or, more accurately, before you and Andy started talking about it). What is the purpose of IRC? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:47, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

::It is perhaps the oldest form of instant messaging. It is basically a chat room, where people can join and idle or actively chat. Visitors can ask members questions, and members can collaborate. There is even file sharing, if that would be useful. I'm going to be writing a how-to-use guide to explain the actual usage better. 
::Most people use software clients, which they install (or run portably, which a whole different story), but web clients are also available, such as [https://kiwiirc.com/client?settings=7c7240c62a5d4861a8ad0ba697929f39 this one]. With the web client, you can just pick a name and connect, without installing anything. Also, since IRC has been around so long, software for it is compatible with almost anything. All desktop and most mobile operating systems support it. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:55, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

:::Thanks for the info! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:24, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

== Re: Vandal ==

Already took care of that and left a note for [[User talk:Teapublican|Teapublican]] on his talk page. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 00:09, 20 April 2017 (EDT)
:Thank you. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:08, 20 April 2017 (EDT)

== Recent item on maintalk -- congratulations! ==

Sorry, I just couldn't resist making fun of you there. I immediately recognized the Breitbart article, as one that I had seen shortly before. And then I saw that it was you. No hard feelings, I hope. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:22, 24 April 2017 (EDT)
:None at all. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:37, 24 April 2017 (EDT)

::Congratulations! The [[March for Science]] article is a ''really good article''. And you made it so. (Well, with a little prodding from me.) It sets out, straightforwardly, what was going on, and it doesn't descend into namecalling. I realize that you probably have very strong disagreements with what most of those people were doing, but you kept it professional.

::Really good articles, especially on potential "hot button" issues of politics, aren't all that common. Now maybe I will make another attempt to return the [[Pussy Riot]] article to the good state it was in back when I expanded it in 2014, before it got messed up with the implication that anyone who opposes murderous thug tyrant Vladimir Putin must be a "leftist", "elitist", or "social justice warrior". For which I was blocked, in blatant violation of the rules of this site. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 14:25, 26 April 2017 (EDT)

:::Thank you for the compliment! Unfortunately, the router I'm using blocked the "Pussy Riot" article because of the first word in the title, so I cannot comment on that at all. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:00, 26 April 2017 (EDT)

::::How sad. I have created the redirect [[Nadezhda Tolokonnikova]] in case that helps. But it probably won't. You had no trouble typing the "P" word above, so I guess it's a problem of your router not going to a page with that word in the title. Maybe I should have named the page with its Cyrillc letters: "Пусси Райот". Well, you're not missing anything of cosmic importance. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 16:42, 26 April 2017 (EDT)

:::::The redirect actually did work. Thanks! The article does not appear to have a high quality (at least in the aesthetic sense), so changes would probably be beneficial, but if you're going to make changes, I would like to remind you to be cautious and not to contradict CP's POV. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:17, 26 April 2017 (EDT)

:::In case you forgot, Sam <s>(and how fast it appears that happens with you)</s>, it was ''you'' who violated the rules of this site by putting a liberal POV into that article (among others, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/SamHB per your history]) in the first place, then insistently readding it after your edit was reverted and you were warned about violating CP policy and about starting fights with other editors. You really should take the advice you're being given here and not continue violating CP policy. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 21:59, 26 April 2017 (EDT)

A few things:
*Today is my 9th anniversary at Conservapedia!
*I can assure everyone that I am very familiar with, and well versed in, the rules, commandments, guidelines, customs, and habits of CP. I am also familiar with the many, many, many discussions of these points that have taken place over the years.
*@Northwest: this is the expected response.
*@1990's guy: this is ''not'' the response I expected. I'm chagrined that you think the article is of low quality. Especially since you know how to write high quality articles.
I'm serious. I was proud of that article as originally written/expanded by me. I thought it laid out the facts accurately, and avoided name-calling and such. Exactly like the March for Science article. Please look at the article (preferably the [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Pussy_Riot&oldid=1328015] version, before name-calling got put in) and fix it up as you see fit. The name-calling consisted, among other things, of saying that those people around the world who took an interest in the case were "elitists" and "social justice warriors on the left". The latter term is straight out of Huffington Post and their ilk. It is a term of bleeding hearts in America, and not used widely elsewhere. In any case, one doesn't need to be an SJW to oppose murderous thug tyrant Vladimir Putin. In fact, given the recent falling out between President Trump and Putin, the accepted orthodoxy here at CP might be swinging away from support for the murderous thug. I hope so.

Please improve the article.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 11:28, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

:My problem is not with content; it is with organization, layout, aesthetics, etc. There are no subsections, which at least show the reader how the article is organized; it is just many paragraphs. Such articles do not appeal to the reader. IMO, it feels like reading a textbook. If it is just a few paragraphs, it is fine, but thus article has ten paragraphs. Adding a few headers and possibly an image would be beneficial (and I realized just as I wrote this that the March for Science article is approaching that length as well, so I probably either should just keep my mouth shut or add headers there as well). I did not mean to insult or degrade your work, and I apologize for giving that impression. BTW, happy 9th anniversary! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:46, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

:Sam - by your response, you're only proving what I said about your tactics and your history here right. You claim to be "very familiar with, and well versed in, the rules, commandments, guidelines, customs, and habits of CP", but you only pay lip service to them here while your actions on CP over the years (and even now) are showing that you simply choose to disregard them for the sake of pushing liberal POV on this site and to start fights with those who don't share your viewpoint. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 18:08, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

== Bill Nye ==

Could you please contact me by email at sam4557@gmail.com? I think we can make a really good article out of this. I have a number of criticisms of his behavior--my opinion of him has gone down a whole lot over the last few weeks, and I think I have some insights about this that I'd like to bounce off of you. I know that you and I disagree totally about evolution and creationism, but we can put together a good article stating the facts. We can stay away from the name-calling that so many articles contain, and avoid things like "so-and-so falsely believes that ..."

This is ''not'' about Pussy Riot, ''not'' about Conservapedia politics, and ''not'' about you-know-who. I just want to bounce some ideas off of you about Bill Nye and see if we can put together a really nice article.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 01:00, 4 May 2017 (EDT)

== Expanded article, footnote did not support genocide/racist abortions adequately ==

I greatly expanded this article [[Abortion and eugenics]]. The footnote in the liberal article was not supporting or at the very least inadequately supporting racist/genocidal abortion policies of [[Margaret Sanger]], etc.

Specifically, I skimmed the article as far as the footnoted article and it did not appear to strongly support such a big claim like abortion/genocide, etc. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:26, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

==Something isn't right here==
... Ohhh I know what it is. ''Margaret Thatcher'' is on the list of liberals. ''Margaret. Thatcher.'' The bastion of conservatism. A favourite of Reagan. How in the ''world'' did she make the liberal list? [[User:Koidevelopment|Vive]] [[User talk:Koidevelopment|Liberté!]] 09:14, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:Wasn't me who added her. She was not as conservative as people think she is, as she did vote in favor of legalizing abortion and homosexuality. But, that said, it would probably be better without mentioning her, to avoid people focusing on her mention in the article. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:24, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

::She might not have been a perfect conservative, but I still think she probably doesn't belong on that list. Of course, if you go back 80 years and read writings and speeches from liberals of the day, they sound downright conservative now. Still, she did defend liberty and much of conservatism. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 13:18, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:::Lady Thatcher's criticism of Simon Callow's performance in ''Amadeaus'' made her homophobic, I thought. Being homophobic wouldn't preclude one from being liberal however, [[Bill Moyers]] and Louis Black for example. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''The coup plotters won, for now'']] 15:31, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
I assume that adding the liberalism template to the [[Episcopal Church]] article was improper? I would like to know what the proper usage of this template is for future reference. TEC is one of, if not the most liberal Christian denomination in the US these days, sadly. I do apologize for this improper usage, as I am a new editor. --[[User:Anglican|Anglican]] ([[User talk:Anglican|talk]]) 15:00, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:Hello Anglican! I removed the template because I thought the article was outside the scope of the "liberal" template. What I mean is that the template links to liberal traits, but not necessarily to liberal organizations. I think the category is good for the article, but not template. I hope this helps! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:11, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
::That makes sense. Thank you for your patience. It's sad what has happened to the Episcopal Church in recent years. --[[User:Anglican|Anglican]] ([[User talk:Anglican|talk]]) 15:14, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:::You're welcome, and I agree. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:18, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

== User: Karajou sent me and others an email saying he didn't like CP's article on liberalism. So... ==

User: Karajou sent me and others an email saying he didn't like CP's article on [[liberalism]].

The article needs major improvements.

I am not going to work on it due to time restraints. I spent a lot of time improving the [[liberal]] article.

I would use the same approach used with the liberal article. Clearly delineate liberalism from socialism/fascism because they are very substantially different (for example, Sweden vs. Communist China vs. Nazi Germany). But mention how the gap between the ideologies has narrowed in the United States. I don't keep up with European politics to know the situation there as far as the gap other than knowing that China has become more capitalistic. European countries commonly have more major political parties in a country so the situation is more difficult to keep tabs on. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:33, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

:I posted the below information on RobS' talk page and thought I would share it with you also. You can go to RobS' talk page to see his response to me.

::I would work on the liberalism article. But also create 2-3 sub-articles: [[American liberalism]] and [[Western liberalism]] and [[European liberalism]]. The [[American liberalism]] article is just a one sentence stub article.

::I suggest a [[Western liberalism]] article due to the Canadians, Australia, NZ, and South Africa. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:09, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:::Since the Brits and Canadians have the most influence in the Anglosphere on the USA, you might want to create a [[British liberalism]] article and a [[Canadian liberalism]] article too.

:::Its too bad all this wasn't done before given that CP is a political website. I was largely focused on [[atheism]] which is a dying ideology. This had an indirect relation to liberalism given the prominence of the [[secular left]] on liberal/leftist politics. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:17, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

== Re: American liberalism ==

I copied and pasted some of the [[liberal]] article into the [[American liberalism]] article.

Generally speaking, ideally you want the material in the section for main article linking to a sub-article to have substantially different content. In this case, you want the [[American liberalism]] article to have different content than the "American liberalism" section of the [[liberal]] article.

So if you want to reword and/or add material to the [[American liberalism]] article the would be excellent. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:17, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

== Opinion on renaming an article ==

I wanted your opinion on an idea of mines to rename one of our articles on Conservapedia before taking it to an admin or someone with the ability to actually change the name of a page.

The current page [[Exodus of Israel]], I think, should be renamed to [[The Exodus]], where [[Exodus of Israel]] should simply be a redirect to that page. Not many users would think of typing 'Exodus of Israel' to get to a page on 'The Exodus', and 'The Exodus' is just much simpler. As it is, [[The Exodus]] is currently a redirect to [[Exodus of Israel]]. I think it should be the other way around. Your thoughts?[[User:Korvex|Korvex]] ([[User talk:Korvex|talk]]) 13:34, 10 May 2017 (EDT)
:No, I think it is better the way it is. My main reason is that having titles along the lines of "The...." does not sound encyclopedic. The current name, I believe, is more high quality for that reason. Now, it is true that many users might not think of typing "Exodus of Israel," but if they type "[[Exodus]]," they'll run into the disambiguation page and find the actual article. Also, I'm not sure that many people would think of typing "The Exodus." To sum it up, I think the current title is better and give the article a more encyclopedic feel, but you're welcome to ask another editor what they think. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:59, 10 May 2017 (EDT)
Thanks for the thoughts. Wikipedia currently uses 'The Exodus', and I find that it simply looks better, as a title, then 'Exodus of Israel'. Secondly, I also consider it more likely for someone to type in 'The Exodus' then 'Exodus of Israel'.[[User:Korvex|Korvex]] ([[User talk:Korvex|talk]]) 15:59, 10 May 2017 (EDT)
:Once again, if you want to ask another editor for their opinion, like DavidB4, feel free to do so. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:20, 10 May 2017 (EDT)
Thanks for your opinion. One thing though, do you know who can get this template locked?

At this point, all relevant pages have been created, and therefore this template no longer will ever need any more editing as it is complete. So the best thing to do is to get it locked to avoid any vandalism problems in the future. Just to note, before I came on, it was already locked, even though it still had many problems. Now that the template is fixed, the best thing to do is to get it locked. [[User:Korvex|Korvex]] ([[User talk:Korvex|talk]]) 20:57, 12 May 2017 (EDT)
:I recommend asking [[User:Aschlafly]] or [[User:Karajou]]. They have protection powers. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:15, 12 May 2017 (EDT)
==Block length==
Thanks for your alert blocks. But one year is a long time for a block. IP addresses often change in a shorter period. You might consider 3 months as a better block duration in many cases.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:25, 17 May 2017 (EDT)
:OK. I'll see to that. Should I change the blocks I just did? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:26, 17 May 2017 (EDT)
::I just went ahead and changed them. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:41, 17 May 2017 (EDT)

== Congratulations on Donald Trump accomplishments ==

Hey, I just checked Google. While that movie award comes up first when "Donald Trump achievements," is Googled, and you are the first result after, you get nice results with certain other phrases:
*Donald Trump accomplishments - third link, no box
*Trump achievements - first link, no box
*Trump accomplishments - fourth link, no box
*Donald Trump achievements and failures - fourth link, no box
While Conservative's essays come up first when their exact titles are Googled, bear in mind that these phrases are Googled more frequently.
Congratulations on the publicity, 1990sguy!--[[User:Abcqwe|Nathan]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 08:07, 25 May 2017 (EST)

:Great job, it is well deserved! - -[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])
::Thanks, Nathan and DavidB, I appreciate it! It seems I chose the right article to create, in terms of gaining page views. For a while, when one searched the exact title of my article, that silly award was not at the top of the article, and in its place was a box with a picture of Trump linking to my article. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:24, 25 May 2017 (EDT)
== Can you chat briefly? ==

Can we chat briefly? Can you please go to place I sent you messages before? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:16, 3 June 2017 (EDT)
== Here is the the article ==

*[[Liberal vs. libertarian]]

Thanks. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:54, 3 June 2017 (EDT)

== It's been great ==

You've been helpful since I you first welcomed me here - me, someone who had never used wikitext or HTML in his life and never believed in a young Earth. You've really made me consider that viewpoint, and you've done it with a brilliant personal appeal, far better than User:Conservative ever has.--[[User:Abcqwe|Nathan]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 16:34, 4 June 2017 (EDT)

==Europe's childless leaders==
Where do you think [http://dcwhispers.com/rather-odd-troubling-fact-european-leaders/ we can squeeze this in] [[European migrant crisis]]? In the Intro or elsewhere? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 02:13, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
:I think that would be a good idea. We could also, possibly, add it to the [[European Union]] article, and maybe [[Globalism]] or [[Liberal]], as these leaders advocate for left-wing globalist policies. Are you able to find other sources that note this fact? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:53, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
::I think this also illustrates liberal European values. They support mass immigration of peoples who do not share their culture while they themselves have no children. They are committing national/cultural suicide. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:15, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

== The reason I removed Ted Nugent from Notable Texans ==

Because Ted Nugent is actually from Michigan. Sorry that I forgot to add an explanation. ([[User:King Conservative|King Conservative]] ([[User talk:King Conservative|talk]]) 13:37, 17 June 2017 (EDT)King Conservative)
:I removed him from the list. Thanks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:16, 17 June 2017 (EDT)

==Template tweak==

Hi, guy! Thanks for the {{tl|See also}} in [[Neil Gorsuch]]. That template works better. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 08:53, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
:You're welcome, always happy to help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:58, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
==Nasty edit summaries==
Dear 1990sguy: Please stop writing inflammatory edit summaries. There is no need to make false personal attacks on other editors. As for Breitbart, each reference is evaluated individually on its own merits. If it is news reporting, I welcome it. However, some references are clearly opinion-editorial pieces that criticize other news stories instead of offering any independent news gathering. Some authors there are editorial-opinion writers rather than news reporters. Also, when I check a source and see photos of immodestly dressed women with "wardrobe malfunction" captions or women wearing tight T-shirts imprinted with "no silicone", I am less inclined to use those sources, given our family-friendly approach. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 15:31, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
:Conservapedia has no requirement that only news reporter sources can be used for mews sources. For example, many excellent conservative editorial pieces link to a news story or quote a news story while providing excellent commentary.

:The mainstream press. which is very liberal, have a lot more reporters and they still have some foreign bureaus if I am not mistaken. Then you have Fox which only has a fraction of the combined viewership of ABC, CBS, and NBC.

:To be overly reliant on news sources merely from websites who have reporters is not a good policy.

:Yes, there are conservative news organizations such as CNS News. But I don't think we should limit ourselves to merely using conservative news organizations as far as news sources.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:54, 28 June 2017 (EDT)

::I agree with Conservative on this. We can use conservative news sources, even if the articles appear to be editorializing. This is a conservative encyclopedia, after all. Why should we adopt editing policies that give liberal MSM sources an unfair advantage? How then can we differentiate ourselves from Wikipedia? I am not opposed to citing MSM sources (I do it myself), but we should give precedence to conservative sources, which do not have leftist bias. Yes, Breitbart has silly ads, but I care more about the content of the article than the ads. There are many Breitbart writers who support conservative, Christian pro-family policies. Are there any at CNN or the NYT?

::JDano, yes, my edit summaries were inflammatory. I probably should have acted cooler when dealing with you, and for that, I apologize. Your behavior, constantly reverting and adding changes that I genuinely believe to contain leftist bias without going to the talk page until you've been reverted several times, is not constructive. I do believe your changes are undermining our status as a conservative alternative to Wikipedia. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 02:50, 29 June 2017 (EDT)

== re: JDano and you getting "horse throwing" mad ==

In the recent edit changes, I saw you use all caps in your description of your edit. It was for the [[Travel ban]] article.

This tells me that you are starting to get "horse throwing" mad.

If it becomes necessary, you can impose a [[Conservapedia:Topic bans|Conservapedia:Topic ban]] to JDano since you have blocking rights. You can make it applicable to certain articles or certain article categories. Probably a certain article would be best as a shot across his bow.

If JDano also has blocking rights, you can get Karajou/Aschlafly to impose such a ban. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:29, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
:P.S. I don't know if you are correct in this matter. And I don't have time to mediate. I am just offering you a suggestion since I have experienced JDano being unreasonable at times. Also, the majority of Conservapedians/Republicans/conservatives are more fans of Trump than Lindsey Graham. JDano appears to be in the Graham camp. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:37, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
::Please see my comment in the section immediately above. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 02:51, 29 June 2017 (EDT)

== JDano has a topical ban imposed on him for the "travel ban" article. ==

I just posted this message to JDano's talk page:

"You are not allowed to edit the [[travel ban]] article anymore. I am imposing a [[Conservapedia:Topic bans|Conservapedia:Topic ban]] on you for this article.

By the way, Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in terms of its Muslim population. The travel ban of the Trump administration does not include Indonesia."[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:13, 28 June 2017 (EDT)

== JDano has a topical ban imposed on him for the fake news article ==

I posted this on JDano's talk page:

"The [[fake news]] article was locked/protected. It seems as if the root cause of the page being locked was an edit war involving yourself.

You are no longer allowed to edit the fake news article. I am imposing a Conservapedia topic ban on you for this article. See: [[Conservapedia:Topic bans|Conservapedia:Topic ban]]

I hope additional topic bans are not imposed on you by people with block rights." [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:23, 28 June 2017 (EDT)

== Socks of JamesWilson ==

Socks of this clown should receive five year bans. He is a malicious provocateur, and he singlehandedly destroyed another website as well as leading dozens of people off this site. Show this schlemiel no mercy. --[[User:RonaldB|RonaldB]] ([[User talk:RonaldB|talk]]) 14:16, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
:I don't see why we should be giving long blocks to this guy. He's clearly using multiple ip addresses. These addresses will probably get passed to one or more people who have no intention of vandalizing CP. DavidB4 explained by long blocks are not a good idea on my talk page: [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:1990%27sguy&diff=1304184&oldid=1303142] However, I will not challenge your lengthening of that block or any other. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:20, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
::Maybe you do have a point because he has created a few different accounts in the past day or so. All I'm saying is that lightening up on him isn't going to work. My late friend George let this guy off easy, and he destroyed an entire community. I've had plenty of experience with this guy in the past to know his MO, and he's fanatically obsessed with Taylor Swift and "avenging" others because they "ruined" his articles. --[[User:RonaldB|RonaldB]] ([[User talk:RonaldB|talk]]) 14:28, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
:::That's fair. This guy is clearly bad news. Regardless of what block lengths we give him (and I can see some sense in making them longer), we should try not to accidently prevent innocent people from viewing CP. Thanks for your help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:30, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
::::How do we know that this editor is a "sock" of JamesWilson? Has anyone checked the IP user logs? The Taylor Swift connection could be a false-flag operation. If George and James got into an edit-war on a different website, that would not be relevant here. Let's judge each editor separately until they can be linked by evidence. Are all of the problem users created in the past few days created from the same or very similar IP addresses? Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 15:27, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
:::::He put "Sad case!- James Wilson" in the edit summary of all of his vandalism, and it was the same stuff he's always done. If he says it's him, I'm just gonna assume it's him. Dont give this guy the benefit of the doubt. He's had plenty enough breaks here and elsewhere. --[[User:RonaldB|RonaldB]] ([[User talk:RonaldB|talk]]) 16:03, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
:::::@JDano: Yes, I think it clearly is JamesWilson. His vandalism is very repetitive -- he even vandalizes the user pages of the same users. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:52, 4 July 2017 (EDT)
*FYI, even if an account is blocked indefinitely, the autoblock on the IPs is only for twenty-four hours. If the IP block was for as long as the account's block, checkusers wouldn't have to put separate blocks on persistent vandals' IP addresses. [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] ([[User talk:DMorris|talk]]) 18:26, 3 July 2017 (EDT)
==Articles==
Since I've written a few articles on Christianity, please feel free to edit them to conform to the views of Conservapedia if necessary. Admittedly, writing about Christianity as a Jew can be a bit difficult at times. --[[User:RonaldB|Ronald]] ([[User talk:RonaldB|talk]]) 14:35, 5 July 2017 (EDT)
:I have not seen any factual problems with the articles you created. However, I do recommend that you add categories of the religion you are writing about to those articles. For example, that you add "Category:Christianity" to [[Secular Christianity]] and "Category:Judaism" to [[Secular Judaism]]. The people who practice these are not Jews (religiously speaking) or Christians, but the articles are relevant to those religions.

:Also, I recommend that you add at least one source to the articles you create. Adding sources to articles is Commandment #2 in [[Conservapedia:Commandments]], and it makes the articles better for readers. They know where you are getting your information from, and they can read further if they are interested. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:51, 6 July 2017 (EDT)

== Changing my username ==

I don't know if Andy saw my request on his talk page. Did he skip it or didn't see it? --[[User:KommissarReb|KommissarReb]] ([[User talk:KommissarReb|talk]]) 9:18, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
:I don't know. Sometimes he does that, but when I message him again he usually replies. I recommend commenting again, letting him know how much you want your username changed, and asking him to respond. I think we will do it, but only if you absolutely want it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:49, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
::I read [[User_talk:Aschlafly#Inquiry|the back and forth]] with the guy you probably were referring to on Andy's page. Andy seemed pretty reluctant to change the RonaldB's name for most of the discussion.. Is the process of changing someone's username complex or difficult to do, or did he just want to make sure that the guy wasn't being wishy-washy about the change? I was a little sheepish about asking him again because I don't want to seem annoying. --[[User:KommissarReb|KommissarReb]] ([[User talk:KommissarReb|talk]]) 5:07, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
:::I think CP admins generally prefer simply creating a new account. The user who made the other request was not the original person using the account. The original person let him take over the account. I can see why Andy wanted him to create a new account. I recommend you politely letting him know how much you want your username changed, and why, and asking him to respond, regardless of his answer. I think that would be a good move on your part. It would show how serious you are with this request. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:06, 11 July 2017 (EDT)

== Re: Trump ==

I think Donald Trump is going to get stuck with the blame for the economic bubble created by the Obama administration and the Federal Reserve.[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHwtkIpgAnA]

In addition, TrumpCare probably will not work because it is keeping the "precondition clause" of ObamaCare due to its popularity. People will often not buy health insurance until they are sick. So the health care system will not be viable. Car insurance companies could not be profitable if people could buy their car insurance after their car accident in order to replace their car. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:00, 11 July 2017 (EDT)

:You are probably right on both of those things. The first point would be the fault of the Obama Administration, and the second by the establishment GOP Congress. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:05, 11 July 2017 (EDT)

Got it, thanks for letting me know. --[[User:OneTrueConservative|OneTrueConservative]] ([[User talk:OneTrueConservative|talk]]) 00:12, 12 July 2017 (EDT)
:You're welcome. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:21, 12 July 2017 (EDT)
== Expansion of right-wing material on the internet ==

*[https://www.axios.com/the-partisan-explosion-of-digital-news-2279022772.html The recent explosion of right-wing news sites]

*[https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3dy7vb/why-the-right-is-dominating-youtube Why the Right Is Dominating YouTube] - Vice News

*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HndA5MoxK08 Why the Right is Dominating YouTube (A Response to Vice)]

*[https://www.nctv.nl/binaries/psychological-effects-of-right-wing-and-islamic-extremist-internet-videos_tcm31-30177.pdf Psychological effects of right-wing and Islamic extremist videos] - Netherlands and German report

I know Twitter bans and shadow bans right-wingers.

I haven't looked at the latter two items, but right-wingers gaining momentum on the internet is an interesting development. With nationalism gaining ground in Europe and 21st century [[desecularization]] occurring, the trend is bound to continue. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])

===Scriptural Geology===
Scriptural Geologists published in the USA as well. CRSQ published my review of David Lord "Geognosy" (that has other citations as well). [my magazines are in
storage but the year was 2000-2004.] Another recent CRSQ review was Gordon's 1878 book that mentioned USA Scriptural Geologist Martyn Payne.
:Thanks, Snoopy2, for your addition! I noted this fact, briefly in the article, in "The scriptural geologists" section. I knew that most of the Scriptural Geologists were British, and I did not have the time or knowledge of them to go into much more detail. Thanks for your help! Please remember to sign your posts in the future. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:06, 31 July 2017 (EDT)

== important message for you ==

I sent you an important message to the last place we communicated.

I also have some good news for you. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:10, 13 July 2017 (EDT)

== BLOCK THIS GUY!!!!!!!! ==

BLOCK THIS GUY!!!!!!!!

== Block duration ==

Thanks for your great blocks but they should generally not exceed 6 months in duration. By then the IP address is typically being used by someone else.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:27, 27 July 2017 (EDT)
:OK. I will keep that in mind. I will change this vandal's block. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:46, 27 July 2017 (EDT)

== "Denkmal der Schande" ==

Björn Höcke nannte das Holocaust-Mahnmal ein "Denkmal der Schande". Zudem sprach er von einer "dämlichen Bewältigungspolitik" und forderte eine "erinnerungspolitische Wende um 180 Grad". Hinterher behauptete Höcke, er hätte den Holocaust als Schande bezeichnet. Wenn man sich nun seine Rede genau anschaut, kann er nur das Denkmal als Schande bezeichnet haben. Höcke hat offen NS-Gedankengut offenbart und dies auch gewollt. Er ist ein Agent des BRD-Systems, die zum Ziel haben, die AfD unwählbar zu machen. Dasselbe haben sie schon mit der NPD gemacht (in den 90er Jahren). Ich find's ja auch schade, dass die AfD unterwandert wurde und nicht mehr wählbar ist. Auch ich habe große Hoffnungen in sie gesetzt. Aber spätestens seit dem letzten Parteitag ist sie unwählbar, die Neo-Nazis gewannen die Oberhand, Gauland wurde Spitzenkandidat. Solange Petry keine neue Partei gründet, müssen Rechtschaffene bei der Bundestagswahl das geringste Übel wählen (z.B. die Freien Wähler oder die BüSo). Aber die AfD ist klar von NS-Agenten unterwandert und ich schrieb noch mehr in den Artikel, also lassen Sie mich zumindest Höckes Rede einfügen, dann kann sich jeder selber ein Bild machen. MfG --[[User:Elessar|Elessar]] ([[User talk:Elessar|talk]]) 10:16, 1 August 2017 (EDT)
:Grüetzi Elessar, CP ist ein Englisher website, so es ist besser wann wir in English schreiben. Ich denke dass die meisten leute heir sprechen kein Deutsch. Danke. Wass ich sage ist sehr kontrovers in Deutschland, aber, Ich probiere ein klares und gutes antwort zum geben:

:First off, many political parties have their crazy members. I know that UKIP explicitly disavows racism, but it has had some members who have said some silly things. I definitely do ''not'' believe the GOP in the U.S. is racist, but David Duke considers himself a Republican (and every other Republican disavows him). Even the Swiss People's Party in my country (I am also a U.S. citizen) has some members who have said racist things. Just because parties have members like this does not necessarily mean that the entire party is racist or whatever. In the case of Höcke's speech, Petry (the party leader, as you know) condemned what he said, or at least criticized him.

:Second, I know the mindset that the German have today. They are still ashamed for what they did during World War II, and they are still focused on trying to make restitution. Personally, I think it is good that they have repented, but they miss the fact that there are two extremes: one extreme is what the Nazis did, the other is being so ashamed bad things one did that they essentially hate their country. We see this with liberals in the United States. I think the German mindset is too far in the second extreme -- and no, I am anywhere close to being a racist or Nazi. Patriotism and nationalism can be very good things, as long as they are handled correctly and are not an excuse to persecute others. The German people, I think, are trying to extinguish them, and they have accused people, even those in the middle of those two extremes, as being Nazis.

:Let me also make clear that I have not read much about Björn Höcke's speech, other than what you provided and what his English Wikipedia article states, so I cannot comment on his entire speech and his entire character. He may very well be what you say he is. However, what I read about his speech and about him actually seems reasonable. Many peoples all over the world have done many evil things -- slavery in the U.S. and the other European colonies, the Islamic slave trade, religious persecution in Rome and the communist nations, the several genocides in history, etc. However, it is not constructive for cultures to focus on these events. It is good to remember them and repent of them, but not to obsess about them. There is much more to German history than World War II, just as there is more to U.S. history than slavery. Why can't we build monuments celebrating the positive things about our cultures and our people? It is cultural suicide not to do so. While we should not forget the bad events, we should focus on the good events and remain proud as a people in order to remain strong. This seems to me what Höcke is getting at. Am I wrong?

:Reading his Wikipedia article, I came accross this quote: "Die Syrer, die zu uns kommen, haben immer noch Syrien. Wenn wir – durch die Syrer – unser Deutschland verloren haben, dann haben wir keine Heimat mehr." I can see how in Germany this is very controversial, but I think in most other countries, this is quite reasonable. It may not be a bad thing if Syrians come, but it would mean that the German people would be in danger of disappearing, at least in a cultural sense. If someone values this (as most people of all ethnicies and nationalities do -- just ask the Poles or Hungarians), they will strongly oppose immigration.

:Am I wrong in what I am saying? Am I misrepresenting Höcke? I would appreciate some dialogue. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:18, 1 August 2017 (EDT)

::No, you aren't wrong and I too was never questioning that the "eternal fault" (electing Hitler/WW2) which is propagated by German liberals is bullshit. I only mean that Höcke was not only saying that, but he also clearly favorized the Holocaust by calling for an "erinnerungspolitische Wende um 180 Grad" and calling the Holocaust monument a "Denkmal der Schande". This speech was much criticized by Jewish organizations in Germany and Höcke was forbidden to visit Concentration Camp Memorials. He's not a single exemption, but there are unfortunately already lots of neo-Nazis or neo-Nazi sympathizers in the AfD who are all defending Höcke's speech, including Spitzenkandidat Alexander Gauland. Party leader Petry was forced by them not to participate. These (real) neo-Nazis are system agents who are overrunning the AfD like they did decades ago with the NPD in order to make these parties uneligible by conservative voters. But of course many liberals call all ''real'' conservatives "neo-Nazis" which there is nonsense. But Höcke is really a neo-Nazi and anti-semite and should be excluded together with his inner-party defenders. --[[User:Elessar|Elessar]] ([[User talk:Elessar|talk]]) 14:05, 1 August 2017 (EDT)

:::I don't understand how the "erinnerungspolitische Wende um 180 Grad" shows that Höcke is a neo-Nazi. It seems to be saying that German policy on these matters needs to change, which I also think is reasonable. The culture of shame in Germany must end -- when will Egypt build a monument mourning the Islamic slave trade, and when will Turkey build a monument mourning the Armenian Genocide? That's what I think he is saying. Am I wrong? Please explain.

:::While I am a strong supporter of Israel, I do think that many Jewish organizations in Europe and the United States are politically left-wing -- unlike the current Israeli government. The fact that they opposed Höcke's speech is unsurprising, even if he is not a neo-Nazi. Most European/American Jews support the ruling establishment's views on who is extreme and who is "moderate." And besides, Jewish organizations have their own interests. It's reasonable for them to defend monuments mourning a genocide of their own people, regardless of whether having such a monument, or at least the mindset behind it, is a good thing or not.

:::It seems to me that you are making a jump from noting what Höcke is saying to calling him a neo-Nazi. A lot of what he is saying seems reasonable, even if it is better that he watches what he says more closely, and I don't see how these comments make them neo-Nazis (I do see, however, how such comments are far outside the current German mainstream, and that they make such parties less attractive to moderate Germans). It seems to me that Höcke is a nationalist who is angry at the culture of shame in his country, which is probably the reason why it is being flooded with immigrants and weakened by the EU. Many conservatives said silly things (that sounded extremely racist) about Obama when he was U.S. President, even though those people would have voted for conservative blacks (Ben Carson, Allen West, Herman Cain) or Hispanics (Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz) in a heartbeat. Could it be that this is what Höcke is doing?

:::My last thing I want to say in this comment is not related to the above. I would like to remind you that CP is a family-friendly encyclopedia, and I think this policy also applies to talk pages. I request that you thus refrain from spelling out cuss words when making comments. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:35, 1 August 2017 (EDT)

::::Sorry about the term "b***" but I'm as angry as you about the "eternal fault" dogma. And you are completely right with most (including the Jews being too liberal in Europe), but in my opinion the quote "erinnerungspolitische Wende um 180 Grad" is like he wanted to say "The Holocaust was nothing bad" or "not so bad" or so. Like it would be Holocaust relativation. Maybe Höcke really didn't mean anything bad in his speech but then he's simply uncaring of what he says because he damages his party with such unclear statements. --[[User:Elessar|Elessar]] ([[User talk:Elessar|talk]]) 16:34, 1 August 2017 (EDT)

:::::As we disagree on his speech (even though I do think your last comment was very reasonable), I chose to move the info to another place in the article and re-word it. If you have any problems with how I re-worded it, we can discuss that as well. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:05, 1 August 2017 (EDT)

::::::Björn Höcke said in whole this: "Wir Deutschen – und ich rede jetzt nicht von euch Patrioten, die sich hier heute versammelt haben – wir Deutschen, also unser Volk, sind das einzige Volk der Welt, das sich ein Denkmal der Schande in das Herz seiner Hauptstadt gepflanzt hat." This means, not German patriots but the other Germans (liberals e.g.) have founded the Holocaust monument which he calls a Denkmal der Schande. Which means, according to him true German patriots wouldn't have built the Holocaust monument, which can be interpreted as he's pro-Holocaust. The same interpretation is open in his other quote "Wir brauchen eine erinnerungspolitische Wende um 180 Grad". Maybe he didn't want to relativate the Holocaust but he should watch out what he says, especially if his party wants to enter a coalition. A coalition with establishment parties wouldn't be bad as long as the AfD maintains its goals and gets many of them into a government program. --[[User:Elessar|Elessar]] ([[User talk:Elessar|talk]]) 01:37, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

:::::::I can see now how people think the speech was sympathizing with Nazis -- the Holocaust and WWII is a touchy topic, especially for Germans. However, I still see how what he is saying is reasonable. Turkey, for example, is not going to build a monument for the Armenian Genocide anytime soon, Russia is not going to build a monument for the many Baltic peoples they killed during WWII, and Japan is not going to build any monument for the millions of people they killed, including concentration camp prisoners.

:::::::I do know that there are two AfD factions: one that has a goal of becoming a coalition party, and the other that wants to remain an anti-establishment party. Höcke is clearly part of the latter, while Petry is in the former. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:31, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

::::::::The AfD can remain an anti-establishment party and anyway be part of a government coalition, like the Austrian [[FPÖ]] which also seeks being part in coalitions (and already is in two states) and remains loyal to all of its positions. --[[User:Elessar|Elessar]] ([[User talk:Elessar|talk]]) 14:09, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

:::::::::Fair enough, but you get the point: there are two factions in the party on the best way foreward for the party. One of them support coalition agreements and the other side is less pragmatic in this regard. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:23, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

==Brexit==
Hi - not sure why you changed my edits on the BREXIT page - I tried to provide an accurate account of what is happening and what is being reported by many news outlets --unsigned comment by HORSEMAN
:Hello "HORSEMAN", I removed the info about the potential referendums because this was just speculation that died down. I also thought that some of your wording (such as the "full complexity and impacts of BREXIT become apparent" and by removing the mention of the EU being obstructionist) seemed to insert a left-of-center bias into the article. CP is a conservative encyclopedia, and we align firmly with Brexit and Euroskepticism. However, I will see if I can re-add some of your wording. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:31, 10 August 2017 (EDT)
::Another problem is that for the part about the proposed payments and EU citizen rights, you did not provide sources. The existing info already had a source, and you changed the info while keeping the source. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:35, 10 August 2017 (EDT)
:::Hi Again, would this link suffice http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-17-2001_en.htm It is the definitive statement from the EU negotiating team and sets out the negotiating agenda. Thanks Horseman
::::You can definitely cite the source, but do you also have third party sources as well? I see nothing in the EU source about the monetary amount of the settlement. We prefer sources with conservative editorial stances. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:57, 10 August 2017 (EDT)
:::::Is this syitable, I don't pay for Telegraph articles so only have this link. Thanks Horseman
::::::The Telegraph is one of numerous conservative news organizations. Besides, their non-commentary articles are free for viewing. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:13, 10 August 2017 (EDT)

==[[Margaret Sanger]] revision that you undid==
Hi 1990'sguy,

Is there a way to reword what I wrote in such a way that it could be considered "encyclopedic"?

Thanks,
[[User:Bluedogdemocrat|Bluedogdemocrat]] ([[User talk:Bluedogdemocrat|talk]]) 22:59, 18 August 2017 (EDT)
:You could write "Planned Parenthood eventually expanded to support the form of murder known as abortion." Something like that. We should keep the wording encyclopedic, as this is not a blog or anything like that. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:05, 18 August 2017 (EDT)

== Re: Block of TimJim ==

Sorry about that, I wasn't aware you had already blocked TimJim when I blocked him, so I reset the block length back to that of your original block. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 22:45, 19 August 2017 (EDT)

== Article move request ==

Hi I'd be happy to move those articles you are requesting, but as you know, I cannot avoid the creation of redirects. Let me know if you want this, but hopefully you can get it done the right way. It's also probably easier to ask for a move than a delete. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 17:43, 21 August 2017 (EDT)
:I appreciate your offer, David, but I think it would be better if I keep it simple for Andy, rather than explain that the articles were moved and that he only has to delete the redirect -- having one person do it is more simple. Thanks anyway! :) --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:46, 21 August 2017 (EDT)
::Agreed...okay. I didn't want to cut in and disrupt things, but just thought I'd offer. Cheers! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 17:49, 21 August 2017 (EDT)
:::I do appreciate your offer, David. Thanks! It looks like Andy just moved the articles. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:50, 21 August 2017 (EDT)

==Contact==
You can email me at wirepaladin36@gmail.com [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 11:22, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

==snoopy2==
1990s guy, I just want to verify u could read the Theistic ev. entry and 1994 film clip on my user talk. any comments?
:I could watch it, but would you please explain what it's about in a little more detail? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:55, 11 December 2017 (EST)

== Maybe I was too pessimistic. Good news ==

'''Why [[Democrats]] Should Be''' Losing Sleep Over Generation Z.[https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleystahl/2017/08/11/why-democrats-should-be-losing-sleep-over-generation-z/]

Bye for now. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:47, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
:Thanks for the article. Bye for now. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:48, 5 September 2017 (EDT)

== File comparison tool ==

Did Cons ever get back to you with the comparison tool? I'm curious about it, and whether it does a good job of checking for copied content. The problems that it appears to solve are different from the problems of comparison tools used in software development. I'm curious about whether it uses line hashing, sentence hashing, word group hashing, and things like that. I'd like to try it out, and not just at CP. In fact, probably not at all for CP; I'm not interested in who plagiarizes what at CP, though, when I am, I use other techniques to catch people. I'm just curious as to whether those other techniques have been automated.

It's puzzling that Cons deleted the screenshot, as though he ''wants'' people to believe he's a liar, though I don't think he is.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 14:57, 12 September 2017 (EDT)
:I can assure you that the tool exists. I have not tried it yet and thus cannot answer your question. I have no reason to try it as JDano's essays were deleted, so I recommend that you ask Conservative directly these things. Maybe he will share it with you. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:23, 12 September 2017 (EDT)

::Great!! I'm still very much interested in it. Is it a "cloud app"? Is it a downloadable app that I can run locally on my own computer? Can you send me a URL?
::By the way, the standard wiki comparison of your last edit to the [[Guy Verhofstadt]] article, just as a random example, shows how bad text comparers can be. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 17:40, 13 September 2017 (EDT)
:::You are going to have to ask Conservative for the details of the tool -- he told me not to give it away to anyone, and while I personally have no problem with sharing it with you, I shouldn't go against what he said. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:43, 13 September 2017 (EDT)
::::Well, this is really weird. Cons seems to be trying to censor the internet itself, hiding the location of this tool. And he seems to think that only you can be trusted with it. He said "I will share this tool with 1990sguy [...] so he can evaluate your [JDano's] efforts in an objective way." I of course took this as a challenge. A Google search for "similar page checker tool" gets a number of hits. Ignoring the ones that cost a lot of money, and those that attempt to check a given page against the entire internet, narrowed it down to a few. This one: [https://www.duplichecker.com/similar-page-checker.php] seems to be the right thing. It's a "cloud app" rather than an installable program, but I can put up with that. It has the same appearance—color and layout—as the screenshot that Cons posted and removed. I ran it on the versions of this page before and after your recent reply to me, and it said they were 100% the same. I'm not particularly happy about that, but the additional text was only about 0.3 percent of the total, so I suppose I can accept that. Then I ran it on versions that differ in length by 10% (the 100K version and the 110K version.) It said they were 98% similar. Not good. But I still might find it to be a useful tool. There are pages not relating to JDano that could benefit from such an analysis.

::::I will probably check in with Cons on this, once he stays away from CP for 10 days.

::::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:39, 13 September 2017 (EDT)

==Getting help==
I am trying to fix the stuff on the Corporate bullies page. Am still learning my way around on how to use things. Think I am starting to get it though. The Georgia 2016 stuff has a lot of info and I am in the process of editing it, though it's going to take a while (at least 20 or more minutes. I'm trying though. (BTW, if I wasn't supposed to edit here, sorry. I don't know how to reply to your remark otherwise.) [[User:PatriotMongoose|PatriotMongoose]] ([[User talk:PatriotMongoose|talk]]) 22:31, 15 September 2017 (EDT)
:It's OK to edit here. I recommend that you read CP's guidelines, and probably more importantly, that you read [[Help:How to edit a website like Conservapedia]]. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:34, 15 September 2017 (EDT)

==Fabulous block and reverts==

Fabulous block and reverts this afternoon!!!! Well done!!!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 18:51, 21 September 2017 (EDT)
:Thanks, Andy! :) --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:52, 21 September 2017 (EDT)

== re: JohnZ ==

User: JohnZ fails to recognize that my interest to be a referee to protect a marginal online sparring partner (whose greatest achievement was his dogged stubbornness to ignore facts/evidence) was largely protected by his edits to main space articles and my desire for an online sparring partner.

His rudeness to other editors and his desire to barely skate by with his main space edits certainly did not help matters. In addition, given the [[decline of the atheist movement]] and it now being a hopeless cause destined to ever increasing irrelevance, my desire for an atheist online sparring partner is non-existent at this point given my current/future priorities.

If he wants to create two quality, well-sourced original articles of at least 2,00 words on these topics [[Anti-religious Soviet Union propaganda]] and [[Christian persecution in communist China]] to restore his other editing privileges, that is what is required.

He would also have to pledge to refrain from hurling insults to other editors (idiot, etc.). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:01, 3 November 2017 (EDT)

:Hopefully he'll do it. We've given him these opportunities before and he rejected them. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:18, 3 November 2017 (EDT)
::I made a minor adjustment to his requirements for fully restoring his editing privileges in case someone creates articles on those subjects.

::Secondly, ardent secular leftists generally always double down regardless of any contrary facts/evidence presented to them. Of course, you never know what is going to happen. The Apostle Paul went from being one of Christianity's chief opponents to being its greatest champion. He will just need to be open minded.

::It is very widely recognized that there is and has been religious persecution in communist China and that there was anti-religious propaganda in the former Soviet Union. So I am giving him ample opportunity to show that he is not a close-minded individual given to hurling insults. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:31, 3 November 2017 (EDT)

I would say no to this for a couple reasons. The first is his blatant disrespect of everyone here, and he has shown that multiple times. The gist of it is a pretense of superiority over us, as if it is mandatory that we listen to him; he stated a short time ago that some of us are idiots for not engaging him in conversation. Which I might add is his kind of conversation.

The second reason is that he's a leftist brand of liberal from Great Britain, which means we cannot change his way of thinking whatsoever. Unfortunately for someone who is that close-minded he is going to go into lock-step with every other like-minded individual in his country, which would mean the loss of the United Kingdom as a political entity within a few years time. In his case, he is more concerned with picking a fight with the users of a small American conservative website then he is with what he and his kind are allowing to happen in Britain, namely the Islamic takeover. As a leftist, he probably feels he can get along with them in the name of diversity and multiculturalism, but when all is said and done he will either be forced on his hands and knees with his butt high in the air, or he'll have his head chopped off.

Unfortunately, some people think they're so better than others that they've blinded themselves to what they're actually doing. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 04:35, 4 November 2017 (EDT)
:Karajou, if you look at my comment to his talk page, you will see that I am giving him an opportunity to show that he can be open-minded and reasonable by writing on two topics related to atheistic communism persecution of Christians/religious (namely [[Christian persecution in communist China]] and [[Anti-religious propaganda in the Soviet Union]]) via two quality articles of at least 2,000 words.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 05:38, 4 November 2017 (EDT)

== Anti-Christian bias in Wikipedia ==

Hello 1990'sguy. Am I being hypersensitive or is Wikipedia's anti-Christian bias increasing? For example, the recent dispute about content at Answers in Genesis.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AAnswers_in_Genesis&type=revision&diff=810473662&oldid=810471171] I see also that User:Synthetic Woolly Mammoth[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Synthetic_Woolly_Mammoth] has just been blocked, allegedly for being a sockpuppet of Biscuittin, but more likely because he has been speaking up in support of some Christian editors. [[User:Desmonduk|Desmonduk]] ([[User talk:Desmonduk|talk]]) 05:27, 20 November 2017 (EST)
:I know another editor who has extensively edited topics related to Christianity and atheism on WP, and he told me that the ati-Christian bias on the site was much worse back around 2012. The militant atheists don't have as much power as they did back then. However, the anti-Christian bias obviously is still very bad, especially on YEC topics, which I have been dealing with for years already. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:20, 20 November 2017 (EST)

== Block length ==

Thanks for your alert block of new user "CPishilarious", but I'm going to change the block duration from 2 years to 1 month. Long blocks are disfavored on wikis because they block the IP address as well as the user. The IP address could be a library or other general access IP address, or the user could move or be a college student, or the user could have a change of heart. But thanks again for your quick action.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:11, 20 November 2017 (EST)
:OK, and you're welcome. I have seen blocked vandals come back with their same accounts after their blocks expire, so I wanted to protect against that. But I will shorten blocks like these in the future. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:54, 21 November 2017 (EST)
::Thanks so much for your alert block this morning, but again the block duration is too long. Another user could be trying to use that same IP address within a few months, or the user himself could have a change of heart. I'll shorten it to 4 months. Thanks!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:25, 4 December 2017 (EST)
:::Andy, it feels like I'm the only editor you're messaging about block length, ''even though my blocks are much shorter than most other editors.'' For example, just yesterday, I blocked two accounts for six months for having a silly username and for (relatively) non-serious vandalism, but shortly later, DMorris reset the blocks for 5 years. See here: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Bernieman][http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Hillary_clinton] If you're going (for good reason) to message me for my blocks, please do the same for the other editors who prefer even longer blocks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:33, 4 December 2017 (EST)
:::But yes, I will still shorten my blocks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:36, 4 December 2017 (EST)

== Suggested article ==

Here is an article suggestion:

*[[Donald Trump and evangelicals]]

I think there would be public interest in such an article. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:20, 9 December 2017 (EST)
:Thanks. If I get time, I will start this article. I will add it to my list of articles to create. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:16, 9 December 2017 (EST)

== Two things ==

For one, why do you not have email enabled? Secondly, consider longer blocks for these obviously malicious accounts. You can block an account for infinity and the autoblock on the IP still only lasts 24 hours. There is no reason for these sleeper accounts to come back to life three months later. [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] ([[User talk:DMorris|talk]]) 16:19, 13 December 2017 (EST)

:In his defense, he was doing longer blocks until [[User_talk:1990'sguy#Block_length|Andy started asking him not too]], then [[User_talk:1990'sguy#Block_length_2|reminded him again]]. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 16:25, 13 December 2017 (EST)

::Yes, for crying out loud, why am I the only one being criticized for my block lengths? If I make my block lengths long, Andy posts on my talk page, and if I make my block lengths shorter, DMorris posts on my talk page.

::DMorris, please talk to Andy about this. I will continue making my blocks on the shorter side until your differing opinions are sorted out.

::About my email, I have my email address posted on my user page. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:46, 13 December 2017 (EST)

== Articles of the year: 2017 - your article is being featured on the main page (left side) ==

*[[Donald Trump achievements]]

*[[European migrant crisis]]

*[[Atheists and genetic mutations]]

Keep up the good work.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
:Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:12, 24 December 2017 (EST)

== Nationalism v Globalism ==

I went ahead and added a link to the Gardner article on the Nationalism v Globalism article for you. I figured since we were referencing it, it would be good to see the original article too.--[[User:Whizkid|Whizkid]] ([[User talk:Whizkid|talk]]) 23:52, 7 January 2018 (EST)
:Thanks! I already saw and added it to other articles where I mentioned Gardner. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:53, 7 January 2018 (EST)

==Homeschooling==
I deleted the paragraph on Texas requirements (which I originally added) since it was duplicative of the information I added from HSLDA (which covers all 50 states) regarding state requirements. I left the New Hampshire one since it involved a court imposing its will on a family in violation of state law.

I'm glad you liked my original work, but after finding something better and covering more than just one state, I amended my original work. Though after your comments, I revised it to explain that another state court (Texas) made homeschooling far easier than before. [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 17:22, 29 January 2018 (EST)

:Thanks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:27, 29 January 2018 (EST)

==Deep State==
I will agree with your removal of the word "theory", but I did add the phrase "(or are believed to control)" because there are many conservative Christians who are not totally convinced that the deep state really exists. I believe my edits will be a happy medium between those who hold to the deep state view and those who do not. [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 15:11, 30 January 2018 (EST)
:I kept most of your "is believed/considered" wording (except for the first sentence, which is unnecessary as the first sentence already makes clear that "deep state" is a term and not necessarily reality. I found most of your other changes to be too wordy and unnecessary, so I reverted some of it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:04, 30 January 2018 (EST)
::I looked at your revisions and all you did was revert to your original article, with a few minor edits to try to convince me that you really took my suggestions into consideration. Basically what you did to the article is like putting wood filler and new paint on a house with termite rot. I've dealt with folks like you over on "the other site", who think that once they write an article, it's perfect and can't accept any changes to it. I'm not going to waste time with this one any more; clearly you're trying to espouse tinfoil hat conspiracy theory under the guise of "Christian conservatism". [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 09:22, 31 January 2018 (EST)
:::Much of your changes involved inserting parenthetical notes, which I think made the article more bloated than it had to be. The "or are believed to control" phrase in the first sentence was simply unnecessary and overemphasized your disbelief in the deep state. The part about Wall Street was cited to a good research article, so I don't think we need the "is believed" language for that. But I will still see if I can incorporate more of your edits.
:::About the existence of the deep state, it and the drive for one-world government are things that should be common and uncontroversial knowledge -- but people (both supporters and detractors) "conspiracize" these things and that's how accusations of me wearing a tinfoil hat come about. Look at the evidence -- most of our society (except theologically conservative Christians, most of them probably being premillennialist) accept the Idea of Progress, adopted during the Enlightenment Era. They believe that humanity is progressing for the better, and that this will lead to a one-world utopia with world peace and freedom for humanity (read Kant, for example). Thus, they believe that national identity, subsidiarity, and national sovereignty are growing useless and antiquated and actually are impediments to this utopia. This flows into their policies -- advancing international organizations, taking away national sovereignty, etc. As for the deep state, just look at the whole DOJ/FBI stuff going on right now, or the fact that Republicans and Democrats hire administration personnel from the same group of organizations -- CFR, Trilateral, etc.
:::The garbage that there is some secret conspiracy by liberals to take over the world, that their motives are malevolent, that they want to do evil, that this is a short-term project, and that the Illuminati is involved with all this -- this is all garbage perfectly fit for "the other site". In reality, the drive for a one-world utopia is one of the fundamental philosophical views in our culture, and liberals openly see it as natural/normal/benign (and they're in it for the long haul). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:04, 31 January 2018 (EST)

== Suggested Name Change for [[Christmas and Easter Catholic]] ==
I propose changing this to "Christmas and Easter Christian", since the phenomenon of persons attending church on those days is by no means limited to Catholics. [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 16:17, 30 January 2018 (EST)
:I disagree. I recommend that a separate article entitled "Christmas and Easter Christian" be created -- C&E Catholicism is a notable concept on its own right, enough to have its own article. I think an article on C&E Christianity in general would be a good addition. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:07, 30 January 2018 (EST)
::What's the difference? Both are the same phenomenon -- "so-called" Christian believers who attend only during those two holidays (or weddings and funerals). The current article is fine, it just needs to be revised to not pick on one branch of Christianity. [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 09:17, 31 January 2018 (EST)
:::I've heard Roman Catholics specifically mentioned much more than other Christians when hearing about this "phenomenon." But I will ask another editor of his opinion on this. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:32, 31 January 2018 (EST)

==Campaign promises==
Hello,

The thought occurred to me that Wikipedia does not normally catalog campaign promises.(It never has, that I have seen) Elections there follow a formula of "what did they actually do after getting elected" and election results - which is both boring and completely useless, because we have a big problem with people running for office one way and then governing another way. This leaves a glaring hole of accountability with all of our politicians and it also offers us an opportunity to distinguish ourselves from Wikipedia. What do you think about this? I made a few changes [[Bruce Rauner|here]] as an example start. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 15:00, 4 February 2018 (EST)
:I think your suggestion is a great idea -- we have too many politicians who make really great promises during election campaigns, but they later act like they never even made those promises. When Rauner and his GOP primary opponent (Jeanne Ives) sat down with the ''Chicago Tribune'' editorial board a few days ago, Rauner said that he never promised he would veto a major pro-abortion bill that he ultimately signed (he actually explicitly promised he would multiple times).[http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/01/30/jeanne-ives-crushes-gop-gov-bruce-rauner-illinois-candidates-meet-first-time/][http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/01/31/conservative-jeanne-ives-rips-il-gov-bruce-rauner-abortion-flip-flop/]
:I can also think of Sen. Thom Tillis of NC who campaigned against amnesty in 2014 and is now advocating for a "conservative" amnesty bill (though it's inferior to the Goodlatte bill).
:I support your suggestion. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:11, 4 February 2018 (EST)

== FPÖ ==

Hi, I just wanted to ask you why you have removed [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Freedom_Party_of_Austria&diff=1403167&oldid=1403166 my entry] on the article of the Freedom Party of Austria. The [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kreisky%E2%80%93Peter%E2%80%93Wiesenthal_affair Kreisky–Peter–Wiesenthal affair] is an important event in the history of this party that should not be discreeted.--[[User:JoeyJ|JoeyJ]] ([[User talk:JoeyJ|talk]]) 09:41, 7 February 2018 (EST)
:First off, the info was inserted right in the middle of a paragraph discussing the FPO's ideological development and alliance with the SPO. Your info was out of place.
:Second, the info was unduly wordy. I am sick of seeing the media and leftists do everything in their power to tie right-wing conservative parties like the FPO to Nazi Germany, such as by unduly emphasizing those aspects of the parties and calling them "far-right", "extreme right", "ultra-right", etc. By American conservative standards, these parties are actually quite moderate, and for those of us who realize that Nazism is a vastly overrated threat (placed alongside climate change by the Left), such parties have clearly moved away from their pasts.
:I don't want our articles to accept the left-wing narratives of these right-wing populist parties. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:50, 7 February 2018 (EST)
::Well, all the informations I have put in the article were confirmed with trustworthy sources. [[Simon Wiesenthal]] who accused the FPÖ leader Friedrich Peter of being part in a unit which committed massacres against jews, was himself a Conservative. Wiesenthal supported the (at that time very conservative) Austrian People's Party. So it is not easy to label his accusations as "left-wing narratives". I am also pretty sure that the Conservative government of Israel does not spread "left-wing propaganda" if they criticize the party for its charged history. Instead of simply removing facts from the article, you might emphasize how the FPÖ moved away from its past.--[[User:JoeyJ|JoeyJ]] ([[User talk:JoeyJ|talk]]) 10:01, 7 February 2018 (EST)
:::Israel is a Jewish state, so issues related to the Holocaust are sensitive to them. But as much as I support Israel and its right-wing government, Israel's position toward the FPO is irrational, and they are unduly obsessed with Nazism like Western Europe is. Israel's opinion on the FPO means very little because of the context -- it's easy to offend Israel on matters like this.
:::About Wiesenthal, I don't know anything about him, but him supporting the OVP does not mean much to me. If the party were "very conservative", why did it support the EU, Maastricht Treaty, Schengen Agreement, etc.
:::And yes, these are the narratives promoted by the Left, the establishment, and the media. These are the same people who were comparing Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler during the election campaign and who tried to smear Breitbart News as anti-Semite (despite loads of evidence to the contrary), among many other cases. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:17, 7 February 2018 (EST)
::::Just because these "narratives" are promoted by the Left it does not mean that they are wrong. I can ensure you that Simon Wiesenthal was never a supporter of left-wing policies. As I already told you it would be better to emphasize the current measures by Strache to reappraise the controversial history of this party instead of denying it.--[[User:JoeyJ|JoeyJ]] ([[User talk:JoeyJ|talk]]) 11:20, 8 February 2018 (EST)
:::::They're wrong -- they overemphasize every small and petty incident related to parties like the FPO that allude to Nazi Germany. Their point in doing so is to make it seem like that if we elect these people/parties into power (including Donald Trump), we'll be repeating 1933 all over again and will usher in the end of freedom in Europe -- never mind that Germany is still enforcing the Nazi ban on homeschooling, or that many Western European countries have free speech restrictions even on topics like Islam and homosexuality, or etc. Conservapedia will not go along with the media -- we acknowledge that parties like the FPO are conservative and/or right-wing (not "far-right" or "neo-Nazi") and the best choice in order to protect/expand freedom and protect European culture/patriotism. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:58, 8 February 2018 (EST)

== request ==

Can you create this article: [[Donald Trump's major achievements]]? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:39, 9 February 2018 (EST)
:This seems like a good idea, and I will do it. I won't do it immediately, since I have a lot of other things to do, but I will create it soon. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:54, 9 February 2018 (EST)
::OK. Thanks. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:18, 9 February 2018 (EST)

I'm very sorry about the article. If it make you feel like a advertisement. However, everything that is state is true. Thank you for your understanding. Pleased assist by make any corrections. That you think is necessary. When your time is most convenient.

Your brother in Christ,
Luke
:Thanks for your message, but the article I deleted is not acceptable for Conservapedia. There is nothing I can do to change that, unless you receive coverage from good sources (Breitbart, Fox, etc.). I'm keeping the other article for now, since it's one I can imagine keeping, but I'm discussing it with other editors to see what to ultimately do about it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:00, 21 February 2018 (EST)

Could you add some categories to my page please? [[User:Willow Smith|Willow Smith]] ([[User talk:Willow Smith|talk]]) 11:26, 22 February 2018 (EST)

==Response to your complaints==
From what appears EVERY time someone creates a new page or edits an existing one:

"Please note that all contributions to Conservapedia may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here."

If the real rule is "any contributions by Conservapedia administrators -- no matter how good, bad, or ugly they may be -- are fixed for all time and never to be altered", then make that the rule. But don't invite someone to improve things, then complain because they do. [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 10:26, 6 March 2018 (EST)
:Your bolding does not improve things. Also, nobody reverted your turning pages into redirects -- it's just a good idea to let people know before making major unilateral changes. If your complaint is that I'm messaging you about these things, then you have no real complaint at all. If you make edits here, you (like I was, and still am to an extent) are bound to be messaged about these things, which other editors do with the intention of improving others' editing. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:37, 6 March 2018 (EST)

::Additionally, administrators and editors alike must watch the activity of others, especially newer editors. A few people have the hobby of trying to vandalize CP in any way possible, so excuse us if we sound cynical or obstinate, but some "new users" are actually just the same vandals as always. Since we don't really know you yet, we do our best to assume good intent, but can't afford to ignore what seems to be odd behavior.
::I'm sure you'll do fine, if you just listen to the recommendations of others and keep improving content. Thank you for your efforts, and for understanding! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 17:16, 6 March 2018 (EST)

==Thank you for the intro==
Just wanted to say thank you for the welcome! PS--Do you know what an eagle does when a storm approaches? [[User:Bcarlin|Bcarlin]] ([[User talk:Bcarlin|talk]]) 20:34, 21 March 2018 (EDT)

== Double standard article is now unprotected ==
1990sguy, I unprotected the [[Double standard]] article.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:16, 3 April 2018 (EDT)
:Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:43, 3 April 2018 (EDT)

== Regarding the Whale article ==

Hello,
I would like to know what caused you to revert my edits to the Whale article, and what I could do in the future to avoid this.--[[User:Cetacean|Cetacean]] ([[User talk:Cetacean|talk]]) 23:23, 23 April 2018 (EDT)
:First off, I did not revert everything -- not even close. I reverted what appeared to be unnecessary wordiness on your part, along with your insertion of evolutionist-favored terms ("evolutionary biologists" instead of "evolutionists"--believe it or not, but people who believe in a young Earth can be evolutionary biologists too). If you keep your wording as concise as possible and if you choose your wording while keeping in mind that this is a conservative-Christian encyclopedia (thus, using terms favored by conservatives and Christians), then you won't be reverted. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:10, 23 April 2018 (EDT)
::OK, thanks for letting me know. I'll keep that in mind. I think I was correct about Darwin's views, though - could I reinstate that part?--[[User:Cetacean|Cetacean]] ([[User talk:Cetacean|talk]]) 23:23, 23 April 2018 (EDT)
:::Fine, but only if you change that part. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:27, 23 April 2018 (EDT)
::::Done. Thank you!--[[User:Cetacean|Cetacean]] ([[User talk:Cetacean|talk]]) 23:40, 23 April 2018 (EDT)
== Thanks for your edits ==

Thanks for cleaning up the edits to [[Biblical scientific foreknowledge]]. I was planning to do likewise.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:13, 24 April 2018 (EDT)
:You're welcome, happy to help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:15, 24 April 2018 (EDT)

== Ummm... how? ==

Ok... if not supernatural then how is evolution a folklore genre? I don't understand... Do you go to your doctor... Do you believe in evidence based medicine? If so, are you aware that many medicines and treatment methods are derived from experiment on animals... In your viewpoint why? If animals are COMPLETELY unrelated to us IN ANY WAY... then what is the point of experimenting and more importantly, why do those experiments help us develop pills and treatment of diseases? Why do the animals most close to us suffer from related diseases? Why do chimps suffer from HIV and not cockroaches? Just coincidence that our nearest relative is the one who suffers from problems more close to us? --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 00:01, 25 April 2018 (EDT)

== Things for you to note ==

Ok... thanks... I feel like there are a couple of things you have to know about potholer54... First, he DOES NOT discuss the political regulations on climate change (https://youtu.be/MTJQPyTVtNA?t=10) in other words, he maintains that political part of the debate (whether conservative or not) is NOT his business. Also, he has criticized leftists for blowing up the effects of climate change (he has frequently said that science does not support earth being destroyed by climate change since in history there have been higher CO2 levels)... these are the reasons why I felt that my wording was correct, but I will not start arguing. Do as you wish. I only ask that if you modify my article please try expanding it (there are enough stubs and short articles here), and cite sources. Even if the sources would not be considered legitimate (by other's standards), citing the sources makes the article look good. I see too many articles, where the writer goes on and on without citing a single source.

About evolution. I do NOT agree with everything here. But I understand your mission. And I understand that people here feel differently and it is NOT my mission to undermine your work. I simply add and create pages which I think Conservapedia lacks, and I try to write from neutral point of view (more experienced people can edit it to sound more conservative, I do not want to seem like a troll).

I did as you commanded. I know the wiki that shall not be named is not welcome here, but I wanted people to have another way to contact me. Anyways, it is removed
--[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 19:09, 26 April 2018 (EDT)
:Responded on your talk page. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:26, 26 April 2018 (EDT)

1)Yes... there are several instances of him trying to take the politics out of it... I'll send them later

2)When you say he "criticizes skepticism" as opposed to "denialism" the reader may have the impression that potholer is against being skeptical when in fact he is against what he considers to be denialsim... He is pro free speech, he welcomes questions, I have even spoken with him at length months ago. That is why I wrote what I wrote.

3)That's ok. While my interests change very unpredictably and rapidly, recently I am more interested in history, pseudohistory and archaeology, pseudoarchaeology articles.

4)I understand... I will obey. But just for curiosity, can I know where does that rule originate from? I have read the Guidelines and the Commandments and I did not see any mention of the site which calls itself that which it thinks Conservapedia is not? I do obey, and I respect, but just for interest, where is that rule documented and what is the purpose (since you seem to tolerate other anti-Conservapedia wikis like Lieberapedia) --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 20:48, 26 April 2018 (EDT)

:Responded again on your talk page. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:31, 26 April 2018 (EDT)

::OK... Is there a way for me to add images (illustrations) to my articles? How do I do that and what is CP policy on that? Are google images, wiki images ok? --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 21:43, 26 April 2018 (EDT)
:::You can post requests at [[Conservapedia:Image upload requests]]. User:DavidB4 usually uploads the requests. If the image has a license that allows us to use it, we can upload it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:53, 26 April 2018 (EDT)

== Blocked me ==

Hey...
1)I thought that the ban meant that I was actually banned, meaning the site would prevent me from editing, so when I saw that I could edit, I thought it was ok... I did not know that you meant I should stay away from those topics. I simply thought the article used to many words, so I made it simple and more encyclopedic.

2)Your addition to my article is also written, don't get me wrong, a little too simply. I understand that editors here do not accept the scientific consensus on evolution, but at least you can write it more encyclopedically, like you state that scientists say that humans turned from dumb to intelligent and turned to farmers... That sounds like something a 12 year old would write... Can't you make it sound more scientific. I mean, disagree with it, but at least a)represent it correctly b)write it in a grown-up manner...

3)Why did you delete my "Gay Nazis" article... From what I understand, that is pseudo historical and Hitler hated gays and persecuted them?

By the way, thanks for a reasonable block time... I thought I might be blocked for another two years without a chance to explain myself --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 18:26, 27 April 2018 (EDT)
:1) Topic bans mean you're not allowed to edit a topic, not that you don't have the ability to do so. Besides, regardless of your apparent misunderstanding, you removed content that you disagreed with, something I told you repeatedly not to do.
:2) Disapproving of my wording isn't a good reason to remove the entire thing, especially considering that it is one of the few examples in the article that secularists hate. Besides, we're supposed to give reasonably simple explanations when writing (see [[Conservapedia:Guidelines#Style]]). My explanation is what the "scientific/historical consensus" essentially holds, and if that's the case, there's no reason to make it read like it was copied out of a prestigious journal. But regardless, I will see if there's any wording that I could change.
:3) It cited two explicitly left-wing sources that use this example to advocate for social-leftist policies and to criticize modern American conservatives. Surely there must be more apolitical sources out there about this? Also, regardless, it's good not to confuse Adolf Hitler's opposition to homosexuality (and the policies that came out of that) with homosexuality's presence in the Nazi Party. What I mean is that some high-ranking people in the Nazi Party, who helped found and build up the party (most notably Ernst Röhm), were homosexuals, and it's more complicated than "Nazis hated homosexuals."
:4) You're welcome. But also a warning: if you don't improve (and I hope you do improve), I will progressively increase the block lengths. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:55, 27 April 2018 (EDT)

::Ok, fine... But out of curiosity, does everyone on this site share your views on evolution, black holes, relativity, atheists etc? Is this site representative of Conservative (and/or Christian) values in general or a very specific type of sense? Do mainstream conservatives reference this site as an authority? And also, is there a rule (formal) where this has to be YEC or strictly Christian? Or is it an unspoken rule? Or does it depend on editors? I'm not trying to step on anyone's toes, I am genuinely interested. One more thing, you told me that I could NOT become an admin/sysop because there were very few, yet you clearly have more authority than me. You block and unblock me at will... How can I get that authority? Thanks! --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 23:39, 27 April 2018 (EDT)
:::No, not everyone shares CP's views on these issues -- in fact, we've had some liberals and atheists edit CP on relatively good terms. However, most editors here (including myself, though I'm agnostic on the relativity info and opposed to the CBP) share the vast majority of CP's stated views. As the owner of CP, Andy obviously has the right to choose what it says.
:::CP is representative of, for lack of a better term, what I would call "full conservatism", rather than cafeteria conservatism, where people pick and choose what parts of conservatism they support and what they don't. There are many people (especially in Europe, but also here) who say they are conservative but share many views and even many underlying presuppositions of the globalist Left. CP is pretty consistent with our support for limited/small government and staying true to the values of the founding fathers.
:::It really depends on who you mean when you say "mainstream conservative" -- that's a slippery term that can mean different things.
:::I'm not an admin -- I'm technically an assistant admin, since I have many but not all sysop rights. Even getting those took a while, and it's all at Andy's discretion. If you become a good editor who respects CP's perspective and does not challenge them in any way, you'll probably get some rights eventually. But you were just blocked twice, and you're still having problems learning how to edit CP without undermining its perspective -- I don't think you should count on being promoted anytime soon -- focus on other things here for now. CP has a significantly stricter sysop policy than "the other website", and for good reason -- we're the target of parodists and other people who regularly seek to vandalize and undermine us, and we want to ensure that we don't have to deal with a parodist sysop or anything like that. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:09, 28 April 2018 (EDT)

== Sorry ==

Sorry, you'll have to explain that more... What do I not do? --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 15:58, 28 April 2018 (EDT)

== Left Wing Sources ==

Hi... I do not usually look at the political leanings... I cite sources which I am SURE state something that is verifiable... Though, SPLC might be left leaning, I am SURE they can get Richard Spencer's birth date right... So I cited as a source for his birth date... The RWW, was a YOUTUBE video, that is the one I found first, I don't cite them to support left leaning politics, just facts that are verifiable by ANY honest person... I repeat SPLC might be left, but I am sure they can get a BIRTH DATE correctly! So that is what I cited, but do as you please! --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 16:22, 28 April 2018 (EDT)
:Surely, there are better sources that give Spencer's birthdate than SPLC. Also, those sources are not merely "left-leaning" (that designation more properly belongs to something like "The Atlantic") -- they are far-left partisan interest groups. They have no business being here. As a conservative encyclopedia, it makes sense to predominantly rely on conservative sources (or, at least, apolitical sources). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:27, 28 April 2018 (EDT)

== Arguing With You ==

Lol.. You are trying to get me to argue about evolution... but the problem is that if I do that I (and ONLY I, ie NOT both of us) will get blocked... It's kinda dirty that you on one hand basically provoke me to argument and if I do respond to your arguments you have the authority to block me... Assuming, this time you really were interested and WILL NOT block me for simply RESPONDING TO WHAT YOU TOLD ME... It is my humble opinion, based on what you have said here, you do not understand what The Theory of Evolution actually is... You seem to think that evolution says that monkeys turned human and that macro evolution means that a new organism appears over time, although macro evolution is THE SAME as micro evolution only on a larger time scale (yes as simple as that)... You have made it clear NOT to correct these errors (ERRORS) so I respect conservapedia rules... I respect what you told me and I keep away from stuff that we disagree on and keep contributing what I can in good faith...

Last time we got into this argument, I pointed out a really good and simple thing... I told you how we can see the familial pattern and the animals closer to us suffer more ailments like us... I also pointed out that experiments on animals closer to us help us find treatment, this was a good point to think about... Instead you chose to ignore it... So I did NOT want to get blocked, so I simply let it go (again, respecting your opinions)... Yet you show NONE of this respect calling 200 years of research "junk science" simply because you have been unable to process this information... @Karajou is YEC too and he thinks that evolution is fake, but he does not push it, and he is not calling me out on "believing" (or understanding, as I prefer) evolution... He simply keeps what he believes to himself... I can respect that!

I am ready to respond if you have questions... But only if I am guaranteed not to get blocked like last time (after I RESPONDED to QUESTIONS addressed to me FOR 2 years)! --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 20:40, 30 April 2018 (EDT)

:On a side note, I happen to know of a CP user who openly created a RW account. They were immediately interrogated on evolution as well.
:To the main issue, though, microevolution is not the same as macroevolution. You should really do some research on the subject. There is a significant difference between a change in fur length, and a change in species. That and other issues I disagree with you aside, I don't think you will or should get blocked simply for stating your opinion. As long as you continue to respect our polices regarding mainspace articles, you should be safe. (I don't know the details of the block, but I suspect there was more going on than just an angry response to your opposing opinion.)
:Anyway, I'm cutting in on this conversation, and I should really just let 1990'sguy speak for himself. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 22:00, 30 April 2018 (EDT)

::@Kingdamian1: I am '''not''' trying to argue with you about evolution. First off, I explicitly tried to end the discussion on Andy's talk page because I didn't want to use it arguing about political positions. Also, I was more focused on your political positions. We all know what you believe on evolution. I was tempted to ask clarifying questions about your ''political'' views, but I thought it wasn't worth it.
::Also, I actually don't care whether you believe in evolution. What I care about is the fact that you are apparently unable to put away your bias when editing CP. Your edits on the [[Potholer54]], [[Pseudohistory]], and [[Macroevolution]] inserted pro-evolution bias into CP (and keep in mind that your first edit after joining was creating a debate page on evolution where the first sentence insulted CP). As I noted elsewhere, you inserted bias on other topics in your edits. I don't care about your personal views on any of this (there are several CP users who believe in evolution) -- the fact that you are struggling to make your editing compatible with CP's point of view is a problem. Hopefully, you're learning.
::Claiming that I'm "''unable to process this information''" on evolution shows how little you actually know about me, and it's not a good strategy for staying on this site. I've thought a lot about this issue, and its strengthened my belief that the Bible is authoritative in all it says and that science affirms it as true (rather than Ephesians 6:14).
::DavidB4's comment above is correct, and to clarify to him, Kingdamian1 was blocked (by Karajou and me) for more than simply giving an opposing opinion. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:18, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
I CLEARLY have it on my page that I am a LIBERTARIAN... according to Conservapedia, that is what you would consider conservative, you keep telling me I admitted I was NOT conservative, where Conservapedia COUNTS Libertarianism as conservative... About evolution, I do NOT think you do not think about the subject, I think you look at it FROM A SINGLE point of view. I suspect that your view about evolution comes from strictly YEC... The first of your many mistakes, is saying that evolution=atheism, when in fact, OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of religious people agree with evolution. If you really are honest and interest in BOTH sides and NOT JUST ONE... there are MANY videos you can watch...

I have these 2 videos I usually recommend as they are NOT boring and fun and also explain things in easy to understand terms...
If you are truly interested in BOTH sides, try to seat through these two videos. Watch them in order (1st and then 2nd) as one is kind of answering the rebuttal that followed (the rebuttal you may have in mind when watching the first one)... If you can sit through both of them calmly without getting agitated (They are NOT boring and easy to understand, filled with humor), please, get back to me and tell me (after watching BOTH completely) how has your view changed about what evolution actually is!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RnygS7opCA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-ilMYc5xdQ

--[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 23:59, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
:KingDamian, you are bringing back an argument that has been refuted again and again and again. I've seen the videos you posted, and all it does is once more post an assumption that we must accept evolution as true based upon the word of a scientist who said so. So I'm going to ask you once, and I expect a straight up or down YES or NO answer, and it's based on the horse line at the end of video 2: DID YOU PHYSICALLY SEE THE ''EOHIPPUS'' CHANGE INTO THE ''EQUUS''? Keep in mind that I will not accept as an answer anyone pointing to the fossils themselves and saying we must assume a change took place. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 00:21, 1 May 2018 (EDT)

::Hi... No I have not seen it... But do you realize that if I had that would be THE SINGLE MOST POTENT evidence against evolution? Do you realize that? If I had actually observed the change that would be the single best evidence against evolution NOT for it... AGAINST IT! Do I make myself clear? --[[User:Kingdamian1|Kingdamian1]] ([[User talk:Kingdamian1|talk]]) 00:26, 1 May 2018 (EDT)
:::And there you go. You haven't seen it happen. And neither has every single scientist who ever lived; they didn't see it happen either. And we have to sit here and take their word - and your's, I might add - that evolution did take place because they eyeballed a bunch of fossils and ''said'' a change took place? We have to ''assume'' the change happened because these guys put these fossils in a nice little line-up? This website will not accept evolution based on hearsay evidence; we will call evolution what it actually is - JUNK SCIENCE; and we will post direct evidence that contradicts what these supporters say about it. Do I make myself clear? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 00:49, 1 May 2018 (EDT)

I am not here to argue... I like CP... I think you are worthy of a response, so please don't block me, Brian. Evolution has not been observed? Did you watch it from beginning to end? Evolution Has been observed... What you asked me was if we had observed a SPECIFIC species change over millions of years with my eyes... no I have not. But I have not observed ancient English evolve into modern english either, i have not observed Latin change into Italian either... and you have not observed George Washington s life... so according to your logic, all of this must be junk science too Kingdamian1 (talk) 02:30, 1 May 2018 (EDT)
:No, evolution has not been observed; you are arguing, and you have been arguing since day one, when you know full well where we stand on the subject. It's stopping now. And I'm not going to stand for someone who demands we look at pretty pictures just to get us to believe in an assumption; we might as well assume a monkey evolved from a living room wall because Little Billy drew one on it with his crayons. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 07:18, 1 May 2018 (EDT)
::I agree with Karajou and DavidB4 (on his own talk page). Kingdamian1, your comments show you think I'm some "low-information" person who lives in a bubble who will immediately change my mind once I'm "enlightened" (emphasis on the scare quotes) -- your assumption is complete BS (it shows you have no clue who I am). I tried to end a discussion on Andy's talk page and you brought it up again on my talk page (and I didn't even have to be present for it to heat up). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:32, 1 May 2018 (EDT)
:::Also, I just saw [http://www.psypost.org/2018/04/scientific-reasoning-ability-not-predict-acceptance-evolution-among-religious-individuals-study-finds-51082 this study published in a scientific journal] (by evolutionists, with an evolutionist perspective) that admits that there's no correlation between one's level of education or intelligence and their acceptance of evolution. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:21, 1 May 2018 (EDT)
::::Here's a link to an article responding to the "You don't understand real evolution" argument: [https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2015/09/24/do-we-have-misconceptions-about-evolution/] AiG Also has many articles on the many "proofs" of Evolution that have been used ad Nauseum to attack creationism, such as this one about bacteria: [https://answersingenesis.org/natural-selection/antibiotic-resistance/is-antibiotic-resistance-proof-of-evolution/] Here's and article explaining why the changes that are actually observed are not even really "evolution": [https://answersingenesis.org/natural-selection/is-natural-selection-the-same-thing-as-evolution/] And here's a comprehensive list of some of the most common attacks against Creationist assertions: [http://creationwiki.org/Index_to_Creationist_Claims_(Talk.Origins)]

::::The thing is, Creationists are very well aware of the weapons used against them by Evolutionists and one of the biggest mistakes evolutionists make is assuming that Evolutionists know some critical piece of information that is a "knockout punch" to Creationism, when in reality, Creationists are very well aware of these assertions and have written many articles responding to them. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 23:55, 20 May 2018 (EDT)

One more thing. As Frank Turek, one of the foremost Christian apologists, says "Science doesn't say anything, scientists do." Whenever anyone says "Science says that..." what it should really be is "based on their interpretations of certain observations, scientists conclude..." When people say "Science says..." they are committing the fallacy of reification. A detailed explanation can be found here: [https://answersingenesis.org/logic/the-fallacy-of-reification/] Despite KingDamian1's claims that he is "not trolling" he has carried a rather rude and condescending tone typical of those who attack Creationism. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 13:16, 21 May 2018 (EDT)

:As User:Kingdamian1 is a new user, I feel like he/she should given another chance, rather than indeffed. After all, he/she seems really interested in improving Conservapedia and creating articles here, as evidenced from his/her multiple comments even on Wikipedia, requesting his unblock and his/her desire to change. Would there be any objections to me unblocking him/her, with him/her understanding that he/she is topic-banned from any science-related articles (since this seems to be the reason other editors are upset with him/her)? I hope this helps. With regards, [[User:Anupam|Anupam]][[User talk:Anupam|Talk]] 04:07, 23 May 2018 (EDT)
::We gave him a chance, and he had more than NPOV problems (which were in and of themselves annoying, since it was my role to check his articles). I was really annoyed at his expectation that he could be instantly promoted to adminship status (and his apparent desperation at it, since he messaged several editors several times about it), when it is very hard and takes a long time even to become an assistant admin. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:35, 23 May 2018 (EDT)

== Question ==

How do you ping someone? (i responded to you on my talk page) [[User:Qw23|Qw23]] ([[User talk:Qw23|talk]]) 17:21, 8 May 2018 (EDT)
:I don't think CP has a ping option. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:23, 8 May 2018 (EDT)

== Hi ==

I'm new to this project and I do need help with this sentence:
{{Quote|[[Mike Pompeo]] and the Trump administration helped secure the release of Kim Dong Chul, Kim Hak Song and Tony Kim from North Korea.{{cite news|author=Andrew O'Reilly|coauthors=Elizabeth Llorente|title=Trump administration finds success in bringing home detained Americans|url=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/05/09/trump-administration-finds-success-in-bringing-home-detained-americans.html|work=[[Associated Press (AP)|Associated Press]]|publisher=[[Fox News Channel|Fox News]]|date=9 May 2018}} The three men described their “deep appreciation” for the Trump administration for help freeing them.{{Cite news|last=Dorell|first=Oren|title='God Bless America': Freed American prisoners thankful after being released from North Korea|url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/05/09/north-korea-kim-jong-un-free-3-american-citizens/582094002/|publisher=[[USA Today]]|date=9 May 2018|accessdate=10 May 2018|quote=We thank God, and all our families and friends who prayed for us and for our return}}</ref>}}

I believe it should go under [[Donald Trump achievements: Foreign policy]] but for 2018, which section do you believe it fits best under? Also, how do sources work here? --[[User:MaddieJ|MaddieJ]] ([[User talk:MaddieJ|talk]]) 15:14, 11 May 2018 (EDT)
:I already added this to the article, but I will look through your sources to see if more can be added. References could be surrounded by ref tags, like this : <code><nowiki><ref>[citation]</ref></nowiki></code> --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:29, 11 May 2018 (EDT)
::Hi [[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] I just want to let you know I'm glad I'm learning how to edit here. I just recently added the ISIS statements on [[Justin Trudeau]] and also mentioned [[Maxime Waters]] on this edit [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=2017_left-wing_violence&diff=prev&oldid=1422057]. I will allow you to monitor me if any edit I do is good or bad, and I will message you if I need anything. Regards.
--[[User:MaddieJ|MaddieJ]] ([[User talk:MaddieJ|talk]]) 10:03, 15 May 2018 (EDT)
:OK, thanks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:01, 15 May 2018 (EDT)

== A Message for that British Troll ==

Just in case (s)he makes another sock account, (s)he should know that campaign finance laws are unfair and D'Souza was directly targeted because of his unpopular opinions. Also, in the case of Roy Moore, there is only accusations and hearsay. That troll must also ignore the things that Leftist politicians did:

Bill Clinton: raped, molested and abused several women.

Hillary Clinton: Deflected responsibility for Bengazi, kept emails on her own private servers illegally, and covered up her husband's illicit affairs.

And I'm sure you could name more. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 09:21, 24 June 2018 (EDT)

== Conservapedia's Opinion on Joseph McCarthy ==

Hello,
I noticed that you reverted my edit to the Joseph McCarthy page. I made the edit to align with the views expressed in a news story I saw in the main page that described McCarthy as "two of a kind" with Robert Mueller. I feel that Conservapedia should be consistent, so I would appreciate it if the news story was removed/replaced, or the McCarthy article was changed.--[[User:Cetacean|Cetacean]] ([[User talk:Cetacean|talk]]) 18:35, 16 May 2018 (EDT)
:I added sources from a reliable conservative source backing up the article. Besides, the sentence as it is now is more neutrally-worded than your wording (I think even the person who posted the news blurb could agree with it). Bottom line: the article is fine, but it's not worth fighting what is a good analogy (considering that we have many leftist readers who hate McCarthy) on the news feed. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:48, 16 May 2018 (EDT)

== About draft ==

I just replied to your email. Its for here, not for Wikipedia. --MaddieJ 14:45, 18 May 2018 (EDT)

== [[Brian and Ed Krassenstein]] ==

I created the article [[Brian and Ed Krassenstein]]. If you would like to do improvements and better grammar to it, feel free to do so. --[[User:MaddieJ|MaddieJ]] ([[User talk:MaddieJ|talk]]) 14:38, 20 May 2018 (EDT)

== Barack Obama's achievements ==

See: [[Essay: President Barack Obama's achievements]]

It required a lot less work than your article [[Donald Trump achievements]]. :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:59, 29 May 2018 (EDT)

:Ha! And the little that Obama actually did is being wiped away by President Trump right as we speak! :) --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:22, 29 May 2018 (EDT)

==Finland==
I didnt find a way to send a message here so i assume, once its a wiki, that im supposed to edit this page when i want to contact you. Im not sure if i comment on the articles talk page, would it inform you?
I wanted to ask you about your edits of Finland's article, noticed few grammar mistakes that you corrected but didnt get why the day of independence cant be on the page? Then wanted to mention hat the the Lapps is a same name as Sami, so its like mention the same ethnic group twice.
Then i wondered why the population of the capital city shouldnt be mentioned?
The name of party Perussuomalaiset is in english "the Finns Party" not "True Finns".
There is also few smaller issues i will come back to them later. So would be nice to have a talk about these. Thanks. -Karjalainen

:First off, thank you for editing, and for messaging me here! The problem with the date of independence is that the infobox does not have a parameter (at least that I'm aware of) for the date of independence. This means that if you add the date of independence like what you did, the infobox will not actually show it to whoever is reading.

:I was not aware that the Lapps and Sami are the same. I will fix this. I will also fix the part about the Finns Party, since you're also right on this.

:I just didn't think it was necessary to list the population of Helsinki, especially since the population keeps changing and few editors are available to change it. But, if you want to add the population on the [[Helsinki]] article, you are free to do so.

:I noticed that you updated the economic information using Euros, rather than dollars. The reason why I changed it back is that most Conservapedia readers live in the United States, and the dollar is obviously what they use (and they probably don't know the exchange rate). We can mention the numbers in Euros, but we should also use dollars. Since I don't know the exchange rate, I did not add both.

:I hope all this helps! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:05, 22 July 2018 (EDT)

Thanks for answering.
I dont know if this info can be found but is CP based on the MediaWiki platfom? If yes, is it being updated when never versions come out?
Scrolling around some tutorial pages i found a template of countries where i took that "established" tag from, why does it exist if it doesnt show?
How do you edit the sources? I wanted to add but i dont see the other sources listed there?
Is there any plans to add to CP also other languages?
Is there a way to add both mi2/km2 or $/€ ? Would be nice to attrack also non-american readers and make this website even bigger and popular, maybe one day to replace wikipedia as the biggest.
I will write the issues concerning Finland on the talk page of Finland, please refer to there. -Karjalainen
:Sorry for the belated response. CP is based on the MediaWiki platform, but we use a different infobox than Wikipedia -- we didn't just copy and paste their infobox. We do update it, but I don't know how often.
:You can add sources by putting them in in between a tag like this <code><nowiki><ref>[source]</ref></nowiki></code>
:There are no plans to make CP in a different language that I am aware of, but I recommend asking Andy Schlafly, the site's owner here: [[User talk:Aschlafly]].
:Unfortunately, I do not know how to add both mi2/km2 or $/€ to the infobox.
:I will take a look at your message on the Finland talk page. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:23, 26 July 2018 (EDT)

== Five solas ==

Hearty thanks, 1990'sguy, for your assist with [[Five Solas]]! --[[User:Dataclarifier|Dataclarifier]] ([[User talk:Dataclarifier|talk]]) 14:44, 29 July 2018 (EDT)
:You're welcome! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:24, 29 July 2018 (EDT)
== requested article: Trumponomics ==

Article request: [[Trumponomics]]. It would be a nice complementary article to our [[Obamunism]] article. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:40, 5 August 2018 (EDT)
:I'll see what I can do. The [[Donald Trump achievements: Economic policy and labor]] (along with the trade sub-article) give a pretty good overview of his economic policies and the effects of those policies. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:48, 5 August 2018 (EDT)

==Contact==
I don't have yours, either. Use this: nobs315@gmail.com [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 23:07, 15 August 2018 (EDT)
:Mine is on my user page. You can verify there. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:18, 15 August 2018 (EDT)
==Capital Punishment==
By quoting Genesis 9:5 you are confusing what God is permitted to do versus what man may do and how man is to conduct himself in relation to his fellow man. It is also inaccurate to write that Jesus had nothing to say on the subject of capital punishment when he directly called into question the teaching of "eye for an eye."[[User:Tulip Festival|Tulip Festival]] ([[User talk:Tulip Festival|talk]]) 19:02, 17 August 2018 (EDT)
:No, Genesis 9:5-6 clearly says that the just punishment for taking a human life is that one's own life be taken. The proportionate and just punishment for murder is not jail time, nor community service. You're confusing what the Bible says regarding personal conduct and governmental policy, which is not personal. I recommend you read these two links: [https://www.gotquestions.org/death-penalty.html][https://answersingenesis.org/culture/the-death-penalty-wdjb-not-wwjd/] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:15, 17 August 2018 (EDT)

== HTTP -->HTTPS update ==

As you probably saw, I have moved this list to: [[User:DavidB4-bot/HTTPS URL update project]]. Thank you for your additions to the list...my apologies for adding your entries to the new page under may name. I hope you don't mind. Please feel free to continue adding to that list. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:45, 10 September 2018 (EDT)
:Thanks, and thanks for creating this list! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:49, 10 September 2018 (EDT)

== i try ==

More than a single sentence? Okay I can try. [[User:Knockforpeace|Knockforpeace]] ([[User talk:Knockforpeace|talk]]) 19:29, 15 September 2018 (EDT)
::Sorry i have a disorder. I will try to add more. [[User:Knockforpeace|Knockforpeace]] ([[User talk:Knockforpeace|talk]]) 19:39, 15 September 2018 (EDT)
:::See [[Conservapedia:How to create and maintain high-quality articles]] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:41, 15 September 2018 (EDT)
::::Tutoring avalible? By you? [[User:Knockforpeace|Knockforpeace]] ([[User talk:Knockforpeace|talk]]) 19:45, 15 September 2018 (EDT)
:::::Read and follow all of the links provided at the very top of this talk page. That will help you. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:09, 15 September 2018 (EDT)

== Logician account ==

It wasn’t a troll. Could you unblock it? Also, I removed Russell and Whitehead’s Principia Mathematica because it’s supposedly recommended reading. Thing is though that it’s such dense and complicated symbolic logic that no one would actually be able to understand it. It shouldn’t be recommended reading. Anyway, thanks. [[User:Anaxagoras|Anaxagoras]] ([[User talk:Anaxagoras|talk]]) 12:36, 20 September 2018 (EDT)
:I will unblock the account (though I will procedurally block the "Anaxagoras" one), but do not remove the Principia Mathematica book. It may be dense and complicated, and it may be to the extent that laypeople can't understand it, but it should remain for those who can understand it and who will find it useful. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:50, 20 September 2018 (EDT)

== Re: [[Kavanaugh smear]] article name change ==

A high proportion of CP's readers lean left. I changed the title because I thought the new title would engender less cognitive resistance to these readers and therefore be more likely to change their mind. In addition, I thought the new title sounded more encyclopedic.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:01, 23 September 2018 (EDT)
:That's understandable, but the article is not about opposition to Kavanaugh in general, it's specifically about the accusations made against him by left-wing people (as opposed to people criticizing him with his judicial philosophy being the stated reason). I'm not opposed to the page being moved, but it would be a title that makes it clear that the article is specifically about the attempted rape allegations against him. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:37, 23 September 2018 (EDT)
::The allegations against him are a joke. It is a reflection that the Democrats are a sad joke. All the corroborating witnesses say the events never happened.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:14, 24 September 2018 (EDT)
::::Exactly -- they're politically-motivated character assassination, nothing more. Thus, "Kavanaugh smear" is an appropriate title for the article. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:24, 24 September 2018 (EDT)

:::I have chimed in [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Kavanaugh_smear&curid=150814&diff=1450439&oldid=1450438 here]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 10:28, 24 September 2018 (EDT)

== Re: Switzerland vs. Britain ==

I believe you have visited Switzerland.

Below is a post I made to some left leaning atheists/evolutionists.

Gentlemen,

Don't think I haven't noticed your silence on Swiss trains being more timelier than British trains. What's your excuse for British trains being less timelier than Swiss trains?

Just admit it. The [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2013/06/switzerland-beacon-of-european.html industrious and wealthy Swiss], who have one of the highest rates of creationism in Europe, have a better, wealthier and more efficient society than post Darwinism Britain.

By the way, deny that Britain is the fountainhead of Darwinism and lose all credibility!

=== Main page right post in question ===

'''The British recently had a hard''' time getting their trains to run on time.[https://www.bbc.com/news/business-45572736]

According to [[Wikipedia]], "The Swiss rail network is noteworthy for its density, its coordination between services, its integration with other modes of transport, timeliness and a thriving domestic and trans-alp freight system."

Why can't [[Britain]], the fountainhead of [[Darwinism]], compete with [[Switzerland]] which is known for having one of the highest rates of [[creationism]] [[per capita]] in Europe?[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2013/06/switzerland-beacon-of-european.html][[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:01, 23 September 2018 (EDT)

:I have dual Swiss citizenship, so yes, I have visited the country multiple times. For the record, some (not many, though) of my relatives there are biblical creationists. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:37, 23 September 2018 (EDT)

==Formatting of quotes==

Thanks for the {{tl|cquote}} thing - I had forgotten that template. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 09:15, 26 September 2018 (EDT)
:You're welcome -- happy to help! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:21, 26 September 2018 (EDT)

== Trumpiantexan is a vandal ==

There's a Vandal called "Trumpiantexan" [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 18:53, 16 October 2018 (EDT)

== Why you said this so.. ==

...'' I don't know if his pro-Marx comments actually make him a communist. He's your typical globalist/liberal European uniparty elite.'' It is not mine definition but more a true fact. Regards, [[User:YortKeldher|YortKeldher]] ([[User talk:YortKeldher|talk]]) 11:15, 20 October 2018 (EDT)
:Most liberal/globalist European elites think the same way Juncker does. It would not be a good idea to label them all as communists. They have many of the same goals as communists, but there is some nuance between them (for example, different different tactics/methods, and Juncker and many of his friends are part of "liberal" or "center-right" parties, and seem to like big corporations). Either the "liberal" and "globalist" categories are enough (since liberals and globalists have many similarities with Marxists, like Juncker), or a new category is needed. I prefer the former, as it doesn't imply that liberalism and globalism are too different from Marxism and communism (different strands of the same thing, and the existing categories take the nuances into account). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:00, 20 October 2018 (EDT)

== Cesar Sayoc Article==
Wouldn’t a person with prudent ethics be willing to discuss whether or not a new article should be deleted prior to deleting said article? Cesar Sayoc is dominating the headlines of America yet you say he is a ‘nobody’? Based on your reasoning the [[Lee Harvey Oswald]] article should be deleted immediately.--[[User:JLind|JLind]] ([[User talk:JLind|talk]]) 17:01, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
:Lee Harvey Oswald has historical significance -- and fortunately, we get the facts right, that he was a left-wing Marxist (a fact many on the Left like to ignore). The Cesar Sayoc guy may be dominating headlines (of the left-wing mainstream media and the Left, which want to capitalize on this single incident of a mentally ill man and put a rug over the [[Left-wing violence in the Trump era|many examples of leftist violence in the past couple years]]) at the moment, but his 15 minutes of fame will soon end and his 58-year jail sentence will soon begin. I let the other administrators know of the dispute over this page, and they will decide soon. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:08, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
::I got the facts right in the Sayoc article, I hope you are not implying otherwise. I’d like to think the Best of the Public could create an article free from liberal bias. Alas, it looks like the readers of Conservapedia will have to suffice with the liberal slant since you are keen to prevent this educational resource from telling the truth. Sad.--[[User:JLind|JLind]] ([[User talk:JLind|talk]]) 17:35, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
:::All the facts except that he wasn't a bomber. ''Per the Associated Press'': {{quotebox|7:50 p.m. A law enforcement official says tests have determined that a powder found inside an envelope delivered to CNN along with a pipe bomb was harmless. The official wasn’t authorized to discuss the investigation publicly and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity. New York City’s police commissioner said earlier Wednesday that the package sent to CNN’s offices in Manhattan contained a live explosive and an envelope containing white powder. The FBI said the package was similar to explosives sent to former President Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, former Attorney General Eric Holder and billionaire George Soros. The package sent to CNN was addressed to former CIA Director John Brennan, a frequent guest on the channel. The official says that parcel contained no note or claim of responsibility. — Tom Hays Associated Press, October 24, 2018}} [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 17:41, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
::A man sends bombs through the mail, and in your opinion, he is not a bomber? The director of the FBI is quoted as saying the devices were ‘…not hoax devices’. What, exactly, is your definition of a bomber?--[[User:JLind|JLind]] ([[User talk:JLind|talk]]) 18:17, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
:::They were too hoax devices. You have terrible reading comprehension. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 01:44, 28 October 2018 (EDT)

Why did you block me? All I did was state the obvious fact that Joe Manchin is a DINO. he voted to confirm Kavanaugh, confirm Gorsuch, and supports the coal industry. He's even more right-wing than Lisa Murkowski! [[User:Libertarianmoderate2|Libertarianmoderate2]] ([[User talk:Libertarianmoderate2|talk]]) 17:50, 28 October 2018 (EDT)
:Manchin lives in a state that voted for Trump by 40 points, and he knows it. He's appealing to the people of his state so he doesn't alienate them. Take a broader view, rather than look at the narrow set of issues where he made a big deal of supporting right-of-center people on -- for example, notice how he's voted against many of Trump's conservative circuit court nominees and several cabinet nominees. Also, when there were narrow votes for any nominee or bill, Manchin voted with Democrats -- he only voted with Republicans when his vote wasn't anywhere close to affecting the vote's outcome. And his support for Planned Parenthood is pretty extreme for a red-state Democrat who has claimed to be pro-life. I stand entirely by my reverts, and CP has never considered Murkowski a conservative, AFAIK. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:44, 28 October 2018 (EDT)
::And look at his record with the 2A -- he has a "D" rating from the NRA, a moderate (as opposed to GOA) pro-gun organization -- several Democrats even have better ratings than him.
::In short, Manchin only votes with conservatives in high profile votes when his vote is not a deciding factor in whether the bill/nominee will pass. He's not a conservative, and he's in line with the Democrat Party. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:54, 28 October 2018 (EDT)

Sorry about that. In the meantime, I'm a very skilled wiki writer who wrote for Wikivoyage for a while, and my skills are exactly what this site needs. I hope you can overlook this disagreement. [[User:Libertarianmoderate2|Libertarianmoderate2]] ([[User talk:Libertarianmoderate2|talk]]) 19:58, 29 October 2018 (EDT)

==Pinging==
I tried to ping you, but it didn't work. I typed {d{Ping|1990'sguy}d} (remove the d's, I added them here so it comes out as text). [[User:Libertarianmoderate2|Libertarianmoderate2]] ([[User talk:Libertarianmoderate2|talk]]) 20:26, 29 October 2018 (EDT)

== Troll ==

Eleonóra Dubiczki is defacing the page on Rightpedia. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 14:47, 3 November 2018 (EDT)
:There's another one named Fiala, probably a sock of the same person. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 14:50, 3 November 2018 (EDT)

==UN migrant treaty==
We're gonna need a [[UN Migrant Treaty]] page. To begin, we need a thumbnail sketch what it is, then a list whose all opposed. Do you have any info to help start? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 15:46, 22 November 2018 (EST)
:Yes -- or [[UN Global Compact on Migration]] or something like that. Several countries have already said they will leave, so it will take some effort to track them all down. I can help. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:46, 22 November 2018 (EST)
::Coincidentally, I found this article giving a good list: [https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/11/22/world-follows-trumps-lead-nations-abandon-legal-framework-building-un-migration-pact/] I can create and/or expand the article, if you want. I think the biggest issue will be what the title should be. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:50, 22 November 2018 (EST)
:::I'd suggest UN Migrant Treaty, then bolden the formal title; its already being discussed as "the [[migrant treaty]]". Moves & redirects can be done as needed. But both the [[European migrant crisis]] and [[2018 Migrant caravan]] already need minor subsections or references to it. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 19:53, 22 November 2018 (EST)
::::I started it. I will do more work tomorrow, if I have time. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:56, 22 November 2018 (EST)

==Wanna chat?==
Hey, I'm curious if I could get to know you. I like your edits. [[User:AnnBelleAldaco96|AnnBelleAldaco96]] ([[User talk:AnnBelleAldaco96|talk]]) 22:00, 28 November 2018 (EST)

:You can either contact me through my CP email address or through this talk page. I won't reveal/discuss personal/private info about myself (obviously), but I'd be happy to talk. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:32, 28 November 2018 (EST)

== Does CP hate video games? ==

I think the tone of the video games article is a little too critical. If you truly are a 1990's guy, then you probably grew up with video games too. You probably also remember the controversy of video game violence back in the 90s too (perhaps there should be a section in the article on that). Ironically, the members of Congress who pushed for potential legislation were two Democrat senators, Joe Lieberman and Herb Kohl. I was, along with my fellow kids of the 90s, booing and jeering at the old people who knew nothing about video games criticizing our hobby. There is a reason why the article "Essay:Greatest Conservative Video Games" exists. Most of the people who criticize video games are older people who didn't grow up with them. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 11:15, 29 November 2018 (EST)

:To be clear, the 1990s was the decade I was born in, so unfortunately, I don't have firsthand knowledge of the controversies of that decade. I played some video games, though not as much as other people, and only on my Gameboy and Nintendo DS, and I lost all interest by the time I turned, roughly, 13.

:I have nothing against video games in and of themselves, and I still think positively of some of the games I played. However, I think many of the criticisms of video games -- such as encouraging obesity and staying indoors rather than going outside -- are valid. Also, video game addition appears to be a real problem: [https://www.foxnews.com/tech/girl-9-sent-to-rehab-after-refusing-to-stop-playing-fortnite-wetting-herself][https://www.foxnews.com/health/compulsive-video-game-playing-now-qualifies-as-mental-health-condition] Those problems probably aren't inherent to video games, though -- they can and are used in good, harmless ways too, as I have experienced. That said, it's not a topic that I have strong feelings on.

:About the article itself, it is Andy's choice to have the article the way it is. There is nothing I can do about it -- it would have to be something you would have to discuss with him if it should be changed. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:20, 29 November 2018 (EST)

== Explaination of edits to the page regarding Thomas Aquinas and theft ==

Did Aquinas endorse theft?

Without the full quote from the Summa Theologica it would appear so, However:
Whether it is lawful to steal through stress of need?
Objection 1: It would seem unlawful to steal through stress of need. For penance is not imposed except on one who has sinned. Now it is stated (Extra, De furtis, Cap. Si quis): "If anyone, through stress of hunger or nakedness, steal food, clothing or beast, he shall do penance for three weeks." Therefore it is not lawful to steal through stress of need.

Objection 2: Further, the Philosopher says (Ethic. ii, 6) that "there are some actions whose very name implies wickedness," and among these he reckons theft. Now that which is wicked in itself may not be done for a good end. Therefore a man cannot lawfully steal in order to remedy a need.

Objection 3: Further, a man should love his neighbor as himself. Now, according to Augustine (Contra Mendac. vii), it is unlawful to steal in order to succor one's neighbor by giving him an alms. Therefore neither is it lawful to steal in order to remedy one's own needs.

On the contrary, In cases of need all things are common property, so that there would seem to be no sin in taking another's property, for need has made it common.

I answer that, Things which are of human right cannot derogate from natural right or Divine right. Now according to the natural order established by Divine Providence, inferior things are ordained for the purpose of succoring man's needs by their means. Wherefore the division and appropriation of things which are based on human law, do not preclude the fact that man's needs have to be remedied by means of these very things. Hence whatever certain people have in superabundance is due, by natural law, to the purpose of succoring the poor. For this reason Ambrose [*Loc. cit., A[2], OBJ[3]] says, and his words are embodied in the Decretals (Dist. xlvii, can. Sicut ii): "It is the hungry man's bread that you withhold, the naked man's cloak that you store away, the money that you bury in the earth is the price of the poor man's ransom and freedom."

Since, however, there are many who are in need, while it is impossible for all to be succored by means of the same thing, each one is entrusted with the stewardship of his own things, so that out of them he may come to the aid of those who are in need. Nevertheless, if the need be so manifest and urgent, that it is evident that the present need must be remedied by whatever means be at hand (for instance when a person is in some imminent danger, and there is no other possible remedy), then it is lawful for a man to succor his own need by means of another's property, by taking it either openly or secretly: nor is this properly speaking theft or robbery.

Reply to Objection 1: This decretal considers cases where there is no urgent need.

Reply to Objection 2: It is not theft, properly speaking, to take secretly and use another's property in a case of extreme need: because that which he takes for the support of his life becomes his own property by reason of that need.

Reply to Objection 3: In a case of a like need a man may also take secretly another's property in order to succor his neighbor in need.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/sum322.htm

"In cases of need all things are common property, so that there would seem to be no sin in taking another's property, for need has made it common" is not in the Summa Theogica and is therefore inaccurate and misleading. The quote should be:

"It is not theft, properly speaking, to take secretly and use another's property in a case of extreme need: because that which he takes for the support of his life becomes his own property by reason of that need."

I will therefore change the quote to the correct quotation. {{unsigned|JPConservative}}

:Look again -- both quotes are there, and they're quoted accurately. The article is correct in saying that Aquinas does not take a strong position on property rights as other conservatives (including John Locke, the intellectual father of the founding fathers) held. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:39, 11 December 2018 (EST)

The quotes used misses out that Thomas Aquinas was referring to those who might die of starvation, not merely out of need. The original quotes in the article imply that he supported "Socialism" which is not so. Aquinas did take a strong stand on property rights, he made one exception, those who face death can take some food (and by implication, water & clothing.) This is the interpretation that the Catholic Church uses and is supported by the majority of Thomists. {{unsigned|JPConservative}}

:Once again, the quote mentioning hunger was already quoted in the paragraph. Also, the paragraph doesn't say that he supported socialism, but that it represented a slippery slope. Either way, his position is weaker than that of some other intellectuals who wrote on property rights. I might (possibly) be OK with a single short sentence/phrase saying that overall he supported property rights, if you can back it up, but the specific info you're citing does not back it up. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:03, 11 December 2018 (EST)

Yes hunger is mentioned, but the meaning has been distorted, I can assure you that having studied the Summa Theologica in a monastery guided by a Thomist professor that the section on Politic Philosophy is wrong. It is not a correct interpretation of Aquinas's political views. Thomas Aquinas clearly upholds property rights in the Summa Theologica:

I answer that, Two things are competent to man in respect of exterior things. One is the power to procure and dispense them, and in this regard it is lawful for man to possess property. Moreover this is necessary to human life for three reasons. First because every man is more careful to procure what is for himself alone than that which is common to many or to all: since each one would shirk the labor and leave to another that which concerns the community, as happens where there is a great number of servants. Secondly, because human affairs are conducted in more orderly fashion if each man is charged with taking care of some particular thing himself, whereas there would be confusion if everyone had to look after any one thing indeterminately. Thirdly, because a more peaceful state is ensured to man if each one is contented with his own. Hence it is to be observed that quarrels arise more frequently where there is no division of the things possessed.

The second thing that is competent to man with regard to external things is their use. In this respect man ought to possess external things, not as his own, but as common, so that, to wit, he is ready to communicate them to others in their need. Hence the Apostle says (1 Tim. 6:17, 18): "Charge the rich of this world . . . to give easily, to communicate to others," etc.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/sum322.htm

Yes, I can back up my claims. The quoted I cited are from authorized sites. I have used the quotes as written and provided links, so please explain how I am wrong?

Here is additional proof that Thomas Aquinas upheld property rights https://tifwe.org/five-insights-about-private-property-from-aquinas/
{{unsigned|JPConservative}}

I have added further material to refute the idea that the writings of Thomas Aquinas can be used to support Socialism. If you edit or remove it, please first demonstrate that I am wrong. Thank you & God Blessings be with you.

==just an idea...==
What do you think of coining the term [[anti-constitutionalist]] to describe people who oppose constitutionalists? People who oppose free speech, gun rights, due process, etc. There certainly are a lot of them in the upcoming session of Congress.

First, we'd need a working definition, then a list of members with their stated positions. The idea may catch on. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 23:52, 12 December 2018 (EST)

:I like it. What do you think of a definition along the lines of "someone who opposes the rights contained in the Constitution, and by extension, the United States as envisioned by the founding fathers"? This is just a draft proposal, the wording wouldn't be final. Maybe we should note that the Constitution reflects a classical liberal philosophy, showing that these "liberals" reject liberalism? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:06, 13 December 2018 (EST)
::Yes. In various articles [[Justice Kavanaugh]] is refered to as a constitutionalist, so I suspect we'll be hearing more of term in the future.

::Now, advocates for Amending the Constitution wouldn't automatically fall into this category. People who want to abolish the Electoral College or hold a constitutional convention, for example - if that is their single issue. I'm thinking of people who want outright repeal of the 2nd Amendment, advocate free speech suppression and censorship, disrespect due process and the presumption of innocence as in the Kavanaugh and Judge Moore cases, or ignore the 4th Amendment violations of the FBI & DOJ. Anyone who holds two or more of these positions could be considered an anti-constitutionalist.

::One more thing, I've discovered that whoever is among the first to create a page with a new term entering the public lexicon, Google algorithms favor and can hold a high ranking for years. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 00:26, 13 December 2018 (EST)

:::About the Electoral College and Con Con distinction, it think that's fair, and it would be good to at least make a distinction between the two. We would need to make this clear to readers, though. That said, one could argue that wanting to change the Constitution on something as important as the Electoral College also a rejection of the U.S. as envisioned by the founding fathers. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:46, 13 December 2018 (EST)
::::That's right. That's why I'm thinking two or more. Somebody who wants to abolidh the electoral college and repeal gun rights, then refuses due process and presumption of innocence, and is okay with illegal domestic spying, is an anti-constitutionalist. Throw in support for [[Medicare for All]] and they call themselves a progressive or Democratic Socialist, it's pretty clear they want to tear down the two party system. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 21:34, 13 December 2018 (EST)
::::We shouldn't spell out our criteria on the page before naming names, and if we put everybody on the list who belongs, it would be too long and nobody would read it. We simply need a paragraph or two or three to define in philosophical terms what makes someone opposed to our system of government, and then in the next section spell out a few leaders what positions they've taken to supoort the label, Pelosi, Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez, and other high profile figures we can cite. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 21:40, 13 December 2018 (EST)
:::::The draft below looks great -- and it accurately describes the modern Left. Is "collective responsibility" (#6) the left's counter to states' rights? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 06:26, 14 December 2018 (EST)
::::::On number 6 that's right. I don't recall the exact language on Form 1040 related to the Obamacare individual mandate. I should dig it out and tweak it.
::::::Anyway we got enough to get started. It'll change over time. We should be on the look out for buzzwords and phrases that help define an Anti-Constitutionalist.
::::::As the 2020 election approaches, rather than a long list on the page, we can just create a Category. And the beauty of this idea is, in keeping with liberalism, they don't have to adhere to a strict set of principles, all they have to do is exhibit a few characteristics. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 16:16, 14 December 2018 (EST)

===Pattern===
I googled around and found most definitions of constitutionalist are cut n pastes of each other. Some have lists of principles, but remember, anti-constitutionalists have no principles, they have characteristics. To be an anti-constitutionalist, you don't have to conform or adhere to a list of principles, you just have to resemble a few characteristics.

This came ftom the Urban Dictionary. So all we need to do is tweak the language away from it's original documents or meaning into something other, or it's opposite:

Constitutionalist
1. An individual that shares the views of the political theories of John Locke and the founders of the American republic, that government can and should be legally limited in its powers, and that its authority or legitimacy depends on its observing these limitations.

2. An individual who believes in the basic standards and ideals are to be consistent with an overriding rule of law or ethics.

The 7 principles of a Constitutionalist:

1. Life: For all human beings, from conception to natural death;

2. Liberty: Freedom of conscience and actions for the self-governed individual;

3. Family: One husband and one wife with their children as divinely instituted;

4. Property: Each individual's right to own and steward personal property without government burden;

5. Constitution: and Bill of Rights interpreted according to the actual intent of the Founding Fathers;

6. States' Rights: Everything not specifically delegated by the Constitution to the federal government, nor prohibited by the Constitution to the states, is reserved to the states or to the people;

7. American Sovereignty: American government committed to the protection of the borders, trade, and common defense of Americans, and not entangled in foreign alliances.

===Draft 1===
Here's a start. Now remember. we sort of want to use their own langusge, logic, meaning, and reasoning, so when they read it, they're looking in a mirror. Characteristic #2 needs some work. Feel free to change or suggest anything.

Anti-Constitutionalists

Persons who reject the views of the political theories of [[John Locke]] and the founding fathers of the American republic, that government can and should be limited in its powers. Anti-Constitutionalists believe in the supremacy of federal power over individual rights.

2. Persons who believe in the basic standards and ideals are to be consistent with [[progressive]] values and the rule of law.

The 7 characteristics of many anti-constitutionalists:

1. Life: For all human beings, and a [[pro-abortion|right to choice]].

2. Liberty: Freedom of conscience and actions to suppress [[fascist]] ideals;

3. Family: Equal rights to marry anyone among 58 known genders;

4. Diversity: Out of one, many.

5. Constitution: Outdated and written by white male slaveghlolders;

6. Collective Responsibilty: A duty not a choice;

7. Sovereignty: The universal power, authority, and kinship of the human species.

==Can you unblock me please?, I want to improve Dirty War pg==

Got your message loud and clear and want to keep creating pages for Conservapedia but only under 1 account name. Thanks again.--[[User:Raymondo|Raymondo]] ([[User talk:Raymondo|talk]]) 08:56, 13 December 2018 (EST)
:The account you used to write on my talk page is unblocked. You can use that one. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:34, 13 December 2018 (EST)

Thanks for unblocking me, greatly appreciated.--[[User:Raymondo|Raymondo]] ([[User talk:Raymondo|talk]]) 07:53, 25 December 2018 (EST)

Hello again, can we change the following page title [[Battles of Mount Kent and Top Malo House]] to [[Battle of Mount Kent and Top Malo House]], remove the "s" from battles, once again thanking you very much and all the best in the new year.--[[User:Raymondo|Raymondo]] ([[User talk:Raymondo|talk]]) 20:17, 25 December 2018 (EST)
:Hello, please request this change at [[User talk:DavidB4]], as I currently do not have move powers. He will move the page for you. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:25, 25 December 2018 (EST)

::Done as requested: [[Battle of Mount Kent and Top Malo House]] --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 01:14, 26 December 2018 (EST)

== Appeal ==

Hi. I noticed I can't edit anything to appeal my block [[Special:Contribs/Edenfaithful|here]]. I'm sorry if you thought my edits were trolling; they weren't. AOC does actually want a government-enforced redistribution of wealth via her universal basic income ideas and other concepts. I won't use this account to do anything other than appeal; it's not meant to be harmful. I want to contribute. [[User:Tempacctformessage|Tempacctformessage]] ([[User talk:Tempacctformessage|talk]]) 13:38, 25 December 2018 (EST)
:I have unblocked your account. In the future, please do not make any edits that could be seen as trolling or parody -- your edits on AOC may have been true, but this is an encyclopedia -- all wording should be encyclopedic. If you're going to add particularly strong language like that, it should at least be cited by a good conservative news source. Otherwise, it's personal commentary, which should stay on your user page or an "essay" page. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:37, 25 December 2018 (EST)

== Internet control ==

Hello, 
I have a random question which I was wondering if you might know the answer to. When Obama was in office, he released control of the Internet to the W3C (an international organization). In the opinion of many conservatives including myself, this was a big mistake. I since heard in vague terms that Trump had somehow put a stop to the transfer and retained at least partial control. However, my research attempts have turned up little of value. Do you know if this is something Trump has done, and if so, to what extent? Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 19:00, 8 January 2019 (EST)
:I remember noting that there was a bit of a controversy between Ted Cruz and the Commerce Department nominee most in charge of this topic area, but the nominee agreed to "look into it" (whatever that means): [http://thehill.com/policy/technology/359325-trump-pick-confirmed-to-telecommunications-federal-agency 1],[https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/23/trump-commerce-pick-internet-oversight-reversal-305178 2],[http://thehill.com/policy/technology/370426-trump-commerce-pick-told-lawmakers-he-would-look-at-reversing-obama-move-on 3] I looked into it further, and found these opinion articles ([http://netpolicynews.com/index.php/89-r/997-trump-wants-u-s-to-take-over-internet-governance-like-putin 1],[https://lawreview.unl.edu/Should-the-U.S.-Reclaim-Control-of-the-Internet 2]), which indicate that nothing was done, though I also found [https://regmedia.co.uk/2018/06/05/ntia-internet-policy-noi-jun18.pdf this notice in the Federal Register] where the Commerce Department asked what should be done with the transfer. The government is looking into it, but so far, I have not found anything saying that an official policy change has been enacted.
:I am very interested in this, and I think whatever decision the government makes, it will be relevant to the [[Donald Trump achievements]] series -- so if you find anything else, or if the government makes a decision in the future, please let me know. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:27, 8 January 2019 (EST)

::"Looking into it...." I feel so much better now. I thought I probably would have heard something if action had been taken, but figured I'd check with you. I will keep my ears, and if I hear anything, will let you know. I expect it would be relevant to the achievements pages, hopefully in a positive way. Thank you for the information! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 19:33, 8 January 2019 (EST)
:::I suppose I must admit that one of the main arguments from the left is true...we were not evenly allocating IP addresses. However, if we invented the internet, do we really need to evenly distribute them? Using Network Address Translation, IPv4 has worked quite well. As we began running out of addresses even then, IPv6 was set up in some parts of the world, which gives us MANY more addresses to work with. Should everyone be switched over to IPv6? Yes, probably. However, just giving away all control of the internet to an organization which may as well be a U.N. of sorts can't be a good solution. I also hope the W3C doesn't start setting up new root servers in more...questionable locations. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 19:39, 8 January 2019 (EST)
::::The Left and globalists don't want the U.S. to be dominant, independent/sovereign, or self-sufficient, so that explains why they chose to give away our control of the internet to a "fair" international organization that socialist, Islamic, anti-American, and autocratic governments can control just as much, if not more, than our country. Globalists and the Left would prefer that the U.S. just follows along with the "rules-based international order" rather than take leadership and go its own way. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:36, 8 January 2019 (EST)

== Seraphim 2 ==

What led you to believe this is a sock account? [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] ([[User talk:DMorris|talk]]) 15:48, 23 January 2019 (EST)
:It was created during a vandalism spree, and once or twice, the vandal(s) created two accounts simultaneously and started vandalizing through both of them. This account was created at the same time as another account (can't remember which one) which began continuing the vandalism, appearing to follow the trend. Thus, I blocked the other account and then blocked this one before (I assumed) it started vandalizing. If it doesn't seem suspicious to you, then please unblock it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:04, 23 January 2019 (EST)
::I would try to avoid doing that in absence of evidence because there have been cases on other wikis when innocent parties have been blocked like this, but I'm not going to undo the block at this time. [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] ([[User talk:DMorris|talk]]) 17:23, 23 January 2019 (EST)

== Your wiki work on Trump was alluded to in a web article ==

Your wiki work on Trump was alluded to in a web article. See: http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2018/11/losing-dignity-still-losing/

It is a pretty well read website as can be seen here: https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/quadrant.org.au

I found out about the citation using this free tool: https://muckrack.com [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:53, 29 January 2019 (EST)

:Great -- it's an indirect allusion, but it works. Have you seen these mentions of my [[Donald Trump achievements]] article? [https://stonecoldtruth.com/despite-continuous-attacks-trump-getting-the-job-done/ One from Roger Stone] and [https://twitter.com/mitchellvii/status/881978883771445248 another by Bill Mitchell], who Trump has retweeted in the past. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:52, 29 January 2019 (EST)
::Thanks for sharing with me those mentions of your article.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:47, 29 January 2019 (EST)

== Lou Dobbs ==

Hey, 1990's guy, check out [[Lou Dobbs]]' Conservapedia article: He himself claims he is an "independent populist". Lots of people who do news reporting and support Trump call themselves independent like [[Jedidiah Bila]], [[Alex Jones]] or were Democrat, like [[Harlan Hill]]. We really ought to respect their wishes, don't you think? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 00:11, 8 February 2019 (EST)
:First off, self-descriptions are meaningless. Dobbs can call himself whatever he wants, but it's his actual positions that matter -- and those positions are, without a doubt, conservative. There are many [[token conservative]]s who align 80-100% with globalist Democrats but still call themselves "conservative" -- but we shouldn't add them to your essay because of what they call themselves.
:Also, you may be confusing political party affiliation with political philosophy -- Dobbs isn't a Republican (maybe he rejoined, IDK), but he left because of the Bush Administration's liberal policies on issues such as immigration. It's his political views that matter, not his political party, and Dobbs's positions are conservative, meaning we can safely call him a conservative. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:27, 8 February 2019 (EST)
::I'm a bit embarrassed that I took Lou Dobbs' self-description "independent" to mean non-conservative instead of non-Republican, so not only is what you say correct, but it turns out I've never even heard him deny he's a conservative, here or elsewhere. I don't know if you know this, but coincidentally, I added Lou Dobbs' name to the TCOT list myself in April 2017. But I removed it the same day because of the "independent" label I saw mentioned in his Conservapedia entry soon after I had added his name to the list.

::I'm still concerned, though—Lou Dobbs lives in the liberal stronghold, New York City, and there are cowards that live there who can be vicious if they think they have an easy target.

::Here's something else that's funny; [[Jedidiah Bila]] also called herself an independent (in November 2016) and also lives in New York City. And I delisted her for the very same reasons I used for removing Lou Dobbs' name. I just now checked to see if I could find whether she ever called herself a conservative or just an independent, and, long story short, she labelled herself as conservative in September 2017!

::So, in a way, your diligence has rescued Jedidiah Bila from obscurity in the "conservative world"! But I'm still interested in what you think about Lou Dobbs. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 02:20, 9 February 2019 (EST)
:::Basically, there are two types of Republicans, National Republicans involved in federal issues, and Independent Republicans - people involved in local and state issues, like school board elections and legislative races. The IRs are moreless divorced from the federal issues, usually because they just aren't interested in what the RNC is doing, occassionally over a policy dispute. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 04:07, 9 February 2019 (EST)
::::Dobbs is a TV host -- he has to live in New York City (or nearby) as a result. He has company though, with Trump, Hannity, and others. I think it's obvious Tucker Carlson is a conservative, but he lives in Washington, D.C., where only 4% of the population voted for Trump. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:29, 9 February 2019 (EST)

==ESchlafly==

I get the name "Schlafly" being suspect, but Andy doesn't have a monopoly on it. I say assume good faith for now, unless a senior admin says otherwise. [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] ([[User talk:DMorris|talk]]) 20:41, 12 February 2019 (EST)
:Fair enough. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:54, 12 February 2019 (EST)

::Technically, the username is "ESchafly," which is slightly different anyway. In any case, for an apparently good faith editor, perhaps autoblock should be disabled if they are blocked on grounds of their username alone. Anyway, I was also suspicious...no harm done. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 13:51, 13 February 2019 (EST)

==Thank you==
Thank you for tidying my attempt at an external link in the article on the [[British Psychological Society]]. It is appreciated. [[User:Carltonio|Carltonio]] ([[User talk:Carltonio|talk]]) 12:33, 18 March 2019 (EDT)
:You're welcome. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:57, 18 March 2019 (EDT)

== Christchurch: terrorism? ==

Hi there! Thanks for your frequent positive contributions to Conservapedia. I'm new here so still trying to learn the ropes.

I feel like the use of "Direct Action" in the leading paragraph of the [[New Zealand mosque shooting]] article, rather than "terrorism", is euphemstic and betrays the principles put forth on [[Conservapedia:How_Conservapedia_Differs_from_Wikipedia]]. Would a similar change be appropriate on the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]] page? {{unsigned|Liberalnutjob}}
:I'm not opposed to labeling it a terrorist attack -- the article uses the term several times, including through some edits I made to the article. I'm not sure the CP article you linked is particularly relevant here since the Wikipedia article does call it a terrorist attack in the intro (just as we do in the body).

:I recommend you message [[User talk:RobSmith]], who is the main author of the article and who inserted the "direct action" link in the intro. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:17, 6 April 2019 (EDT)

==Hello!==
:Hey dude! I know you from Wikipedia! I'm here for anti-vandalism work. I am an administrator from [http://deletionpedia.org/en/Special:UserRights/DW Deletionpedia.org]. [[User:DW|DW]] ([[User talk:DW|talk]]) 13:29, 9 April 2019 (EDT)
::Hello -- what is your Wikipedia account name, if you don't mind me asking? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:57, 9 April 2019 (EDT)
== Please create these articles ==

1990'sguy, please create these article and I will tell you why later:

*[[Top 10 achievements of Donald Trump]]

*[[Donald Trump achievements before presidency]]

*[[List of Trump's accomplishments in 2019]]

*[[List of Trump's accomplishments in 2018]]

*[[Donald Trump achievements in his life]]

Also, if this article can be improved, please do it: [[Trump administration]]

I hope this helps.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:52, 10 April 2019 (EDT)

:I will try to create at least some of these when I get time. The two "life achievements" articles seem like good ideas, though the 2018 and 2019 articles would be problematic, particularly with fitting them into my article series which is not based on year. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:36, 10 April 2019 (EDT)

== Unnecessary? ==

My prefix to [[liberal]], describing that kind of person as a United States resident, was included because it's an exclusively U.S. term. In other countries, liberals are known by other names, such as the Labor party in the UK. My edit was not unnecessary, and I would appreciate it if you could please let it stand.

I took a similar issue with the statement that "most individuals are overweight" in every article dealing with obesity. Nationally, this is true, but, globally, it is false. There are more Asians than there are Americans in the world, and 2 billion of them are starving, outnumbering America's obese population 10 to 1. {{unsigned|MacTavish}}

:I oppose changing it back, and there's a big difference between the exact definition of certain terminology and health statistics.

:Labour Party is a political party, and CP's "liberal" page refers to the ideology. I travel to (continental) Europe frequently, and the word "liberal" is increasingly meaning the same thing as in the U.S. while "conservative" increasingly means something similar to the U.S.

:More importantly, the CP article clearly defines what a liberal is, and that's what matters. Every political term like this has multiple meanings, depending on who's doing the explaining. The best solution to the problem of the same words having many different meanings is to clearly define the word and create articles such as the [[classical liberalism]] or [[liberal conservatism]] articles. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:59, 15 April 2019 (EDT)

== Bible ==

I note that you believe that "As unpopular it is to believe this in our present culture, I know that the Bible contains absolutely no errors or mistakes". Last night I was listening to an interesting talk on the radio about [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+8%3A3-11&version=ESV John 8:3-11], and this has led me to pondering this morning [https://www.openbible.info/topics/stoning_to_death what the Bible has to say about stoning people to death]. My question is how can anyone, in light of this, believe that the Bible is always to be taken literally? I accept that the Bible contains invaluable spiritual truths but I also consider that it is the creation of fallible human beings. I believe that such barbarous practices as stoning someone to death, for blasphemy, sexual misconduct, and breaking the Sabbath, is a reflection of the values of an early pastoral society and not God's word. To be honest with you I find ''any'' type of dogmatic belief deeply disturbing. I note that the Conservapedia article takes a moderate line on the [[Bible]]: "The Bible is the most logical, insightful and influential collection of books and letters ever written", and doesn't claim that it's the word of God.

Because of our recent "conversations" you seemed to be the most obvious person to ask this question. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 13:15, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

:First off, the Bible contains a unified narrative free of contradictions and errors. The human writers were men of their times (Solomon's wives, Noah's drunkenness), but God is the true author of the Bible and none of his commands are wrong or "barbarous." The Mosaic Law was directly commanded by God and is not some reflection of early pastoral society values (I will also say that stoning is ''not'' merely an "early pastoral society" value--the urban Greeks did it, Acts 14:19, and modern urban Brunei and other Islamic countries are doing it).

:You need to understand the Mosaic Law and its place in God's plan to redeem humanity. God revealed Himself first to the Israelites, and in preparing them for the Promised Land, he gave them the Mosaic Law. The Mosaic Law was good and holy (Romans 7:12) -- so good that the Israelites found they, sinful humans, couldn't even follow it correctly. Yes, some of the punishments for various sins include stoning, but remember, "the wages of sin is death" (Romans 6:23). The better question than "why did God command this" is "why didn't God command this for everybody and for every sin". Instead, by giving the law to the Israelites, God showed them they couldn't save themselves. They needed a savior--Jesus Christ. Also, see Deuteronomy 17:6 -- two or three witnesses were required to be stoned.

:Jesus didn't abolish the law, he fulfilled it. I recommend reading the Book of Hebrews -- because of Christ's sacrificing Himself on the cross (great timing in asking your question), we no longer need to make animal sacrifices or follow the civic parts of the law (which include stoning)--that doesn't make the law "barbaric" though. Also, in John 8, Jesus did not condemn stoning outright. The Jews did not have witnesses nor did they have the guilty man with them either to stone, contrary to the law's requirements.[https://www.gotquestions.org/without-sin-cast-first-stone.html]

:I hope this helps. Ask me other questions if you'd like. I also highly recommend [https://www.gotquestions.org/ GotQuestion.org] for other Christianity-related questions. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:47, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

::Many thanks for taking the time to answer me. Sorry to be argumentative, but I'm still confused, because on one hand you seem to be suggesting that Christ would have supported stoning the adulteress to death if the man had also been arrested, and there had been two witnesses? But on the other hand you also seem to suggest that, because Christ rose from the dead, Mosaic law no longer needed be applied. and that following the Resurrection stoning someone to death was no longer lawful?

::Surely Christans are right in believing that stoning a rebellious child, or someone who collects firewood on a Sunday, or because they are sexually involved with someone of the same sex is no longer the word of God? That ''now'' such practices are dated –"barbaric"? That Christ brought a new message from God, one that is entirely different from what Moses received? A message in which charity and forgiveness is far more important than punishment. That we should focus first on our own failures rather than those of others: "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her”. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 15:41, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
:::The gospel was preached to Israel in the wilderness (Hebrews 4:2). Israel was given the choice between Law and Grace. Law can only condemn, Grace saves. Israel chose Law ("Moses told us to stone such a one").
:::There are other such examples in the Bible where people (or man, to use the politically incorrect parlance), made choices with long-term consequences that God did not ordain, such as when Jethro (Moses' father-in-law) gave advice to [[community organizer|organize]] the people into captains of tens and captains of hundreds, etc., or when God advised against Israel having a King who would "multiply horses," (i.e. build a military industrial complex) and Solomon proceeded to do exactly that. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 15:56, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

:::: Thanks [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]. So how should 21st century man operate? You generalize, whereas I asked specific questions. Do fundamentalist Christians believe that Christ's Resurrection changed Mosaic law, or should we , if possible, return to it. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 16:52, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
:::::If you're going to continue editing here, it's important you realise the management considers the adultress story to be a [[Essay:Adulteress Story|liberal insertion]]. Buckle in! [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 16:56, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
::::::Mosaic Law never intended to save. It is still operable for those who reject Grace. And faith in the Resurrection always provided grace - knowing that whatsoever he promised, he was able to deliver (Romans 4:21) - even before Jesus' birth, death, and resurrection. Law always only applies to the lost, and not blood washed believers in Christ.
::::::Now, Christians are admonished to act in such a way as to be an example to non-believers (to do otherwise is not acting in love); however it is not determinative of a person's standing in Christ or eternal salvation, and to preach otherwise, that is to say salvation is determined by works, is the spirit of anti-Christ. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 17:02, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

:::::::I would not so much say that Israel chose the law, as it was a matter of that being all there was. The law taught a great deal about the nature of God, the depravity of men, and the seriousness of sin, among other lessons. The law was given to state how, from at least an outward sense, mankind should behave in order to keep God's perfect law. Under the law, certain sins were deserving of death--this was to show the seriousness of transgression. It is easy for us to look at some sin and say, "Well, it was only one small sin. Everyone makes mistakes, so just give him/her a break! It's not THAT serious!" However, we are judging with sentimentality from the perspective of a sinner. Only God can judge righteously from the perspective of perfection.
:::::::This rule did not really go away, either. Certainly we don't execute people for "minor" sins, but James said that "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10). One singe sin is enough to make us less than perfect, which makes us utterly filthy and unacceptable to God, much as a single act of defiance made an old testament Jew unacceptable to the congregation. God has given us a way out through His Son, but without that, we will face a judgement worse than stoning for a single act of sin (which is itself defiance against the one truly holy God). Only because of Jesus' shed blood can we be forgiven these sins, and made as though we are perfect, by Jesus' merit. The Hebrews didn't seem to know that Jesus was coming as a sacrifice, rather than a king, but yet they sacrificed animals to gain forgiveness for their sins, looking forward to Jesus' sacrifice.
:::::::In regard to the adulteress specifically, There has been a great deal of debate by people more intelligent than I. Under mosaic law, she was guilty, but it seems that either she was forgiven under the new law and no longer deserving of death, or she should have justly been stoned, but the congregation failed to do so(or the witnesses failed to testify against her properly), due to Jesus' words. In either case, Jesus sends her away alive. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 17:11, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

::::::::In response to Timber's followup question, the Mosaic Law is just, but it's impossible to follow. That's why Jesus died on the cross -- so we can actually have a path to salvation, one by God's grace through faith and not by works.

::::::::However, this doesn't mean that the message of the law is "entirely different" from Christ -- in fact, the total opposite. The law pointed people to Christ, that it's impossible to follow it and that they need Jesus. Also, through sacrifices, God provided a way for the Jews' sins to be forgiven. By dying on the cross, our past, present, and future sins are forgiven if we trust in Christ, without need for sacrifices. God will judge everyone in the end, but right now, we live in the age of grace, and the Mosaic Law has been fulfilled through Christ. '''Also,''' the Mosaic Law was never intended to be required of all people everywhere -- only the Israelites before Christ.

::::::::If I'm understanding [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:1990%27sguy&curid=139936&diff=1517413&oldid=1517408 Rob] correctly, I agree that many actions by people in the Bible are not condoned by God, but the Mosaic Law isn't one of them. It came from God to set the Israelites apart from other nations (Exodus 19:5) and reveal their sinfulness to them (Galatians 3:19; Romans 3:20), among other reasons.

::::::::For the record, I believe the adultress story is a valid part of the Bible. Others here disagree. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:15, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
:::::::::Moses spoke to Lord face to face as a man speaketh to his friend (Exodus 33:11) and "found grace in thy sight" (Exodus 33:13); the New Testament says "No man hath seen God at anytime" (John 1:27). Now, unless you think there are contradictions in the Bible, one has to explain Hebrews 12:14 (without holiness no one will see the Lord) and more specifically, 1 Cor. 2:13, "comparing spiritual things with spiritual".
:::::::::In conclusion, (a) Moses was saved; (b) the Law of Moses could not save then, and it can not save now; (c) Christ has existed from everlasting to everlasting, before the foundations of the earth were laid; (d) ye are not under law, but under grace. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 17:36, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
:::::::::Roman Catholic theology explains the difference between the Perfect Will of God and the Permissive Will of God (for example, God allowing David to marry Bethsheba after David committed adultery and murdered her husband). And while the Mosaic Law may be an expression of the Perfect Will of God, it nevertheless still cannot save. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 17:44, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

Many thanks that makes things much clearer. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 19:29, 19 April 2019 (EDT) I greatly appreciate that you both have offered such a thorough explanation. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 19:31, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

== Cyrus ==
Hi 1990'sguy,

I don't think we need flashy photos of anti-Christian celebrities, which promote their lifestyles to our kids. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] ([[User talk:DouglasA|talk]]) 13:54, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

:I'll ask Andy about this. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:58, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

::We could get a less "flashy" photo I suppose, but we are here to educate people of all ages. While I may not approve of her lifestyle, I don't really see an problem with including it, since this helps to educate our readers. It is not at all uncommon for use to include photos of people on pages talking about them. And actually, this "flashy" photo may be well suited, since it demonstrates that she is all about the show. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 14:27, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
:::This is becoming a real problem for CP, since deviant sex seems to be the Democratic party's key plank in the 2020 elections. Ignoring their issues is fraught with problems. They must be tastefully addressed; and we shouldn't pass up the opportunity to straighten out readers. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 16:09, 19 April 2019 (EDT)

== Edit war ==

Hi 1990'sguy, you have twice blocked me for edit warring. I don't like being quarrelsome but with due respect to your seniority I don't think you really understand what edit warring is. My reverts had an explanation and yours did not. You tended to ignore
the Conservapedia Guidelines. Also you didn't issue any warning, or suggest starting a discussion. I have edited on Wikipedia for several years and have a clean record there, I'd also note, the highly undemocratic exercise of administrative power here. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 16:24, 21 April 2019 (EDT)

:The fact is the Barack Obama article has been the way it is for years, and several editors (RobS and Pokeria, for example) support it, at least overall, and oppose your changes. Also, you admit you're not a conservative. And you think you can just come in and unilaterally make edits that others oppose? That's not how it works here. Continuing to revert will only get you indefinitely banned -- I hope you realize I'm being extremely gracious by only giving short blocks.

:Also, CP makes no apology for not being "democratic." We're a conservative encyclopedia with a conservative point of view, which includes support for natural law and republicanism over mob-rule democracy that Aristotle, the Ancient Roman Republicans, and the U.S. founding fathers opposed. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:57, 21 April 2019 (EDT)

::::Thanks -[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]]. I have no quarrel with this site's extreme right wing ideology but I do quarrel with its failure at times to implement its own policy of truth and verifiablity and the way some editors use of gossip and dubious sources. Also most of the editors I have dealt with recently are very slippery politicians–that is they avoid answering any comment or question. By the way the Barack Obama article is contradictory. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 18:18, 21 April 2019 (EDT) Additionally most edits made by you and others do not have an explanation. [[User:Timber|Timber]] ([[User talk:Timber|talk]]) 18:25, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
:::::ach ach <choke> WaPo, NYT & CNN aren't dubious sources? they don't use gossip? Liberal commie scholars and Marxist PhD's aren't dubious sources? As to edit summaries, you gotta earn your stripes. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 18:46, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
:::::C'mon. Be reasonable and realistic. The ''NYT'' White House correspondent thinks ''Edelweiss'' is a Nazi anthem. Never in my life has there been such an open opportunity for citizen journalists as right now. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 18:49, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
::::::@Timber: I'm not particularly interested in the Barack Obama dispute -- what I care about is avoiding edit warring and making sure we give due treatment to material which has been in the articles for a long time. Thus, the content should be discussed on the talk page. On Wikipedia, not having a consensus for changes similar to yours is good enough explanation for reverting, so CP isn't actually too much different. Regarding the behavior of other editors, you might just be experiencing their differing personalities, that's all. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:51, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
:::::::@1990'sguy, he's not learning his lesson, I've given him a long block, not just for the edit warring, but also for his pretentious attitude, especially on this edit summary: [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Michelle_Obama&diff=1518377&oldid=1518376] [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 19:18, 21 April 2019 (EDT)

::Personally, I have no objection to moving the sections on natural born citizenship to [[Early life and career of Barack Hussein Obama]] where it can be debated or sources challenged. The lesson here is, work somebody else put much time into should not be overwritten just cause some liberal communist doesn't like it or it isn't sanctioned by [[fake news]] [[mainstream media]] sources. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 17:08, 21 April 2019 (EDT)

:::@RobS: It might be worth considering moving some of that content into the [[Early life and career of Barack Hussein Obama]] article. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:14, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
::::Let Timber do it, and we can seriously vet sources and wording on the Talk page there. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 17:16, 21 April 2019 (EDT)

== Look at this edit ==

Please look at this edit: [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia&diff=1519161&oldid=1516763 1990'sguy and Conservapedia]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:39, 24 April 2019 (EDT)
:Thanks, Conservative, I really appreciate it! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:57, 24 April 2019 (EDT)
::That's great, I only wish the essays I made about Christian virtues could get this kind of notability. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 14:26, 24 April 2019 (EDT)
:::I recommend linking them in the "See also" sections of relevant articles and continuing to work on them. That might make Andy or Cons more likely to promote them on the main page. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:38, 24 April 2019 (EDT)

== What happened to you user page? ==

Your page was vaped by [[User:Conservative]], on or about April 22. It was then recreated as a blank page, also by Cons, on April 23. Do you know anything about this? I recall that you had a lot of interesting things to say on your user page. Do you have a backup copy? Alas, I don't normally checkpoint other people's user pages, so I don't have a copy. (Though I do have a checkpoint copy of your talk page.) [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 12:51, 26 April 2019 (EDT)
:I asked Cons to do it -- don't worry, I have all the information saved, and I could recreate it if I want. I thought I should be more "low-key" on wikis, and I did the same to my Wikipedia user page (which I also have a copy of). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:34, 26 April 2019 (EDT)

== Question. ==

Hello. Is it possible to write about artists? {{unsigned|RinatMilow}}

:You may write about what you want on the following conditions:
:#Everything is sourced with reliable sources -- no exceptions
:#This is a conservative encyclopedia, so nothing from a non-conservative perspective, wherever applicable
:#Absolutely no plagiarism, including from Wikipedia
:#Know all of CP's rules and guidelines (you can find them at the top of my talk page)
:I hope this helps. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 10:28, 4 May 2019 (EDT)

I wrote an article,tried to do it right.

[[User:RinatMilow|RinatMilow]]
:This website does not do self-promotion. You can write about artists like Picasso, Dali, Michaelangelo, etc, but I noticed that you're doing promoting yourself on this (deleted) and other websites. Not here. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 11:00, 4 May 2019 (EDT)

I don't promote anything anywhere where to me what to write, it is especially my personal right. I'm not upset. I'm not upset that the article didn't fit.
[[User:RinatMilow|RinatMilow]]

== Donald Trump's achievements keep rolling in ==

'''The ''[[New York Times]]'' FINALLY Admits:''' The World is Turning [[Nationalism|Nationalist]] [[Populism|Populist]].[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQOgUVsUQJQ]

The ''New York Times'' article admitted that this statement of [[Donald Trump]] was prophetic: "We gonna win so much you may even get tired of winning and you'll say please, please Mr. President, It's too much winning! We can't take it anymore!"[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:34, 27 May 2019 (EDT)

:Trump has been very successful as a president so far, especially considering that Republicans opposed much of his agenda in 2017/2018 and the divided Congress now. The EU elections went well -- the League outperformed exit polls by a lot, becoming the largest party in Italy and tied as the largest in the EU Parliament, and the Brexit Party also won more seats than predictions I saw beforehand. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:43, 27 May 2019 (EDT)

::The Greens continue to gain, at the expense of Social Democrats. This is reflective of a younger, climate orientated group of socialists, just as radical, more single issue oriented and naive, trying to throw off the history established Socialist parties. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 16:06, 27 May 2019 (EDT)

== Article suggestion ==

Consider creating this article: [[Donald Trump achievements: Religious freedom]][[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:08, 1 July 2019 (EDT)
:It might be a good split-up article. All religious freedom achievements are currently at [[Donald Trump achievements: Religious liberty, gender issues, and other social policies]]. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:19, 1 July 2019 (EDT)
::I might split the article into [[Donald Trump achievements: Religious freedom and LGBTQ]] and [[Donald Trump achievements: Healthcare, welfare, housing, and affirmative action]] -- I might have to rework the article titles, among other changes, before I actually implement this. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:27, 1 July 2019 (EDT)

§== Could you delete this file? ==

I uploaded this file from the mobile version of the website and the title messed up, could you remove the pic? I already uploaded the correct one. [[:File:' 'Copied from' '- https---commons-wikimedia-org-wiki-File-Luis Pardo Villalón - Armada de Chile-png--br--' 'Original source' '- http---www-armada-cl-custom-pilotopardo-pilotopardo-html--br--' 'License' '- Th 2019-07-01 04-37.png|file]] --[[User:Capitalist.Chile|Capitalist.Chile]] ([[User talk:Capitalist.Chile|talk]]) 16:38, 4 July 2019 (EDT)
:Done! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:10, 4 July 2019 (EDT)

== Salute to America ==

'Salute to America' articele - this was not a copy of Wikipedia, but independent research. Your deletion is merely censorship. too bad for conservapedia. I was on a roll... [[User:Let us eat lettuce|Let us eat lettuce]] ([[User talk:Let us eat lettuce|talk]]) 18:30, 6 July 2019 (EDT)

:That's a ridiculous response that will get you no respect from conservatives. I cross-checked [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salute_to_America&oldid=905110556 the Wikipedia article], and you indeed copied the article (not the whole thing but only a condensed version. Your wording changes were far too minor to not consider it plagiarism. You also cited the same sources (from the MSM, by the way) for the same sentences.
:If you create an original article, citing conservative media sources (you know, the kind of information that will actually get censored on Wikipedia and other leftist websites), it won't get deleted. Another admin already deleted a previous article of yours for plagiarism, and I already (and kindly) warned you. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:36, 6 July 2019 (EDT)
::Okay, you're "right". but my research was original. maybe the same sources, is all. [[User:Let us eat lettuce|Let us eat lettuce]] ([[User talk:Let us eat lettuce|talk]]) 18:47, 6 July 2019 (EDT)
:::The second version is even worse than the first (for a different reason). It's a stub; the wording is sloppy, poor, and vague; and you didn't cite any sources. If you cannot create a quality article citing multiple conservative media sources (Breitbart, TNA, Daily Caller, Daily Wire, Free Beacon, etc.) without having to consult Wikipedia or plagiarizing, you probably shouldn't create articles.
:::You saw my message on your talk page, as well as the welcome template with the various links. We're giving you multiple chances to improve. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:15, 6 July 2019 (EDT)
::::Don't make up rules. There is nothing that requires the use of "conservative media sources" in either the [[Conservapedia:Commandments|commandments]], the [[Conservapedia:Guidelines|guidelines]], the [[Conservapedia:Editing article and talk pages|manual of style]], or the [[Conservapedia:How to create and maintain high-quality articles|general guidance on "high-quality" articles]].

::::Your preferences are not policy. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 08:25, 7 July 2019 (EDT)
:::::The 1990'sguy just deleted the article without contributing a thing. On the article talk page, I had encouraged others to collaborate. Not much collaboration here. [[User:Let us eat lettuce|Let us eat lettuce]] ([[User talk:Let us eat lettuce|talk]]) 08:37, 7 July 2019 (EDT)
::::::JohnZ, you don't get to decide what Conservapedia policy is (especially not if you're trying to force liberal POV again as you usually do). That's for the admins to decide, not you. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 08:38, 7 July 2019 (EDT)
:::::::@Let us eat lettuce: "encouraging others to collaborate" does not equal making others write 99% of an article (because it was a tiny, vague stub), or making a great effort to completely revamp the article because it was plagiarized.
:::::::@JohnZ: I never said citing from the conservative media is a website requirement, but it's necessary if you want to create a quality article from a conservative point of view. And keep in mind that I told this to an editor who copied from Wikipedia, including, but not only, the citations (many new users do this, and I gave advice on how to write a good article). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:39, 7 July 2019 (EDT)
::::::::I don't get it anyway. What's the purpose of creating a Salute to America article? Is he going to create separate articles for every Forth of July celebration since 1776? Is there not enough news happening this Summer to write about? Is there not enough [[Trump news]] to write on?
::::::::If someone wants to trash Trump, be it on Wikipedia or here, don't be so lame and obvious about it. Get creative. Use some subtlety, ambiguity, and imagination. Goosestepping to liberal fascist talking points won't get you there. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 13:13, 7 July 2019 (EDT)

==Nitpicking I know but==
Boris Johnson is not as yet The Prime Minister of the UK.--[[User:Chewy Suarez|Chewy Suarez]] ([[User talk:Chewy Suarez|talk]]) 13:48, 23 July 2019 (EDT)
:I know -- his term starts tomorrow (really, in only a few hours now), but CP is a small wiki with few editors, so it's good to make all the necessary edits at once, and he'll become PM is so short a time from now that it really doesn't matter. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:51, 23 July 2019 (EDT)

==Too fast on the trigger==
A couple of new editors have contributed some useful, albeit problematic, content. By reverting them instantly you may be scaring them off from participating further. My suggestion: try letting things develop and/or engage with them to develop proper editing skills. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 13:53, 28 July 2019 (EDT)

Most wikis have adopted a Don't Bite the Newbies policy. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 13:59, 28 July 2019 (EDT)

:That's fair. That said, I don't want being friendly to newcomers to compromise CP's quality. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:10, 28 July 2019 (EDT)

::Well, we need the newcomers to help improve quality. CP has nearly 50,000 articles now, and all could use some level of maintenance or improvement. We need to be more welcoming to newcomers and recognize there are different levels of editing skills. People volunteering their time should be treated with respect, engaged, and recruited into specific tasks to help improve the project. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]

:::I agree, but if they create an account and immediately start changing the POV of articles, plagiarize from Wikipedia, or make other unencyclopedic edits, we need to let them know. It's a two-way street -- we need to be welcoming, but the new user needs to be willing to learn and grow (I've seen new users unwilling to do that). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:21, 28 July 2019 (EDT)
::::This is where the rule of thumb, ''Discuss first, then revert'' comes in. Granted, there are users who insert commie agitprop that needs to be reverted instantly without discussion. Citations formatted from Wikipedia can be useful, the content needs to be reviewed. It's not a blanket rule. It's the speed at which a newbie is engaged that is intimidating (I'd recommend [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221367707_Don't_bite_the_newbies_How_reverts_affect_the_quantity_and_quality_of_Wikipedia_work perusing]).
::::Here's were the subject matter a user is working on applies. If the user shows interest in conservative subjects, for instance, they may be only 14 years old and their understanding of conservativism is not fully developed. But they have enthusiasm for the subject. Being reverted can have a devastating effect. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 14:37, 28 July 2019 (EDT)
:::::I won't argue over this any further -- it's not worth arguing over. I will try not to "bite" new users and to be more engaging with them -- that said, I hope you and Conservative don't go too far in the other direction. We can't go so far in that direction that edits that clearly violate CP guidelines and reduce its quality are tolerated purely to avoid offending someone. The user should be treated respectfully and kindly, but they should also be expected to learn from their mistakes and change their editing, if there is a problem. It's a two-way street. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:00, 28 July 2019 (EDT)

== Added post ==

Hi 1990'sguy, just wanted to say thank you for your suggestions about my articles: I'll keep them in mind in the future.

I know many of my contributions are rather boring ones, but my hope is to not just write about what I know, but create articles superior to their WP counterparts. Whatever helps steer more viewers this direction. -Teakin88
:You're welcome! I agree that your articles are better than Wikipedia's, and I think you've been a big help to CP. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:58, 29 July 2019 (EDT)
==Cornell University==
What portions of the article do you believe were copied? They seem completely different to me. Thanks, [[User:GChang|GChang]] ([[User talk:GChang|talk]]) 15:12, 2 August 2019 (EDT)
:See [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Cornell_University&diff=prev&oldid=1546023#Organization this] vs. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cornell_University&oldid=906741697#Organization_and_administration this] -- you clearly copied (as in, you knowingly took -- plagiarized -- content on WP and added it to CP). Rearranging certain paragraphs doesn't undo that fact that it's blatant plagarism. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:17, 2 August 2019 (EDT)
::I have made a side by side comparison at [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User%3AGChang%2FCU&diff=1546189&oldid=1546188]. I will hold off on editing until you identify what material constitutes impermissible copying from Wikipedia. Some of what I did was based on past editing of Conservapedia, and not from Wikipedia. By the way, footnotes and facts are not copyrighted. Most sentences as well as the overall structure of the article is completely different. Outline what you find to be copying and I will avoid those areas. Thank you. [[User:GChang|GChang]] ([[User talk:GChang|talk]]) 18:26, 2 August 2019 (EDT)
:::Stop making sandbox pages when they're unnecessary. I have the permalinks above. The first four paragraphs on your CP version plus the sixth paragraph are identical to the paragraphs in that section of the Wikipedia article. You didn't even change the wikilinks from the WP page (hence the large number of red links on the CP page), though not including those red links wouldn't change the fact it's plagiarism. Changing the paragraphs' order or combining them -- as you did -- also doesn't change the fact that it's plagiarism. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:44, 2 August 2019 (EDT)
::::I made the sandbox changes so that you can see all of the differences. I don't see how they would be viewed as the same. [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User%3AGChang%2FCU&diff=1546189&oldid=1546188] Please look it over and give some feedback. Thanks, [[User:GChang|GChang]] ([[User talk:GChang|talk]]) 12:15, 17 August 2019 (EDT)

== Minuteman has blocked me over Fredogate (Chris Cuomo) page, can someone help? ==

Can someone please help so I can improve the page I started? I've been blocked by Minuteman for creating the Fredogate page. No explanation was given and I find his censoring very frustrating since this incident some media personalities call Fredogate, is widely covered in youtube.--[[User:Bearbrau|Bearbrau]] ([[User talk:Bearbrau|talk]]) 19:19, 14 August 2019 (EDT)

:You are unblocked. Minuteman is a bot (not a human editor), and its block was accidental. You apparently made some edit that fit within the bot's computerized criteria for making blocks. The bot's human owner unblocked you, and the fact you're writing on my talk page shows that you've already been unblocked. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:27, 14 August 2019 (EDT)

== Slovakia ==
Hello, I saw your edits on [[Slovakia]]. Thank you for taking time to correct my edits but I need to say I don't think writing "Slovakia (...) formed in 1993" is accurate.
*First, Slovakia is a name ascribed to the territory historically occupied by (mainly) Slovaks (slightly smaller than the territory of present-day Slovakia), so I think we should make that distinction somewhere in the beginning of the article. Thus, Slovakia (as a historical region) formed much earlier then 1990s.
*Secondly, Slovak Republic was legally created on January 1, 1969 as the Slovak Socialist Republic, then part of communist "federation" (it was not true federation, of course, but it was considered a separate legal entity), then turned from being a communist to democratic state in 1990 with its name constitutionally changed to Slovak Republic on March 1, 1990. On January 1, 1993, Slovak Republic as well as Czech Republic become independent states with Czechoslovak Republic no longer in existence.--[[User:RobSteff|RobSteff]] ([[User talk:RobSteff|talk]]) 18:08, 18 August 2019 (EDT)

:I changed it. Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:27, 18 August 2019 (EDT)

::Thank you!--[[User:RobSteff|RobSteff]] ([[User talk:RobSteff|talk]]) 13:57, 19 August 2019 (EDT)

== 700,000+ page views for Donald Trump achievements ==

700,000+ page views for Donald Trump achievements. Congratulations! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:20, 19 August 2019 (EDT)

:Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 06:52, 20 August 2019 (EDT)

== Great work in fixing those links! ==

Great work in fixing the Declaration of Independence links!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:46, 24 August 2019 (EDT)
:Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:48, 24 August 2019 (EDT)

== Template on Nationalism ==

Do you think a template on nationalism, as a counterweight to the template on globalism, would work well?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:06, 1 September 2019 (EDT)
:I think it would be helpful -- it could include links to articles like [[Border wall]], [[Economic nationalism]], [[Self-governance]], [[sovereignty]], [[National conservatism]], [[Euroskepticism]], [[Patriotism]], [[Subsidiarity]], [[Founding Fathers]], and [[U.S. Constitution]], among others. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:25, 1 September 2019 (EDT)

== The Dixiecrat, Conservative Democrat, and Reagan Democrat Pages ==

'''"Dixiecrat was the informal term for Southern Democrats who in 1948 refused to support President Harry S. Truman for reelection because he was too liberal on racial issues."'''

Shouldn't it say because he was too conservative on racial issues since it was the '''liberal''' Democrats who were against civil rights?
:Truman desegrated the Armed Forces in 1947, so this one appears correct.

Oh. Because I thought that it was conservatives who were for desegregation and liberals who were for segregation. That's why I had a hard time understanding why it said Truman was too liberal on racial issues since the liberals were segregationists.
:Believe it or not, there are liberal segregationists. It is not a demarcation line between liberal and conservative.
::The phrase "because he was '''too liberal''' on racial issues" kind of got me and I thought it was insisting that liberals were for desegregation and conservatives weren't.
:::The 1947 desegregation order marks a turning point in the liberal movement, but many liberals and alleged "liberals" (white folks riding the Democrat, anti-Republican welfare state and gravy train) remained segregationists, or at least racists.
::::This point deserves expanding on cause of recent developments: Many whites who wear the "liberal" label do so for government goodies, not social equality of blacks. We see it right now in support of various democrat candidates. Biden is buoyed by the black vote right now, and Biden ''is not'' promising a basketful of government goodies. Sanders, Warren, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker and Buttigieg are all promising wholesale government goodies, and getting the support of white "alleged liberals" - not blacks. Being "liberal" with other people's money, and being for civil rights and social equality, '''are not''' synonymous. Blacks know this more than anyone.

::::This was true during the [[New Deal Coalition]], the [[Great Society]], and today. Handing out food stamps to whites as well as blacks is not slave reparations, although since Great Society times whites who didn't qualify for food stamps viewed it as such. Or the creation of the [[Department of Housing and Urban Development]] in 1964, was viewed than as a poverty program for dispossessed blacks, yet today most of the funding goes to whites. Black's view white liberals as dishonest leeches, who plunder resources supposedly earmarked for them. The only thing they have in common is opposing Republicans who want to cut and balance the budget.

::::Blacks today are indeed the conservative, moderate, or centrist wing of the Democrat party, while white liberals are the [[far left]], handing the election to Trump. It will be one more grievance Blacks have against white Democrat liberals when it is all over. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 13:59, 22 September 2019 (EDT)

Doesn't this:

'''"The Dixiecrats went back to the Democrats, where they came into increasingly more conflict with the liberal sections of the party, and eventually abandoned the Democratic Party for the Republican Party after the presidency of Lyndon Johnson."'''

play into the liberal narrative that the racist conservatives switched parties and Dixiecrats were conservatives when in fact they were racist southern liberals?
:That's a misreading, but one this one needs some touching up. As is, it's a basic restatement of the [[fake news]] media, academia, and DNC false narrative of a Southern Strategy; Dixiecrat was basically a one-hit-wonder in 1948, when Democrats were divided 3 ways, Progressives, Dixiecrats, and Regular Democrats. What page is this on?

That's on the [[Dixiecrat]] page.

I also have a hard time understanding the Time Magazine picture from 1968 on [[Curtis LeMay]] when it says "Revolt of the '''Right'''."
:Curtis LeMay was George Wallace's VP pick in 1968; he was also [[Robert MacNamara]]'s (JFK & LBJ's defense secretary) boss during the Korean War. His nickname was the "Mad Bomber". Both Nixon & Humphrey were running as "Peace candidates". I don't recall Le May's politics off the top of my head, though I'm fairly certain he was not a Republican. Again, that's Prof. Jensen's work, and IMO, [[fake news]] from the 1960s intended to smear conservatives as warmongers, as usual (in fact, most conservatives are peaceniks and isolationists). We're in agreement, the page needs an overhaul.

On the [[Reagan Democrats]] page, this feeds into the narrative that the racists jumped ships:

'''"Most were working men and women who had come to feel that the Democratic party was no longer championing them, but favored blacks instead."'''
:i see nothing wrong with this statement; and it's corroborated by the Stan Greenberg poll cited here just prior to the 1992 election: [https://www.salon.com/2016/01/31/the_clintons_sordid_race_game_no_one_will_say_it_but_the_clintons_rise_was_premised_on_repudiating_black_voters/ The Clintons’ sordid race game: No one will say it, but the Clintons’ rise was premised on repudiating black voters], Corey Robin, ''Salon'', Jan 31, 2016.

On the [[Conservative Democrat]] page, it says:

'''"A few former Dixiecrats, including Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms, were early converts to the Republican Party, foreshadowing a long trend of conservatives leaving the Democrats and joining the Republicans that continued through the 1980s and 1990s."'''
:Good point; looks like Prof. Jensen's work; [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiprVX4os2Y Prof. Carol Swain of PragerU] refutes the notion three switched and says only one. And Helms association as a Dixiecrat I'd have to look into. There's much of Prof. Jensen's work I've been meaning to revise, beginning with [[New Deal Coalition]] and [[Conservative Coalition]] which carries a lot of the historical revisionist basis for the alleged GOP Southern Strategy.

I thought only 3 Dixiecrats ever switched. The rest remained Democrats until they died. There was no switch and the Dixiecrats were not conservatives. They were liberals. Can you please explain why these pages insist they were conservatives who were opposed to the liberals when it's us, the conservatives who were for civil rights and the liberals who were against it or clarify the edits on the pages made by DavidB4-bot? And on Joe Biden's page, it says '''a coalition of liberals and George Wallace supporters''' and I thought they were one and the same. --[[User:Classical Liberal|Classical Liberal]] ([[User talk:Classical Liberal|talk]]) 10:10, 21 September 2019 (CDT)
:Dixiecrats were racist Southern New Dealers; there were both conservatives and liberals among them. Most importantly, they were anti-Republican, a legacy of Reconstruction. And as Prof. Swain says, only one Senator ever switched. Strom Thurmond himself was a liberal.

I don't understand how conservatives could be among the Dixiecrats. Conservatives were against the New Deal.

:To understand the meaning of Dixiecrat, one should read the articles on 1948 and 1964 Democratic conventions, and the 1964 Mississippi Freedom Party. Johnson didn't want a replay of 1948 in 1964. Hubert Humphrey cut his teeth as a civil rights leader in his 1948 speech (as [[David Horowitz]] also was inspired). By 1964, the Dixiecrat movement was dead, and only Strom Thurmond - a Southern New Deal liberal - left the party to join the GOP). [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 15:22, 21 September 2019 (EDT)

:Thanks for letting me know about this. I'll see what we can do to improve CP's coverage on this topic. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:51, 21 September 2019 (EDT)

::Dixiecrat is basically one of the those journalistic terms that takes on its own life and lives on in infamy; in 1948 Truman, [[Henry Wallace]], and Strom Thurmond all claimed the mantle of Democrat; the press assigned labels to distinguish them.
::Strom Thurmond would be the first to deny he was a "Dixiecrat', given the definition journalists assigned to it. He'd argue he was Democrat, loyal to the Democrat party ideals and traditions.
::[[Cokie Roberts]], who just died and her obituary lauds her as a feminist pioneer in political journalism, reared as the daughter of a longtime Democrat Majority Leader, doesn't mention she was reared by her father [[Hale Boggs]] (signer of the [[Southern Manifesto]]) in the Dixiecrat tradition. Cokie Roberts, raised in a Dixiecrat household by parents who'' both'' served in the House (her mother succeeded her father), owed her entire success and career to the political education she received from her parents, and never rebelled against it.

::Which of coarse brings us to a discussion of Louisiana Democrat politics and its godfather, Huey "Every Man a King (except blacks)" Long, his place in the history of American Socialism, and his successors in Louisiana-style politics and demagoguery, notable among several, [[James Carville]]... [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 15:39, 21 September 2019 (EDT)
[[Image:Gop-plank.JPG|thumb|275px|1936 cartoon shows GOP building its platform from the conservative planks abandoned by the Democrats]]
:And I have one more question. On the [[Conservative]] page, is this picture accurate?
::I'm not exactly sure of Prof. Jensen's reasoning there; I'd say it is related to the Democrat Congress in 1931 turning down Herbert Hoover's relief efforts at the start of the Great Depression, paving the way to blaming Hoover for the Depression in the 1932 election. But some it can go back as far as the creation of the Federal Reserve Board after the 1912 elections, or even the Cross of Gold speech of William Jennings Bryan in 1896. "Sound Money" in that context refers to an anti-inflationist gold standard; I don't know when Democrats ever were "Sound Money" anti-inflationists, other than when they nixed Hoover's relief efforts or passed the Federal Reserve Act (but even there, that's debatable whether the Federal Reserve Act was inflationary or for maintaining a rigid gold standard).

::On the whole, I've debated with myself for years about removing some of Prof. Jensen's work, cause I regard him as a qualified historian. Only when I'm armed with the facts do I challenge some of his biases or excesses. And he does have a habit of using what I regard as biased fake news sources going back as far as 1936. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 21:55, 21 September 2019 (EDT)

Thank you for the info. I'm learning a lot from on here and I'm still learning. I'm just trying to get a better understanding is all. I love your and 1990'sguy's edits. Keep up the good work guys!
[[User:Classical Liberal|Classical Liberal]] ([[User talk: Classical Liberal|talk]]) 22:20, 21 September 2019 (CDT)
:Thank you, I appreciate it! And thanks for coming to my talk page to discuss it and get a better understanding! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 07:38, 22 September 2019 (EDT)

==Thank you==
Thank you for tidying up the link to [[Alister Hardy]] on the page on the [[Templeton Prize]]. [[User:Carltonio|Carltonio]] ([[User talk:Carltonio|talk]]) 11:41, 26 September 2019 (EDT)
:You're welcome! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:44, 26 September 2019 (EDT)

== Let's start off on a clean slate as far as User: BernieandTrumpfan==

I put the below post on the talk page of User: BernieandTrumpfan:

Tell you what. Let's just start off with a clean slate. I deleted my previous remarks. I don't forsee deleting any more of your content. I just thought the errors of fact in these articles were not by accident: [[Agnosticism, deism, and confusion]] and [[List of Social Darwinists]]. I will assume your edits are good faith henceforth plus 1990sguy said he would review your future edits.

I think I probably was too quick on the draw in determining some of your errant edits were made in bad faith (agnosticism has caused many people to become insane with the footnotes not supporting that, Yasser Arafat is a social Darwinist, etc.). My apologies if I made a mistake.

I will not restore those articles two articles above because they had some quality issues, but I did restore the mainspace articles/essays I could find. I turned [[Atheism and chaos]] into an essay.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 21:50, 1 October 2019 (EDT)
:I restored all but 2 of BernieandTrump fan articles/essays.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 09:26, 2 October 2019 (EDT)

== Ted Cruz edit ==
Calm down, please. At that time, I used the 'Stop Left Wing Newspeak' extension. It automatically changes some words. I reverted it immediately, and changed the preferences of the extension. Please do not lose your temper over a minor mistake. I am only trying to improve Conservapedia, and your unpleasant reaction has put me off a little. -- [[User:Toby Chester|Toby Chester]] ([[User talk:Toby Chester|talk]]) 01:40, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

==Something you might be able to use==
[[File:Trump-wage-growth-1.jpg |right|300px|thumb|Wage growth among low income workers has been double that of high income workers under President Trump. ''Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics'']]
You might be able o use this somewhere. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 22:51, 5 October 2019 (EDT)
:Will do! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:53, 5 October 2019 (EDT)
== Why right-wing populism will triumph ==

*[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-behind-the-rise-of-radicalism-here-are-some-theories/2019/10/09/d88f4c62-eac2-11e9-9c6d-436a0df4f31d_story.html What’s behind the rise of radicalism? Here are some theories] By Megan McArdle, ''Washington Post'', Oct. 9, 2019

*[https://quillette.com/2019/05/27/how-progressivism-enabled-the-rise-of-the-populist-right/ How Progressivism Enabled the Rise of the Populist Right], [[Eric Kaufmann]], ''Quillette'', 2019

*[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/08/shawn-rosenberg-democracy-228045 The Shocking Paper Predicting the End of Democracy], By RICK SHENKMAN, ''Politico'', September 08, 2019

*[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/08/10/the-rise-of-populism-shouldnt-have-surprised-anyone/ The rise of populism shouldn’t have surprised anyone], ''Washington Post'', 2017

*[https://www.businessinsider.com/global-recession-could-boost-far-right-populism-in-us-worldwide-2019-8 Trump rode an 'us versus them' populism all the way to the White House. A global recession could take it to dangerous levels], ''Business Insider'', 2019

*[https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/interview/civic-tech-expert-the-alliance-between-new-media-and-anti-establishment-forces-is-powerful/ Civic tech guru: Trump, Breitbart and populism are ‘the new normal’], 2017

I thought you might find these articles interesting.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 12:28, 28 October 2019 (EDT)

:Thanks! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:30, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
::It seems like the media elites are starting to come out of their denialism and are beginning to recognize that right-wing populism is not a temporary blip on the radar.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 12:34, 28 October 2019 (EDT)

== Fred Schiele ==

Thank you for correcting my mistakes in [[Fred Schiele]] article. Didn't notice the Louisiana people category. --[[User:Orb|Orb]] ([[User talk:Orb|talk]]) 13:41, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
:You're welcome. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:52, 3 November 2019 (EST)

==Thank you for the categorisations==
Thank you for adding the categorisations to the article I started on [[Erich von Daniken]]. I wonder whether this article could also be added to the category "Pseudoscience"? After all, in the article [[Pseudoscience]], the ancient astronaut theory is listed as a pseudo-science! [[User:Carltonio|Carltonio]] ([[User talk:Carltonio|talk]]) 16:35, 3 November 2019 (EST)
:Sure, that might be appropriate. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:52, 3 November 2019 (EST)
== Congratulations! ==
Congratulations, your account has been promoted to Sysop! Please feel free to post to the Main page from time to time.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 16:27, 11 November 2019 (EST)
:Thank you very much, Andy! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:34, 11 November 2019 (EST)
::Congratualations! And with political polarization occuring, perhaps you will develop a loyal opposition that will obsess over you!

::BY the way, maybe a [[Donald Trump 2020]] article would be a good article to create.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:59, 25 November 2019 (EST)
:::This is my favorite Sysop user page: https://www.conservapedia.com/User:BethanyS I just incorporated her GIF on my user page. I am a big fan of GIFs - especially [https://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:_The_transitional_animal_the_flying_kitty%3F THIS ONE]![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:08, 25 November 2019 (EST)

==Question==
Hi, I'm new and I'd like to ask a question or two. I want to help document knowledge without liberal or atheist interference.

First question: How can I add a page? I'd like to add a page to document liberal uncivil behavior.
:There are already pages on [[Liberal bigotry]], [[Liberal intolerance]], and [[Liberalism and racism]]. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 21:15, 19 November 2019 (EST)

Second, and last: How long does it take to become a Sysop, to stop far-left trolls from harming Conservapedia? I'm willing to put in a lot of effort.
:Make enough substantive edits long enough and prove yourself to be a true conservative, and you will get blocking rights. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 21:15, 19 November 2019 (EST)

Thanks.--[[User:Ay|Ay]] ([[User talk:Ay|talk]]) 20:13, 19 November 2019 (EST)

:It took me over three years, 45,000 edits, and ~100-150 article creations to be promoted to admin. It also requires integrity (no sock accounts) and always using sources when adding info. Also, remember that this is an encyclopedia, so don't use hyperbolic or over-the-top language. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:28, 19 November 2019 (EST)

== I hope you agree with this edit I made to one of your articles ==

I hope you agree with [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Donald_Trump_achievements:_Foreign_policy_(2019)&curid=151805&diff=1599943&oldid=1599936 THIS EDIT] I made to one of your articles.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:43, 27 November 2019 (EST)

:I disagree. No matter what, this is a significant action, so no matter what we do, it should either be listed as an achievement or failure. I've seen both supportive and critical articles on this from strongly conservative sources (Breitbart, The New American, etc.). Both sides (conservatives, specifically) have made convincing arguments. Thus, I prefer to give the "pro" side the benefit of the doubt to avoid inflating the "failure" section of the sub-article.

:Also, I don't think the fact that the other countries won't like the policy should matter to us. Trump's foreign policy doctrine is America First, so by definition, other countries won't like some U.S. policies (NATO, Paris agreement, immigration, foreign aid, etc.). Thus, that fact alone isn't very important. Also, some sources I read noted the policy is rather modest in scope.

:A good argument against the policy is that the U.S. is engaging in liberal-leaning neocon "human rights" promotion. That's a very valid argument, and some of the sources I cited noted this argument. Also, I believe homosexuality is a sinful practice that is contrary to Scripture (Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10).

:With good arguments for and against -- and with the policy being significant either way -- I'd prefer to keep it in the "achievements" section rather than put it in the "failure" section. I think it has to be in one or the other. Because this is a notable policy change, I strongly think we must keep it in the article no matter what.

:I hope this clarifies my position on this. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:42, 27 November 2019 (EST)

::Also, if you look further down, I listed the achievements of how Pompeo refused to fly the homosexual flag over U.S. embassies, and how he created a natural law commission (homosexuality is counter to natural law). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:23, 27 November 2019 (EST)
:::For 200+ years the USA was anti-homosexuality in its laws. I am assuming the founding fathers didn't have a right to engage in homosexuality in the Constitution. So it is essentially is a states rights issue constitutionally.

:::Here is what The Nation claims is true: "Take the scholarship on the colonial era, with which Eskridge begins his account. During the 1600s, the American colonies adopted sodomy (or “buggery”) laws that prohibited bestiality as well as anal sex between either a man and a woman or between two men. (New Haven Colony was rare in including sexual acts between women as part of its sodomy prohibition.) Punishment–which included death–was draconian, but the laws were very rarely enforced. Historians know of less than ten executions for sodomy throughout the seventeenth century. Of those few, almost all involved assault or sex with animals. These laws were not directed in any particular way toward homosexuality. Indeed, they couldn’t be–the idea that there was a type of person who was a homosexual didn’t even emerge until the late nineteenth century."[https://www.thenation.com/article/we-colonials-sodomy-laws-america/]

:::I was told by someone fairly knowledgeable about this topic of homosexuality that the research shows the more society is against homosexuality, the less there is of it. This makes sense because even Kinsey admitted that homosexuality among Orthodox Jews is rare. And there was a culture in New Guinea where they didn't even know homosexuality existed until the Western missionaries told them about homosexuality. From Conservapedia's [[Religious Upbringing and Culture Affects Rates of Homosexuality]] article: "However, in another group of Dani who were genetically related, homosexuality was totally unknown. Missionaries report that when they were translating the Bible into Dani for this group, their tribal assistants, who knew their own culture intimately, were nonplused by references to homosexuality in Romans 1; they did not understand the concept."

:::And the fruit of a society being more tolerant of homosexuality is not good (Diseases, gender imbalances in terms of marriageable people, etc. ). And in the Western World and in Asian developed countries, the fertility rates is below replacement levels and homosexuality is certainly not helping this problem. Graying populations is going to create big problems in terms of caring for the aged, pension plans, societies being less productive, Muslim terrorism if countries open the floodgates of Muslim immigration due to labor shortages, etc.

:::So it is very hard to call decriminalization an achievement. About the only thing you can say is that it frees up police resources.

:::Personally, since the Bible says in Romans 1 that he gives men/women over to a depraved mind who fail to acknowledge Him and some engage in homosexuality, you can regard homosexuality as a quasi type of punishment. To explain what I mean, here is what a pastor said, "From the foregoing man has fallen into a debased state, and God's yearning is to teach, guide and bestow his abundant mercy so that he is reconciled back to Him, by seeing and coming into His covenant. Therefore to "give man up" is to withdraw His teaching, guidance, and mercy and allow man continue in his wickedness"[https://ebible.com/questions/197-what-does-it-mean-that-god-will-give-them-over-to-a-debased-mind][[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:48, 27 November 2019 (EST)

::::I agree with everything you said above. The problem is that every now and then, there's a Trump Administration policy announcement that's in a gray area, where it's very hard to decide whether it should be listed as an achievement or a failure because generally strong conservatives whose opinions I respect disagree with each other. Because they're significant actions, there's no way that I will just ignore the action, so I need to decide whether to list it as a success or failure. When I decide this question, I try to note that not all consistent conservatives agreed with each other.

::::I also liked how the information debunked leftist homosexual activists' hysterical claims about the Trump Administration's policies.

::::Do you think I should move the information into a "failure" section? It will stay in the article no matter what because it's a significant action, but I'm open to listing it as a failure. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:04, 27 November 2019 (EST)
As far as American conservatives coming down on both sides of the fence, I would say that American conservatism has largely been a failure on social conservatism side (abortion, education, etc.). So a conservatism that doesn't conserve isn't conservative at all. It is argued that many conservatives weren't willing to fight and sully their uniforms and flew the flag of surrender quickly in term of social conservatism. Many people are so-called conservatives because they want respectability and social approval, so they quickly cave when opposition comes. Now [[Phyllis Schlafly]] was willing to get into the political trenches and fight for what she believed, but this wasn't true of American conservatism as a whole from 1960s up until Trump. But now you can see that Trump has given many conservatives a fighting spirit. Eventually, given their higher fertility rates, conservatives will likely win the culture war in the USA. But there has been a long period of defeatism. The problem essentially is that the label of "conservative" is ill-defined so people who are not conservative can easily call themselves conservative.

I just found out that sodomy laws didn't appear to exist in European countries such as England, Germany, France until after 1500. There were obviously Christians before 1500 so to call sodomy laws conservative in terms of Western Civilization would be a stretch. My guess is that the Reformation was a big influence in terms of countries eventually passing sodomy laws. And the spread of theologically conservative Protestantism does tend to cause countries/societies to be less tolerant of homosexuality. I know the Russian Orthodox church influenced Russia to be anti-homosexuality in its laws, but I don't know what the other Eastern Orthodox countries are like.

On the whole, since the most truly conservative portion of mankind's history was the garden of Eden before the fall, I would list the decriminalization of homosexuality as a failure! There was no homosexuality before the fall! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:21, 27 November 2019 (EST)
:I do think that social conservatives did a respectable job in fighting abortion pre-Trump after Roe vs. Wade was passed, but Trump appointing another conservative to SCOTUS could put them over the finish line on the abortion issue.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:24, 27 November 2019 (EST)
::I think the biggest reason why social conservatives lost so many battles was the advent of the baby boomers. You had a lot of prosperous young people by historical standards and many of them abandoned God. And so the sexual revolution, cultural Marxism, etc. came into American society. But again, conservatives are having more babies post the advent of the pill and so eventually conservatives could win the culture war. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:28, 27 November 2019 (EST)
:::I moved the information into a failure section. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:52, 27 November 2019 (EST)
:::Also, if you have other good sources I can cite in those entries, please let me know. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:03, 28 November 2019 (EST)
Thanks! By the way, ranking #3 for Donald Trump achievement is certainly an accomplishment. The White House website ranks #1 and #2 for that search result. And as Hillary found out, it is tough to compete with Trump so coming in 3rd place is pretty good!

Here is a suggestion. Why don't you take the failures out of the Donald Trump achievement articles. The failures are non-relevant to those articles. And given the current political polarization, I doubt someone going to a Donald Trump achievement article wants failures listed in the article. I think at most you should put in the fact that some victories were partial victories. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:09, 28 November 2019 (EST)

:I won't take the failures out, and they are relevant. One can't fully analyze and assess the Trump Administration's successes and achievements without also knowing it's failures. It gives a broader picture from a conservative perspective. People didn't think much about Reagan's illegal alien amnesty bill signing in 1986, but that failure has come back to hurt the U.S. and (partially) his legacy. We cannot whitewash that failure from his presidency, and we should not ignore any Trump Administration failure (but the vast majority of the administration's actions have been achievements, as the articles show).

:I already note in most of the failure sections that many of them were not the fault of Trump himself but rather of Congress and lower-ranking administration officials who didn't fully share his agenda. I'll consider also noting that some of them were partial victories. I want my article series to be comprehensive. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:18, 28 November 2019 (EST)
My guess is that Trump's failures are often the result of Paul Ryan being an impendiment for awhile such as the late building of the expansion border wall.

In addition, the Mueller probe and the impeachment farce were kind of like [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1dKsmV3fIU the hedgerows] that slowed down the Allies advancement for awhile after D-Day. Imagine what Trump would have gotten accomplished if he picked Bill Barr as his first attorney general instead of Jeffrey Sessions.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:41, 28 November 2019 (EST)
:I will see what I can do to make the "failure" section less of a distraction, but it needs to stay no matter what because it's relevant and provides context. Also, I think personnel has been Trump's biggest mistake as president -- many people in his administration opposed his conservative agenda and tried to turn him into another Bush. However, Trump has had many more successes/achievements than failures and setbacks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:14, 28 November 2019 (EST)
::Anne Coulter said Trump hiring the wrong people was one of his shortcomings. I don't know why this is happening.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:40, 28 November 2019 (EST)
I just read this:

"There are many reasons behind the sluggish hiring.

On Capitol Hill, Republicans blame Democrats for slow-walking nominees.

"They've continuously forced procedural hurdles on nominees for no reason other than to stall confirmations, launching more filibusters against this president's cabinet than any other in history," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last month.

To be sure, one cause of the slowdown stems from systemic problems in the Washington nomination process.

The White House is subjecting candidates to rigorous vetting -- one person familiar with the process described it as "brutal." They say the process has discouraged a number of candidates, especially those coming from the banking industry with deep financial ties.

"It was bad enough during the Obama administration, but it has gotten worse, and worse, and worse," said one banking lawyer, who noted he knew at least two people who dropped out of the process because of the tougher scrutiny."[https://money.cnn.com/2017/06/07/news/economy/trump-staffing-vacancies/index.html]

I am guessing given the heat put on Trump personnel by the media, some job candidates decline to be hired.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:50, 28 November 2019 (EST)
:Here is an satirical article which describes what I mentioned above: [https://babylonbee.com/news/conservative-slams-liberals-for-supporting-policies-hell-support-five-years-from-now Conservative Slams Liberal Policies He'll Support Five Years From Now].

:Many conservatives are too easily cowed by spurioous charges of being a racist, etc. etc. and cave into liberal demands. In short, many conservatives crave social approval and respect rather than being moored by biblical principles. I saw an interview of British conservatives and they said they now support views that they totally rejected several years ago and the reason was obvious. They craved the approval of men and had no firm principles.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:03, 28 November 2019 (EST)

::It seems that conservatives (overall) are less bold than leftists when it comes to pressing forward with their agenda. A leftist will come to power, make many significant changes, and then when a conservative replaces them, they only partially revert those changes. The cycle then repeats itself. I'm glad that Trump has been more aggressive in pressing with his agenda than other Republican presidents like the Bushes.

::Many of the setbacks Trump has seen during his presidency are more accurately described as "setbacks" rather than "failures." They are still relevant to someone wanting to evaluate how effective his presidency was at advancing conservative principles, so I revised the articles accordingly. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:38, 29 November 2019 (EST)
:::Your Trump articles are very informative. If Trump wins by a very razor thin margin, I will credit you with putting him over the top![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:31, 29 November 2019 (EST)

== Check the online place where we chat ==

Please check the online place where we chat. I will be online there now. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:02, 29 November 2019 (EST)
:I saw. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:19, 29 November 2019 (EST)

== Nice headline! ==

Very nice headline! Please feel free to post more headlines in the future.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:02, 8 December 2019 (EST)
:Thank you, Andy! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 08:11, 9 December 2019 (EST)

== Finding accurate sources to help explain cases of children who claim to remember past lives ==

Just wondering, since you seem to know how everything works in Conservapedia and can find accurate sources to back information, do you know any reliable sources that can provide a rational explanation for the multiple cases of children who claimed to remember past lives? This seems like an interesting topic for the [[Reincarnation]] page that I'm possibly adding more information to, and I'm hoping to find a scientific reason to make sense of all the obscure cases. Or are all these just individual cases of parental abuse in the seeking of publicity? Thanks! -[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]

:Reincarnation isn't a topic that I haven't studied very deeply, but here are some good sources from some good websites that I recommend: [https://www.gotquestions.org/past-lives-reincarnation.html 1],[https://answersingenesis.org/world-religions/new-age-movement-pantheism-monism/ 2] I would also check [https://carm.org/ carm.org] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 20:22, 24 December 2019 (EST)

::Thank you! -[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]

Nice unblock! MERRY CHRISTMAS!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:39, 25 December 2019 (EST)
:Thank you Andy, and Merry Christmas to you too! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:46, 25 December 2019 (EST)

== I'm Only Curious ==

I had heard that many ancient Egyptian pharaohs were in deed overweight due to their diets and sedentary lifestyles. I was told that the same applies to most Roman emperors, medieval royalty, and historical dictators. Additionally, I also remember hearing that being overweight was long a status symbol in history. I had also heard that they had quite the meat, carbohydrate, honey, dairy, and candy based diets. Is that true? If not, what were their diets mostly high in? ([[User:King Conservative|King Conservative]] ([[User talk:King Conservative|talk]]) 17:52, 11 January 2020 (EST)King Conservative)

:What does that have to do with government regulation of what you can eat? The government making a legal statute requiring people to eat healthy is as bad (from a liberty standpoint) as a legal statute requiring people to go to McDonald's three times a day. It's good to eat healthy, but it shouldn't be something imposed upon people by the government. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:56, 11 January 2020 (EST)

== About earning user rights ==

How can I, as a editor, earn [[conservapedia:user rights|user rights]]? For instance, in the future, I'd like to have the edit and upload flags. How do you earn those two and how many edits are required in order for that to happen? --[[User:AHills6|'''A''']][[User talk:AHills6|'''Hills''']][[Special:Contributions/AHills6|'''6''']] 21:43, 13 February 2020 (EST)

:I'm not 1990'sguy, but I don't think we have any officially published criteria for specific promotions. Generally, these privileges are granted senior editors who have contributed a significant amount. Just make good, high-quality contributions, and they will probably come eventually. Until then, you can request image uploads here: [[CP:IUR]]. We are processing them rather slowly right now, but we'll get to your requests eventually. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 22:00, 13 February 2020 (EST)
::Thank you for your help [[user:DavidB4|DavidB4]]. --[[User:AHills6|'''A''']][[User talk:AHills6|'''Hills''']][[Special:Contributions/AHills6|'''6''']] 22:04, 13 February 2020 (EST)

== 2019 Chilean State of Emergency ==

Thanks for all the material and pictures, after taking a break I'm back and think it's time to change the title of the page to 2019-20 Violent Chilean Protests (Chile Awakes Movement) to counter the leftist lies that have branded this episode simply as Peaceful Protests and for this Conservapedia page to appear in the top 10 google results along with Wikipedia's '2019–20 Chilean protests'
--[[User:Bearbrau|Bearbrau]] ([[User talk:Bearbrau|talk]]) 17:19, 25 February 2020 (EST)

== Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Mike Bloomberg, and Ted Turner ==

Do you think any of those four people have connections to organized crime syndicates? If so, why and if not, why not? ([[User:King Conservative|King Conservative]] ([[User talk:King Conservative|talk]]) 13:26, 10 April 2020 (EDT)King Conservative)

:I'm not 1990'sguy, but I would recommend you see [[Clinton body count|this page]] and [[Jeffrey Epstein|this page]] for some brief information on Clinton crimes. As for Bloomberg, I don't know too much, and I haven't done research into Ted Turner. Also, as for 1990'sguy, the user's last edits were almost three months ago ([[Special:Contributions/1990'sguy|see here]]). --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 13:37, 10 April 2020 (EDT)
: Ok. Thanks. ([[User:King Conservative|King Conservative]] ([[User talk:King Conservative|talk]]) 14:02, 10 April 2020 (EDT)King Conservative)

::You're welcome! If you ever have more questions, you can ask on my talk page if other editors aren't always frequently around on their talk pages. --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 14:05, 10 April 2020 (EDT)

:Reminder of Conservapdia Commandments 1, 2, and 5.
#Everything you post must be true and verifiable. Do not copy from Wikipedia[1] or elsewhere unless it was your original work.[2]
#Always cite[3] and give credit to your sources,[4] even if in the public domain.[5] When making citations from books, users are encouraged to find additional online sources that provide easy verification. Please check Google Books to see if this particular source is available in online form. If you are unfamiliar on how to place footnotes in a wiki, please see: Conservapedia:Footnotes - technical help
:5. Do not post personal opinion on an encyclopedia entry. Opinions can be posted on Talk:pages or on debate or discussion pages. Advertisements are prohibited.
:I think we're just being trolled in advance of the 2020 elections to discredit CP as a biased source. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 16:11, 10 April 2020 (EDT)

::Wait, did I do anything wrong, RobSmith? --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 16:16, 10 April 2020 (EDT)
:::No. Nothing wrong with being tolerant of others' views. But I have detected a pattern in recent weeks of trolling to paint CP as 'extreme' in certain viewpoints in advance of the 2020 elections. We have two examples just today of using categories, [[:Category:Men]] and [[:Category:Criminals]]. These categorizations of certain individuals are needlessly controversial.

:::[https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Michael_Cohen&diff=prev&oldid=1419238 See this past categorization], for example. (A} No one asserts that [[Michael Cohen]], a lifelong Democrat, is a conservative; (B} more importantly, I have good reason to suspect the miscategorization of certain individuals as being "Pro-2nd Amendment" is to make it easy to galvanize anti-2nd Amendment activists against Michael Cohen and others by simply clicking on the category link. There's no evidence anywhere I can find Michael Cohen ever spoke about the 2nd Amendment, pro or con. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 17:35, 10 April 2020 (EDT)

::::Oh yeah, I see your point, RobSmith. Also, just wondering, why did you mention something about a [[DNC]] attempt to promote division among Republicans after I requested creating [[Template:Republican establishment|this template]]? And speaking of promoting division, did you find it suspicious what [[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] was doing a while ago, labeling [[Nikki Haley]] and [[Ted Cruz]] as [[RINOs]]? And lastly, out of topic, but generally at least how many edits does it take to be granted extra tags? --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 18:22, 10 April 2020 (EDT)

==Main Page News==
Hi, the news on the main page talks about Jimmy Kimmel saying that he's a bigot because of Trump, but the video shows a statement where he doesn't talk about Trump at all. Fix please. [[User:Libcons|Libcons]] ([[User talk:Libcons|talk]]) 18:13, 24 June 2020 (EDT)

== Welcome back! ==

Welcome back 1990'sguy! —[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May Dataclarifier be well!]]''''' 14:20, 9 July 2020 (EDT)

hey! I'm not sure who to report this problem to but when editing on mobile the captcha question doesn't appear. the captcha text box does appear but it's impossible to see what the question is until I either use a laptop or the desktop version of chrome.. {{unsigned|Mikephshdj}}

Great to see you around again, 1990'sguy! How have you been doing? (by the way, I believe your previous reply here disappeared following some server errors) —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>Liberaltears</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Wednesday, 20:35, 22 September 2020 (EDT)
:Yes, I noticed -- the previous comments were removed for whatever reason. I'm doing well. I left because of an increase in my off-wiki workload, and now, with a more stable situation, I'll be slowly working to update some important articles (sadly, not the "Donald Trump achievements" series). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:52, 27 September 2020 (EDT)
::Oh, alright. For the Donald Trump achievements series, I'll mainly focus on the foreign policy part for this year. (by the way, I'm replying from a sock I account I just created a few hours ago because I can't log in from my normal one) [[User:TemporarysockofLT|TemporarysockofLT]] ([[User talk:TemporarysockofLT|talk]]) 19:58, 27 September 2020 (EDT)

Template:Barrett Confirmation Hearing

2020-09-27T23:47:27Z

TemporarysockofLT: add Da Nang Dick to the list - he apparently said that he would boycott meeting with Barrett

{{Navbox
|name=Barrett Confirmation Hearing
|basestyle=font-size: 95%; background-color:DarkRed;
|title=[[Barrett Confirmation Hearing| Barrett Confirmation Hearing ]]
|state=expanded

|group1style=font-size: 85%; background-color:#faecc8;
|group1=Topics
|list1style=font-size: 85%; background-color:white;
|list1=[[Barrett Confirmation Hearing]] • [[Senate Judiciary Committee]] • [[Amy Coney Barrett]] • [[Dianne Feinstein]] • [[Richard Blumenthal]] • [[Haiti]]

}}
<noinclude>
[[Category:Templates]]
</noinclude>

William Marcy Tweed

2020-09-27T23:45:37Z

TemporarysockofLT: /* Investigations */ move image

{{Officeholder
|name=William Marcy Tweed
|image=Tweed1.JPG
|party=[[Democrat]]
|spouse=Jane Skaden
|religion=
|offices=
{{Officeholder/state senator
|state=New York
|district=4th
|terms=January 1, 1868 – December 31, 1873
|preceded=George Briggs
|former=y
|succeeded=John Fox
}}
{{Officeholder/misc
|office=Grand Sanchem of [[Tammany Hall]]
|terms=1858 – 1871
|preceded=Fernando Wood
|former=y
|succeeded=John Kelly/John Morrissey
}}
{{Officeholder/representative
|state=New York
|district=4th
|terms=March 4, 1853 – March 3, 1855
|preceded=George Briggs
|former=y
|succeeded=Thomas R. Whitney
}}
}}

'''William Marcy Tweed''' (or ''William Magear Tweed''; byname "Boss Tweed"; 1823-1878), was a [[New York City]] [[Democratic Party]] leader who turned [[Tammany Hall]] into one of the most corrupt political machines in United States history, as well as running a network of close city officials under the so-called Tweed Ring, which was responsible for extorting [[kickbacks]] from contractors and others doing business with the city, manipulating the public vote in his favor, and plundering more than $100,000,000 from the treasury before he was driven from power and arrested.

==History==
Tweed was born in New York City on April 3, 1823, the son of a chairmaker, from whom he eventually learned the trade. As a young man he became the organizer and foreman of a city fire-engine company, which gave him a bit of popularity and a taste of the power of local politics, from which he spent much of his life. He was a city alderman in 1852-1853, served one term in the [[United States Congress]] in 1853-1855, then returned to New York to serve in several successive posts before being elected to the state senate for one term in 1867.

While serving as state senator he was also appointed to the department of public works in New York City as commissioner, and while in that position he gathered his three chief henchmen - Alexander Oakey Hall, Peter Sweeney and Richard Connolly - and with a few others formed the Tweed Ring. Their first order of business was to secure themselves in positions of power by bribery and influence among the lower classes in the city - already they had total control of Tammany Hall - which enabled them to manipulate and alter the outcome of the mayoral election of 1865. As a result, the mayor's office went to Hall; Sweeney was appointed the treasurer for both the city and county; Connolly was appointed the city comptroller; and Tweed the superintendent of streets. In 1870 these men would compel the city government to re-write the charter, enabling the Ring to install more of their cronies in selected positions; Tweed himself would be named commissioner of public works, which enabled Tweed to directly control the money flowing in.

And the graft began: three hundred park benches were bought by Tweed for five dollars each, yet he charged the city $600 each to have them installed. On July 30, 1870, over $200,000 was charged to the city to repair furniture at several armories. To furnish a single courthouse, the city was forced to pay $1,476,980.24 to a single firm. In an article of the ''[[New York Times]]'' (January 3, 1871) it was identified that the Ring used their stolen money to purchase property in several city wards in excess of a million dollars between 1868 and 1871; Tweed alone was responsible for a total of $547,000; yet officially his salary was $2,500 a year.

==Investigations==
[[File:Tweed2.jpg|left|200px|thumb|''Tweed at the Ballot Box'', by Thomas Nast]]
For several months in 1870-1871 various article speculated on the corruption alleged by Tweed, but an expose appeared in the ''New York Times'' on July 24, 1871, in which the writer laid bare to the public tens of millions of dollars that went missing. "We have brought very serious charges against Mayor Hall and Controller Connolly," began the article, "and in reply to them the Mayor says that the City owes us a bill for advertising which we cannot get." ("Proofs", July 24, 1871). Stating that the information came from a "dishonest person" was the Mayor's reply, but he did not deny the allegations. But worse was yet to come for the Ring, especially Tweed. Democratic reformist [[Samuel Tilden]] - who would lose a disputed presidential election to [[Rutherford B. Hayes]] - also threw himself into the fray and demanded investigations into the matter.

But it was cartoonist [[Thomas Nast]] who did the most damage. Cartoons appeared in ''Harper's Weekly'' showing Tweed as an uncaring buffoon about to alter the ballot box, or as a buzzard about to gorge on his victims. In one the blame for the stolen money was passed around the circle of his cronies without end. Tammany Hall was represented by a ravenous tiger, about to tear apart another taxpayer. Above all else, the cartoons were having an effect on the public, and on Tweed personally. "Let’s stop them damned pictures," Tweed supposedly said. "I don’t care so much what the papers write about — my constituents can’t read — but damn it, they can see pictures!" Tweed offered Nast a bribe of half a million dollars to stop his cartoons; Nast rejected the offer, and went on drawing.

Tweed was arrested and charged with forgery and larceny in 1873, and he served two years. He then faced civil charges: a suit from New York for $6,000,000. Although technically in jail, he was allowed daily visits out to be with his family, and on one of these visits he escaped to Europe. The pleasure of living abroad was short-lived: he was arrested in Spain after a ship's hand recognized him from a Nast cartoon. Extradited back to New York, he died in prison on April 12, 1878.

==References==
*"The Ring's Real Estate: Some of the Plunder of Tweed, Sweeney & Co," article in the ''New York Times'', January 3, 1871
*"Our Proofs of Fraud Against the City Government," article in the ''New York Times'', July 24, 1871

{{DEFAULTSORT:Tweed, William Marcy}}
[[Category:New York]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Criminals]]
[[Category:State Senators]]
{{Democrat establishment}}

William Marcy Tweed

2020-09-27T23:42:18Z

TemporarysockofLT: added officeholder template, category links

{{Officeholder
|name=William Marcy Tweed
|image=Tweed1.JPG
|party=[[Democrat]]
|spouse=Jane Skaden
|religion=
|offices=
{{Officeholder/state senator
|state=New York
|district=4th
|terms=January 1, 1868 – December 31, 1873
|preceded=George Briggs
|former=y
|succeeded=John Fox
}}
{{Officeholder/misc
|office=Grand Sanchem of [[Tammany Hall]]
|terms=1858 – 1871
|preceded=Fernando Wood
|former=y
|succeeded=John Kelly/John Morrissey
}}
{{Officeholder/representative
|state=New York
|district=4th
|terms=March 4, 1853 – March 3, 1855
|preceded=George Briggs
|former=y
|succeeded=Thomas R. Whitney
}}
}}

'''William Marcy Tweed''' (or ''William Magear Tweed''; byname "Boss Tweed"; 1823-1878), was a [[New York City]] [[Democratic Party]] leader who turned [[Tammany Hall]] into one of the most corrupt political machines in United States history, as well as running a network of close city officials under the so-called Tweed Ring, which was responsible for extorting [[kickbacks]] from contractors and others doing business with the city, manipulating the public vote in his favor, and plundering more than $100,000,000 from the treasury before he was driven from power and arrested.

==History==
Tweed was born in New York City on April 3, 1823, the son of a chairmaker, from whom he eventually learned the trade. As a young man he became the organizer and foreman of a city fire-engine company, which gave him a bit of popularity and a taste of the power of local politics, from which he spent much of his life. He was a city alderman in 1852-1853, served one term in the [[United States Congress]] in 1853-1855, then returned to New York to serve in several successive posts before being elected to the state senate for one term in 1867.

While serving as state senator he was also appointed to the department of public works in New York City as commissioner, and while in that position he gathered his three chief henchmen - Alexander Oakey Hall, Peter Sweeney and Richard Connolly - and with a few others formed the Tweed Ring. Their first order of business was to secure themselves in positions of power by bribery and influence among the lower classes in the city - already they had total control of Tammany Hall - which enabled them to manipulate and alter the outcome of the mayoral election of 1865. As a result, the mayor's office went to Hall; Sweeney was appointed the treasurer for both the city and county; Connolly was appointed the city comptroller; and Tweed the superintendent of streets. In 1870 these men would compel the city government to re-write the charter, enabling the Ring to install more of their cronies in selected positions; Tweed himself would be named commissioner of public works, which enabled Tweed to directly control the money flowing in.

And the graft began: three hundred park benches were bought by Tweed for five dollars each, yet he charged the city $600 each to have them installed. On July 30, 1870, over $200,000 was charged to the city to repair furniture at several armories. To furnish a single courthouse, the city was forced to pay $1,476,980.24 to a single firm. In an article of the ''[[New York Times]]'' (January 3, 1871) it was identified that the Ring used their stolen money to purchase property in several city wards in excess of a million dollars between 1868 and 1871; Tweed alone was responsible for a total of $547,000; yet officially his salary was $2,500 a year.

==Investigations==
[[File:Tweed2.jpg|right|200px|thumb|''Tweed at the Ballot Box'', by Thomas Nast]]
For several months in 1870-1871 various article speculated on the corruption alleged by Tweed, but an expose appeared in the ''New York Times'' on July 24, 1871, in which the writer laid bare to the public tens of millions of dollars that went missing. "We have brought very serious charges against Mayor Hall and Controller Connolly," began the article, "and in reply to them the Mayor says that the City owes us a bill for advertising which we cannot get." ("Proofs", July 24, 1871). Stating that the information came from a "dishonest person" was the Mayor's reply, but he did not deny the allegations. But worse was yet to come for the Ring, especially Tweed. Democratic reformist [[Samuel Tilden]] - who would lose a disputed presidential election to [[Rutherford B. Hayes]] - also threw himself into the fray and demanded investigations into the matter.

But it was cartoonist [[Thomas Nast]] who did the most damage. Cartoons appeared in ''Harper's Weekly'' showing Tweed as an uncaring buffoon about to alter the ballot box, or as a buzzard about to gorge on his victims. In one the blame for the stolen money was passed around the circle of his cronies without end. Tammany Hall was represented by a ravenous tiger, about to tear apart another taxpayer. Above all else, the cartoons were having an effect on the public, and on Tweed personally. "Let’s stop them damned pictures," Tweed supposedly said. "I don’t care so much what the papers write about — my constituents can’t read — but damn it, they can see pictures!" Tweed offered Nast a bribe of half a million dollars to stop his cartoons; Nast rejected the offer, and went on drawing.

Tweed was arrested and charged with forgery and larceny in 1873, and he served two years. He then faced civil charges: a suit from New York for $6,000,000. Although technically in jail, he was allowed daily visits out to be with his family, and on one of these visits he escaped to Europe. The pleasure of living abroad was short-lived: he was arrested in Spain after a ship's hand recognized him from a Nast cartoon. Extradited back to New York, he died in prison on April 12, 1878.

==References==
*"The Ring's Real Estate: Some of the Plunder of Tweed, Sweeney & Co," article in the ''New York Times'', January 3, 1871
*"Our Proofs of Fraud Against the City Government," article in the ''New York Times'', July 24, 1871

{{DEFAULTSORT:Tweed, William Marcy}}
[[Category:New York]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Criminals]]
[[Category:State Senators]]
{{Democrat establishment}}

Template:Democrat establishment

2020-09-27T23:35:11Z

TemporarysockofLT: copyedit

{{Navbox
|name=Democrat establishment
|basestyle=font-size: 100%; background-color:Blue
|title=Democrat Establishment
|state=expanded

|group1style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group1=Groups
|list1style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list1=Senate Democratic Caucus • [[New Democrat Coalition]] • [[Blue Dog Democrat|Blue Dog Coalition]] • [[DNC]] • [[DSCC]] • [[DCCC]]

|group2style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group2=Agenda
|list2style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list2=[[Liberalism]] • [[Leftism]] • [[Progressivism]] • [[Democrat Plantation]] • [[Big tent politics]] • [[Marxism]] • [[Spending bills]] • [[Elitism]] • [[Big government]] • [[Anti-Trump]] • [[Biden Putsch]] • [[Infanticide]]

|group3style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group3=Tactics
|list3style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list3=[[Liberal deceit]] • [[Political correctness]] • [[Liberal propaganda]] • [[Bait and switch]] • [[Liberal media bias]] • [[Russia collusion hoax]] • [[Voter fraud]]

|group4style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group4=Historical Figures
|list4style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list4=[[William Marcy Tweed|Boss Tweed]] • [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] • [[Richard Russell Jr.|Richard Russell, Jr.]] • [[Harry F. Byrd]]

|group5style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group5=Leaders
|list5style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list5=[[Cheri Bustos]] • [[James Clyburn]] • [[Catherine Cortez Masto]] • [[Jason Crow]] • [[Val Demings]] • [[Richard Durbin]] • [[Marc Elias]] • [[Steny Hoyer]] • [[Ben Ray Luján]] • [[Jerrold Nadler]] • [[Tom O'Halleran]] • [[Nancy Pelosi]] • [[Gary Peters]] • [[Adam Schiff]] • [[Charles Schumer]] • [[Jon Tester]] • [[Debbie Wasserman Schultz]]

|group6style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group6=Puppets
|list6style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list6=[[Cindy Axne]] • [[Anthony Brindisi]] • [[Steve Bullock]] • [[T.J. Cox]] • [[Cal Cunningham]] • [[Joe Cunningham]] • [[Sharice Davids]] • [[Abby Finkenauer]] • [[Elizabeth P. Fletcher]] • [[Sara Gideon]] • [[Jared Golden]] • [[Al Gross]] • [[Josh Harder]] • [[John Hickenlooper]] • [[Kendra Horn]] • [[Chrissy Houlahan]] • [[Conor Lamb]] • [[Elaine Luria]] • [[Mark E. Kelly]] • [[Andy Kim]] • [[Tom Malinowski]] • [[Ben McAdams]] • [[Lucy McBath]] • [[Amy McGrath]] • [[Max Rose]] • [[Elissa Slotkin]] • [[Abigail Spanberger]] • [[Haley Stevens]] • [[Xochitl Torres Small]] • [[Jennifer Wexton]]

|group7style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group7=Allies
|list7style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list7=[[Lamestream media]] • [[Democratic Socialists of America]] • [[Ghislaine Maxwell]] • [[Organizing for America]] • [[Thousand Currents]]

|group8style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group8=Far-left opponents
|list8style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list8=[[Pramila Jayapal]] • [[Barbara Lee]] • [[Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez]] • [[Ilhan Omar]] • [[Ayanna Pressley]] • [[Bernie Sanders]] • [[Rashida Tlaib]]
}}

<includeonly>[[Category:Establishment]]</includeonly>

Harry F. Byrd

2020-09-27T23:34:34Z

TemporarysockofLT: added a template

{{Officeholder
|name=Harry F. Byrd
|image=
|party=[[Democrat]]
|spouse=Anne Douglas Beverley
|religion=
|offices=
{{Officeholder/senator
|state=Virginia
|terms=March 4, 1933 – November 10, 1965
|preceded=[[Claude A. Swanson]]
|status=f
|succeeded=Harry F. Byrd, Jr.
}}
{{Officeholder/governor
|state=Virginia
|lieutenant=Junius Edgar West
|terms=February 1, 1926 – January 15, 1930
|preceded=Elbert Lee Trinkle
|former=y
|succeeded=John Garland Pollard
}}
{{Officeholder/state senator
|state=Virginia
|district=26th
|terms=January 9, 1924 – February 1, 1926
|preceded=James M. Dickerson
|former=y
|succeeded=Joseph S. Denny
}}
{{Officeholder/state senator
|state=Virginia
|district=10th
|terms=January 12, 1916 – January 9, 1924
|preceded=Frank S. Tavenner
|former=y
|succeeded=Marshall B. Booker
}}
}}
:''No relation to [[Robert Byrd]], former U.S. senator from [[West Virginia]]
'''Harry Flood Byrd, Sr.''' (June 10, 1887 – October 20, 1966) was a senator from the state of [[Virginia]] from 1933 to 1965. A staunch opponent of desegregation, he was a Southern [[Democrat]] who led the Byrd Organization, a political machine during the 20th century that dominated statewide politics in the [[Commonwealth of Virginia]]. Having been a member of the [[Conservative Coalition]], Byrd was also remembered as a leader against [[New Deal]] initiatives spearheaded by [[FDR]].

==Early life==
Harry Flood Byrd was born on June 10, 1887 to Richard Evelyn Byrd and Eleanor Bolling Flood in Martinsburg, [[West Virginia]]. Reared in Winchester along with his brothers, Byrd's lifelong prominence would root to the Southern culture he was raised with there. Quitting school at the age of fifteen, he managed to take over the family newspaper that had been failing, and transformed it into an enterprise that was profitable.

==Early political career==
At the age of 21, Byrd began his political career by serving an appointed term on the Winchester City Council. Losing election to a second term in the position, he would no longer take any elections for granted in the rest of his lifetime.

In 1915, Byrd was elected to the [[Virginia]] State Senate, and would serve for eight years from the 10th district and two years from the 26th district. Here, he was known for favoring [[prohibition]], having an expertise on fiscal matters, in addition to being an opponent of [[women's suffrage]].

==Governor of Virginia==
===1925 election===
After having experience in running a Democrat political machine, Byrd garnered the experience that propelled him to successfully run in the 1925 Virginia gubernatorial election, defeating G. Walter Mapp in the primary and later [[Republican]] S. Harris Hoge in the general election held in November that year.

===Tenure===
A [[fiscal conservative]] who favored a business-like approach to running government, Gov. Byrd was known for having centralized executive powers, re-organized the state government overall, utilized an authorized survey to reduce the number of elected state officers from eight to three, abolished a number of state agencies, and altered the statewide tax system that left the income tax to the state while allowing precincts/localities to enact taxations on personal property and real estate. All this had generated a surplus of four million dollars for the treasury, and the policies leading up to such was met with overall approval from the Virginia legislature.

Following two [[lynching]]s in [[Virginia]] during Byrd's gubernatorial tenure, the governor pushed the state legislature to pass tough anti-lynching bills; while this was done, the assembly also passed a law without the signature of the governor that segregated all statewide public assemblies.

==Family==
In 1913, Byrd married Anne Douglas Beverley and had four children; of them, his son [[Harry F. Byrd, Jr.]] replaced him in the Senate upon his death in 1966.

==See also==
*[[Richard Russell, Jr.]]

==External links==
*[https://www.jstor.org/stable/1900773?seq=1 The New Deal and the States: Roosevelt Versus the Byrd Organization in Virginia]
*[https://bioguideretro.congress.gov/Home/MemberDetails?memIndex=B001208 Byrd, Harry Flood - Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress]
*[https://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/Byrd_Harry_Flood_Sr_1887-1966 Harry F. Byrd (1887–1966) - Encyclopedia Virginia]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Byrd, Harry F.}}
[[Category:Virginia]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
{{Democrat establishment}}
[[Category:Racism]]
[[Category:Virginia Governors]]
[[Category:Former United States Senators]]
[[Category:Fiscal Conservatives]]
[[Category:State Senators]]

Lyndon B. Johnson

2020-09-27T23:34:30Z

TemporarysockofLT: added a template

{{Officeholder
|name=Lyndon B. Johnson
|image=LBJ by Shoumatoff.jpg
|party=[[Democratic Party|Democrat]]
|spouse=[[Lady Bird Johnson]]
|religion=[[Disciples of Christ]]
|offices=
{{Officeholder/president
|country=the United States
|number=36th
|terms=November 22, 1963 – January 20, 1969
|vp=[[Hubert Humphrey]]
|preceded=[[John F. Kennedy]]
|former=y
|succeeded=[[Richard Nixon]]
}}
{{Officeholder/vice president
|country=the United States
|number=37th
|terms=January 20, 1961 – November 22, 1963
|president=[[John F. Kennedy]]
|preceded=[[Richard Nixon]]
|former=y
|succeeded=[[Hubert Humphrey]]
}}
{{Officeholder/senator
|state=Texas
|terms=January 3, 1949 – January 3, 1961
|preceded=W. Lee O'Daniel
|former=y
|succeeded=[[William Blakley]] (interim) 
[[John Tower]] (permanent)
}}
{{Officeholder/representative
|state=Texas
|district=10th
|terms=April 10, 1937 – January 3, 1949
|preceded=[[James P. Buchanan]]
|former=y
|succeeded=[[Homer Thornberry]]
}}
}}
'''Lyndon Baines Johnson''' (1908–1973), often referred to as '''LBJ''', was the 36th [[President of the United States of America]] (1963–1969). After serving in the House and Senate since 1937, Johnson was elected vice president in 1960, and in November 1963, he succeeded to the presidency following President [[John F. Kennedy]]'s assassination. President Kennedy disliked his Vice President Johnson so much that Kennedy ostracized him from social events, and Johnson was perhaps the most crooked, bullying politician ever to become president.<ref>[https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu//NSAEBB/NSAEBB132/tapes.htm ''LBJ Tapes on the Gulf of Tonkin Incident Source: John Prados, The White House Tapes'']</ref>

In [[Texas]], Johnson stole his first election to the [[U.S. Senate]], as recounted by historians. As president in 1964, Johnson ordered the [[CIA]] to infiltrate and spy on his [[conservative]] opponent, [[Barry Goldwater]], which enabled Johnson to preempt Goldwater's initiatives with Johnson's own. Johnson also lied about the [[Gulf of Tonkin]] attack in order to boost his re-election efforts in 1964.

Johnson began his career as a liberal [[New Deal]]er, later when he became a senator he initially aligned himself with the Southern Democrats, although by the time he ascended to Senate Leadership he espoused moderate politics in an attempt to bridge both wings of the fractious [[Democratic Party]]. However, as president, he seized the leadership of liberalism citing [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] as his role model. Johnson moved the [[Democratic Party]] to the left, and pushed through Congress the [[Great Society]], comprising liberal economic policy including Medicare (free health care for the elderly), Medicaid (free health care for the poor), aid to education, and a major "War on Poverty". As part of his jobs program, he greatly escalated the American troop strength in [[Vietnam]] through [[conscription]], from 16,000 in 1963 to 23,000 by the end of 1964 and finally to 550,000 by early 1968. [[Unemployment]] consequently, remained in check.

Johnson won re-election in a landslide in 1964 over [[conservative]] leader [[Barry Goldwater]], and proceeded to push through a massive expansion of federal programs known as the "Welfare State." This included [[Medicare]], food stamps, and federal spending on education. Johnson also supported the [[Voting Rights Act]] of 1965, which passed over a Democratic Filibuster.

Johnson's popularity steadily declined after 1966 and his reelection bid in 1968 collapsed as a result of turmoil in his Democratic party primarily due to Johnson's mishandling (and micromanagement) of the [[Vietnam War]] (which also ironically involved the [[Liberal bias#Vietnam War|intentionally false reporting]] by [[Walter Cronkite]] on the [[Tet Offensive]]). Johnson was humiliated by a primary challenge to his reelection from fellow [[Democrat]] [[Eugene McCarthy]] in early 1968 in [[New Hampshire]], and then LBJ withdrew as a candidate for reelection. His Vice President [[Hubert Humphrey]] lost in the general election due in part to Johnson's unpopularity.

==Early years==
Johnson was maternally descended from a pioneer Baptist clergyman, George Washington Baines, who pastored numerous small rural churches in Texas, Arkansas, and Louisiana. Baines was also the president of [[Baylor University]] during the [[American Civil War]]. George Baines was the grandfather of Johnson's mother, Rebekah Baines Johnson.

Johnson was born in Stonewall, Texas, in a small farmhouse in a poor farming area along the Pedernales River. His parents, Samuel Ealy Johnson, Jr. and the former Rebekah Baines, had three girls and two boys. The nearby village of Johnson City, Texas, was named after a relative who came from Georgia. In school, Johnson was an awkward, talkative youth and was elected president of his eleventh-grade class.<ref>https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/36_l_johnson/tguide/l_johnson_dk.html</ref> He graduated from Johnson City High School in 1924.<ref>http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/archives.hom/biographys.hom/lbj_bio.asp</ref>

In 1926, Johnson enrolled in Southwest Texas State Teachers' College (now called Texas State University-San Marcos). He worked his way through school, participated in debate and campus politics, edited the school newspaper, and graduated in 1931. Biographer Robert Caro asserts he was known as "the biggest liar on campus." <ref>Caro, Robert A. The Years of Lyndon Johnson: The Path to Power. New York: Alfred A Knopf, Inc. 1982. p. xx</ref> The college years refined his remarkable skills of persuasion and political organization. One year Johnson taught mostly Mexican American children at the Welhausen School in Cotulla, Texas. When he returned to San Marcos in 1965, after having signed the [[Higher Education Act]], Johnson looked back:
:"''I shall never forget the faces of the boys and the girls in that little Welhausen Mexican School, and I remember even yet the pain of realizing and knowing then that college was closed to practically every one of those children because they were too poor. And I think it was then that I made up my mind that this Nation could never rest while the door to knowledge remained closed to any American''."<ref>see [http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/lbjforkids/edu_whca370-text.shtm "Remarks at Southwest Texas State College Upon Signing the Higher Education Act of 1965"]</ref>

==Early political career==
After graduation, Johnson briefly taught public speaking at Genesee Community College and debate in a Houston high school, then entered politics. Johnson's father had served five terms in the Texas legislature and was a close friend to one of Texas's rising political figures, Congressman [[Sam Rayburn]]. In 1930, Johnson campaigned for Texas state Senator Welly Hopkins in his run for Congress. Hopkins recommended him to Congressman [[Richard M. Kleberg]], who appointed Johnson as Kleberg's legislative secretary. LBJ was elected speaker of the "Little Congress," a group of Congressional aides, where he cultivated Congressmen, newspapermen and lobbyists. Johnson's friends soon included aides to President [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]], as well as fellow Texans such as Vice President [[John Nance Garner]]. He became a surrogate son to Sam Rayburn.

Johnson married Claudia Alta Taylor (already nicknamed "Lady Bird") of Karnack, Texas on November 17, 1934, after she had attended Georgetown University Law School for several months. They had two daughters, Lynda Bird Johnson, born in 1944, and Luci Baines Johnson, born in 1947. Johnson enjoyed giving people and animals his own LBJ initials; his daughters' given names are examples, as was his dog Little Beagle Johnson.

In 1935, he was appointed head of the Texas [[National Youth Administration]] (NYA), which enabled him to use the government to create educational and job opportunities for young people. He resigned two years later to run for Congress. Johnson was a notoriously tough boss throughout his career, often demanding long workdays and work on weekends; he worked as hard as any of them.<ref>Woods, (2006), p. 131</ref>

==House years==
Johnson resigned from his NYA job in 1937 to run successfully in a special election for a seat in the [[House of Representatives]] representing [[Austin, Texas|Austin]] and the surrounding Hill Country. He ran on a [[New Deal]] platform and was effectively aided by his wife, Lady Bird Johnson.

President Roosevelt found Johnson to be a welcome ally and conduit for information, particularly with regards to issues concerning internal politics in Texas (informally dubbed "Operation Texas") and the machinations of Vice President Garner and House Speaker Sam Rayburn. Johnson was immediately appointed to the powerful Naval Affairs Committee. He worked for rural electrification and other improvements for his district. Johnson steered the projects towards contractors which he personally knew, such as the Brown Brothers, Herman and George, who would finance much of Johnson's future career.<ref>Caro, (1982) is full of details.</ref> In 1941, he ran for the U.S. Senate (while not giving up his House seat) in a special election against the sitting governor, radio personality W. Lee "Pappy" O'Daniel. Johnson was not expected to win against the popular governor, but he ran a strong race and was declared the winner in unofficial returns. He ultimately was defeated by controversial official returns in an election marked by massive fraud on the part of both campaigns.

==Senate years==

In 1948, Johnson won an election for [[U.S. Senate]] by stealing the election, according even to historians sympathetic to him. Johnson ran against former governor Coke Stevenson; neither candidate won a majority of the votes in the election, which under Texas law forced a runoff between Johnson and Stevenson. Johnson then claimed an 87-vote victory over Stevenson in the runoff, which was fraudulent.<ref>See eg Robert A Caro Master of the ''Senate Means of Assent''</ref> After joining the Senate, Johnson established relationships with several senior senators, including [[Richard Russell]]. Johnson was appointed to the powerful [[Armed Services Committee]] in 1950, and became chairman of the Preparedness Subcommittee which brought him into the public spotlight much like [[Harry Truman]] used the "Truman Committee" during the Second World War. He was named minority whip in 1951 under Democratic leader Bob McFarland, and he became the leader of the [[Democratic Party]] in the Senate in 1953. His first major policy, with the support of Russell, was to bypass the Seniority rule in committee assignments, which meant that Senators became reliant on his favor in order to obtain positions on important committees. This move, in combination with his strong personality gave him power of senators that had not been seen before (or since) in Senate History. He is often referred to as the "Master of the Senate". Surprisingly, after he became majority leader in 1955 he supported many of Eisenhower's proposals despite the partisan resistance of the liberal wing of the Democratic party. This allowed him to bask in the reflected glow of Eisenhower's immense popularity and gain a reputation for working across the aisle and getting things done.

Although publicly posing as a Civil Rights hero, in private Johnson was—like most southern Democrats of the 1960s—a racist: When his sometime chauffeur, Robert Parker, told LBJ he'd prefer to be called by his name rather than "boy," "n***er" or "chief," Johnson replied, "As long as you are black, and you're gonna be black till the day you die, no one's gonna call you by your goddamn name. So no matter what you are called, n***er, you just let it roll off your back like water, and you’ll make it. Just pretend you’re a goddamn piece of furniture."<ref>Robert Parker and Richard L. Rashke, ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=JKhpZMj8Z6wC Capitol Hill in Black and White]'' (Penguin Group, 1989), ISBN 0515101893, p. v.</ref>

In his capacity as Majority Leader of the Senate, Johnson joined with [[Strom Thurmond]] to kill the Civil Rights Act of 1957. But when Senate Republicans re-introduced the bill, LBJ said, "I'm going to have to bring up the n***er bill again," according to LBJ's White House Special Counsel Harry McPherson.<ref>Michael L. Gillette, [https://web.archive.org/web/20050304042315/http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/archives.hom/oralhistory.hom/mcpherson/mcpher06.pdf Transcript, Harry McPherson Oral History Interview VI], 5/16/85, LBJ Library, 16 May 1985.</ref> "Let's face it. Our ass is in a crack. We're gonna have to let this n***er bill pass," he told Senator John Stennis (D-MS), according to a Pulitzer Prize winning<ref>[http://www.pulitzer.org/bycat/Biography-or-Autobiography Biography or Autobiography]. Past winners & finalists by category. The Pulitzer Prizes. Retrieved 2012-03-24.</ref> biography.<ref>Caro, Robert A. (2002). ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=U87rzAqVhbwC The Years of Lyndon Johnson: Master of the Senate, Volume 3]''. New York: Knopf. p. 954. ISBN 0394528360.</ref> According to Bancroft Prize winning<ref>[http://library.columbia.edu/about/awards/bancroft/previous_awards.html The Bancroft Prizes: Previous Awards]. The Columbia University Libraries/Information Services</ref> biographer Robert Dallek, he asked Senator Sam Rayburn (D-TX), "Sam, why don't you all let this n***er bill pass?"<ref>Dallek, Robert (1991). ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=t_LjEJdaAiYC Lone Star Rising: Lyndon Johnson and His Times, 1908-1960]''. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. p. 519. ISBN 0195054350.</ref> According to former Harvard historian and Johnson staffer Doris Kearns Goodwin, LBJ explained his position to Senator Richard Russell, Jr. (D-GA) thus:
{{cquote|These Negroes, they’re getting pretty [[uppity]] these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.<ref>Goodwin, Doris Kearns (1977). [https://books.google.com/books?id=HS9aAAAAYAAJ Lyndon Johnson and the American Dream]. New York: New American Library. p. 155. ISBN 0451140826</ref>}}

Johnson saw to it that once the bill reached the Senate judiciary committee it was weakened enough to ensure passage, the first passed since Reconstruction. Johnson then took credit. He was a master at balancing the powerful southern wing of the Democratic party with the liberal northern and eastern wing. He would employ very effective tactics of persuasion with senators; including intimidation, flattery, threats and promises. Johnson sought the Democratic nomination for president prior to the [[United States presidential election, 1960|1960 election]], but accepted the nomination for vice-president following Kennedy's nomination.

==Presidency==
[[Image:LBJ-64.jpg|left|thumb|President Lyndon Johnson ran for reelection in the shadow of Kennedy]]
{{see also|Great Society|Johnson administration}}
Lyndon B. Johnson was sworn into the [[President of the United States of America|Office of the President]] just hours after John F. Kennedy was assassinated. The [[Oath of Office]] took place aboard [[Air Force One]] just prior to the flight to [[Washington DC]] from [[Dallas]]. It was administered by [[Sarah T. Hughes]] (one of the first justices to hear and write the decision for [[Roe v. Wade]] in favor of [[abortion]]).<ref>University of North Texas Libraries, Sarah T. Hughes Collection, http://www.library.unt.edu/archives/historical-manuscripts/historical-manuscripts-exhibits/hughes/</ref> Also, since no Bible could be found aboard Air Force One, Johnson recited the oath with his hand on a [[Roman Catholic]] [[missal]] which had been in Kennedy's desk.<ref>New York Times, "After a Time of Tragedy, a Beginning Toward the 'Great Society,'" January 1973. Online at https://www.nytimes.com/books/98/04/12/specials/johnson-tragedy.html</ref> Largely because of the KGB's disinformation campaign shortly after the JFK assassination, Johnson was often believed by conspiracy theorists to have been the one who arranged for Kennedy's assassination to get into the presidency. However, declassified CIA documents in 2015 that dated back to the assassination revealed that Johnson learned from the CIA that the assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, had been getting visas for escape from the country via Cuba and the Soviet Union only three days after the assassination occurred, making this motive unlikely.<ref>https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3237770/Declassified-CIA-memo-reveals-Lee-Harvey-Oswald-visited-embassies-Cuba-Soviet-Union-plot-escape-assassinating-John-F-Kennedy.html</ref>

As President, Johnson greatly expanded the federal government with his [[Great Society]] programs. He played a key role in helping the [[civil rights movement]] win legislative victories, pushing for the adoption of the [[Civil Rights Act]] (1964), which outlawed segregation, and the [[Voting Rights Act]] (1965), which guaranteed African-Americans' right to vote. President Johnson's support for civil rights was purely partisan. Discussing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with two southern governors on Air Force One, LBJ stated, “I’ll have them n***ers voting Democratic for two hundred years,” according to Air Force One steward Robert M. MacMillan. “That was the reason he was pushing the bill," added MacMillan, an African American, "not because he wanted equality for everyone. It was strictly a political ploy for the Democratic Party. He was phony from the word go.”<ref>Interview with Robert M. MacMillan, March 23, 1993, cited in Ronald Kessler, ''[https://books.google.com/books/about/Inside_the_White_House.html?id=lJz-yIZNE2sC Inside the White House]'' (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996), p. 33, ISBN 0671879197.</ref>

Johnson also appointed [[NAACP]] lawyer [[Thurgood Marshall]] the first African American Supreme Court Justice. When a young White House attorney recommended Federal Judge William Henry Hastie—who had been Marshall's professor at Harvard Law School—as a more qualified African American candidate, LBJ rejected the light-skinned Hastie, explaining, "Son, when I appoint a n***er to the court, I want everyone to know he's a n***er."<ref>Dallek, Robert (1991). ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=t_LjEJdaAiYC Lone Star Rising: Lyndon Johnson and His Times, 1908-1960]''. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. p. 519. ISBN 0195054350. Hastie had previously been considered for the Court by Eisenhower in 1956, who shelved the idea because Hastie's nomination would have been "[https://books.google.com/books?id=RAVl_KwcBuAC&pg=PA122#v=onepage&q&f=false filibustered to death] by Southerners on the floor of the Senate" (All 22 southern Senators at the time were [http://historycms.house.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=40930 white Democrats]); and again in 1962 by Kennedy, who rejected him after white liberals -- Chief Justice Earl Warren and Justice William O. Douglas -- objected that Hastie, an African American, was [https://books.google.com/books?id=7UTPwJNHQG4C&pg=PA143#v=onepage&q&f=false too conservative] (As Warren put it, "He's not a liberal, and he'll be opposed to the measures we're interested in.") During World War II, Hastie had laid the groundwork for the 1947 integration of the US armed forces when he [http://www.theroot.com/articles/history/2014/09/_1st_black_federal_judges_who_were_they.html resigned as aide to Secretary of War Henry Stimson] in protest of segregated training in the US Army Air Force for the Tuskeegee Airmen.</ref>

During the 1964 Presidential campaign, Johnson ran "[https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/revisiting-the-daisy-ad-revolution/ the most negative political ad in American history]," a campaign ad titled "Daisy," smearing Republican challenger [[Barry Goldwater]] as a warmonger who threatened nuclear devastation. Thus "[http://www.pophistorydig.com/topics/lbjs-atomic-ad1964-daisy-girl/ the negative political ad was born], initiating the clever use of image and sound to paint an opponent in negative or scary terms."

Johnson won the 1964 presidential election in a landslide over the hawkish Goldwater but, ironically, greatly expanded American involvement in [[Vietnam]] (see [[Vietnam War]]). In November 1965, during a meeting with his Joint Chiefs, after stating how they could mine the North Vietnamese ports as well as do massive aerial strikes on Hanoi to prevent Soviet or other Communist aid from going into the region, although Johnson seemingly acted receptive, he then turned around and started screaming various obscenities, including using the f-word more freely as an adjective than a Marine at boot camp, and told them he was disgusted with their naivety and made clear that he wasn't going to let "military idiots" drag him into World War III before bluntly dismissing them by telling them to "get the hell out of [Johnson's] office!"<ref>Cheers and Tears: A Marine's Story of Combat in Peace and War (2002).</ref> His popularity plunged as the death toll from the conflict in Vietnam steadily increased. In early 1968, faced with plummeting poll numbers and mounting public opposition to his foreign policy, Johnson announced that he would neither seek nor accept his party's nomination for the presidency in 1968. This decision may have been brought about by his surprisingly narrow victory in the New Hampshire primary over Eugene McCarthy, a liberal anti-war Democrat. It is widely thought that had he run, he would have been trounced in the primaries or in the subsequent general election—eventually won by Republican [[Richard M. Nixon]]. Another reason he decided to not pursue reelection may have also had to do with the then-recent reporting of the 1968 [[Tet Offensive]] by [[Walter Cronkite]] that [[Liberal bias#Vietnam War|falsely implied]] that America was losing the Vietnam War (with Johnson allegedly stating to his aides during the broadcast that "If I've lost Cronkite, I've lost Middle America"), coupled by a failed attempt to explain otherwise to the American public.<ref>http://www.iancfriedman.com/?p=383</ref>

==Legacy==
Even [[MSNBC]] admits that Johnson was a [[racist]].<ref>http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/lyndon-johnson-civil-rights-racism</ref>

Johnson has been caught on tape saying the n-word.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1rIDmDWSms</ref> He also was reported to have said after signing the [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]] into law, "“I’ll have those n*****s voting Democrat for the next 200 years.”<ref>https://clashdaily.com/2014/03/allen-west-lbj-ill-nggers-voting-democratic-next-200-years/?amp=1</ref>

==See also==
[[USS Scorpion (SSN 589)]]
[[USS Pueblo]]

==Bibliography==
===Biographies===
* Caro, Robert A. ''The Years of Lyndon Johnson'' (3 volumes as of 2006): ''The Path to Power'' (1982); ''Means of Ascent'' (1990); ''Master of the Senate: The Years of Lyndon Johnson'' (2002). The most detailed biography, extends to 1960; generally hostile to LBJ; See Dallek and Woods for balanced biographies; [https://www.amazon.com/Path-Power-Years-Lyndon-Johnson/dp/0679729453/ref=sr_1_2/103-4827826-5463040?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189836030&sr=1-2 vol 1 excerpt and online search from Amazon.com]; [https://www.amazon.com/Means-Ascent-Years-Lyndon-Johnson/dp/067973371X/ref=sr_1_3/103-4827826-5463040?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189836030&sr=1-3 vol 2 excerpt and online search from Amazon.com]; [https://www.amazon.com/Master-Senate-Lyndon-Johnson-Vintage/dp/0394720954/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-4827826-5463040?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189836030&sr=1-1 vol 3 excerpt and online search from Amazon.com]
* Dallek, Robert. ''Lone Star Rising: Lyndon Johnson and His Times, 1908–1960'' (1991), [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=59394514 online edition vol 1]; ''Flawed Giant: Lyndon Johnson and His Times, 1961–1973'' (1998) [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=65196503 online edition vol 2]; also: '' Lyndon B. Johnson: Portrait of a President'' (2004). A 400-page abridged version of his 2 volume scholarly biography, [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=103184871 online edition of short version].
* Goodwin, Doris Kearns. ''Lyndon Johnson & the American Dream'' (1977). A character study.
* Schulman, Bruce J. ''Lyndon B. Johnson and American Liberalism: A Brief Biography with Documents'' (1995)
* Woods, Randall. ''LBJ: Architect of American Ambition'' (2006). A highly detailed scholarly biography (1000 pages). [https://www.amazon.com/LBJ-Architect-American-Randall-Woods/dp/0684834588/ref=sr_1_1/103-4827826-5463040?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189835998&sr=1-1 excerpt and online search from Amazon.com]

===Presidential years===
* Altschuler, Bruce E.; ''LBJ and the Polls'' (1990) [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=37809550 online edition]
* Andrew, John A. ''Lyndon Johnson and the Great Society'' (1999) 224 pp. [https://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1566631858/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-4827826-5463040#reader-link excerpt and online search from Amazon.com]
* Bernstein, Irving. ''Guns or Butter: The Presidency of Lyndon Johnson'' 1994.
* Bornet, Vaughn Davis. ''The Presidency of Lyndon B. Johnson''. 1983
* Branch, Taylor. ''Parting the Waters: America in the King Years 1954-63'' (1989) [https://www.amazon.com/Parting-Waters-America-Years-1954-63/dp/0671687425/ref=sr_1_31?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208722057&sr=1-31 excerpt and text search]
* Branch, Taylor. ''Pillar of Fire: America in the King Years 1963-65'' (1999) [https://www.amazon.com/Pillar-Fire-America-Years-1963-65/dp/0684848090/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208722178&sr=1-5 excerpt and text search]
* Branch, Taylor. ''At Canaan's Edge: America in the King Years, 1965-68'' (2007)
* Divine, Robert A., ed. ''The Johnson Years. Vol. 1: Foreign Policy, the Great Society and the White House.'' 1981; essays by scholars
* Divine, Robert A., ed. ''The Johnson Years. Vol. 2: Vietnam, the Environment, and Science.'' 1987; essays by scholars
* Divine, Robert A., ed. ''The Johnson Years. Vol. 3: LBJ at Home and Abroad''. 1994; essays by scholars [https://www.amazon.com/Johnson-Years-Three-Home-Abroad/dp/0700606556/ref=sr_1_5/103-4827826-5463040?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189836030&sr=1-5 excerpt and online search from Amazon.com]
* Firestone, Bernard J., and Robert C. Vogt, eds. ''Lyndon Baines Johnson and the Uses of Power.'' (1988); essays by scholars [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=23324778 online edition]
* Graham, Hugh Davis. ''The Civil Rights Era: Origins and Development of National Policy, 1960-1972'' (1990)
* Gould, Lewis L. ''Lady Bird Johnson and the Environment.'' 1988.
* Lichtenstein, Nelson, ed. ''Political Profiles: The Johnson Years''. 1976. short biographies of 400+ key politicians
* Mann, Robert. ''The Walls of Jericho: Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey, Richard Russell, and the Struggle for Civil Rights.'' 1996.
* Milkis, Sidney M. and Jerome M. Mileur, eds. ''The Great Society And The High Tide Of Liberalism'' (2005) 490pp of essays by scholars; [https://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1558494936/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-4827826-5463040#reader-link excerpt and online search from Amazon.com]
* Redford, Emmette S., and Marlan Blissett. ''Organizing the Executive Branch: The Johnson Presidency.'' 1981.
* Shesol, Jeff. ''Mutual Contempt: Lyndon Johnson, Robert Kennedy, and the Feud That Shaped a Decade'' 1997.
* White, Theodore H. ''The Making of the President, 1964'' 1965. [http://www.historyebook.org/ online at ACLS e-books]
* Zarefsky, David. ''President Johnson's War on Poverty'' 1986.

===Vietnam===
* Barrett, David Marshall. ''Advice and Dissent: An Organizational Analysis of the Evolution of Lyndon Johnson's Vietnam Advisory System, 1965–1968.'' (University of Notre Dame, 1990)
* Berman, Larry. ''Lyndon Johnson's War: The Road to Stalemate in Vietnam'' (1991)
* Brands, H. W. ''The Wages of Globalism: Lyndon Johnson and the Limits of American Power '' (1997)
* Casey, Francis Michael. ''The Vietnam Policy of President Lyndon Baines Johnson in Response to the Theory of the Protracted Conflict as Applied in the Politics of Indochina: A Case Study of Threat Perception and Assessment in the Crisis Management Process of a Pluralistic Society.'' (Claremont Graduate School, 1976)
* Cherwitz, Richard Arnold. ''The Rhetoric of the Gulf of Tonkin: A Study of the Crisis Speaking of President Lyndon B. Johnson.'' (University of Iowa, 1978)
* Goodnight, Lisa Jo. ''The Conservative Voice of a Liberal President: An Analysis of Lyndon B. Johnson's Vietnam Rhetoric.'' (Purdue University, 1993)
* Kaiser, David E. ''American tragedy: Kennedy, Johnson, and the origins of the Vietnam War.'' (Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2000) ISBN 0-674-00225-3
* Karnow, Stanley. ''Vietnam, A History.'' (Penguin, 1991), balanced assessment
* Logevall, Fredrik Bengt Johan. ''Fear to Negotiate: Lyndon Johnson and the Vietnam War, 1963–1965.'' (Yale University, 1993)
* Turner, Kathleen Jane. ''The Effect of Presidential-Press Interaction on Lyndon B. Johnson's Vietnam War Rhetoric.'' (Purdue University, 1978)
* Vandiver, Frank E. ''Shadows of Vietnam: Lyndon Johnson's Wars'' (1997) [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=53311933 online edition]
* Woods, Randall B. "The Politics of Idealism: Lyndon Johnson, Civil Rights, and Vietnam," ''Diplomatic History'' (2007) 31 (1), 1–18. [http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/J.1467-7709.2007.00599.X online at Blackwell-Synergy]

==Primary sources==
* Barrett David M. ed. "Lyndon B. Johnson's Vietnam Papers: A Documentary Collection" (1997). Documents from LBJ Library and other archives.
* Beschloss Michael R. ed. ''Taking Charge: The Johnson White House Tapes, 1963–1964'' (1997). Transcribed recordings of LBJ's phone calls.
* Beschloss, Michael R. ed. ''Reaching for Glory: Lyndon Johnson's Secret White House Tapes, 1964-1965'' (2002) [https://www.amazon.com/Reaching-Glory-Lyndon-Johnsons-1964-1965/dp/074322714X/ref=sr_1_7/103-4827826-5463040?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189836030&sr=1-7 excerpt and online search from Amazon.com]
* Califano Joseph A., Jr. ''The Triumph & Tragedy of Lyndon Johnson'' (1991). By a cabinet member.
* [http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/publications/ERP/ Council of Economic Advisors, ''Economic Report of the President'' (annual 1947- )], complete series online; important analysis of current trends and policies, plus statistcial tables
* Gallup, George H. ed. ''The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion, 1935–1971, volume 3: 1959–1971'' (1972). Summary of poll data.
* Johnson Lyndon B. ''The Vantage Point: Perspectives on the Presidency, 1963–1969'' (1971). LBJ's memoirs.
* ''Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: Lyndon B. Johnson'' (10 volumes, GPO, 1965–70). All speeches and official statements.
* Reedy, George ''Lyndon B. Johnson: A Memoir'' (1982), ISBN 0-8362-6610-2. A memoir by the press secretary.

==References==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

==External links==
* [https://librivox.org/author/11302 Works by Lyndon B. Johnson - text and free audio] - [[LibriVox]]

{{USPresidents}}
{{USVicePresidents}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Johnson, Lyndon B.}}
[[Category:Texas]]
[[Category:Presidents of the United States]]
[[Category:Vice Presidents of the United States]]
[[Category:Former United States Senators]]
[[Category:Democrats]]
[[Category:Liberals]]
[[Category:Racism]]
[[Category:Liberalism]]
{{Democrat establishment}}
[[Category:Welfare State]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Affirmative Action]]

William Marcy Tweed

2020-09-27T23:34:25Z

TemporarysockofLT: added a template

[[File:Tweed1.JPG|right|300px|thumb|William Marcy Tweed]]
'''William Marcy Tweed''' (or ''William Magear Tweed''; byname "Boss Tweed"; 1823-1878), was a [[New York City]] [[Democratic Party]] leader who turned [[Tammany Hall]] into one of the most corrupt political machines in United States history, as well as running a network of close city officials under the so-called Tweed Ring, which was responsible for extorting [[kickbacks]] from contractors and others doing business with the city, manipulating the public vote in his favor, and plundering more than $100,000,000 from the treasury before he was driven from power and arrested.

==History==
Tweed was born in New York City on April 3, 1823, the son of a chairmaker, from whom he eventually learned the trade. As a young man he became the organizer and foreman of a city fire-engine company, which gave him a bit of popularity and a taste of the power of local politics, from which he spent much of his life. He was a city alderman in 1852-1853, served one term in the [[United States Congress]] in 1853-1855, then returned to New York to serve in several successive posts before being elected to the state senate for one term in 1867.

While serving as state senator he was also appointed to the department of public works in New York City as commissioner, and while in that position he gathered his three chief henchmen - Alexander Oakey Hall, Peter Sweeney and Richard Connolly - and with a few others formed the Tweed Ring. Their first order of business was to secure themselves in positions of power by bribery and influence among the lower classes in the city - already they had total control of Tammany Hall - which enabled them to manipulate and alter the outcome of the mayoral election of 1865. As a result, the mayor's office went to Hall; Sweeney was appointed the treasurer for both the city and county; Connolly was appointed the city comptroller; and Tweed the superintendent of streets. In 1870 these men would compel the city government to re-write the charter, enabling the Ring to install more of their cronies in selected positions; Tweed himself would be named commissioner of public works, which enabled Tweed to directly control the money flowing in.

And the graft began: three hundred park benches were bought by Tweed for five dollars each, yet he charged the city $600 each to have them installed. On July 30, 1870, over $200,000 was charged to the city to repair furniture at several armories. To furnish a single courthouse, the city was forced to pay $1,476,980.24 to a single firm. In an article of the ''[[New York Times]]'' (January 3, 1871) it was identified that the Ring used their stolen money to purchase property in several city wards in excess of a million dollars between 1868 and 1871; Tweed alone was responsible for a total of $547,000; yet officially his salary was $2,500 a year.

==Investigations==
[[File:Tweed2.jpg|right|200px|thumb|''Tweed at the Ballot Box'', by Thomas Nast]]
For several months in 1870-1871 various article speculated on the corruption alleged by Tweed, but an expose appeared in the ''New York Times'' on July 24, 1871, in which the writer laid bare to the public tens of millions of dollars that went missing. "We have brought very serious charges against Mayor Hall and Controller Connolly," began the article, "and in reply to them the Mayor says that the City owes us a bill for advertising which we cannot get." ("Proofs", July 24, 1871). Stating that the information came from a "dishonest person" was the Mayor's reply, but he did not deny the allegations. But worse was yet to come for the Ring, especially Tweed. Democratic reformist [[Samuel Tilden]] - who would lose a disputed presidential election to [[Rutherford B. Hayes]] - also threw himself into the fray and demanded investigations into the matter.

But it was cartoonist [[Thomas Nast]] who did the most damage. Cartoons appeared in ''Harper's Weekly'' showing Tweed as an uncaring buffoon about to alter the ballot box, or as a buzzard about to gorge on his victims. In one the blame for the stolen money was passed around the circle of his cronies without end. Tammany Hall was represented by a ravenous tiger, about to tear apart another taxpayer. Above all else, the cartoons were having an effect on the public, and on Tweed personally. "Let’s stop them damned pictures," Tweed supposedly said. "I don’t care so much what the papers write about — my constituents can’t read — but damn it, they can see pictures!" Tweed offered Nast a bribe of half a million dollars to stop his cartoons; Nast rejected the offer, and went on drawing.

Tweed was arrested and charged with forgery and larceny in 1873, and he served two years. He then faced civil charges: a suit from New York for $6,000,000. Although technically in jail, he was allowed daily visits out to be with his family, and on one of these visits he escaped to Europe. The pleasure of living abroad was short-lived: he was arrested in Spain after a ship's hand recognized him from a Nast cartoon. Extradited back to New York, he died in prison on April 12, 1878.

==References==
*"The Ring's Real Estate: Some of the Plunder of Tweed, Sweeney & Co," article in the ''New York Times'', January 3, 1871
*"Our Proofs of Fraud Against the City Government," article in the ''New York Times'', July 24, 1871

{{DEFAULTSORT:Tweed, William Marcy}}
[[Category:Criminals]]
{{Democrat establishment}}

Samuel J. Tilden

2020-09-27T23:32:15Z

TemporarysockofLT: spacing

'''Samuel Jones Tilden''' was an attorney and politician of the [[Democratic party]]. He studied law at New York University and was admitted to the bar in 1841.

Born: February 9, 1814 in New Lebanon, New York.
Died: August 4, 1886 at his home in New York.

He represented a number of railroads and invested in real estate. His investments made him wealthy at a young age.

Tilden was the leader of the [[Bourbon Democrats]]—the conservative pro-business wing of the party. he took the lead in fighting and breaking the [[Tweed Ring]] in New York City politics.

Tilden served as governor of New York from 1874 to 1876.
He was nominated as the Democratic candidate for President for the 1876 election but the result was contested and finally a special Electoral Commission awarded the presidency to Republican [[Rutherford B. Hayes]]. Tilden's health collapsed and he never ran again.

He bequeathed two million dollars to construct and maintain a public library which later merged with others to become the New York Public Library.

==References==
* [http://www.nndb.com/people/263/000050113/ Biography]
* http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAtilden.htm

{{DEFAULTSORT:Tilden, Samuel J.}}
[[Category:New York Governors]]
[[Category:Gilded Age]]
[[Category:Conservative Democrats]]
[[Category:Democratic Governors]]
[[Category:Failed Presidential Candidates]]

Samuel Tilden

2020-09-27T23:32:03Z

TemporarysockofLT: Redirected page to Samuel J. Tilden

#REDIRECT [[Samuel J. Tilden]]

Template:Democrat establishment

2020-09-27T23:29:06Z

TemporarysockofLT: added a section on historical figures

{{Navbox
|name=Democrat establishment
|basestyle=font-size: 100%; background-color:Blue
|title=Democrat Establishment
|state=expanded

|group1style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group1=Groups
|list1style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list1=Senate Democratic Caucus • [[New Democrat Coalition]] • [[Blue Dog Democrat|Blue Dog Coalition]] • [[DNC]] • [[DSCC]] • [[DCCC]]

|group2style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group2=Agenda
|list2style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list2=[[Liberalism]] • [[Leftism]] • [[Progressivism]] • [[Democrat Plantation]] • [[Big tent politics]] • [[Marxism]] • [[Spending bills]] • [[Elitism]] • [[Big government]] • [[Anti-Trump]] • [[Biden Putsch]] • [[Infanticide]]

|group3style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group3=Tactics
|list3style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list3=[[Liberal deceit]] • [[Political correctness]] • [[Liberal propaganda]] • [[Bait and switch]] • [[Liberal media bias]] • [[Russia collusion hoax]] • [[Voter fraud]]

|group4style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group4=Historical Figures
|list4style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list4=[[William Marcy Tweed|Boss Tweed]] • [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] • [[Richard Russell, Jr.|Richard Russell Jr.]] • [[Harry F. Byrd]]

|group5style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group5=Leaders
|list5style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list5=[[Cheri Bustos]] • [[James Clyburn]] • [[Catherine Cortez Masto]] • [[Jason Crow]] • [[Val Demings]] • [[Richard Durbin]] • [[Marc Elias]] • [[Steny Hoyer]] • [[Ben Ray Luján]] • [[Jerrold Nadler]] • [[Tom O'Halleran]] • [[Nancy Pelosi]] • [[Gary Peters]] • [[Adam Schiff]] • [[Charles Schumer]] • [[Jon Tester]] • [[Debbie Wasserman Schultz]]

|group6style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group6=Puppets
|list6style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list6=[[Cindy Axne]] • [[Anthony Brindisi]] • [[Steve Bullock]] • [[T.J. Cox]] • [[Cal Cunningham]] • [[Joe Cunningham]] • [[Sharice Davids]] • [[Abby Finkenauer]] • [[Elizabeth P. Fletcher]] • [[Sara Gideon]] • [[Jared Golden]] • [[Al Gross]] • [[Josh Harder]] • [[John Hickenlooper]] • [[Kendra Horn]] • [[Chrissy Houlahan]] • [[Conor Lamb]] • [[Elaine Luria]] • [[Mark E. Kelly]] • [[Andy Kim]] • [[Tom Malinowski]] • [[Ben McAdams]] • [[Lucy McBath]] • [[Amy McGrath]] • [[Max Rose]] • [[Elissa Slotkin]] • [[Abigail Spanberger]] • [[Haley Stevens]] • [[Xochitl Torres Small]] • [[Jennifer Wexton]]

|group7style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group7=Allies
|list7style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list7=[[Lamestream media]] • [[Democratic Socialists of America]] • [[Ghislaine Maxwell]] • [[Organizing for America]] • [[Thousand Currents]]

|group8style=font-size: 90%; background-color: #faecc8
|group8=Far-left opponents
|list8style=font-size: 90%; background-color: white
|list8=[[Pramila Jayapal]] • [[Barbara Lee]] • [[Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez]] • [[Ilhan Omar]] • [[Ayanna Pressley]] • [[Bernie Sanders]] • [[Rashida Tlaib]]
}}

<includeonly>[[Category:Establishment]]</includeonly>

Christopher Wray

2020-09-27T23:22:48Z

TemporarysockofLT: added officeholder template

{{Officeholder
|name=Christopher A. Wray
|image=Wray.PNG
|party=[[Republican]]
|spouse=Helen Garrison Howell
|religion=
|offices=
{{Officeholder/misc
|office=Director of the [[Federal Bureau of Investigation]]
|terms=August 2, 2017 – present
|preceded=[[James Comey]]
|former=n
|succeeded=
}}
{{Officeholder/misc
|office=Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division
|terms=September 11, 2003 – May 17, 2005
|preceded=[[Michael Chertoff]]
|former=y
|succeeded=Alice S. Fisher
}}
}}

'''Christopher Asher Wray''' (born December 17, 1966 (age {{age|1966|12|17}})) is the 8th Director of the [[FBI]] appointed by [[President Donald Trump]] on August 2, 2017 to fill the position vacated by disgraced [[Obama]] appointee [[James Comey]] and Acting Director [[Andrew McCabe]]. McCabe later was fired and came under [[criminal]] investigation for lying under oath, and Comey was granted immunity from prosecution by Special Counsel [[Robert Mueller]]. Wray has been criticized for being more interested in preserving the FBI's shattered reputation after the [[Obamagate]] domestic spying scandal than administering [[justice]].

{{Deep State}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Wray, Christopher}}
[[Category:United States Government]]
[[Category:2010s]]
[[Category:RINOs]]
[[Category:Establishment]]

Conservative of the Year 2020

2020-09-27T23:17:20Z

TemporarysockofLT: rank Zelenko higher than Hannity

#Rep. [[Thomas Massie|Tom Massie]] (R-KY), for standing up against the bloated $2.2 trillion bailout and seeking a roll call vote rather than the cowardly House vote which enable Representatives to conceal their position. Rep. Massie then won by a landslide in his primary against a moderate challenger.
#[[Kristi Noem]], Governor of [[South Dakota]], for standing strong against failed [[liberal]] approaches to the [[coronavirus]] crisis.
#President [[Jair Bolsonaro]], for holding [[Brazil]]ian fatalities from [[coronavirus]] below that in the [[United States]] despite having far few resources, by promoting the benefits of the inexpensive [[hydroxychloroquine]] as a successful early treatment.
#Senator [[Ron Johnson]] (R-WI) for attempting to end the interference by [[liberal]]s with effective early treatment of victims of [[COVID-19]].
#Congressman [[Andy Biggs]] (R-AZ), chairman of the [[Freedom Caucus]], for speaking out against the misguided policies of Anthony Fauci.<ref>https://secure.housefreedomfund.com/f5j67/s?c=50b0723247a359dd563d389977753806</ref>
#Senator [[Josh Hawley]] (R-MO), for quickly introducing a resolution to censure [[Chuck Schumer]] after his harsh comments on the steps of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] personally against two [[Trump]]-appointed judges. Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] rebuked Schumer for his comments, but Schumer did not apologize until Hawley introduced his censure resolution, which other senators then joined.
#President [[Donald Trump]].
#Vice President [[Mike Pence]], for frequently promoting [[Christian]] and conservative values as [[vice president]] under Donald Trump.
#Dr. [[Vladimir Zelenko]] is a [[New York State]] physician who treated 350 (later exceeding 700) [[coronavirus]] patients in March of 2020 with 100% success using hydroxychloroquine, antibiotics and zinc.<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/doctor-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success], WND.com</ref><ref>[https://techstartups.com/2020/03/25/doctor-vladimir-zelenko-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success-using-hydroxychloroquine-sulfate/ Doctor Vladimir Zelenko: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success using Hydroxychloroquine Sulfate], Techstartups.com</ref><ref>[https://forward.com/news/national/442511/trump-coronavirus-fda/ A Jewish doctor’s off-label virus treatment is now being used in multiple states] by Ari Feldman and Helen Chernikoff</ref> There were no hospitilizations, intubations or deaths among Zelenko's 350 patients.<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/doctor-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success], WND.com</ref> Dr. Zelenko's coronavirus treatment is now being used in multiple states.<ref>[https://forward.com/news/national/442511/trump-coronavirus-fda/ A Jewish doctor’s off-label virus treatment is now being used in multiple states] by Ari Feldman and Helen Chernikoff</ref>
#[[Tucker Carlson]], for standing up to the radical left-wing mob and for achieving the largest audience of any program in the history of cable news.<ref>https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/fox-news-q2-2020-ratings-tucker-carlson-averaged-4-3-million-viewers-in-the-8-p-m-hour-the-largest-audience-in-cable-news-history/446144/</ref>
#[[Sean Hannity]], for defending President Trump and promoting conservative principles.
#[[Conservapedia]] editor [[User:RobSmith|RobSmith]], for having worked extra hard covering the most important events here, from the [[CCP pandemic]] to the [[2020 Leftwing insurrection]].

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Conservative of the Year]]

Conservative of the Year 2020

2020-09-27T23:16:31Z

TemporarysockofLT: copyedit

#Rep. [[Thomas Massie|Tom Massie]] (R-KY), for standing up against the bloated $2.2 trillion bailout and seeking a roll call vote rather than the cowardly House vote which enable Representatives to conceal their position. Rep. Massie then won by a landslide in his primary against a moderate challenger.
#[[Kristi Noem]], Governor of [[South Dakota]], for standing strong against failed [[liberal]] approaches to the [[coronavirus]] crisis.
#President [[Jair Bolsonaro]], for holding [[Brazil]]ian fatalities from [[coronavirus]] below that in the [[United States]] despite having far few resources, by promoting the benefits of the inexpensive [[hydroxychloroquine]] as a successful early treatment.
#Senator [[Ron Johnson]] (R-WI) for attempting to end the interference by [[liberal]]s with effective early treatment of victims of [[COVID-19]].
#Congressman [[Andy Biggs]] (R-AZ), chairman of the [[Freedom Caucus]], for speaking out against the misguided policies of Anthony Fauci.<ref>https://secure.housefreedomfund.com/f5j67/s?c=50b0723247a359dd563d389977753806</ref>
#Senator [[Josh Hawley]] (R-MO), for quickly introducing a resolution to censure [[Chuck Schumer]] after his harsh comments on the steps of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] personally against two [[Trump]]-appointed judges. Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] rebuked Schumer for his comments, but Schumer did not apologize until Hawley introduced his censure resolution, which other senators then joined.
#President [[Donald Trump]].
#Vice President [[Mike Pence]], for frequently promoting [[Christian]] and conservative values as [[vice president]] under Donald Trump.
#[[Sean Hannity]], for defending President Trump and promoting conservative principles.
#Dr. [[Vladimir Zelenko]] is a [[New York State]] physician who treated 350 (later exceeding 700) [[coronavirus]] patients in March of 2020 with 100% success using hydroxychloroquine, antibiotics and zinc.<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/doctor-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success], WND.com</ref><ref>[https://techstartups.com/2020/03/25/doctor-vladimir-zelenko-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success-using-hydroxychloroquine-sulfate/ Doctor Vladimir Zelenko: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success using Hydroxychloroquine Sulfate], Techstartups.com</ref><ref>[https://forward.com/news/national/442511/trump-coronavirus-fda/ A Jewish doctor’s off-label virus treatment is now being used in multiple states] by Ari Feldman and Helen Chernikoff</ref> There were no hospitilizations, intubations or deaths among Zelenko's 350 patients.<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/doctor-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success], WND.com</ref> Dr. Zelenko's coronavirus treatment is now being used in multiple states.<ref>[https://forward.com/news/national/442511/trump-coronavirus-fda/ A Jewish doctor’s off-label virus treatment is now being used in multiple states] by Ari Feldman and Helen Chernikoff</ref>
#[[Tucker Carlson]], for standing up to the radical left-wing mob and for achieving the largest audience of any program in the history of cable news.<ref>https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/fox-news-q2-2020-ratings-tucker-carlson-averaged-4-3-million-viewers-in-the-8-p-m-hour-the-largest-audience-in-cable-news-history/446144/</ref>
#[[Conservapedia]] editor [[User:RobSmith|RobSmith]], for having worked extra hard covering the most important events here, from the [[CCP pandemic]] to the [[2020 Leftwing insurrection]].

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Conservative of the Year]]

Christopher Wray

2020-09-27T23:14:52Z

TemporarysockofLT: added age template

[[File:Wray.PNG|right|200px|thumb|]]
'''Christopher Asher Wray''' (born December 17, 1966 (age {{age|1966|12|17}})) is the 8th Director of the [[FBI]] appointed by [[President Donald Trump]] on August 2, 2017 to fill the position vacated by disgraced [[Obama]] appointee [[James Comey]] and Acting Director [[Andrew McCabe]]. McCabe later was fired and came under [[criminal]] investigation for lying under oath, and Comey was granted immunity from prosecution by Special Counsel [[Robert Mueller]]. Wray has been criticized for being more interested in preserving the FBI's shattered reputation after the [[Obamagate]] domestic spying scandal than administering [[justice]].

{{Deep State}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Wray, Christopher}}
[[category:United States Government]]
[[category:2010s]]

Christopher Wray

2020-09-27T23:13:48Z

TemporarysockofLT: added {{DEFAULTSORT}}, template

[[File:Wray.PNG|right|200px|thumb|]]
'''Christopher Wray''' is the 8th Director of the [[FBI]] appointed by [[President Donald Trump]] on August 2, 2017 to fill the position vacated by disgraced [[Obama]] appointee [[James Comey]] and Acting Director [[Andrew McCabe]]. McCabe later was fired and came under [[criminal]] investigation for lying under oath, and Comey was granted immunity from prosecution by Special Counsel [[Robert Mueller]]. Wray has been criticized for being more interested in preserving the FBI's shattered reputation after the [[Obamagate]] domestic spying scandal than administering [[justice]].

{{Deep State}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Wray, Christopher}}
[[category:United States Government]]
[[category:2010s]]

Conservative of the Year 2020

2020-09-27T23:12:25Z

TemporarysockofLT: nominating RobSmith, after all his hard work this year

1. Rep. [[Thomas Massie|Tom Massie]] (R-KY), for standing up against the bloated $2.2 trillion bailout and seeking a roll call vote rather than the cowardly House vote which enable Representatives to conceal their position. Rep. Massie then won by a landslide in his primary against a moderate challenger.

2. [[Kristi Noem]], Governor of [[South Dakota]], for standing strong against failed [[liberal]] approaches to the [[coronavirus]] crisis.

3. President [[Jair Bolsonaro]], for holding [[Brazil]]ian fatalities from [[coronavirus]] below that in the [[United States]] despite having far few resources, by promoting the benefits of the inexpensive [[hydroxychloroquine]] as a successful early treatment.

4. Senator [[Ron Johnson]] (R-WI) for attempting to end the interference by [[liberal]]s with effective early treatment of victims of [[COVID-19]].

5. Congressman [[Andy Biggs]] (R-AZ), chairman of the [[Freedom Caucus]], for speaking out against the misguided policies of Anthony Fauci.<ref>https://secure.housefreedomfund.com/f5j67/s?c=50b0723247a359dd563d389977753806</ref>

6. Senator [[Josh Hawley]] (R-MO), for quickly introducing a resolution to censure [[Chuck Schumer]] after his harsh comments on the steps of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] personally against two [[Trump]]-appointed judges. Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] rebuked Schumer for his comments, but Schumer did not apologize until Hawley introduced his censure resolution, which other senators then joined.

7. President [[Donald Trump]].

8. Vice President [[Mike Pence]], for frequently promoting [[Christian]] and conservative values as [[vice president]] under Donald Trump.

9. [[Sean Hannity]], for defending President Trump and promoting conservative principles.

10. Dr. [[Vladimir Zelenko]] is a [[New York State]] physician who treated 350 (later exceeding 700) [[coronavirus]] patients in March of 2020 with 100% success using hydroxychloroquine, antibiotics and zinc.<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/doctor-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success], WND.com</ref><ref>[https://techstartups.com/2020/03/25/doctor-vladimir-zelenko-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success-using-hydroxychloroquine-sulfate/ Doctor Vladimir Zelenko: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success using Hydroxychloroquine Sulfate], Techstartups.com</ref><ref>[https://forward.com/news/national/442511/trump-coronavirus-fda/ A Jewish doctor’s off-label virus treatment is now being used in multiple states] by Ari Feldman and Helen Chernikoff</ref> There were no hospitilizations, intubations or deaths among Zelenko's 350 patients.<ref>[https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/doctor-treated-350-coronavirus-patients-100-success/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success Doctor: I treated 350 coronavirus patients with 100% success], WND.com</ref> Dr. Zelenko's coronavirus treatment is now being used in multiple states.<ref>[https://forward.com/news/national/442511/trump-coronavirus-fda/ A Jewish doctor’s off-label virus treatment is now being used in multiple states] by Ari Feldman and Helen Chernikoff</ref>

11. [[Tucker Carlson]], for standing up to the radical left-wing mob and for achieving the largest audience of any program in the history of cable news.<ref>https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/fox-news-q2-2020-ratings-tucker-carlson-averaged-4-3-million-viewers-in-the-8-p-m-hour-the-largest-audience-in-cable-news-history/446144/</ref>

12. [[Conservapedia]] editor [[User:RobSmith|RobSmith]], for having worked extra hard covering the most important events here, from the [[CCP pandemic]] to the [[2020 Leftwing insurrection]].

==References==
{{reflist|2}}
[[Category:Conservative of the Year]]

Amy Coney Barrett

2020-09-27T23:05:31Z

TemporarysockofLT: /* References */

{{Officeholder
|name=Amy Coney Barrett
|image=Amy Coney Barrett.jpg
|party=
|spouse=Jesse M. Barrett
|religion=[[Roman Catholic]]<ref name="Amy Barrett info">[https://heavy.com/news/2018/07/amy-barrett-children-kids-coney/ Amy Barrett Children: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know]</ref>
|offices=
{{Officeholder/misc
|office=Judge of the [[United States Court of Appeals]] for the [[Seventh Circuit]]
|terms=November 2, 2017 – present
|preceded=John Daniel Tinder
|former=n
|succeeded=
}}
}}

'''Amy Coney Barrett''' (born January 28, 1972) is a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the [[Seventh Circuit]], having been appointed by President [[Donald Trump]] to the position. She was nominated by President [[Trump]] on September 26, 2020 to replace the seat vacated by the death of [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]], on the [[U.S. Supreme Court]].

After intense, irrational [[liberal]] opposition to her confirmation, which included [[Dem]] [[Senator]] [[Dianne Feinstein]] questioning her religious beliefs,<ref name="Amy Barrett info"/> the [[U.S. Senate]] voted 55–43 to confirm Barrett on October 31, 2017,<ref>[https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=115&session=1&vote=00255 U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 115th Congress - 1st Session]</ref> with [[Joe Donnelly]], [[Tim Kaine]], and [[Joe Manchin]] being the only [[Democrats]] who voted for her.

[[Susan B. Anthony]] List described Judge Barrett's confirmation as a [[pro-life]] victory: "Judge Amy Barrett’s confirmation is a victory for the pro-life movement as well as for the fundamental freedom of all Americans to live out their faith in the public square,” said SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. “In spite of her exemplary qualifications, Judge Barrett was subject to outrageous personal attacks for her Catholic faith from pro-abortion Senators during her confirmation hearing. Those attacks have no place in America, let alone Congress, in the 21st century.”<ref>https://www.sba-list.org/newsroom/press-releases/pro-life-victory-judge-amy-barrett-confirmed</ref>

Axios reported a "scoop" that [[President Trump]] is "saving" Judge Barrett to be [[Ruth Ginsburg|Ginsburg]]'s replacement.<ref>[https://www.axios.com/supreme-court-trump-judge-amy-barrett-ruth-bader-ginsburg-11d25276-a92e-4094-8958-eb2d197707c8.html Scoop: Trump "saving" Judge Amy Barrett for Ruth Bader Ginsburg seat]</ref> As he was deliberating last year over replacing Supreme Court Justice [[Anthony Kennedy]], Trump told confidants he had big plans for Judge Amy Coney Barrett.

"I'm saving her for Ginsburg," Trump said of Barrett, according to three sources familiar with the president's private comments. Trump used that exact line with a number of people, including in a private conversation with an adviser two days before announcing Brett Kavanaugh's nomination. On September 25, 2020, reports circulated that the President had decided to nominate Barrett to replace Ginsburg, confirmed by Trump at a press conference the following day.<ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/25/politics/donald-trump-amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court/index.html Sources: Trump intends to choose Amy Coney Barrett for Supreme Court]</ref>

Barrett is a favorite among conservative activists, many of whom wanted her to take Kennedy’s spot."<ref>https://www.axios.com/supreme-court-trump-judge-amy-barrett-ruth-bader-ginsburg-11d25276-a92e-4094-8958-eb2d197707c8.html</ref>

Judge Barrett has written that [[stare decisis]] or judicial precedent is not absolutely binding and can be overturned for solid reasons: “I tend to agree with those who say that a justice’s duty is to the Constitution and that it is thus more legitimate for her to enforce her best understanding of the Constitution rather than a precedent she thinks is clearly in conflict with it.” <ref>https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2291141</ref>

==Early Life==

Amy Vivian Coney was born and raised in [[New Orleans|New Orleans, Louisiana]], the oldest of seven children. Her father, Michael Coney, was an attorney for the Shell Oil Company; her mother, Linda, was a stay-at-home mom. A lifelong [[Roman Catholic]], she attended St. Mary's Dominican High School, where she was vice-president of the student body. She is a member of [[ecumenical]] People of Praise congregation, which includes [[Charismatic Catholic|spirit filled]] Roman Catholics.<ref>https://peopleofpraise.org/about/who-we-are/</ref> After graduating in 1990, she attended Rhodes College in [[Memphis|Memphis, Tennessee]], majoring in English literature. While there, she joined the Phi Beta Kappa academic honor society, and graduated ''magna cum laude'' in 1994, having been chosen by the English department's faculty as their most outstanding student. Coney went on to study law at the University of Notre Dame, obtaining a prestigious Kiley Fellowship; she served for a time as executive editor of the Notre Dame Law Review, and graduated ''summa cum laude'' first in her class in 1997, winning the Law School's highest honor, the Hoynes Prize.

She married Jesse M. Barrett, a former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of [[Indiana]] and current partner at SouthBank Legal in South Bend, Indiana. They have seven children, two of whom are adopted from [[Haiti]].

==Legal Career==

After graduating from Notre Dame, Barrett spent a year as a law clerk for Judge Laurence H. Silberman of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, then did the same the following year for [[Supreme Court]] Associate Justice [[Antonin Scalia]]. In 1999, she joined the [[Washington, D.C.]] law firm Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin, where she litigated cases in constitutional, criminal, and commercial law. In 2002, Barrett returned to Notre Dame to join the Law School's faculty, teaching and researching in the fields of federal courts, constitutional law, and statutory interpretation. Several of the nation's leading law journals, including the Columbia, Texas, and Virginia Law Reviews, have published scholarly articles written by her on these subjects. During her time on the Notre Dame faculty, three of the Law School's graduating classes voted her "Distinguished Professor of the Year," and former students of hers later described her as "inspirational," "always approachable," and "remarkably fair-minded and smart."<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/weekly-standard/female-scotus-candidate-amy-coney-barrett-praised-by-her-law-school-students</ref>

Apart from her work at Notre Dame, Barrett has also served as a visiting professor at the University of Virginia and the George Washington University Law School, and is a member of the American Law Institute. From 2010 to 2016, she was a member of the Advisory Committee for the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.<ref>https://law.nd.edu/directory/amy-barrett/</ref>

==Federal Judicial Career==

On May 8, 2017, President Trump nominated Barrett for the position of Circuit Judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, succeeding Judge John Daniel Tinder.

Her nomination was heard in September by the Senate Judiciary Committee, where Barrett was sharply criticized by its [[Democratic]] members, including [[Dick Durbin]] and [[Dianne Feinstein]], who seemed less concerned about her legal and judicial credentials than about whether she would uphold ''[[Roe vs. Wade]]''. In 1998, Barrett had written that Catholic judges who objected to [[capital punishment]] on religious grounds should consider recusing themselves; moreover, during her time at Notre Dame she had been part of a [[pro-life]] faculty organization, and in 2015 had signed a joint letter to Catholic bishops affirming "the value of human life from conception to natural death." Though Barrett stated during the hearing that judges must rule according to the law and not to their personal opinions, Feinstein and Durbin remained hostile, Feinstein in particular remarking that "the dogma lives loudly within you": a line that drew considerable criticism from some observers, who raised concerns that Senate Democrats were applying an unconstitutional "religious test" to Barrett.

In October 2017, Barrett's nomination was passed through the committee on a party-line vote and brought before the Senate, which voted to confirm her by a vote of 55-42. She won the support of all [[Republican]] senators, as well as three Democrats ([[Joe Donnelly]], [[Tim Kaine]], and [[Joe Manchin]]). Barrett was the first woman appointed to the federal courts during Trump's presidency, and the first of four Trump appointees to the Seventh Circuit Court.

During Barrett's time on the Seventh Circuit, she has written two opinions considered of particular importance. In ''Doe v. Purdue University'' (2019), Barrett wrote the majority opinion finding in favor of an anonymous male student at [[Purdue University]] who had been suspended and stripped of his scholarship by university administrators who had ruled him guilty of sexual assault. Barrett noted that the administrators had utterly failed to provide the student with [[due process]], and had arbitrarily favored his female accuser's testimony over his. "It is plausible," she concluded, that the university "chose to believe {John Doe's accuser} because she is a woman and to disbelieve John because he is a man....John's allegations raise a plausible inference that he was denied an educational benefit on the basis of his sex."<ref>https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca7/17-3565/17-3565-2019-06-28.html</ref>

Barrett's other significant opinion, her dissent in ''Kanter v. Barr'' (2019), regarded the issue of gun-ownership rights for convicted felons. The majority upheld a lower-court decision that Kanter (the plaintiff), who had earlier been found guilty of mail fraud, was automatically disqualified from owning a firearm; in her dissent, Barrett argued that Kanter's crime, though a felony, was nonviolent, and to lose one's gun-ownership rights regardless of the nature of the felony was based neither on the wording of the [[Constitution]] nor on standards of common sense. Furthermore, she added, it ought to be the rule that, even if felons, citizens retained their constitutional rights by default, unless or until their rights were curtailed by government action (rather than automatically losing them by falling into a designated category).<ref>https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca7/18-1478/18-1478-2019-03-15.html</ref>

As of September 20, 2020, Judge Barrett had dissented only seven times in nearly 3 years on the [[Seventh Circuit]].

=== Immigration ===

In ''Cook County v. Wolf'', 962 F.3d 208 (7th Cir. 2020), Barrett dissented in her 40-page disagreement with the panel majority's decision to uphold a preliminary injunction against President [[Trump]]'s public charge rule cutting off entitlements to some immigrants. Judge Barrett pointed out that an overwhelming majority of those within the scope of the rule were not eligible for government benefits anyway. Judge Barrett wrote that Trump's rule fell within the broad scope of discretion granted by Congress in the Immigration and Nationality Act to the [[Executive Branch]].

In ''Yafai v. Pompeo'', 924 F.3d 969 (7th Cir. 2019), Judge Barrett wrote a decision for the 2-1 panel which rejected a wife's claim for a visa which had twice been denied by a consular officer, despite how her husband was a [[United States]] citizen. Judge Barrett wrote for the court that the plaintiff’s claim was properly dismissed under the doctrine of consular nonreviewability. Judges Barrett and Joel Flaum wrote opinions concurring in the subsequent denial of the petition for rehearing en banc.

== Coronavirus jurisprudence ==
[[File:Amy Barrett and her husband Jesse.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Judge Amy Barrett and her husband Jesse.]]
In a challenge to a broad shutdown order by [[Illinois]] [[Democrat]] Gov. J.B. Pritzker which prohibited gatherings of more than 50 people, Judge Barrett joined an opinion by [[liberal]] Judge Diane Wood which ruled against the state [[Republican Party]].<ref>http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2020/D09-03/C:20-2175:J:Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:2574463:S:0</ref> The effect of the shutdown order is to block energetic [[Trump]] rallies, while allowing [[BLM]] rallies.

The Chairman of the Illinois Republican Party, Tim Schneider, declared in connection with filing this lawsuit in June:
{{quotebox-float|"Gov. Pritzker is ruling Illinois like an unaccountable king where only he gets to decide which violations of his executive order have his blessing."<ref name="Politico">https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/04/illinois-coronavirus-lockdown-court-challenge-408747</ref>}}
The opinion joined by Judge Barrett even included a warning against the state [[GOP]] not to complain too much about the shutdown order, lest the governor remove exemptions for religious services which the court said he could do.<ref name="Politico"/>

==Views==

In terms of her judicial philosophy, Barrett is, like the late Justice Scalia for whom she clerked, an originalist and a textualist, meaning that she seeks to interpret the Constitution according to what it actually says, not according to what others wish to read into it. On several occasions, she has praised Scalia for holding such a position and for being so attentive to the actual text of statutes he reviewed.<ref>https://www.wsj.com/articles/amy-coney-barrett-is-again-a-top-contender-for-supreme-court-nomination-11600644990</ref>

Some of Barrett's more notable legal publications regard the doctrine of ''stare decisis'', that previous legal precedents can, in certain cases, be binding on future courts. She has suggested the doctrine is sometimes applicable, but only in relatively limited circumstances, for instance on matters in which a court decision has such overwhelming support from the legal community and from the broader public that overturning it would be practically unthinkable. ''[[Brown v. Board of Education]]'', according to Barrett, would be an example of this. Otherwise, ''stare decisis'' is not inviolable; in situations where precedent and the Constitution come into conflict, the Constitution must have first consideration.<ref>http://texaslawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Barrett.pdf</ref>

==Nomination to the Supreme Court==

Immediately following the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on September 18, 2020, rumors circulated that Barrett would be nominated to replace her. President Trump himself and those around him sent signals at once that he would select a woman to replace Ginsburg, and though [[Barbara Lagoa]] and other judges were also mentioned, Barrett received the most attention. This speculation was substantiated a week later, when Republican sources announced that Trump had decided to nominate her, and the President confirmed this at his press conference on the 26th. In his statement, Trump described Barrett as "very imminently qualified for the job," praised her "loyalty to the Constitution," and noted the bipartisan vote she had received in her confirmation to the Seventh Circuit. In her own remarks, Barrett praised Ginsburg's achievements in her legal career, while also stressing her originalist philosophy in speaking of her former boss Scalia and saying "His judicial philosophy is mine too...judges are not policymakers."

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

{{Barrett Confirmation Hearing}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Barrett, Amy}}
[[Category:United States Judges]]
[[Category:Conservatives]]
[[Category:Catholics]]
[[Category:Pro-Life]]
[[Category:Patriots]]
[[Category:Anti-establishment]]
[[Category:The 100 Americans The Left Hates Most]]

The Hill

2020-09-27T23:04:33Z

TemporarysockofLT: grammar

[[File:TheShill.png|thumb|right|550px|''The Hill'' is seen here tweeting an outright false claim.]]
'''''The Hill''''' is a political newspaper and website founded in 1994. It is located in [[Washington, D.C.]] and is a subsidiary of News Communications. At one time it was a weekly publication but has since expanded to a daily format while lawmakers are in session. News for and about [[Congress]] with a special focus on business and lobbying, political campaigns, and the goings on in the Washington, D.C. [[beltway]]. ''The Hill'' has the largest circulation of any Capitol Hill periodical.

Not necessarily as left-leaning as most [[lamestream media]] sources, ''The Hill'' is marginally more balanced compared to other sites, although the comment sections for its online stories still tend to get overwhelmed with liberal posters who make vulgar, immature and grossly misinformed comments that deliberately mischaracterize and libel conservative public figures and anyone who supports them. In 2018, it announced it would no longer attend the [[White House Correspondents Dinner]] minus "major reforms" after the event featured vulgar [[anti-Trump]] speakers.<ref>Concha, Joe (May 1, 2018). [https://thehill.com/homenews/media/385636-the-hill-to-end-attendance-at-white-house-correspondents-dinner-without-major The Hill to end attendance at WHCA dinner without 'major reforms']. ''The Hill''. Retrieved May 1, 2018.</ref> Leftists have occasionally attacked ''The Hill'' for not always reporting on the news from a left-wing perspective.<ref>Wulfsohn, Joseph A. (May 3, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/the-hill-faces-backlash-for-putting-conservative-centric-spin-on-alabama-dems-abortion-remarks The Hill faces backlash for putting conservative-centric spin on Alabama Dem's abortion remarks]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved May 3, 2019.</ref>

''The Hill'' is currently and has in the past behaved like a [[leftist]] outlet. For example, they participated in the use of photos of migrant detention facilities under the Obama administration to smear Donald Trump.<ref>https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2019/07/02/the-hill-keeps-using-photos-from-2014-who-was-president-then-to-hit-trump-on-migrant-detentions/</ref> Some conservatives, such as [[Mark Dice]], have criticized ''The Hill''.<ref>https://twitter.com/MarkDice/status/1139259015437754368</ref>

The site has continuously labeled anti-establishment [[Republican]] candidates for Congress as "far-right" (including [[Laura Loomer]] and [[Bob Good]]) while giving [[far-left]] [[Democrats]] (such as [[the Squad]]) a free pass.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/house/512818-loomer-win-creates-bigger-problem-for-house-gop Loomer win creates bigger problem for House GOP]</ref> They also disparage [[QAnon]] while ignoring the violence of [[BLM]] thugs and [[Antifa]] terrorists.

''The Hill'' ran a major fake news story<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/515590-trump-supporters-gather-without-masks-despite-request-from-local-gop Trump, supporters gather without masks in NC despite request from local GOP official]</ref> in early September 2020 when covering a Trump rally in [[North Carolina]], outright falsely claiming on [[Twitter]] that attendees "gathered without masks" ''despite their very provided image showing exactly otherwise'';<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/09/fake-news-hill-bashes-trump-supporters-not-wearing-masks-nc-rally-look-closely-photo-use/ MORE FAKE NEWS: The Hill Bashes Trump Supporters for Not Wearing Masks at NC Rally… But Look Closely at the Photo they Use!]</ref> the tweet was later removed.

''The Hill'' ridiculously claimed in late September 2020 that several House [[Democrats]] such as [[Max Rose]], [[Abigail Spanberger]], Dean Phillips, and [[Cindy Axne]] were "Centrist Democrats";<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/house/518279-centrist-democrats-got-their-covid-bill-now-they-want-a-vote Centrist Democrats got their COVID bill, now they want a vote]</ref> they have all voted in favor of the [[impeachment coup against Donald Trump]],<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/70540 H Res 755 - Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors - Voting Record]</ref> and none of them voted against certain [[left-wing]] legislation, including a [[climate alarmism|climate alarmist]] bill,<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/67056 HR 9 - Climate Action Now Act - Voting Record]</ref> the [[Equality Act]],<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/67163 HR 5 - Equality Act - Voting Record]</ref> and a bill to remove the ratification deadline for the [[Equal Rights Amendment]].<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/71052 H J Res 79 - Removing the deadline for the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment - Voting Record]</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.thehill.com The Hill website]
*[http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/07/30/2008-top-conservative-political-websites Top Conservative Political Websites.]

{{liberalism}}

[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Washington, DC]]
[[Category:United States Newspapers]]
[[Category:Websites]]

The Hill

2020-09-27T23:03:55Z

TemporarysockofLT: /* References */

[[File:TheShill.png|thumb|right|550px|''The Hill'' is seen here tweeting an outright false claim.]]
'''''The Hill''''' is a political newspaper and website founded in 1994. It is located in [[Washington, D.C.]] and is a subsidiary of News Communications. At one time it was a weekly publication but has since expanded to a daily format while lawmakers are in session. News for and about [[Congress]] with a special focus on business and lobbying, political campaigns, and the goings on in the Washington, D.C. [[beltway]]. ''The Hill'' has the largest circulation of any Capitol Hill periodical.

Not necessarily as left-leaning as most [[lamestream media]] sources, ''The Hill'' is marginally more balanced compared to other sites, although the comment sections for its online stories still tend to get overwhelmed with liberal posters who make vulgar, immature and grossly misinformed comments that deliberately mischaracterize and libel conservative public figures and anyone who supports them. In 2018, it announced it would no longer attend the [[White House Correspondents Dinner]] minus "major reforms" after the event featured vulgar [[anti-Trump]] speakers.<ref>Concha, Joe (May 1, 2018). [https://thehill.com/homenews/media/385636-the-hill-to-end-attendance-at-white-house-correspondents-dinner-without-major The Hill to end attendance at WHCA dinner without 'major reforms']. ''The Hill''. Retrieved May 1, 2018.</ref> Leftists have occasionally attacked ''The Hill'' for not always reporting on the news from a left-wing perspective.<ref>Wulfsohn, Joseph A. (May 3, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/the-hill-faces-backlash-for-putting-conservative-centric-spin-on-alabama-dems-abortion-remarks The Hill faces backlash for putting conservative-centric spin on Alabama Dem's abortion remarks]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved May 3, 2019.</ref>

''The Hill'' is currently and has in the past behaved like a [[leftist]] outlet. For example, they participated in the use of photos of migrant detention facilities under the Obama administration to smear Donald Trump.<ref>https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2019/07/02/the-hill-keeps-using-photos-from-2014-who-was-president-then-to-hit-trump-on-migrant-detentions/</ref> Some conservatives, such as [[Mark Dice]], have criticized ''The Hill''.<ref>https://twitter.com/MarkDice/status/1139259015437754368</ref>

The site has continuously labeled anti-establishment [[Republican]] candidates for Congress as "far-right" (including [[Laura Loomer]] and [[Bob Good]]) while giving [[far-left]] [[Democrats]] (such as [[the Squad]]) a free pass.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/house/512818-loomer-win-creates-bigger-problem-for-house-gop Loomer win creates bigger problem for House GOP]</ref> They also disparage [[QAnon]] while ignoring the violence of [[BLM]] thugs and [[Antifa]] terrorists.

''The Hill'' ran a major fake news story<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/515590-trump-supporters-gather-without-masks-despite-request-from-local-gop Trump, supporters gather without masks in NC despite request from local GOP official]</ref> in early September 2020 when covering a Trump rally in [[North Carolina]], outright falsely claiming on [[Twitter]] that attendees "gathered without masks" ''despite their very provided image showing exactly otherwise'';<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/09/fake-news-hill-bashes-trump-supporters-not-wearing-masks-nc-rally-look-closely-photo-use/ MORE FAKE NEWS: The Hill Bashes Trump Supporters for Not Wearing Masks at NC Rally… But Look Closely at the Photo they Use!]</ref> the tweet was later removed.

''The Hill'' ridiculously claimed in late September 2020 that several House [[Democrats]], such as [[Max Rose]], [[Abigail Spanberger]], Dean Phillips, [[Cindy Axne]], were "Centrist Democrats";<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/house/518279-centrist-democrats-got-their-covid-bill-now-they-want-a-vote Centrist Democrats got their COVID bill, now they want a vote]</ref> they have all voted in favor of the [[impeachment coup against Donald Trump]],<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/70540 H Res 755 - Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors - Voting Record]</ref> and none of them voted against certain [[left-wing]] legislation, including a [[climate alarmism|climate alarmist]] bill,<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/67056 HR 9 - Climate Action Now Act - Voting Record]</ref> the [[Equality Act]],<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/67163 HR 5 - Equality Act - Voting Record]</ref> and a bill to remove the ratification deadline for the [[Equal Rights Amendment]].<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/71052 H J Res 79 - Removing the deadline for the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment - Voting Record]</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.thehill.com The Hill website]
*[http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/07/30/2008-top-conservative-political-websites Top Conservative Political Websites.]

{{liberalism}}

[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Washington, DC]]
[[Category:United States Newspapers]]
[[Category:Websites]]

The Hill

2020-09-27T23:03:34Z

TemporarysockofLT: copyedit

[[File:TheShill.png|thumb|right|550px|''The Hill'' is seen here tweeting an outright false claim.]]
'''''The Hill''''' is a political newspaper and website founded in 1994. It is located in [[Washington, D.C.]] and is a subsidiary of News Communications. At one time it was a weekly publication but has since expanded to a daily format while lawmakers are in session. News for and about [[Congress]] with a special focus on business and lobbying, political campaigns, and the goings on in the Washington, D.C. [[beltway]]. ''The Hill'' has the largest circulation of any Capitol Hill periodical.

Not necessarily as left-leaning as most [[lamestream media]] sources, ''The Hill'' is marginally more balanced compared to other sites, although the comment sections for its online stories still tend to get overwhelmed with liberal posters who make vulgar, immature and grossly misinformed comments that deliberately mischaracterize and libel conservative public figures and anyone who supports them. In 2018, it announced it would no longer attend the [[White House Correspondents Dinner]] minus "major reforms" after the event featured vulgar [[anti-Trump]] speakers.<ref>Concha, Joe (May 1, 2018). [https://thehill.com/homenews/media/385636-the-hill-to-end-attendance-at-white-house-correspondents-dinner-without-major The Hill to end attendance at WHCA dinner without 'major reforms']. ''The Hill''. Retrieved May 1, 2018.</ref> Leftists have occasionally attacked ''The Hill'' for not always reporting on the news from a left-wing perspective.<ref>Wulfsohn, Joseph A. (May 3, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/the-hill-faces-backlash-for-putting-conservative-centric-spin-on-alabama-dems-abortion-remarks The Hill faces backlash for putting conservative-centric spin on Alabama Dem's abortion remarks]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved May 3, 2019.</ref>

''The Hill'' is currently and has in the past behaved like a [[leftist]] outlet. For example, they participated in the use of photos of migrant detention facilities under the Obama administration to smear Donald Trump.<ref>https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2019/07/02/the-hill-keeps-using-photos-from-2014-who-was-president-then-to-hit-trump-on-migrant-detentions/</ref> Some conservatives, such as [[Mark Dice]], have criticized ''The Hill''.<ref>https://twitter.com/MarkDice/status/1139259015437754368</ref>

The site has continuously labeled anti-establishment [[Republican]] candidates for Congress as "far-right" (including [[Laura Loomer]] and [[Bob Good]]) while giving [[far-left]] [[Democrats]] (such as [[the Squad]]) a free pass.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/house/512818-loomer-win-creates-bigger-problem-for-house-gop Loomer win creates bigger problem for House GOP]</ref> They also disparage [[QAnon]] while ignoring the violence of [[BLM]] thugs and [[Antifa]] terrorists.

''The Hill'' ran a major fake news story<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/515590-trump-supporters-gather-without-masks-despite-request-from-local-gop Trump, supporters gather without masks in NC despite request from local GOP official]</ref> in early September 2020 when covering a Trump rally in [[North Carolina]], outright falsely claiming on [[Twitter]] that attendees "gathered without masks" ''despite their very provided image showing exactly otherwise'';<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/09/fake-news-hill-bashes-trump-supporters-not-wearing-masks-nc-rally-look-closely-photo-use/ MORE FAKE NEWS: The Hill Bashes Trump Supporters for Not Wearing Masks at NC Rally… But Look Closely at the Photo they Use!]</ref> the tweet was later removed.

''The Hill'' ridiculously claimed in late September 2020 that several House [[Democrats]], such as [[Max Rose]], [[Abigail Spanberger]], Dean Phillips, [[Cindy Axne]], were "Centrist Democrats";<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/house/518279-centrist-democrats-got-their-covid-bill-now-they-want-a-vote Centrist Democrats got their COVID bill, now they want a vote]</ref> they have all voted in favor of the [[impeachment coup against Donald Trump]],<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/70540 H Res 755 - Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors - Voting Record]</ref> and none of them voted against certain [[left-wing]] legislation, including a [[climate alarmism|climate alarmist]] bill,<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/67056 HR 9 - Climate Action Now Act - Voting Record]</ref> the [[Equality Act]],<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/67163 HR 5 - Equality Act - Voting Record]</ref> and a bill to remove the ratification deadline for the [[Equal Rights Amendment]].<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/71052 H J Res 79 - Removing the deadline for the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment - Voting Record]</ref>

==References==
{{reflist}}

==External links==
*[http://www.thehill.com The Hill website]
*[http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/07/30/2008-top-conservative-political-websites Top Conservative Political Websites.]

{{liberalism}}

[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Washington, DC]]
[[Category:United States Newspapers]]
[[Category:Websites]]

The Hill

2020-09-27T23:02:53Z

TemporarysockofLT: added a detail

[[File:TheShill.png|thumb|right|550px|''The Hill'' is seen here tweeting an outright false claim.]]
'''''The Hill''''' is a political newspaper and website founded in 1994. It is located in [[Washington, D.C.]] and is a subsidiary of News Communications. At one time it was a weekly publication but has since expanded to a daily format while lawmakers are in session. News for and about [[Congress]] with a special focus on business and lobbying, political campaigns, and the goings on in the Washington, D.C. [[beltway]]. ''The Hill'' has the largest circulation of any Capitol Hill periodical.

Not necessarily as left-leaning as most [[lamestream media]] sources, ''The Hill'' is marginally more balanced compared to other sites, although the comment sections for its online stories still tend to get overwhelmed with liberal posters who make vulgar, immature and grossly misinformed comments that deliberately mischaracterize and libel conservative public figures and anyone who supports them. In 2018, it announced it would no longer attend the [[White House Correspondents Dinner]] minus "major reforms" after the event featured vulgar [[anti-Trump]] speakers.<ref>Concha, Joe (May 1, 2018). [https://thehill.com/homenews/media/385636-the-hill-to-end-attendance-at-white-house-correspondents-dinner-without-major The Hill to end attendance at WHCA dinner without 'major reforms']. ''The Hill''. Retrieved May 1, 2018.</ref> Leftists have occasionally attacked ''The Hill'' for not always reporting on the news from a left-wing perspective.<ref>Wulfsohn, Joseph A. (May 3, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/the-hill-faces-backlash-for-putting-conservative-centric-spin-on-alabama-dems-abortion-remarks The Hill faces backlash for putting conservative-centric spin on Alabama Dem's abortion remarks]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved May 3, 2019.</ref>

''The Hill'' is currently and has in the past behaved like a [[leftist]] outlet. For example, they participated in the use of photos of migrant detention facilities under the Obama administration to smear Donald Trump.<ref>https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2019/07/02/the-hill-keeps-using-photos-from-2014-who-was-president-then-to-hit-trump-on-migrant-detentions/</ref> Some conservatives, such as [[Mark Dice]], have criticized ''The Hill''.<ref>https://twitter.com/MarkDice/status/1139259015437754368</ref>

The site has continuously labeled anti-establishment [[Republican]] candidates for Congress as "far-right" (including [[Laura Loomer]] and [[Bob Good]]) while giving [[far-left]] [[Democrats]] (such as [[the Squad]]) a free pass.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/house/512818-loomer-win-creates-bigger-problem-for-house-gop Loomer win creates bigger problem for House GOP]</ref> They also disparage [[QAnon]] while ignoring the violence of [[BLM]] thugs and [[Antifa]] terrorists.

''The Hill'' ran a major fake news story<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/515590-trump-supporters-gather-without-masks-despite-request-from-local-gop Trump, supporters gather without masks in NC despite request from local GOP official]</ref> in early September 2020 when covering a Trump rally in [[North Carolina]], outright falsely claiming on [[Twitter]] that attendees "gathered without masks" ''despite their very provided image showing exactly otherwise'';<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/09/fake-news-hill-bashes-trump-supporters-not-wearing-masks-nc-rally-look-closely-photo-use/ MORE FAKE NEWS: The Hill Bashes Trump Supporters for Not Wearing Masks at NC Rally… But Look Closely at the Photo they Use!]</ref> the tweet was later removed.

''The Hill'' ridiculously claimed in late September 2020 that several House [[Democrats]], such as [[Max Rose]], [[Abigail Spanberger]], [[Dean Phillips]], [[Cindy Axne]], etc. were "Centrist Democrats";<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/house/518279-centrist-democrats-got-their-covid-bill-now-they-want-a-vote Centrist Democrats got their COVID bill, now they want a vote]</ref> they have all voted in favor of the [[impeachment coup against Donald Trump]],<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/70540 H Res 755 - Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors - Voting Record]</ref> and none of them voted against certain [[left-wing]] legislation, including a [[climate alarmism|climate alarmist]] bill,<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/67056 HR 9 - Climate Action Now Act - Voting Record]</ref> the [[Equality Act]],<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/67163 HR 5 - Equality Act - Voting Record]</ref> and a bill to remove the ratification deadline for the [[Equal Rights Amendment]].<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/votes/71052 H J Res 79 - Removing the deadline for the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment - Voting Record]</ref>

==References==
{{reflist}}

==External links==
*[http://www.thehill.com The Hill website]
*[http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/07/30/2008-top-conservative-political-websites Top Conservative Political Websites.]

{{liberalism}}

[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Washington, DC]]
[[Category:United States Newspapers]]
[[Category:Websites]]

Conservapedia:Unofficial 2020 Senate predictions

2020-09-27T22:36:01Z

TemporarysockofLT: update - Peters' lead in Michigan isn't very high, and Collins is inclined to lose due to ranked-choice voting in Maine

With the '''[[2020 U.S. Senate elections]]''' approaching, this project page is a list of predictions made by [[Conservapedia]] editors to provide a helpful insight on the background of the elections, taking into account of key issues and factors.

{{TOC left}}

<div style="float:center">
<center>
{|class="wikitable sortable" style="text-align:center;"
!class=unsortable | State
!class=unsortable | Fake News Projections (average)
!class=unsortable | [[RCP]] ratings
!class=unsortable | Conservapedia Prediction
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Alabama_(opponent_TBD){{!}}Alabama]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff8080;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean/Likely R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff6666;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff6666;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely R
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Alaska{{!}}Alaska]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff6666;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff6666;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff6666;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely R
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Arizona_(Special){{!}}Arizona (Special)]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#9999ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean D
|colspan="1" style="background:#e6e6e6;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tossup
|colspan="1" style="background:#ffb3b3;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tilt R
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Arkansas{{!}}Arkansas]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff0000;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff0000;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff0000;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe R
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Colorado{{!}}Colorado]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#9999ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean D
|colspan="1" style="background:#e6e6e6;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tossup
|colspan="1" style="background:#b3b3ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tilt D
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Delaware{{!}}Delaware]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#4d4dff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe D
|colspan="1" style="background:#4d4dff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe D
|colspan="1" style="background:#8080ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean/Likely D
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Georgia{{!}}Georgia]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#ffb3b3;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tilt R
|colspan="1" style="background:#e6e6e6;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tossup
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff8080;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean R
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Idaho{{!}}Idaho]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff0000;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff0000;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff0000;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe R
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Illinois{{!}}Illinois]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#4d4dff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe D
|colspan="1" style="background:#4d4dff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe D
|colspan="1" style="background:#4d4dff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe D
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Iowa{{!}}Iowa]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#e6e6e6;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tossup
|colspan="1" style="background:#e6e6e6;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tossup
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff8080;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean R
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Kansas{{!}}Kansas]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff8080;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean/Likely R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff6666;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff6666;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely R
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Kentucky{{!}}Kentucky]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff6666;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff6666;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff6666;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely R
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Maine{{!}}Maine]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#b3b3ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tilt D
|colspan="1" style="background:#e6e6e6;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tossup
|colspan="1" style="background:#9999ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean D
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Massachusetts{{!}}Massachusetts]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#4d4dff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe D
|colspan="1" style="background:#4d4dff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe D
|colspan="1" style="background:#4d4dff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe D
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Michigan{{!}}Michigan]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#9999ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean D
|colspan="1" style="background:#e6e6e6;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tossup
|colspan="1" style="background:#ffb3b3;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tilt R
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Minnesota{{!}}Minnesota]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#6666ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely D
|colspan="1" style="background:#e6e6e6;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tossup
|colspan="1" style="background:#9999ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean D
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Mississippi{{!}}Mississippi]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff0000;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff6666;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff0000;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe R
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Montana{{!}}Montana]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#ffb3b3;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tilt R
|colspan="1" style="background:#e6e6e6;font-size=115%"{{!}}Tossup
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff9999;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean R
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Nebraska{{!}}Nebraska]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff0000;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff0000;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff0000;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe R
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#New_Hampshire{{!}}New Hampshire]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#6666ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely D
|colspan="1" style="background:#9999ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean D
|colspan="1" style="background:#9999ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean D
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#New_Jersey{{!}}New Jersey]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#4d4dff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe D
|colspan="1" style="background:#6666ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely D
|colspan="1" style="background:#4d4dff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe D
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#New_Mexico|New Mexico]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#4d4dff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Safe D
|colspan="1" style="background:#9999ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean D
|colspan="1" style="background:#6666ff;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely D
|-
|[[Conservapedia:Unofficial_2020_Senate_predictions#Texas_(opponent_TBD){{!}}Texas]]
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff8080;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean/Likely R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff9999;font-size=115%"{{!}}Lean R
|colspan="1" style="background:#ff6666;font-size=115%"{{!}}Likely R
|}
</center>
</div>

==CP election ratings explanation==
For the election ratings table to the right of the table of contents, the right column shows the [[Conservapedia]] predictions, with further specifications that ought to be noted. Unlike most election "predictions" from unreliable sources, the CP projections are less likely to change because they are based on long-term trends and relevant data rather than what certain fake "polls" may claim. For the "safe" ratings, these are all the seats that are guaranteed to favor one side and have zero chance of being vulnerable. For "likely", this refers to the Senate seats that are ''almost'' guaranteed to favor one side though have a potential to be somewhat vulnerable and result in closer margins than expected in the general election. For "lean", this refers to those that incline towards favoring one side though have a chance of ending up in close margins. "Lean/Likely" is also used for some seats that fall right between the two ratings. "Tilt" represents the seats that only slightly favor one side, where the other side would still have a strong chance of winning. "Tossup" would refer to any Senate seat that does not significantly favor any side and can result in either party (Republican or Democrat) taking victory.

==Senate control analysis==
An important note to firstly mention is the analysis behind the criteria for Senate control. Although [[Republicans]] currently have a majority with 53 seats, there are two [[RINOs]] that tend to dissent from their party line the most on key issues: [[Susan Collins]] and [[Lisa Murkowski]]. This means that the [[Republican Party]] needs at least fifty seats aside from these two senators if [[Donald Trump]] wins re-election, and fifty-one seats if the latter doesn't, as the vice president provides tie-breaking votes for the Senate if need be. Sen. Collins is up for re-election while Murkowski isn't. This means that in order for Republicans to maintain Senate control (assuming that despite the two [[RINO]] senators being unreliable, all other GOP senators will remain mostly in lockstep on votes), they cannot lose more than a net positive number of seats if Trump loses re-election (in this scenario disregarding whether Collins is re-elected or not), and cannot lose more than a net amount of one seat if Trump wins re-election (again without regards to whether Collins is re-elected/or not).

==Current Scenario analysis==
The Republican party currently has 53 seats in the Senate. 33 Senate Seats are up for grabs in 2020, and 2 special elections will take place. Of these 35 seats, Republicans will be defending 23 Seats, while Democrats will be defending 12 Seats.<ref>https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/2020-election-will-democrats-win-back-senate-914873/</ref> Thus, for e.g. if the Republican party hopes to advance to a 60 vote majority, it will need to win a net total of 30 seats (i.e. reverse 7 democrat seats, while retaining all its seats, for e.g.).

==Alabama==
'''Democrat:''' [[Doug Jones]] 
'''Republican:''' [[Tommy Tuberville]] 

[[File:Doug Jones 2017.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Sen. Jones is expected to lose after voting to convict Trump.]]
The Alabama Senate seat is a contest between [[Doug Jones]] and [[Tommy Tuberville]]. Jones is the incumbent but Tuberville is expected to win the election. This is due to the fact that Sen. Jones, despite representing a state [[Donald Trump]] won by over twenty-five points,<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/alabama Alabama Election Results 2016]</ref> voted in favor of the sham articles of impeachment brought against the president.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/05/us/politics/impeachment-vote-results.html Trump Impeachment Results: How Democrats and Republicans Voted]</ref>

===AL Background===
Jones won election as a [[Democrat]] to the [[United States Senate]] in the 2017 Senate special election following the resignation of then-longtime incumbent [[Jeff Sessions]] to become [[United States Attorney General]]. The [[establishment]]-backed [[Luther Strange]] was initially appointed to replace Sessions, but finished second place in the [[Republican]] primary and lost in the runoff to his much more [[conservative]] and anti-establishment challenger [[Roy Moore]].<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/alabama-senate-special-election-primary Alabama Election Results: Two Republicans Advance, Democrat Wins in U.S. Senate Primaries]</ref> After Moore faced allegations of sexual misconduct that he firmly stood against, his own party's establishment ganged up on him, with some [[RINO]]s such as [[Jeff Flake]] even endorsing and donating to Jones.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/jeff-flake-no-doubt-id-support-a-democrat-over-roy-moore Jeff Flake: 'No doubt' I'd support a Democrat over Roy Moore]</ref><ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/363402-flake-donates-100-to-doug-jones-campaign-country-over-party Flake donates $100 to Doug Jones campaign: 'Country over Party']</ref>

===AL Analysis===
Every election rating and poll conducted for the general election so far has shown that Tuberville is inclined to win the general election over Sen. Jones.

==Alaska==
'''Republican:''' [[Dan Sullivan]] 
'''Independent:''' [[Al Gross]]

In Alaska, one term Republican Dan Sullivan is running for re-election. The incumbent is being challenged by independent candidate Al Gross.

==Arizona (Special)==
'''Republican:''' [[Martha McSally]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Mark Kelly]]

The Arizona Senate election is a contest between [[Martha McSally]] and [[Mark Kelly]]. Conservapedia predicts Martha McSally will beat Mark Kelly for the seat.

==Arkansas==
'''Republican:''' [[Tom Cotton]] 
'''Libertarian:''' [[Ricky Harrington]]

The race in Arkansas is between Tom Cotton and Ricky Harrington. Conservapedia predicts that Senator Cotton will easily retain his Senate seat with a strong win.

==Colorado==
'''Republican:''' [[Cory Gardner]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[John Hickenlooper]]

The race in Colorado is between Cory Gardner and John Hickenlooper.

==Delaware==
'''Republican:''' Lauren Witzke vs attorney Jim DeMartino 
'''Democrat:''' [[Chris Coons]]

The race in Delaware is between Chris Cooons and the winner of the race between Lauren Witzke and attorney Jim DeMartino.

==Georgia==
'''Republican:''' [[David Perdue]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Jon Ossoff]]

The race in Georgia is between David Perdue and Jon Ossoff.

==Idaho==
'''Republican:''' [[Jim Risch]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Paulette Jordan]]

The race in Idaho is between Jim Risch and Paulette Jordan.

==Illinois==
'''Democrat:''' [[Dick Durbin]] 
'''Republican:''' [[Mark Curran]]

The race in Illinois is between Dick Durbin and Mark Curran.

==Iowa==
'''Republican:''' [[Joni Ernst]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Theresa Greenfield]]

The race in Iowa is between Joni Ernst and Theresa Greenfield.

==Kansas==
'''Republican:''' [[Roger Marshall]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Barbara Bollier]]

The race in Kansas is between the winner between Roger Marshall and Dave Lindstrom and Barbara Bollier.

==Kentucky==
'''Republican:''' [[Mitch McConnell]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Amy McGrath]]

The race in Kentucky is between Mitch McConnell and Amy McGrath.

==Maine==
'''Republican:''' [[Susan Collins]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Sara Gideon]]

The race in Maine is between Susan Collins and Sara Gideon.

==Massachusetts==
'''Republican:''' [[Shiva Ayyadurai]] vs. [[Kevin O'Connor]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Ed Markey]] vs. [[Joe Kennedy III]]

The race in Massachusetts is between Sen. Ed Markey and Kevin O'Connor.

==Michigan==
'''Republican:''' [[John James]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Gary Peters]]

The race in Michigan is between Gary Peters and John James.

==Minnesota==
'''Republican:''' [[Jason Lewis]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Tina Smith]]

The race in Minnesota is between Jason Lewis and Tina Smith.

==Mississippi==
'''Republican:''' [[Cindy Hyde-Smith]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Mike Espy]]

The race in Mississippi is between Cindy Hyde-Smith and Mike Espy.

==Montana==
'''Republican:''' [[Steve Daines]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Steve Bullock]]

The race in Montana is between Steve Daines and Steve Bullock.

==Nebraska==
'''Republican:''' [[Ben Sasse]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Chris Janicek]]

The race in Nebraska is between Ben Sasse and Chris Janicek.

==New Hampshire==
'''Republican:''' [[Donald Bolduc]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Jeanne Shaheen]]

The race in New Hampshire is between Donald Buldoc and Jeanne Shaheen.

==New Jersey==
'''Democrat:''' [[Cory Booker]] 
'''Republican:''' [[Rik Mehta]]

The race in New Jersey is between Cory Booker and Rik Mehta.

==New Mexico==
'''Democrat:''' [[Ben Ray Lujan]] 
'''Republican:''' [[Mark Ronchetti]]

The race in New Mexico is between Ben Ray Lujan and Mark Ronchetti.

==North Carolina==
'''Democrat:''' [[Cal Cunningham]] 
'''Republican:''' [[Thom Tillis]]

The race in North Carolina is between incumbent Thom Tillis and Cal Cunningham.

==Oklahoma==
'''Democrat:''' [[Abby Broyles]] 
'''Republican:''' [[Jim Inhofe]]

The race in Oklahoma is between Jim Inhome and Abby Broyles.

==Oregon==
'''Democrat:''' [[Jeff Merkley]] 
'''Republican:''' [[Jo Rae Perkins]]

The race in Oregon is between Jeff Merkley and Jo Rae Perkins.

==Rhode Island==
'''Democrat:''' [[Jack Reed]] 
'''Republican:''' [[Allen Waters]]

The race in Rhode Island is between Jack Reed and Allen Waters.

==South Carolina==
'''Democrat:''' [[Jaime Harrison]] 
'''Republican:''' [[Lindsey Graham]]

The race in South Carolina is between Lindsey Graham and Jaime Harrison.

==South Dakota==
'''Democrat:''' [[Dan Ahlers]] 
'''Republican:''' [[Mike Rounds]]

The race in South Dakota is between Mike Rounds and Dan Ahlers.

==Tennessee==
'''Democrat:''' [[Marquita Bradshaw]] 
'''Republican:''' [[Bill Hagerty]] 
'''Independent:''' Multiple candidates

The race in Tennessee is between Bill Hagerty, Marquita Bradshaw, and Independent Candidates.

==Texas==
'''Republican:''' [[John Cornyn]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Mary Hegar]]

The Texas Senate seat is a contest between John Cornyn and Mary Hegar. Conservapedia predicts that Mary Hegar will go on to be defeated by John Cornyn for the Senate Seat in November.

==Virginia==
'''Republican:''' [[Daniel Gade]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Mark Warner]]

The Virginia Senate seat is a contest between Mark Warner and Daniel Gade.

==Wyoming==
'''Republican:''' [[Cynthia Lummis]] 
'''Democrat:''' [[Merav Ben-David]]

The Wyoming Senate seat is a contest between Cynthia Lummis and Merav Ben-David.

==See also==
*[[Conservapedia:Unofficial 2020 presidential election predictions]]

==External links==
*[https://www.insideelections.com/ratings/senate Senate Ratings | Inside Elections]
*[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/race-forecasts-and-predictions/senate/ Who wins 2020? Senate Elections Forecast - Politico]
*[https://cookpolitical.com/ratings/senate-race-ratings 2020 Senate Race ratings | The Cook Political Report]

==Notes/References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:2020s]]

Lincoln Project

2020-09-27T22:31:49Z

TemporarysockofLT: added a category link

The '''“Lincoln” Project''' (note term to be an oxymoron, [[Lincoln Project#Oxymoronic_terminology|see below]]), also referred to as the clown crew,<ref name="Guy Benson bashes 'clown crew' Lincoln Project over ad calling Susan Collins 'Trump Stooge'">[https://www.foxnews.com/media/guy-benson-lincoln-project-susan-collins-ad Guy Benson bashes 'clown crew' Lincoln Project over ad calling Susan Collins 'Trump Stooge']</ref> is a bigoted,<ref name="The MAGA Church">[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoglNFN5-Js The MAGA Church]</ref> sexist,<ref name="New">[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn1bjfOFICY New]</ref><ref name="#WarOnWomen: Lincoln Project Attacks Ivanka Trump in Quite Possibly the Most Sexist Political Ad Ever Made">[https://www.redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2020/07/17/waronwomen-lincoln-project-attacks-ivanka-trump-in-quite-possibly-the-most-sexist-political-ad-ever-made/ #WarOnWomen: Lincoln Project Attacks Ivanka Trump in Quite Possibly the Most Sexist Political Ad Ever Made]</ref><ref name="Debra Saunders: Anti-Trump Republicans Show Dysfunctional Love for the GOP">[https://magicvalley.com/opinion/columnists/debra-saunders-anti-trump-republicans-show-dysfunctional-love-for-the-gop/article_02bec52f-1c86-5799-955a-5acad0e60c09.html Debra Saunders: Anti-Trump Republicans Show Dysfunctional Love for the GOP]</ref> [[liberal]]<ref>[https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php Super PACs | OpenSecrets]</ref> group of [[TDS]]-infected [[RINO]]s and former [[Republicans]] who are obsessed with opposing [[President Donald Trump]] and anyone who supports him. Comprising of [[moderate Republican]]s, [[neocon]] backers, former [[conservative]] leaders and McMasterites, their website headline is "Dedicated Americans Protecting Democracy"; note that the U.S. is a [[constitutional republic]] and ''not'' a simple democracy.

According to the fake news [[liberal media]], the "Lincoln" Project is a "conservative group"<ref>[https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/new-ad-from-conservative-group-criticizes-sen-mcsally-77749317929 New ad from conservative group criticizes Sen. McSally]</ref><ref>[https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/05/05/trump-tweet-lincoln-project-ad-ip-vpx.cnn Conservative group's ad garners angry Trump tweet]</ref> founded by "conservative"<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/george-conway-and-other-prominent-conservatives-call-for-expeditious-impeachment-probe/2019/10/09/4971b404-eade-11e9-9c6d-436a0df4f31d_story.html George Conway and other prominent conservatives call for ‘expeditious’ impeachment probe]</ref><ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/12/17/anti-trump-lincoln-project-super-pac/2672990001/ George Conway, other conservatives, launch Lincoln Project super PAC to 'defeat Trump']</ref><ref>[https://apnews.com/513cab63a1b3317f6342daf888a10763 Trump conservative critics launch PAC to fight reelection]</ref><ref>[https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/trump-s-conservative-critics-launch-pac-fight-re-election-n1103086 George Conway, Trump conservative critics launch PAC to fight re-election]</ref><ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/conservative-trump-critics-attack-mcsally-in-new-attack-ad/ar-BBZuWEz Conservative Trump critics attack McSally in new attack ad]</ref> critics of [[Donald Trump]].

After releasing an ad entirely misleading to the point of being "censored" by the liberal platform [[Facebook]],<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/08/lincoln-project-called-facebook-to-dispute-warning-label-on-anti-trump-ad.html Lincoln Project called Facebook to dispute fact-check warning label on anti-Trump ad ‘Mourning in America’]
*[https://www.wired.com/story/plaintext-why-facebook-censored-an-anti-trump-ad/ Why Facebook Censored an Anti-Trump Ad]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/media/496768-facebook-says-anti-trump-add-includes-partly-false-information Facebook says anti-Trump ad includes 'partly false' information]</ref> the project release a headline whining over their obvious lies being exposed.<ref>[https://lincolnproject.us/news/zuckerberg/ THE LINCOLN PROJECT SLAMS FACEBOOK CEO, MARK ZUCKERBERG, FOR CENSORSHIP HYPOCRISY]</ref> Even the extremely biased, left-wing [[PolitiFact]] rated the major claim made in the advertisement as "False".<ref name="Lincoln Project’s “Mourning in America” ad critical of Trump misleads on bailouts ">[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/may/07/lincoln-project/mourning-america-ad-critical-trump-misleads-bailou/ Lincoln Project’s “Mourning in America” ad critical of Trump misleads on bailouts]</ref> However, the liberal site has still refused to face-check nearly all of the group's most outrageous claims.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/list/?speaker=lincoln-project Latest Fact-Checks on Lincoln Project]</ref> [[Media Bias Fact Check]] also makes zero mention of the group's worst lies, giving a glowing review and marking their factual reporting as "Mixed" when most of the claims made have been proven to be outrageously false.<ref>[https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-lincoln-project/ The Lincoln Project - Media Bias Fact Check]</ref>

[[Leftist roots of Wikipedia|Left-leaning]] [[Wikipedia]] has refused to accurately cover the sheer number of lies spread by the group.<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lincoln_Project The Lincoln Project - Wikipedia]</ref>

[[President Trump]] has accurately referred to the group has the "Loser's Project".<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/take-look-guy-guys-stone-cold-loser-trump-goes-off-george-conway-losers-project-f-disgruntled-never-trumpers-video/ “Take a Look at That Guy. The Guy’s a Stone Cold Loser” – TRUMP GOES OFF on George Conway and his “Losers’ Project” of Disgruntled Never-Trumpers (VIDEO)]</ref>

==Members==
Four of the founding members of the group wrote an op-ed on [[the New York Slimes]] in mid-December 2020.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/opinion/lincoln-project.html We Are Republicans, and We Want Trump Defeated]</ref> It was reported that they apparently had tax troubles.<ref name="Lincoln Project founders have ties to Russia and tax troubles, docs reveal">Two references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/documents-show-never-trump-lincoln-project-founders-had-ties-to-russia-and-tax-debt-report Documents show Never-Trump Lincoln Project founders had ties to Russia and tax debt: Report]
*[https://nypost.com/2020/07/21/lincoln-project-founders-have-ties-to-russia-tax-troubles-docs/ Lincoln Project founders have ties to Russia and tax troubles, docs reveal ]</ref>

===George Conway===
[[George T. Conway III]], the bigoted [[Never Trump]]er husband of [[Kellyanne Conway]], was among the founding members of the "Lincoln" Project after consistently exhibiting signs of acute [[TDS]]. Supposedly superior on moral grounds compared to Trump, Conway called [[moderate Republican]] representative [[Elise Stefanik]] "trash" and shared a fake photograph of her.<ref>Two references:
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2019/11/18/george-conway-that-elise-stefanik-certainly-is-trash-you-know-n2556616 George Conway: Let's Face It, This Elise Stefanik Character Is 'Trash']
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/18/donald-trump-praises-rep-elise-stefanik-a-new-republican-star-as-left-attacks/ Donald Trump Praises Rep. Elise Stefanik ‘A New Republican Star’ as Left Attacks]</ref> He has even asserted a toxic attitude towards his wife,<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/12/george-conway-publicly-dunks-on-wife-kellyanne-over-trump-ukraine-and-biden/ Toxic George Conway Publicly Shames His Wife Kellyanne Over Trump, Ukraine and Biden]</ref> and attacked [[Melania Trump]] for defending her son Barron from a crude remark made by liberal hack [[Pamela Karlan]].<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/12/george-conway-attacks-melania-trump-after-first-lady-defends-son-barron/ George Conway Attacks Melania Trump After First Lady Defends Son Barron]
*[https://www.westernjournal.com/george-conway-attacks-melania-defending-son-public-mockery/ George Conway Attacks Melania for Defending Her Son Against Public Mockery]</ref> He has referred to the [[Trump Administration]] as a "s***show in a dumpster fire".<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/11/kellyanne-conways-husband-the-administration-is-like-a-shtshow-like-a-dumpster-fire-audio/ Kellyanne Conway’s Husband: The Administration is Like a Sh*tshow in a Dumpster Fire (AUDIO)]</ref>

Conway announced in late August 2020 that he would step down from the group to focus on family matters<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/08/23/kellyanne-conway-stepping-down-white-house-focus-family/ Kellyanne Conway Stepping Down at the White House to Focus on Family]</ref> after his daughter Claudia had ranted as a [[social justice warrior]] on [[TikTok]] in the manner of a modern whiny teenager.<ref>[https://nypost.com/2020/08/24/kellyanne-conways-daughter-claudia-reacts-to-her-moms-resignation/ Kellyanne Conway’s daughter Claudia reacts to her mom’s resignation]</ref> Kellyanne stepped down from her [[White House]] position as well.<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/08/kellyanne-conway-leaving-trump-administration-focus-family/ Kellyanne Conway Leaving the Trump Administration to Focus on Her Family]</ref>

===John Weaver===
Despite the group repeating the [[Russian collusion hoax]] in falsely accusing Trump of having ties to Russia,<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUBAAeuBpPQ Fellow Traveler]</ref> co-founder John Weaver ''was a foreign agent for the country''.<ref name="Lincoln Project founders have ties to Russia and tax troubles, docs reveal"/><ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/shocker-co-founder-never-trump-lincoln-project-foreign-agent-russia/ SHOCKER: Co-Founder of Never Trump ‘Lincoln Project’ Was Foreign Agent for …Russia]
*[https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2020/07/16/lincoln-projects-co-founder-was-a-registered-agent-for-russia-but-thats-okay-because-orangemanbad/ Lincoln Project’s Co-Founder John Weaver Was a Registered Agent for Russia But That’s Okay Because OrangeManBad]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/15/pro-biden-lincoln-project-co-founder-signed-six-figure-deal-advocate-russia/ ‘Lincoln Project’ Co-Founder John Weaver Signed Six-Figure Deal with Russia, Pulled Out After Backlash]</ref>

===Steve Schmidt===
[[Steve Schmidt]], a [[RINO]] shill for the [[homosexual agenda]] who served as a staffer for the late [[neocon]] [[John McCain]], was among the founding members of the group. He falsely claimed in late 2019 to be a Republican when he had already left the party and registered as an [[independent voters|independent]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/12/17/steve-schmidt-claims-to-be-republican-in-nyt-renounced-membership-in-2018/ Steve Schmidt Claims to be ‘Republican’ in NYT; Renounced Membership in 2018]</ref> A bigot, he harshly attacked [[Sarah Palin]] after she had called him out<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGVmPkNob-o Sarah Palin Accuses Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace and Steve Schmidt of Sabotaging McCain Campaign]</ref> for betraying conservative [[Republican]] values; unsurprisingly, the [[liberal media]] that had been extremely biased and sexist towards Palin in 2008 was none too quick to side with Schmidt.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/08/steve-schmidt-buries-sarah-palin-for-her-profound-ignorance-and-insanity-after-fox-news/ Steve Schmidt buries Sarah Palin for her ‘profound ignorance and insanity’ after Fox News attack]
*[https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sarah-palin-steve-schmidt-sabotage_n_5f3eac6ec5b697824f95d434 GOP Strategist Slams Sarah Palin After She Accuses Him Of Sabotage]</ref> Schmidt also has also blamed [[Donald Trump]] for [[Palestinian]] extremism and attacked [[evangelical Christians]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2018/05/15/schmidt-on-israel-embassy-move-there-is-blood-on-trumps-hands/# Schmidt on Israel Embassy Move: There Is Blood on Trump’s Hands]</ref>

===Michael Steele===
Former [[RNC]] chairman [[Michael Steele]], a former [[conservative]] known currently for his outspoken opposition to [[President Trump]], joined the "Lincoln" Project in late August 2020.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/former-rnc-chairman-michael-steele-joins-lincoln-project Former RNC Chairman Michael Steele joins Lincoln Project]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/08/24/lincoln-project-michael-steele-former-head-rnc-joins-anti-trump-group/5625888002/ Former RNC chairman Michael Steele joins Lincoln Project, anti-Trump group working to elect Joe Biden]
*[https://nypost.com/2020/08/25/former-rnc-chair-steele-joins-anti-trump-lincoln-project/ Former RNC chair Michael Steele joins anti-Trump Lincoln Project]</ref> Like Schmidt, he is an anti-Christian bigot who has attacked evangelicals.<ref>Two references:
*[https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/370473-ex-rnc-chair-rips-evangelical-leaders-standing-by-trump-dont Ex-RNC chair rips evangelical leaders standing by Trump: ‘Don’t ever preach to me’ again]
*[https://www.dailywire.com/news/former-rnc-chair-michael-steele-trumps-evangelical-paul-bois Former RNC Chair Michael Steele: Trump’s Evangelical Backers ‘Need To Shut The Hell Up’]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2018/01/24/fmr-rnc-chair-michael-steele-trumps-evangelical-supporters-shut-hell/ Fmr RNC Chair Michael Steele to Trump’s Evangelical Supporters: ‘Shut the Hell Up’]</ref><ref>[https://www.businessinsider.com/former-rnc-chairman-michael-steele-slams-trump-supporting-evangelicals-2019-7?op=1 Former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele calls evangelicals who support Trump 'the biggest phonies of all']</ref>

==Oxymoronic terminology==
It's important to note that the left-wing group naming themselves after President [[Abraham Lincoln]] is an oxymoron; their fierce opposition to [[President Trump]]/his bold policy decisions and sheer desire to see him removed from office nearly parallels that of the Confederates' hatred toward Lincoln. Their stance against Trump matches what early Democrats asserted about the 16th president of the United States:<ref>[https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2019/11/22/editorial/guest/president-nasty-quotes-perspective/ Some nasty anti-President quotes to offer perspective]</ref>
{{quotebox|He is evidently a person of very inferior character. ... Those who vote for the president’s re-election are traitors. He is universally an admitted failure, has no will, no courage, no executive capacity. There is a strong feeling among those who have seen the president, in the way of business, that he lacks practical talent for the job. It is thought that there should be more readiness.}}

==Lies/slanders==
The following is a list of extreme lies, slanders, and blatant falsehoods promoted by the group:

*January 9, 2020—The "project" attacked [[evangelicals]] and fundamentalist Christians for their general strong support for Trump, taking several quotes out of context.<ref name="The MAGA Church"/>

*January 13, 2020—The "Lincoln" Project released an ad attacking Sen. [[Cory Gardner]], making false claims:<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ds77eJz5788 Cory Gardner - Do Your Job]</ref>
**"Why do the polls show you headed for humiliating defeat?" — a poll from Public Policy Polling is cited; the organization is known for their inaccuracies and favoring Democrats.
**"The only thing you'll [Gardner] fight for is Trump. You're just another Trump servant." — Gardner had announced in early January 2018 that he would oppose Trump nominations to the [[DOJ]] unless then-Attorney General [[Jeff Sessions]] would reverse a [[marijuana]] crackdown.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJa9LbFz1DE GOP senator rips Sessions over marijuana policy]</ref> In addition, he had voiced opposition to Trump in 2016.
**"...putting Trump over Colorado every time... on healthcare, our environment, and honesty." — Gardner has championed bipartisan [[conservation]] efforts, and later successfully spearheaded the [[Great American Outdoors Act]].<ref>[https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3422 S.3422 - Great American Outdoors Act]</ref> Furthermore, he has ''not'' sided with Trump on every issue.<ref>[https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/cory-gardner/ Tracking Congress In The Age Of Trump - Cory Gardner]</ref>

*January 28, 2020—The group attacked [[Republican]] interim Sen. [[Martha McSally]], with the following misleading/false points:<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJVDe_345oc Martha McSally Is A Trump Hack]</ref>
**"Martha McSally, Arizona rejected you in 2018..." — while the final results of the [[2018 U.S. Senate election in Arizona]] showed McSally losing to Sinema by a narrow margin,<ref name="Arizona Senate Election Results 2018">[https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/arizona/senate/ Arizona Senate Election Results 2018]</ref> there had potentially been election fraud, as the former initially was leading on the election night before hundreds of thousands of votes were "discovered".<ref>[https://thefederalistpapers.org/opinion/not-arizona-election-results-audited-election-fraud It Is Not Over, Arizona Election Results Being Audited For Election Fraud] '''(Warning: Tweet(s) within article contain foul language)'''</ref> Such cases were prevalent during the [[2018 Midterms]] overall.
**"...and you [McSally] know why. You were too close to Donald Trump." — many conservatives in 2018 countered that McSally lost due to previous opposition to Trump and thus lost a certain degree of support.<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/11/mark-levin-says-mcsally-refused-to-go-on-his-show-didnt-want-to-be-tied-to-conservatives-then-lost-to-a-marxist/ Mark Levin Says McSally Refused to Go on His Show, Didn’t Want to be Tied to Conservatives – Then Lost to a Marxist]</ref>
**"And you [McSally] lost. Badly!" — McSally had only lost by less than three percentage points in a very tight race.<ref name="Arizona Senate Election Results 2018"/>
**"There's a reason your poll numbers are dropping, fast." — The ad cites Public Policy Polling, consistently known for left-wing bias, skewed and/or improperly weighed samples, low sample sizes, and high margins of error.
**"...People like ''[[John McCain]]''. And [[Barry Goldwater]]. Senators that served Arizona. People of courage. Toughness. They stood for what was right, no matter the political risk. And they are remembered as American heroes." — McCain betrayed fellow [[POW]]s left in [[Vietnam]], fought to cover up evidence of such, and attacked those who brought up his actions.<ref>[https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/29882-mccain-was-no-maverick-on-pows McCain Was No Maverick on POWs]</ref>

*May 6, 2020—The group released a thirty-second ad attacking Sen. McSally once again, making false claims:
**"Why. Why aren't you [McSally] leading?" — McSally was a proponent of the [[CARES Act]] and the Paycheck Protection Program covered in it to provide relief for Americans hurt by the [[CCP pandemic]].
**"Why aren't you helping?" — This claim is outrageously false; McSally had paused campaign fundraising in April, donated her salary to [[charity]], and volunteered to deliver care packages to health care workers.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/04/01/martha-mcsally-donates-salary-coronavirus-pauses-fundraising/ Sen. Martha McSally Donates April Salary To Fight Coronavirus, Pauses Fundraising]
*[https://kyma.com/news/coronavirus/2020/04/08/sen-mcsally-donates-paycheck-to-salvation-army-for-covid-19-aid/ Sen. McSally donates paycheck to Salvation Army for COVID-19 aid]
*[https://ktar.com/story/3056382/sen-mcsally-suspends-fundraising-donates-paycheck-to-covid-19-aid/ Sen. McSally suspends fundraising, donates paycheck to COVID-19 aid]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/490571-gop-senator-suspending-campaign-fundraising-donating-paycheck-amid GOP senator suspending campaign fundraising, donating paycheck amid coronavirus pandemic]</ref><ref>[https://www.mcsally.senate.gov/news/press-releases/mcsally-delivers-care-packages-to-tucson-health-care-workers McSally Delivers Care Packages to Tucson Health Care Workers]</ref>
**"Why won't you put Arizona first? Why won't you fight Trump's Wall Street bailout?" — the ad was likely referring to the Republican-led CARES Act, which even [[PolitiFact]] admitted was ''not'' an outright bailout for only large corporations.<ref name="Lincoln Project’s “Mourning in America” ad critical of Trump misleads on bailouts "/>

*July 17, 2020—The group released a malicious ad attacking [[Ivanka Trump]] for supposedly being uncaring and indifferent towards the struggles of Americans amidst the [[CCP pandemic]], even ridiculously comparing her to [[Marie Antoinette]];<ref name="New"/> the ad used [[sexist]] tropes<ref name="#WarOnWomen: Lincoln Project Attacks Ivanka Trump in Quite Possibly the Most Sexist Political Ad Ever Made"/><ref name="Debra Saunders: Anti-Trump Republicans Show Dysfunctional Love for the GOP"/> that would have been condemned across the board such that they were ever directed towards any female [[Democrat]], yet [[far-left]] "news" outlets such as Raw Story sided with the egregious smear.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/07/ivanka-trump-ripped-by-the-lincoln-project-cant-feed-your-kids-let-them-eat-cake/ Ivanka Trump ripped by the Lincoln Project: ‘Can’t feed your kids? Let them eat cake’]</ref> Furthermore, it's important to note that the president's daughter ''doesn't get paid for working at the White House out of a personal choice''.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/ivanka-works-free-trump-white-house-can-pay-well-n779246 Ivanka Works for Free, but Trump White House Can Pay Well]
*[https://www.closerweekly.com/posts/does-ivanka-trump-get-a-salary-154859/ Ivanka Trump Actually Isn’t Earning a Cent by Working at the White House]</ref>

*July 29, 2020—The [[PAC]] released an egregious attack on [[RINO]] senator [[Susan Collins]]:<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSGXknNaYqU Trump Stooge]</ref>
**"''Susan Collins '''never''' stands up to Donald Trump''." — Collins opposed Trump's candidacy in 2016,<ref>[https://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/susan-collins-not-voting-trump-226808 Susan Collins: I'm not voting for Trump]</ref> and has continuously opposed him during the latter's presidency on countless issues, including [[Betsy DeVos]], [[abortion]], [[Obamacare]] repeal efforts, immigration, tariffs, the [[border wall]], withdrawing troops from the [[Middle East]], judicial nominees, regulations, executive war powers against [[Iran]], etc.<ref>[https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/susan-m-collins/?ex_cid=rrpromo Tracking Congress In The Age Of Trump - Susan Collins | FIveThirtyEight]</ref> Following this particularly outrageous assertion, the group was referred to by Guy Benson as the "clown crew".<ref name="Guy Benson bashes 'clown crew' Lincoln Project over ad calling Susan Collins 'Trump Stooge'"/>

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[https://lincolnproject.us/ Official Website] ''(note: site is not to be taken seriously by rational beings)

[[Category:Misnomers]]
{{liberalism}}
[[Category:Former Republicans|*]]
[[Category:RINOs|*]]
[[Category:DIANs|*]]
[[Category:Anti-Trump|*]]
[[Category:Establishment|*]]
[[Category:Liberal Organizations]]
[[Category:Liberal Deceit|*]]
[[Category:Hate Groups]]
[[Category:Propaganda]]
[[Category:Biden Putsch]]
[[Category:2020s|*]]

Lincoln Project

2020-09-27T22:31:06Z

TemporarysockofLT: added category links

The '''“Lincoln” Project''' (note term to be an oxymoron, [[Lincoln Project#Oxymoronic_terminology|see below]]), also referred to as the clown crew,<ref name="Guy Benson bashes 'clown crew' Lincoln Project over ad calling Susan Collins 'Trump Stooge'">[https://www.foxnews.com/media/guy-benson-lincoln-project-susan-collins-ad Guy Benson bashes 'clown crew' Lincoln Project over ad calling Susan Collins 'Trump Stooge']</ref> is a bigoted,<ref name="The MAGA Church">[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoglNFN5-Js The MAGA Church]</ref> sexist,<ref name="New">[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn1bjfOFICY New]</ref><ref name="#WarOnWomen: Lincoln Project Attacks Ivanka Trump in Quite Possibly the Most Sexist Political Ad Ever Made">[https://www.redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2020/07/17/waronwomen-lincoln-project-attacks-ivanka-trump-in-quite-possibly-the-most-sexist-political-ad-ever-made/ #WarOnWomen: Lincoln Project Attacks Ivanka Trump in Quite Possibly the Most Sexist Political Ad Ever Made]</ref><ref name="Debra Saunders: Anti-Trump Republicans Show Dysfunctional Love for the GOP">[https://magicvalley.com/opinion/columnists/debra-saunders-anti-trump-republicans-show-dysfunctional-love-for-the-gop/article_02bec52f-1c86-5799-955a-5acad0e60c09.html Debra Saunders: Anti-Trump Republicans Show Dysfunctional Love for the GOP]</ref> [[liberal]]<ref>[https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php Super PACs | OpenSecrets]</ref> group of [[TDS]]-infected [[RINO]]s and former [[Republicans]] who are obsessed with opposing [[President Donald Trump]] and anyone who supports him. Comprising of [[moderate Republican]]s, [[neocon]] backers, former [[conservative]] leaders and McMasterites, their website headline is "Dedicated Americans Protecting Democracy"; note that the U.S. is a [[constitutional republic]] and ''not'' a simple democracy.

According to the fake news [[liberal media]], the "Lincoln" Project is a "conservative group"<ref>[https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/new-ad-from-conservative-group-criticizes-sen-mcsally-77749317929 New ad from conservative group criticizes Sen. McSally]</ref><ref>[https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/05/05/trump-tweet-lincoln-project-ad-ip-vpx.cnn Conservative group's ad garners angry Trump tweet]</ref> founded by "conservative"<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/george-conway-and-other-prominent-conservatives-call-for-expeditious-impeachment-probe/2019/10/09/4971b404-eade-11e9-9c6d-436a0df4f31d_story.html George Conway and other prominent conservatives call for ‘expeditious’ impeachment probe]</ref><ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/12/17/anti-trump-lincoln-project-super-pac/2672990001/ George Conway, other conservatives, launch Lincoln Project super PAC to 'defeat Trump']</ref><ref>[https://apnews.com/513cab63a1b3317f6342daf888a10763 Trump conservative critics launch PAC to fight reelection]</ref><ref>[https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/trump-s-conservative-critics-launch-pac-fight-re-election-n1103086 George Conway, Trump conservative critics launch PAC to fight re-election]</ref><ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/conservative-trump-critics-attack-mcsally-in-new-attack-ad/ar-BBZuWEz Conservative Trump critics attack McSally in new attack ad]</ref> critics of [[Donald Trump]].

After releasing an ad entirely misleading to the point of being "censored" by the liberal platform [[Facebook]],<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/08/lincoln-project-called-facebook-to-dispute-warning-label-on-anti-trump-ad.html Lincoln Project called Facebook to dispute fact-check warning label on anti-Trump ad ‘Mourning in America’]
*[https://www.wired.com/story/plaintext-why-facebook-censored-an-anti-trump-ad/ Why Facebook Censored an Anti-Trump Ad]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/media/496768-facebook-says-anti-trump-add-includes-partly-false-information Facebook says anti-Trump ad includes 'partly false' information]</ref> the project release a headline whining over their obvious lies being exposed.<ref>[https://lincolnproject.us/news/zuckerberg/ THE LINCOLN PROJECT SLAMS FACEBOOK CEO, MARK ZUCKERBERG, FOR CENSORSHIP HYPOCRISY]</ref> Even the extremely biased, left-wing [[PolitiFact]] rated the major claim made in the advertisement as "False".<ref name="Lincoln Project’s “Mourning in America” ad critical of Trump misleads on bailouts ">[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/may/07/lincoln-project/mourning-america-ad-critical-trump-misleads-bailou/ Lincoln Project’s “Mourning in America” ad critical of Trump misleads on bailouts]</ref> However, the liberal site has still refused to face-check nearly all of the group's most outrageous claims.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/list/?speaker=lincoln-project Latest Fact-Checks on Lincoln Project]</ref> [[Media Bias Fact Check]] also makes zero mention of the group's worst lies, giving a glowing review and marking their factual reporting as "Mixed" when most of the claims made have been proven to be outrageously false.<ref>[https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-lincoln-project/ The Lincoln Project - Media Bias Fact Check]</ref>

[[Leftist roots of Wikipedia|Left-leaning]] [[Wikipedia]] has refused to accurately cover the sheer number of lies spread by the group.<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lincoln_Project The Lincoln Project - Wikipedia]</ref>

[[President Trump]] has accurately referred to the group has the "Loser's Project".<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/take-look-guy-guys-stone-cold-loser-trump-goes-off-george-conway-losers-project-f-disgruntled-never-trumpers-video/ “Take a Look at That Guy. The Guy’s a Stone Cold Loser” – TRUMP GOES OFF on George Conway and his “Losers’ Project” of Disgruntled Never-Trumpers (VIDEO)]</ref>

==Members==
Four of the founding members of the group wrote an op-ed on [[the New York Slimes]] in mid-December 2020.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/opinion/lincoln-project.html We Are Republicans, and We Want Trump Defeated]</ref> It was reported that they apparently had tax troubles.<ref name="Lincoln Project founders have ties to Russia and tax troubles, docs reveal">Two references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/documents-show-never-trump-lincoln-project-founders-had-ties-to-russia-and-tax-debt-report Documents show Never-Trump Lincoln Project founders had ties to Russia and tax debt: Report]
*[https://nypost.com/2020/07/21/lincoln-project-founders-have-ties-to-russia-tax-troubles-docs/ Lincoln Project founders have ties to Russia and tax troubles, docs reveal ]</ref>

===George Conway===
[[George T. Conway III]], the bigoted [[Never Trump]]er husband of [[Kellyanne Conway]], was among the founding members of the "Lincoln" Project after consistently exhibiting signs of acute [[TDS]]. Supposedly superior on moral grounds compared to Trump, Conway called [[moderate Republican]] representative [[Elise Stefanik]] "trash" and shared a fake photograph of her.<ref>Two references:
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2019/11/18/george-conway-that-elise-stefanik-certainly-is-trash-you-know-n2556616 George Conway: Let's Face It, This Elise Stefanik Character Is 'Trash']
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/18/donald-trump-praises-rep-elise-stefanik-a-new-republican-star-as-left-attacks/ Donald Trump Praises Rep. Elise Stefanik ‘A New Republican Star’ as Left Attacks]</ref> He has even asserted a toxic attitude towards his wife,<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/12/george-conway-publicly-dunks-on-wife-kellyanne-over-trump-ukraine-and-biden/ Toxic George Conway Publicly Shames His Wife Kellyanne Over Trump, Ukraine and Biden]</ref> and attacked [[Melania Trump]] for defending her son Barron from a crude remark made by liberal hack [[Pamela Karlan]].<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/12/george-conway-attacks-melania-trump-after-first-lady-defends-son-barron/ George Conway Attacks Melania Trump After First Lady Defends Son Barron]
*[https://www.westernjournal.com/george-conway-attacks-melania-defending-son-public-mockery/ George Conway Attacks Melania for Defending Her Son Against Public Mockery]</ref> He has referred to the [[Trump Administration]] as a "s***show in a dumpster fire".<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/11/kellyanne-conways-husband-the-administration-is-like-a-shtshow-like-a-dumpster-fire-audio/ Kellyanne Conway’s Husband: The Administration is Like a Sh*tshow in a Dumpster Fire (AUDIO)]</ref>

Conway announced in late August 2020 that he would step down from the group to focus on family matters<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/08/23/kellyanne-conway-stepping-down-white-house-focus-family/ Kellyanne Conway Stepping Down at the White House to Focus on Family]</ref> after his daughter Claudia had ranted as a [[social justice warrior]] on [[TikTok]] in the manner of a modern whiny teenager.<ref>[https://nypost.com/2020/08/24/kellyanne-conways-daughter-claudia-reacts-to-her-moms-resignation/ Kellyanne Conway’s daughter Claudia reacts to her mom’s resignation]</ref> Kellyanne stepped down from her [[White House]] position as well.<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/08/kellyanne-conway-leaving-trump-administration-focus-family/ Kellyanne Conway Leaving the Trump Administration to Focus on Her Family]</ref>

===John Weaver===
Despite the group repeating the [[Russian collusion hoax]] in falsely accusing Trump of having ties to Russia,<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUBAAeuBpPQ Fellow Traveler]</ref> co-founder John Weaver ''was a foreign agent for the country''.<ref name="Lincoln Project founders have ties to Russia and tax troubles, docs reveal"/><ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/shocker-co-founder-never-trump-lincoln-project-foreign-agent-russia/ SHOCKER: Co-Founder of Never Trump ‘Lincoln Project’ Was Foreign Agent for …Russia]
*[https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2020/07/16/lincoln-projects-co-founder-was-a-registered-agent-for-russia-but-thats-okay-because-orangemanbad/ Lincoln Project’s Co-Founder John Weaver Was a Registered Agent for Russia But That’s Okay Because OrangeManBad]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/15/pro-biden-lincoln-project-co-founder-signed-six-figure-deal-advocate-russia/ ‘Lincoln Project’ Co-Founder John Weaver Signed Six-Figure Deal with Russia, Pulled Out After Backlash]</ref>

===Steve Schmidt===
[[Steve Schmidt]], a [[RINO]] shill for the [[homosexual agenda]] who served as a staffer for the late [[neocon]] [[John McCain]], was among the founding members of the group. He falsely claimed in late 2019 to be a Republican when he had already left the party and registered as an [[independent voters|independent]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/12/17/steve-schmidt-claims-to-be-republican-in-nyt-renounced-membership-in-2018/ Steve Schmidt Claims to be ‘Republican’ in NYT; Renounced Membership in 2018]</ref> A bigot, he harshly attacked [[Sarah Palin]] after she had called him out<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGVmPkNob-o Sarah Palin Accuses Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace and Steve Schmidt of Sabotaging McCain Campaign]</ref> for betraying conservative [[Republican]] values; unsurprisingly, the [[liberal media]] that had been extremely biased and sexist towards Palin in 2008 was none too quick to side with Schmidt.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/08/steve-schmidt-buries-sarah-palin-for-her-profound-ignorance-and-insanity-after-fox-news/ Steve Schmidt buries Sarah Palin for her ‘profound ignorance and insanity’ after Fox News attack]
*[https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sarah-palin-steve-schmidt-sabotage_n_5f3eac6ec5b697824f95d434 GOP Strategist Slams Sarah Palin After She Accuses Him Of Sabotage]</ref> Schmidt also has also blamed [[Donald Trump]] for [[Palestinian]] extremism and attacked [[evangelical Christians]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2018/05/15/schmidt-on-israel-embassy-move-there-is-blood-on-trumps-hands/# Schmidt on Israel Embassy Move: There Is Blood on Trump’s Hands]</ref>

===Michael Steele===
Former [[RNC]] chairman [[Michael Steele]], a former [[conservative]] known currently for his outspoken opposition to [[President Trump]], joined the "Lincoln" Project in late August 2020.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/former-rnc-chairman-michael-steele-joins-lincoln-project Former RNC Chairman Michael Steele joins Lincoln Project]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/08/24/lincoln-project-michael-steele-former-head-rnc-joins-anti-trump-group/5625888002/ Former RNC chairman Michael Steele joins Lincoln Project, anti-Trump group working to elect Joe Biden]
*[https://nypost.com/2020/08/25/former-rnc-chair-steele-joins-anti-trump-lincoln-project/ Former RNC chair Michael Steele joins anti-Trump Lincoln Project]</ref> Like Schmidt, he is an anti-Christian bigot who has attacked evangelicals.<ref>Two references:
*[https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/370473-ex-rnc-chair-rips-evangelical-leaders-standing-by-trump-dont Ex-RNC chair rips evangelical leaders standing by Trump: ‘Don’t ever preach to me’ again]
*[https://www.dailywire.com/news/former-rnc-chair-michael-steele-trumps-evangelical-paul-bois Former RNC Chair Michael Steele: Trump’s Evangelical Backers ‘Need To Shut The Hell Up’]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2018/01/24/fmr-rnc-chair-michael-steele-trumps-evangelical-supporters-shut-hell/ Fmr RNC Chair Michael Steele to Trump’s Evangelical Supporters: ‘Shut the Hell Up’]</ref><ref>[https://www.businessinsider.com/former-rnc-chairman-michael-steele-slams-trump-supporting-evangelicals-2019-7?op=1 Former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele calls evangelicals who support Trump 'the biggest phonies of all']</ref>

==Oxymoronic terminology==
It's important to note that the left-wing group naming themselves after President [[Abraham Lincoln]] is an oxymoron; their fierce opposition to [[President Trump]]/his bold policy decisions and sheer desire to see him removed from office nearly parallels that of the Confederates' hatred toward Lincoln. Their stance against Trump matches what early Democrats asserted about the 16th president of the United States:<ref>[https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2019/11/22/editorial/guest/president-nasty-quotes-perspective/ Some nasty anti-President quotes to offer perspective]</ref>
{{quotebox|He is evidently a person of very inferior character. ... Those who vote for the president’s re-election are traitors. He is universally an admitted failure, has no will, no courage, no executive capacity. There is a strong feeling among those who have seen the president, in the way of business, that he lacks practical talent for the job. It is thought that there should be more readiness.}}

==Lies/slanders==
The following is a list of extreme lies, slanders, and blatant falsehoods promoted by the group:

*January 9, 2020—The "project" attacked [[evangelicals]] and fundamentalist Christians for their general strong support for Trump, taking several quotes out of context.<ref name="The MAGA Church"/>

*January 13, 2020—The "Lincoln" Project released an ad attacking Sen. [[Cory Gardner]], making false claims:<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ds77eJz5788 Cory Gardner - Do Your Job]</ref>
**"Why do the polls show you headed for humiliating defeat?" — a poll from Public Policy Polling is cited; the organization is known for their inaccuracies and favoring Democrats.
**"The only thing you'll [Gardner] fight for is Trump. You're just another Trump servant." — Gardner had announced in early January 2018 that he would oppose Trump nominations to the [[DOJ]] unless then-Attorney General [[Jeff Sessions]] would reverse a [[marijuana]] crackdown.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJa9LbFz1DE GOP senator rips Sessions over marijuana policy]</ref> In addition, he had voiced opposition to Trump in 2016.
**"...putting Trump over Colorado every time... on healthcare, our environment, and honesty." — Gardner has championed bipartisan [[conservation]] efforts, and later successfully spearheaded the [[Great American Outdoors Act]].<ref>[https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3422 S.3422 - Great American Outdoors Act]</ref> Furthermore, he has ''not'' sided with Trump on every issue.<ref>[https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/cory-gardner/ Tracking Congress In The Age Of Trump - Cory Gardner]</ref>

*January 28, 2020—The group attacked [[Republican]] interim Sen. [[Martha McSally]], with the following misleading/false points:<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJVDe_345oc Martha McSally Is A Trump Hack]</ref>
**"Martha McSally, Arizona rejected you in 2018..." — while the final results of the [[2018 U.S. Senate election in Arizona]] showed McSally losing to Sinema by a narrow margin,<ref name="Arizona Senate Election Results 2018">[https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/arizona/senate/ Arizona Senate Election Results 2018]</ref> there had potentially been election fraud, as the former initially was leading on the election night before hundreds of thousands of votes were "discovered".<ref>[https://thefederalistpapers.org/opinion/not-arizona-election-results-audited-election-fraud It Is Not Over, Arizona Election Results Being Audited For Election Fraud] '''(Warning: Tweet(s) within article contain foul language)'''</ref> Such cases were prevalent during the [[2018 Midterms]] overall.
**"...and you [McSally] know why. You were too close to Donald Trump." — many conservatives in 2018 countered that McSally lost due to previous opposition to Trump and thus lost a certain degree of support.<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/11/mark-levin-says-mcsally-refused-to-go-on-his-show-didnt-want-to-be-tied-to-conservatives-then-lost-to-a-marxist/ Mark Levin Says McSally Refused to Go on His Show, Didn’t Want to be Tied to Conservatives – Then Lost to a Marxist]</ref>
**"And you [McSally] lost. Badly!" — McSally had only lost by less than three percentage points in a very tight race.<ref name="Arizona Senate Election Results 2018"/>
**"There's a reason your poll numbers are dropping, fast." — The ad cites Public Policy Polling, consistently known for left-wing bias, skewed and/or improperly weighed samples, low sample sizes, and high margins of error.
**"...People like ''[[John McCain]]''. And [[Barry Goldwater]]. Senators that served Arizona. People of courage. Toughness. They stood for what was right, no matter the political risk. And they are remembered as American heroes." — McCain betrayed fellow [[POW]]s left in [[Vietnam]], fought to cover up evidence of such, and attacked those who brought up his actions.<ref>[https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/29882-mccain-was-no-maverick-on-pows McCain Was No Maverick on POWs]</ref>

*May 6, 2020—The group released a thirty-second ad attacking Sen. McSally once again, making false claims:
**"Why. Why aren't you [McSally] leading?" — McSally was a proponent of the [[CARES Act]] and the Paycheck Protection Program covered in it to provide relief for Americans hurt by the [[CCP pandemic]].
**"Why aren't you helping?" — This claim is outrageously false; McSally had paused campaign fundraising in April, donated her salary to [[charity]], and volunteered to deliver care packages to health care workers.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/04/01/martha-mcsally-donates-salary-coronavirus-pauses-fundraising/ Sen. Martha McSally Donates April Salary To Fight Coronavirus, Pauses Fundraising]
*[https://kyma.com/news/coronavirus/2020/04/08/sen-mcsally-donates-paycheck-to-salvation-army-for-covid-19-aid/ Sen. McSally donates paycheck to Salvation Army for COVID-19 aid]
*[https://ktar.com/story/3056382/sen-mcsally-suspends-fundraising-donates-paycheck-to-covid-19-aid/ Sen. McSally suspends fundraising, donates paycheck to COVID-19 aid]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/490571-gop-senator-suspending-campaign-fundraising-donating-paycheck-amid GOP senator suspending campaign fundraising, donating paycheck amid coronavirus pandemic]</ref><ref>[https://www.mcsally.senate.gov/news/press-releases/mcsally-delivers-care-packages-to-tucson-health-care-workers McSally Delivers Care Packages to Tucson Health Care Workers]</ref>
**"Why won't you put Arizona first? Why won't you fight Trump's Wall Street bailout?" — the ad was likely referring to the Republican-led CARES Act, which even [[PolitiFact]] admitted was ''not'' an outright bailout for only large corporations.<ref name="Lincoln Project’s “Mourning in America” ad critical of Trump misleads on bailouts "/>

*July 17, 2020—The group released a malicious ad attacking [[Ivanka Trump]] for supposedly being uncaring and indifferent towards the struggles of Americans amidst the [[CCP pandemic]], even ridiculously comparing her to [[Marie Antoinette]];<ref name="New"/> the ad used [[sexist]] tropes<ref name="#WarOnWomen: Lincoln Project Attacks Ivanka Trump in Quite Possibly the Most Sexist Political Ad Ever Made"/><ref name="Debra Saunders: Anti-Trump Republicans Show Dysfunctional Love for the GOP"/> that would have been condemned across the board such that they were ever directed towards any female [[Democrat]], yet [[far-left]] "news" outlets such as Raw Story sided with the egregious smear.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/07/ivanka-trump-ripped-by-the-lincoln-project-cant-feed-your-kids-let-them-eat-cake/ Ivanka Trump ripped by the Lincoln Project: ‘Can’t feed your kids? Let them eat cake’]</ref> Furthermore, it's important to note that the president's daughter ''doesn't get paid for working at the White House out of a personal choice''.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/ivanka-works-free-trump-white-house-can-pay-well-n779246 Ivanka Works for Free, but Trump White House Can Pay Well]
*[https://www.closerweekly.com/posts/does-ivanka-trump-get-a-salary-154859/ Ivanka Trump Actually Isn’t Earning a Cent by Working at the White House]</ref>

*July 29, 2020—The [[PAC]] released an egregious attack on [[RINO]] senator [[Susan Collins]]:<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSGXknNaYqU Trump Stooge]</ref>
**"''Susan Collins '''never''' stands up to Donald Trump''." — Collins opposed Trump's candidacy in 2016,<ref>[https://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/susan-collins-not-voting-trump-226808 Susan Collins: I'm not voting for Trump]</ref> and has continuously opposed him during the latter's presidency on countless issues, including [[Betsy DeVos]], [[abortion]], [[Obamacare]] repeal efforts, immigration, tariffs, the [[border wall]], withdrawing troops from the [[Middle East]], judicial nominees, regulations, executive war powers against [[Iran]], etc.<ref>[https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/susan-m-collins/?ex_cid=rrpromo Tracking Congress In The Age Of Trump - Susan Collins | FIveThirtyEight]</ref> Following this particularly outrageous assertion, the group was referred to by Guy Benson as the "clown crew".<ref name="Guy Benson bashes 'clown crew' Lincoln Project over ad calling Susan Collins 'Trump Stooge'"/>

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[https://lincolnproject.us/ Official Website] ''(note: site is not to be taken seriously by rational beings)

[[Category:Misnomers]]
{{liberalism}}
[[Category:RINOs|*]]
[[Category:DIANs|*]]
[[Category:Anti-Trump|*]]
[[Category:Establishment|*]]
[[Category:Liberal Organizations]]
[[Category:Liberal Deceit|*]]
[[Category:Hate Groups]]
[[Category:Propaganda]]
[[Category:Biden Putsch]]
[[Category:2020s|*]]

Lincoln Project

2020-09-27T22:29:40Z

TemporarysockofLT: added category links

The '''“Lincoln” Project''' (note term to be an oxymoron, [[Lincoln Project#Oxymoronic_terminology|see below]]), also referred to as the clown crew,<ref name="Guy Benson bashes 'clown crew' Lincoln Project over ad calling Susan Collins 'Trump Stooge'">[https://www.foxnews.com/media/guy-benson-lincoln-project-susan-collins-ad Guy Benson bashes 'clown crew' Lincoln Project over ad calling Susan Collins 'Trump Stooge']</ref> is a bigoted,<ref name="The MAGA Church">[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoglNFN5-Js The MAGA Church]</ref> sexist,<ref name="New">[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn1bjfOFICY New]</ref><ref name="#WarOnWomen: Lincoln Project Attacks Ivanka Trump in Quite Possibly the Most Sexist Political Ad Ever Made">[https://www.redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2020/07/17/waronwomen-lincoln-project-attacks-ivanka-trump-in-quite-possibly-the-most-sexist-political-ad-ever-made/ #WarOnWomen: Lincoln Project Attacks Ivanka Trump in Quite Possibly the Most Sexist Political Ad Ever Made]</ref><ref name="Debra Saunders: Anti-Trump Republicans Show Dysfunctional Love for the GOP">[https://magicvalley.com/opinion/columnists/debra-saunders-anti-trump-republicans-show-dysfunctional-love-for-the-gop/article_02bec52f-1c86-5799-955a-5acad0e60c09.html Debra Saunders: Anti-Trump Republicans Show Dysfunctional Love for the GOP]</ref> [[liberal]]<ref>[https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php Super PACs | OpenSecrets]</ref> group of [[TDS]]-infected [[RINO]]s and former [[Republicans]] who are obsessed with opposing [[President Donald Trump]] and anyone who supports him. Comprising of [[moderate Republican]]s, [[neocon]] backers, former [[conservative]] leaders and McMasterites, their website headline is "Dedicated Americans Protecting Democracy"; note that the U.S. is a [[constitutional republic]] and ''not'' a simple democracy.

According to the fake news [[liberal media]], the "Lincoln" Project is a "conservative group"<ref>[https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/new-ad-from-conservative-group-criticizes-sen-mcsally-77749317929 New ad from conservative group criticizes Sen. McSally]</ref><ref>[https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/05/05/trump-tweet-lincoln-project-ad-ip-vpx.cnn Conservative group's ad garners angry Trump tweet]</ref> founded by "conservative"<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/george-conway-and-other-prominent-conservatives-call-for-expeditious-impeachment-probe/2019/10/09/4971b404-eade-11e9-9c6d-436a0df4f31d_story.html George Conway and other prominent conservatives call for ‘expeditious’ impeachment probe]</ref><ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/12/17/anti-trump-lincoln-project-super-pac/2672990001/ George Conway, other conservatives, launch Lincoln Project super PAC to 'defeat Trump']</ref><ref>[https://apnews.com/513cab63a1b3317f6342daf888a10763 Trump conservative critics launch PAC to fight reelection]</ref><ref>[https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/trump-s-conservative-critics-launch-pac-fight-re-election-n1103086 George Conway, Trump conservative critics launch PAC to fight re-election]</ref><ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/conservative-trump-critics-attack-mcsally-in-new-attack-ad/ar-BBZuWEz Conservative Trump critics attack McSally in new attack ad]</ref> critics of [[Donald Trump]].

After releasing an ad entirely misleading to the point of being "censored" by the liberal platform [[Facebook]],<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/08/lincoln-project-called-facebook-to-dispute-warning-label-on-anti-trump-ad.html Lincoln Project called Facebook to dispute fact-check warning label on anti-Trump ad ‘Mourning in America’]
*[https://www.wired.com/story/plaintext-why-facebook-censored-an-anti-trump-ad/ Why Facebook Censored an Anti-Trump Ad]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/media/496768-facebook-says-anti-trump-add-includes-partly-false-information Facebook says anti-Trump ad includes 'partly false' information]</ref> the project release a headline whining over their obvious lies being exposed.<ref>[https://lincolnproject.us/news/zuckerberg/ THE LINCOLN PROJECT SLAMS FACEBOOK CEO, MARK ZUCKERBERG, FOR CENSORSHIP HYPOCRISY]</ref> Even the extremely biased, left-wing [[PolitiFact]] rated the major claim made in the advertisement as "False".<ref name="Lincoln Project’s “Mourning in America” ad critical of Trump misleads on bailouts ">[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/may/07/lincoln-project/mourning-america-ad-critical-trump-misleads-bailou/ Lincoln Project’s “Mourning in America” ad critical of Trump misleads on bailouts]</ref> However, the liberal site has still refused to face-check nearly all of the group's most outrageous claims.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/list/?speaker=lincoln-project Latest Fact-Checks on Lincoln Project]</ref> [[Media Bias Fact Check]] also makes zero mention of the group's worst lies, giving a glowing review and marking their factual reporting as "Mixed" when most of the claims made have been proven to be outrageously false.<ref>[https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-lincoln-project/ The Lincoln Project - Media Bias Fact Check]</ref>

[[Leftist roots of Wikipedia|Left-leaning]] [[Wikipedia]] has refused to accurately cover the sheer number of lies spread by the group.<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lincoln_Project The Lincoln Project - Wikipedia]</ref>

[[President Trump]] has accurately referred to the group has the "Loser's Project".<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/take-look-guy-guys-stone-cold-loser-trump-goes-off-george-conway-losers-project-f-disgruntled-never-trumpers-video/ “Take a Look at That Guy. The Guy’s a Stone Cold Loser” – TRUMP GOES OFF on George Conway and his “Losers’ Project” of Disgruntled Never-Trumpers (VIDEO)]</ref>

==Members==
Four of the founding members of the group wrote an op-ed on [[the New York Slimes]] in mid-December 2020.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/opinion/lincoln-project.html We Are Republicans, and We Want Trump Defeated]</ref> It was reported that they apparently had tax troubles.<ref name="Lincoln Project founders have ties to Russia and tax troubles, docs reveal">Two references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/documents-show-never-trump-lincoln-project-founders-had-ties-to-russia-and-tax-debt-report Documents show Never-Trump Lincoln Project founders had ties to Russia and tax debt: Report]
*[https://nypost.com/2020/07/21/lincoln-project-founders-have-ties-to-russia-tax-troubles-docs/ Lincoln Project founders have ties to Russia and tax troubles, docs reveal ]</ref>

===George Conway===
[[George T. Conway III]], the bigoted [[Never Trump]]er husband of [[Kellyanne Conway]], was among the founding members of the "Lincoln" Project after consistently exhibiting signs of acute [[TDS]]. Supposedly superior on moral grounds compared to Trump, Conway called [[moderate Republican]] representative [[Elise Stefanik]] "trash" and shared a fake photograph of her.<ref>Two references:
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2019/11/18/george-conway-that-elise-stefanik-certainly-is-trash-you-know-n2556616 George Conway: Let's Face It, This Elise Stefanik Character Is 'Trash']
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/18/donald-trump-praises-rep-elise-stefanik-a-new-republican-star-as-left-attacks/ Donald Trump Praises Rep. Elise Stefanik ‘A New Republican Star’ as Left Attacks]</ref> He has even asserted a toxic attitude towards his wife,<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/12/george-conway-publicly-dunks-on-wife-kellyanne-over-trump-ukraine-and-biden/ Toxic George Conway Publicly Shames His Wife Kellyanne Over Trump, Ukraine and Biden]</ref> and attacked [[Melania Trump]] for defending her son Barron from a crude remark made by liberal hack [[Pamela Karlan]].<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/12/george-conway-attacks-melania-trump-after-first-lady-defends-son-barron/ George Conway Attacks Melania Trump After First Lady Defends Son Barron]
*[https://www.westernjournal.com/george-conway-attacks-melania-defending-son-public-mockery/ George Conway Attacks Melania for Defending Her Son Against Public Mockery]</ref> He has referred to the [[Trump Administration]] as a "s***show in a dumpster fire".<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/11/kellyanne-conways-husband-the-administration-is-like-a-shtshow-like-a-dumpster-fire-audio/ Kellyanne Conway’s Husband: The Administration is Like a Sh*tshow in a Dumpster Fire (AUDIO)]</ref>

Conway announced in late August 2020 that he would step down from the group to focus on family matters<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/08/23/kellyanne-conway-stepping-down-white-house-focus-family/ Kellyanne Conway Stepping Down at the White House to Focus on Family]</ref> after his daughter Claudia had ranted as a [[social justice warrior]] on [[TikTok]] in the manner of a modern whiny teenager.<ref>[https://nypost.com/2020/08/24/kellyanne-conways-daughter-claudia-reacts-to-her-moms-resignation/ Kellyanne Conway’s daughter Claudia reacts to her mom’s resignation]</ref> Kellyanne stepped down from her [[White House]] position as well.<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/08/kellyanne-conway-leaving-trump-administration-focus-family/ Kellyanne Conway Leaving the Trump Administration to Focus on Her Family]</ref>

===John Weaver===
Despite the group repeating the [[Russian collusion hoax]] in falsely accusing Trump of having ties to Russia,<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUBAAeuBpPQ Fellow Traveler]</ref> co-founder John Weaver ''was a foreign agent for the country''.<ref name="Lincoln Project founders have ties to Russia and tax troubles, docs reveal"/><ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/shocker-co-founder-never-trump-lincoln-project-foreign-agent-russia/ SHOCKER: Co-Founder of Never Trump ‘Lincoln Project’ Was Foreign Agent for …Russia]
*[https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2020/07/16/lincoln-projects-co-founder-was-a-registered-agent-for-russia-but-thats-okay-because-orangemanbad/ Lincoln Project’s Co-Founder John Weaver Was a Registered Agent for Russia But That’s Okay Because OrangeManBad]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/15/pro-biden-lincoln-project-co-founder-signed-six-figure-deal-advocate-russia/ ‘Lincoln Project’ Co-Founder John Weaver Signed Six-Figure Deal with Russia, Pulled Out After Backlash]</ref>

===Steve Schmidt===
[[Steve Schmidt]], a [[RINO]] shill for the [[homosexual agenda]] who served as a staffer for the late [[neocon]] [[John McCain]], was among the founding members of the group. He falsely claimed in late 2019 to be a Republican when he had already left the party and registered as an [[independent voters|independent]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/12/17/steve-schmidt-claims-to-be-republican-in-nyt-renounced-membership-in-2018/ Steve Schmidt Claims to be ‘Republican’ in NYT; Renounced Membership in 2018]</ref> A bigot, he harshly attacked [[Sarah Palin]] after she had called him out<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGVmPkNob-o Sarah Palin Accuses Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace and Steve Schmidt of Sabotaging McCain Campaign]</ref> for betraying conservative [[Republican]] values; unsurprisingly, the [[liberal media]] that had been extremely biased and sexist towards Palin in 2008 was none too quick to side with Schmidt.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/08/steve-schmidt-buries-sarah-palin-for-her-profound-ignorance-and-insanity-after-fox-news/ Steve Schmidt buries Sarah Palin for her ‘profound ignorance and insanity’ after Fox News attack]
*[https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sarah-palin-steve-schmidt-sabotage_n_5f3eac6ec5b697824f95d434 GOP Strategist Slams Sarah Palin After She Accuses Him Of Sabotage]</ref> Schmidt also has also blamed [[Donald Trump]] for [[Palestinian]] extremism and attacked [[evangelical Christians]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2018/05/15/schmidt-on-israel-embassy-move-there-is-blood-on-trumps-hands/# Schmidt on Israel Embassy Move: There Is Blood on Trump’s Hands]</ref>

===Michael Steele===
Former [[RNC]] chairman [[Michael Steele]], a former [[conservative]] known currently for his outspoken opposition to [[President Trump]], joined the "Lincoln" Project in late August 2020.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/former-rnc-chairman-michael-steele-joins-lincoln-project Former RNC Chairman Michael Steele joins Lincoln Project]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/08/24/lincoln-project-michael-steele-former-head-rnc-joins-anti-trump-group/5625888002/ Former RNC chairman Michael Steele joins Lincoln Project, anti-Trump group working to elect Joe Biden]
*[https://nypost.com/2020/08/25/former-rnc-chair-steele-joins-anti-trump-lincoln-project/ Former RNC chair Michael Steele joins anti-Trump Lincoln Project]</ref> Like Schmidt, he is an anti-Christian bigot who has attacked evangelicals.<ref>Two references:
*[https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/370473-ex-rnc-chair-rips-evangelical-leaders-standing-by-trump-dont Ex-RNC chair rips evangelical leaders standing by Trump: ‘Don’t ever preach to me’ again]
*[https://www.dailywire.com/news/former-rnc-chair-michael-steele-trumps-evangelical-paul-bois Former RNC Chair Michael Steele: Trump’s Evangelical Backers ‘Need To Shut The Hell Up’]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2018/01/24/fmr-rnc-chair-michael-steele-trumps-evangelical-supporters-shut-hell/ Fmr RNC Chair Michael Steele to Trump’s Evangelical Supporters: ‘Shut the Hell Up’]</ref><ref>[https://www.businessinsider.com/former-rnc-chairman-michael-steele-slams-trump-supporting-evangelicals-2019-7?op=1 Former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele calls evangelicals who support Trump 'the biggest phonies of all']</ref>

==Oxymoronic terminology==
It's important to note that the left-wing group naming themselves after President [[Abraham Lincoln]] is an oxymoron; their fierce opposition to [[President Trump]]/his bold policy decisions and sheer desire to see him removed from office nearly parallels that of the Confederates' hatred toward Lincoln. Their stance against Trump matches what early Democrats asserted about the 16th president of the United States:<ref>[https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2019/11/22/editorial/guest/president-nasty-quotes-perspective/ Some nasty anti-President quotes to offer perspective]</ref>
{{quotebox|He is evidently a person of very inferior character. ... Those who vote for the president’s re-election are traitors. He is universally an admitted failure, has no will, no courage, no executive capacity. There is a strong feeling among those who have seen the president, in the way of business, that he lacks practical talent for the job. It is thought that there should be more readiness.}}

==Lies/slanders==
The following is a list of extreme lies, slanders, and blatant falsehoods promoted by the group:

*January 9, 2020—The "project" attacked [[evangelicals]] and fundamentalist Christians for their general strong support for Trump, taking several quotes out of context.<ref name="The MAGA Church"/>

*January 13, 2020—The "Lincoln" Project released an ad attacking Sen. [[Cory Gardner]], making false claims:<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ds77eJz5788 Cory Gardner - Do Your Job]</ref>
**"Why do the polls show you headed for humiliating defeat?" — a poll from Public Policy Polling is cited; the organization is known for their inaccuracies and favoring Democrats.
**"The only thing you'll [Gardner] fight for is Trump. You're just another Trump servant." — Gardner had announced in early January 2018 that he would oppose Trump nominations to the [[DOJ]] unless then-Attorney General [[Jeff Sessions]] would reverse a [[marijuana]] crackdown.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJa9LbFz1DE GOP senator rips Sessions over marijuana policy]</ref> In addition, he had voiced opposition to Trump in 2016.
**"...putting Trump over Colorado every time... on healthcare, our environment, and honesty." — Gardner has championed bipartisan [[conservation]] efforts, and later successfully spearheaded the [[Great American Outdoors Act]].<ref>[https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3422 S.3422 - Great American Outdoors Act]</ref> Furthermore, he has ''not'' sided with Trump on every issue.<ref>[https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/cory-gardner/ Tracking Congress In The Age Of Trump - Cory Gardner]</ref>

*January 28, 2020—The group attacked [[Republican]] interim Sen. [[Martha McSally]], with the following misleading/false points:<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJVDe_345oc Martha McSally Is A Trump Hack]</ref>
**"Martha McSally, Arizona rejected you in 2018..." — while the final results of the [[2018 U.S. Senate election in Arizona]] showed McSally losing to Sinema by a narrow margin,<ref name="Arizona Senate Election Results 2018">[https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/arizona/senate/ Arizona Senate Election Results 2018]</ref> there had potentially been election fraud, as the former initially was leading on the election night before hundreds of thousands of votes were "discovered".<ref>[https://thefederalistpapers.org/opinion/not-arizona-election-results-audited-election-fraud It Is Not Over, Arizona Election Results Being Audited For Election Fraud] '''(Warning: Tweet(s) within article contain foul language)'''</ref> Such cases were prevalent during the [[2018 Midterms]] overall.
**"...and you [McSally] know why. You were too close to Donald Trump." — many conservatives in 2018 countered that McSally lost due to previous opposition to Trump and thus lost a certain degree of support.<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/11/mark-levin-says-mcsally-refused-to-go-on-his-show-didnt-want-to-be-tied-to-conservatives-then-lost-to-a-marxist/ Mark Levin Says McSally Refused to Go on His Show, Didn’t Want to be Tied to Conservatives – Then Lost to a Marxist]</ref>
**"And you [McSally] lost. Badly!" — McSally had only lost by less than three percentage points in a very tight race.<ref name="Arizona Senate Election Results 2018"/>
**"There's a reason your poll numbers are dropping, fast." — The ad cites Public Policy Polling, consistently known for left-wing bias, skewed and/or improperly weighed samples, low sample sizes, and high margins of error.
**"...People like ''[[John McCain]]''. And [[Barry Goldwater]]. Senators that served Arizona. People of courage. Toughness. They stood for what was right, no matter the political risk. And they are remembered as American heroes." — McCain betrayed fellow [[POW]]s left in [[Vietnam]], fought to cover up evidence of such, and attacked those who brought up his actions.<ref>[https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/29882-mccain-was-no-maverick-on-pows McCain Was No Maverick on POWs]</ref>

*May 6, 2020—The group released a thirty-second ad attacking Sen. McSally once again, making false claims:
**"Why. Why aren't you [McSally] leading?" — McSally was a proponent of the [[CARES Act]] and the Paycheck Protection Program covered in it to provide relief for Americans hurt by the [[CCP pandemic]].
**"Why aren't you helping?" — This claim is outrageously false; McSally had paused campaign fundraising in April, donated her salary to [[charity]], and volunteered to deliver care packages to health care workers.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/04/01/martha-mcsally-donates-salary-coronavirus-pauses-fundraising/ Sen. Martha McSally Donates April Salary To Fight Coronavirus, Pauses Fundraising]
*[https://kyma.com/news/coronavirus/2020/04/08/sen-mcsally-donates-paycheck-to-salvation-army-for-covid-19-aid/ Sen. McSally donates paycheck to Salvation Army for COVID-19 aid]
*[https://ktar.com/story/3056382/sen-mcsally-suspends-fundraising-donates-paycheck-to-covid-19-aid/ Sen. McSally suspends fundraising, donates paycheck to COVID-19 aid]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/490571-gop-senator-suspending-campaign-fundraising-donating-paycheck-amid GOP senator suspending campaign fundraising, donating paycheck amid coronavirus pandemic]</ref><ref>[https://www.mcsally.senate.gov/news/press-releases/mcsally-delivers-care-packages-to-tucson-health-care-workers McSally Delivers Care Packages to Tucson Health Care Workers]</ref>
**"Why won't you put Arizona first? Why won't you fight Trump's Wall Street bailout?" — the ad was likely referring to the Republican-led CARES Act, which even [[PolitiFact]] admitted was ''not'' an outright bailout for only large corporations.<ref name="Lincoln Project’s “Mourning in America” ad critical of Trump misleads on bailouts "/>

*July 17, 2020—The group released a malicious ad attacking [[Ivanka Trump]] for supposedly being uncaring and indifferent towards the struggles of Americans amidst the [[CCP pandemic]], even ridiculously comparing her to [[Marie Antoinette]];<ref name="New"/> the ad used [[sexist]] tropes<ref name="#WarOnWomen: Lincoln Project Attacks Ivanka Trump in Quite Possibly the Most Sexist Political Ad Ever Made"/><ref name="Debra Saunders: Anti-Trump Republicans Show Dysfunctional Love for the GOP"/> that would have been condemned across the board such that they were ever directed towards any female [[Democrat]], yet [[far-left]] "news" outlets such as Raw Story sided with the egregious smear.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/07/ivanka-trump-ripped-by-the-lincoln-project-cant-feed-your-kids-let-them-eat-cake/ Ivanka Trump ripped by the Lincoln Project: ‘Can’t feed your kids? Let them eat cake’]</ref> Furthermore, it's important to note that the president's daughter ''doesn't get paid for working at the White House out of a personal choice''.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/ivanka-works-free-trump-white-house-can-pay-well-n779246 Ivanka Works for Free, but Trump White House Can Pay Well]
*[https://www.closerweekly.com/posts/does-ivanka-trump-get-a-salary-154859/ Ivanka Trump Actually Isn’t Earning a Cent by Working at the White House]</ref>

*July 29, 2020—The [[PAC]] released an egregious attack on [[RINO]] senator [[Susan Collins]]:<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSGXknNaYqU Trump Stooge]</ref>
**"''Susan Collins '''never''' stands up to Donald Trump''." — Collins opposed Trump's candidacy in 2016,<ref>[https://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/susan-collins-not-voting-trump-226808 Susan Collins: I'm not voting for Trump]</ref> and has continuously opposed him during the latter's presidency on countless issues, including [[Betsy DeVos]], [[abortion]], [[Obamacare]] repeal efforts, immigration, tariffs, the [[border wall]], withdrawing troops from the [[Middle East]], judicial nominees, regulations, executive war powers against [[Iran]], etc.<ref>[https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/susan-m-collins/?ex_cid=rrpromo Tracking Congress In The Age Of Trump - Susan Collins | FIveThirtyEight]</ref> Following this particularly outrageous assertion, the group was referred to by Guy Benson as the "clown crew".<ref name="Guy Benson bashes 'clown crew' Lincoln Project over ad calling Susan Collins 'Trump Stooge'"/>

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[https://lincolnproject.us/ Official Website] ''(note: site is not to be taken seriously by rational beings)

{{liberalism}}
[[Category:RINOs|*]]
[[Category:DIANs|*]]
[[Category:Anti-Trump|*]]
[[Category:Establishment|*]]
[[Category:Liberal Organizations]]
[[Category:Liberal Deceit|*]]
[[Category:Hate Groups]]
[[Category:Propaganda]]
[[Category:2020s|*]]

Lincoln Project

2020-09-27T22:28:06Z

TemporarysockofLT: grammar

The '''“Lincoln” Project''' (note term to be an oxymoron, [[Lincoln Project#Oxymoronic_terminology|see below]]), also referred to as the clown crew,<ref name="Guy Benson bashes 'clown crew' Lincoln Project over ad calling Susan Collins 'Trump Stooge'">[https://www.foxnews.com/media/guy-benson-lincoln-project-susan-collins-ad Guy Benson bashes 'clown crew' Lincoln Project over ad calling Susan Collins 'Trump Stooge']</ref> is a bigoted,<ref name="The MAGA Church">[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoglNFN5-Js The MAGA Church]</ref> sexist,<ref name="New">[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn1bjfOFICY New]</ref><ref name="#WarOnWomen: Lincoln Project Attacks Ivanka Trump in Quite Possibly the Most Sexist Political Ad Ever Made">[https://www.redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2020/07/17/waronwomen-lincoln-project-attacks-ivanka-trump-in-quite-possibly-the-most-sexist-political-ad-ever-made/ #WarOnWomen: Lincoln Project Attacks Ivanka Trump in Quite Possibly the Most Sexist Political Ad Ever Made]</ref><ref name="Debra Saunders: Anti-Trump Republicans Show Dysfunctional Love for the GOP">[https://magicvalley.com/opinion/columnists/debra-saunders-anti-trump-republicans-show-dysfunctional-love-for-the-gop/article_02bec52f-1c86-5799-955a-5acad0e60c09.html Debra Saunders: Anti-Trump Republicans Show Dysfunctional Love for the GOP]</ref> [[liberal]]<ref>[https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php Super PACs | OpenSecrets]</ref> group of [[TDS]]-infected [[RINO]]s and former [[Republicans]] who are obsessed with opposing [[President Donald Trump]] and anyone who supports him. Comprising of [[moderate Republican]]s, [[neocon]] backers, former [[conservative]] leaders and McMasterites, their website headline is "Dedicated Americans Protecting Democracy"; note that the U.S. is a [[constitutional republic]] and ''not'' a simple democracy.

According to the fake news [[liberal media]], the "Lincoln" Project is a "conservative group"<ref>[https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/new-ad-from-conservative-group-criticizes-sen-mcsally-77749317929 New ad from conservative group criticizes Sen. McSally]</ref><ref>[https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/05/05/trump-tweet-lincoln-project-ad-ip-vpx.cnn Conservative group's ad garners angry Trump tweet]</ref> founded by "conservative"<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/george-conway-and-other-prominent-conservatives-call-for-expeditious-impeachment-probe/2019/10/09/4971b404-eade-11e9-9c6d-436a0df4f31d_story.html George Conway and other prominent conservatives call for ‘expeditious’ impeachment probe]</ref><ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/12/17/anti-trump-lincoln-project-super-pac/2672990001/ George Conway, other conservatives, launch Lincoln Project super PAC to 'defeat Trump']</ref><ref>[https://apnews.com/513cab63a1b3317f6342daf888a10763 Trump conservative critics launch PAC to fight reelection]</ref><ref>[https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/trump-s-conservative-critics-launch-pac-fight-re-election-n1103086 George Conway, Trump conservative critics launch PAC to fight re-election]</ref><ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/conservative-trump-critics-attack-mcsally-in-new-attack-ad/ar-BBZuWEz Conservative Trump critics attack McSally in new attack ad]</ref> critics of [[Donald Trump]].

After releasing an ad entirely misleading to the point of being "censored" by the liberal platform [[Facebook]],<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/08/lincoln-project-called-facebook-to-dispute-warning-label-on-anti-trump-ad.html Lincoln Project called Facebook to dispute fact-check warning label on anti-Trump ad ‘Mourning in America’]
*[https://www.wired.com/story/plaintext-why-facebook-censored-an-anti-trump-ad/ Why Facebook Censored an Anti-Trump Ad]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/media/496768-facebook-says-anti-trump-add-includes-partly-false-information Facebook says anti-Trump ad includes 'partly false' information]</ref> the project release a headline whining over their obvious lies being exposed.<ref>[https://lincolnproject.us/news/zuckerberg/ THE LINCOLN PROJECT SLAMS FACEBOOK CEO, MARK ZUCKERBERG, FOR CENSORSHIP HYPOCRISY]</ref> Even the extremely biased, left-wing [[PolitiFact]] rated the major claim made in the advertisement as "False".<ref name="Lincoln Project’s “Mourning in America” ad critical of Trump misleads on bailouts ">[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/may/07/lincoln-project/mourning-america-ad-critical-trump-misleads-bailou/ Lincoln Project’s “Mourning in America” ad critical of Trump misleads on bailouts]</ref> However, the liberal site has still refused to face-check nearly all of the group's most outrageous claims.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/list/?speaker=lincoln-project Latest Fact-Checks on Lincoln Project]</ref> [[Media Bias Fact Check]] also makes zero mention of the group's worst lies, giving a glowing review and marking their factual reporting as "Mixed" when most of the claims made have been proven to be outrageously false.<ref>[https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-lincoln-project/ The Lincoln Project - Media Bias Fact Check]</ref>

[[Leftist roots of Wikipedia|Left-leaning]] [[Wikipedia]] has refused to accurately cover the sheer number of lies spread by the group.<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lincoln_Project The Lincoln Project - Wikipedia]</ref>

[[President Trump]] has accurately referred to the group has the "Loser's Project".<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/take-look-guy-guys-stone-cold-loser-trump-goes-off-george-conway-losers-project-f-disgruntled-never-trumpers-video/ “Take a Look at That Guy. The Guy’s a Stone Cold Loser” – TRUMP GOES OFF on George Conway and his “Losers’ Project” of Disgruntled Never-Trumpers (VIDEO)]</ref>

==Members==
Four of the founding members of the group wrote an op-ed on [[the New York Slimes]] in mid-December 2020.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/opinion/lincoln-project.html We Are Republicans, and We Want Trump Defeated]</ref> It was reported that they apparently had tax troubles.<ref name="Lincoln Project founders have ties to Russia and tax troubles, docs reveal">Two references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/documents-show-never-trump-lincoln-project-founders-had-ties-to-russia-and-tax-debt-report Documents show Never-Trump Lincoln Project founders had ties to Russia and tax debt: Report]
*[https://nypost.com/2020/07/21/lincoln-project-founders-have-ties-to-russia-tax-troubles-docs/ Lincoln Project founders have ties to Russia and tax troubles, docs reveal ]</ref>

===George Conway===
[[George T. Conway III]], the bigoted [[Never Trump]]er husband of [[Kellyanne Conway]], was among the founding members of the "Lincoln" Project after consistently exhibiting signs of acute [[TDS]]. Supposedly superior on moral grounds compared to Trump, Conway called [[moderate Republican]] representative [[Elise Stefanik]] "trash" and shared a fake photograph of her.<ref>Two references:
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2019/11/18/george-conway-that-elise-stefanik-certainly-is-trash-you-know-n2556616 George Conway: Let's Face It, This Elise Stefanik Character Is 'Trash']
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/18/donald-trump-praises-rep-elise-stefanik-a-new-republican-star-as-left-attacks/ Donald Trump Praises Rep. Elise Stefanik ‘A New Republican Star’ as Left Attacks]</ref> He has even asserted a toxic attitude towards his wife,<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/12/george-conway-publicly-dunks-on-wife-kellyanne-over-trump-ukraine-and-biden/ Toxic George Conway Publicly Shames His Wife Kellyanne Over Trump, Ukraine and Biden]</ref> and attacked [[Melania Trump]] for defending her son Barron from a crude remark made by liberal hack [[Pamela Karlan]].<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/12/george-conway-attacks-melania-trump-after-first-lady-defends-son-barron/ George Conway Attacks Melania Trump After First Lady Defends Son Barron]
*[https://www.westernjournal.com/george-conway-attacks-melania-defending-son-public-mockery/ George Conway Attacks Melania for Defending Her Son Against Public Mockery]</ref> He has referred to the [[Trump Administration]] as a "s***show in a dumpster fire".<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/11/kellyanne-conways-husband-the-administration-is-like-a-shtshow-like-a-dumpster-fire-audio/ Kellyanne Conway’s Husband: The Administration is Like a Sh*tshow in a Dumpster Fire (AUDIO)]</ref>

Conway announced in late August 2020 that he would step down from the group to focus on family matters<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/08/23/kellyanne-conway-stepping-down-white-house-focus-family/ Kellyanne Conway Stepping Down at the White House to Focus on Family]</ref> after his daughter Claudia had ranted as a [[social justice warrior]] on [[TikTok]] in the manner of a modern whiny teenager.<ref>[https://nypost.com/2020/08/24/kellyanne-conways-daughter-claudia-reacts-to-her-moms-resignation/ Kellyanne Conway’s daughter Claudia reacts to her mom’s resignation]</ref> Kellyanne stepped down from her [[White House]] position as well.<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/08/kellyanne-conway-leaving-trump-administration-focus-family/ Kellyanne Conway Leaving the Trump Administration to Focus on Her Family]</ref>

===John Weaver===
Despite the group repeating the [[Russian collusion hoax]] in falsely accusing Trump of having ties to Russia,<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUBAAeuBpPQ Fellow Traveler]</ref> co-founder John Weaver ''was a foreign agent for the country''.<ref name="Lincoln Project founders have ties to Russia and tax troubles, docs reveal"/><ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/shocker-co-founder-never-trump-lincoln-project-foreign-agent-russia/ SHOCKER: Co-Founder of Never Trump ‘Lincoln Project’ Was Foreign Agent for …Russia]
*[https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2020/07/16/lincoln-projects-co-founder-was-a-registered-agent-for-russia-but-thats-okay-because-orangemanbad/ Lincoln Project’s Co-Founder John Weaver Was a Registered Agent for Russia But That’s Okay Because OrangeManBad]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/15/pro-biden-lincoln-project-co-founder-signed-six-figure-deal-advocate-russia/ ‘Lincoln Project’ Co-Founder John Weaver Signed Six-Figure Deal with Russia, Pulled Out After Backlash]</ref>

===Steve Schmidt===
[[Steve Schmidt]], a [[RINO]] shill for the [[homosexual agenda]] who served as a staffer for the late [[neocon]] [[John McCain]], was among the founding members of the group. He falsely claimed in late 2019 to be a Republican when he had already left the party and registered as an [[independent voters|independent]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/12/17/steve-schmidt-claims-to-be-republican-in-nyt-renounced-membership-in-2018/ Steve Schmidt Claims to be ‘Republican’ in NYT; Renounced Membership in 2018]</ref> A bigot, he harshly attacked [[Sarah Palin]] after she had called him out<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGVmPkNob-o Sarah Palin Accuses Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace and Steve Schmidt of Sabotaging McCain Campaign]</ref> for betraying conservative [[Republican]] values; unsurprisingly, the [[liberal media]] that had been extremely biased and sexist towards Palin in 2008 was none too quick to side with Schmidt.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/08/steve-schmidt-buries-sarah-palin-for-her-profound-ignorance-and-insanity-after-fox-news/ Steve Schmidt buries Sarah Palin for her ‘profound ignorance and insanity’ after Fox News attack]
*[https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sarah-palin-steve-schmidt-sabotage_n_5f3eac6ec5b697824f95d434 GOP Strategist Slams Sarah Palin After She Accuses Him Of Sabotage]</ref> Schmidt also has also blamed [[Donald Trump]] for [[Palestinian]] extremism and attacked [[evangelical Christians]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2018/05/15/schmidt-on-israel-embassy-move-there-is-blood-on-trumps-hands/# Schmidt on Israel Embassy Move: There Is Blood on Trump’s Hands]</ref>

===Michael Steele===
Former [[RNC]] chairman [[Michael Steele]], a former [[conservative]] known currently for his outspoken opposition to [[President Trump]], joined the "Lincoln" Project in late August 2020.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/former-rnc-chairman-michael-steele-joins-lincoln-project Former RNC Chairman Michael Steele joins Lincoln Project]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/08/24/lincoln-project-michael-steele-former-head-rnc-joins-anti-trump-group/5625888002/ Former RNC chairman Michael Steele joins Lincoln Project, anti-Trump group working to elect Joe Biden]
*[https://nypost.com/2020/08/25/former-rnc-chair-steele-joins-anti-trump-lincoln-project/ Former RNC chair Michael Steele joins anti-Trump Lincoln Project]</ref> Like Schmidt, he is an anti-Christian bigot who has attacked evangelicals.<ref>Two references:
*[https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/370473-ex-rnc-chair-rips-evangelical-leaders-standing-by-trump-dont Ex-RNC chair rips evangelical leaders standing by Trump: ‘Don’t ever preach to me’ again]
*[https://www.dailywire.com/news/former-rnc-chair-michael-steele-trumps-evangelical-paul-bois Former RNC Chair Michael Steele: Trump’s Evangelical Backers ‘Need To Shut The Hell Up’]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2018/01/24/fmr-rnc-chair-michael-steele-trumps-evangelical-supporters-shut-hell/ Fmr RNC Chair Michael Steele to Trump’s Evangelical Supporters: ‘Shut the Hell Up’]</ref><ref>[https://www.businessinsider.com/former-rnc-chairman-michael-steele-slams-trump-supporting-evangelicals-2019-7?op=1 Former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele calls evangelicals who support Trump 'the biggest phonies of all']</ref>

==Oxymoronic terminology==
It's important to note that the left-wing group naming themselves after President [[Abraham Lincoln]] is an oxymoron; their fierce opposition to [[President Trump]]/his bold policy decisions and sheer desire to see him removed from office nearly parallels that of the Confederates' hatred toward Lincoln. Their stance against Trump matches what early Democrats asserted about the 16th president of the United States:<ref>[https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2019/11/22/editorial/guest/president-nasty-quotes-perspective/ Some nasty anti-President quotes to offer perspective]</ref>
{{quotebox|He is evidently a person of very inferior character. ... Those who vote for the president’s re-election are traitors. He is universally an admitted failure, has no will, no courage, no executive capacity. There is a strong feeling among those who have seen the president, in the way of business, that he lacks practical talent for the job. It is thought that there should be more readiness.}}

==Lies/slanders==
The following is a list of extreme lies, slanders, and blatant falsehoods promoted by the group:

*January 9, 2020—The "project" attacked [[evangelicals]] and fundamentalist Christians for their general strong support for Trump, taking several quotes out of context.<ref name="The MAGA Church"/>

*January 13, 2020—The "Lincoln" Project released an ad attacking Sen. [[Cory Gardner]], making false claims:<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ds77eJz5788 Cory Gardner - Do Your Job]</ref>
**"Why do the polls show you headed for humiliating defeat?" — a poll from Public Policy Polling is cited; the organization is known for their inaccuracies and favoring Democrats.
**"The only thing you'll [Gardner] fight for is Trump. You're just another Trump servant." — Gardner had announced in early January 2018 that he would oppose Trump nominations to the [[DOJ]] unless then-Attorney General [[Jeff Sessions]] would reverse a [[marijuana]] crackdown.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJa9LbFz1DE GOP senator rips Sessions over marijuana policy]</ref> In addition, he had voiced opposition to Trump in 2016.
**"...putting Trump over Colorado every time... on healthcare, our environment, and honesty." — Gardner has championed bipartisan [[conservation]] efforts, and later successfully spearheaded the [[Great American Outdoors Act]].<ref>[https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3422 S.3422 - Great American Outdoors Act]</ref> Furthermore, he has ''not'' sided with Trump on every issue.<ref>[https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/cory-gardner/ Tracking Congress In The Age Of Trump - Cory Gardner]</ref>

*January 28, 2020—The group attacked [[Republican]] interim Sen. [[Martha McSally]], with the following misleading/false points:<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJVDe_345oc Martha McSally Is A Trump Hack]</ref>
**"Martha McSally, Arizona rejected you in 2018..." — while the final results of the [[2018 U.S. Senate election in Arizona]] showed McSally losing to Sinema by a narrow margin,<ref name="Arizona Senate Election Results 2018">[https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/arizona/senate/ Arizona Senate Election Results 2018]</ref> there had potentially been election fraud, as the former initially was leading on the election night before hundreds of thousands of votes were "discovered".<ref>[https://thefederalistpapers.org/opinion/not-arizona-election-results-audited-election-fraud It Is Not Over, Arizona Election Results Being Audited For Election Fraud] '''(Warning: Tweet(s) within article contain foul language)'''</ref> Such cases were prevalent during the [[2018 Midterms]] overall.
**"...and you [McSally] know why. You were too close to Donald Trump." — many conservatives in 2018 countered that McSally lost due to previous opposition to Trump and thus lost a certain degree of support.<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/11/mark-levin-says-mcsally-refused-to-go-on-his-show-didnt-want-to-be-tied-to-conservatives-then-lost-to-a-marxist/ Mark Levin Says McSally Refused to Go on His Show, Didn’t Want to be Tied to Conservatives – Then Lost to a Marxist]</ref>
**"And you [McSally] lost. Badly!" — McSally had only lost by less than three percentage points in a very tight race.<ref name="Arizona Senate Election Results 2018"/>
**"There's a reason your poll numbers are dropping, fast." — The ad cites Public Policy Polling, consistently known for left-wing bias, skewed and/or improperly weighed samples, low sample sizes, and high margins of error.
**"...People like ''[[John McCain]]''. And [[Barry Goldwater]]. Senators that served Arizona. People of courage. Toughness. They stood for what was right, no matter the political risk. And they are remembered as American heroes." — McCain betrayed fellow [[POW]]s left in [[Vietnam]], fought to cover up evidence of such, and attacked those who brought up his actions.<ref>[https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/29882-mccain-was-no-maverick-on-pows McCain Was No Maverick on POWs]</ref>

*May 6, 2020—The group released a thirty-second ad attacking Sen. McSally once again, making false claims:
**"Why. Why aren't you [McSally] leading?" — McSally was a proponent of the [[CARES Act]] and the Paycheck Protection Program covered in it to provide relief for Americans hurt by the [[CCP pandemic]].
**"Why aren't you helping?" — This claim is outrageously false; McSally had paused campaign fundraising in April, donated her salary to [[charity]], and volunteered to deliver care packages to health care workers.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/04/01/martha-mcsally-donates-salary-coronavirus-pauses-fundraising/ Sen. Martha McSally Donates April Salary To Fight Coronavirus, Pauses Fundraising]
*[https://kyma.com/news/coronavirus/2020/04/08/sen-mcsally-donates-paycheck-to-salvation-army-for-covid-19-aid/ Sen. McSally donates paycheck to Salvation Army for COVID-19 aid]
*[https://ktar.com/story/3056382/sen-mcsally-suspends-fundraising-donates-paycheck-to-covid-19-aid/ Sen. McSally suspends fundraising, donates paycheck to COVID-19 aid]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/490571-gop-senator-suspending-campaign-fundraising-donating-paycheck-amid GOP senator suspending campaign fundraising, donating paycheck amid coronavirus pandemic]</ref><ref>[https://www.mcsally.senate.gov/news/press-releases/mcsally-delivers-care-packages-to-tucson-health-care-workers McSally Delivers Care Packages to Tucson Health Care Workers]</ref>
**"Why won't you put Arizona first? Why won't you fight Trump's Wall Street bailout?" — the ad was likely referring to the Republican-led CARES Act, which even [[PolitiFact]] admitted was ''not'' an outright bailout for only large corporations.<ref name="Lincoln Project’s “Mourning in America” ad critical of Trump misleads on bailouts "/>

*July 17, 2020—The group released a malicious ad attacking [[Ivanka Trump]] for supposedly being uncaring and indifferent towards the struggles of Americans amidst the [[CCP pandemic]], even ridiculously comparing her to [[Marie Antoinette]];<ref name="New"/> the ad used [[sexist]] tropes<ref name="#WarOnWomen: Lincoln Project Attacks Ivanka Trump in Quite Possibly the Most Sexist Political Ad Ever Made"/><ref name="Debra Saunders: Anti-Trump Republicans Show Dysfunctional Love for the GOP"/> that would have been condemned across the board such that they were ever directed towards any female [[Democrat]], yet [[far-left]] "news" outlets such as Raw Story sided with the egregious smear.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/07/ivanka-trump-ripped-by-the-lincoln-project-cant-feed-your-kids-let-them-eat-cake/ Ivanka Trump ripped by the Lincoln Project: ‘Can’t feed your kids? Let them eat cake’]</ref> Furthermore, it's important to note that the president's daughter ''doesn't get paid for working at the White House out of a personal choice''.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/ivanka-works-free-trump-white-house-can-pay-well-n779246 Ivanka Works for Free, but Trump White House Can Pay Well]
*[https://www.closerweekly.com/posts/does-ivanka-trump-get-a-salary-154859/ Ivanka Trump Actually Isn’t Earning a Cent by Working at the White House]</ref>

*July 29, 2020—The [[PAC]] released an egregious attack on [[RINO]] senator [[Susan Collins]]:<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSGXknNaYqU Trump Stooge]</ref>
**"''Susan Collins '''never''' stands up to Donald Trump''." — Collins opposed Trump's candidacy in 2016,<ref>[https://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/susan-collins-not-voting-trump-226808 Susan Collins: I'm not voting for Trump]</ref> and has continuously opposed him during the latter's presidency on countless issues, including [[Betsy DeVos]], [[abortion]], [[Obamacare]] repeal efforts, immigration, tariffs, the [[border wall]], withdrawing troops from the [[Middle East]], judicial nominees, regulations, executive war powers against [[Iran]], etc.<ref>[https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/susan-m-collins/?ex_cid=rrpromo Tracking Congress In The Age Of Trump - Susan Collins | FIveThirtyEight]</ref> Following this particularly outrageous assertion, the group was referred to by Guy Benson as the "clown crew".<ref name="Guy Benson bashes 'clown crew' Lincoln Project over ad calling Susan Collins 'Trump Stooge'"/>

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[https://lincolnproject.us/ Official Website] ''(note: site is not to be taken seriously by rational beings)

{{liberalism}}
[[Category:RINOs|*]]
[[Category:DIANs|*]]
[[Category:Anti-Trump|*]]
[[Category:Establishment|*]]
[[Category:Liberal Organizations]]
[[Category:Liberal Deceit|*]]
[[Category:2020s|*]]

Joni Ernst

2020-09-27T22:23:45Z

TemporarysockofLT: wikify

{{Officeholder
|name=Joni Ernst
|image=Joni Ernst Official photo portrait 114th Congress.jpg
|party=[[Republican]]
|spouse=Gail Ernst<ref name=Iowaleg>[http://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislators/legislator?ga=85&personID=9761 "Senator Joni K. Ernst"] (2015). The Iowa Legislature website. Retrieved on January 16, 2014.</ref> (div.)<ref>[https://heavy.com/news/2018/08/gail-ernst-joni-ernst/ Gail Ernst, Joni Ernst’s Ex-Husband: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know]</ref>
|religion=[[Lutheran]]<ref name=Iowaleg/>
|offices=
{{Officeholder/senator
|state=Iowa
|terms=January 3, 2015 – present
|preceded=[[Tom Harkin]]
|status=j
|succeeded=
}}
{{Officeholder/misc
|office=[[Iowa]] Senate, 12th District
|terms=January 5, 2011 – November 28, 2014
|preceded=Kim Reynolds
|succeeded=Mark Costello
}}
|military=y
|allegiance=[[United States]]
|rank=[[Lieutenant Colonel]]
|branch=[[United States Army]] Iowa Army National Guard
|unit=185th Combat Sustainment Support Battalion
|serviceyears=1993 – 2015
|battles=[[Iraq War]]
}}

'''Joni Kay Ernst''' (born July 1, 1970, age {{age|1970|7|1}}) is a [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] U.S. Senator from [[Iowa]] who was elected in 2014.

==Military service==
Ernst saw combat as a veteran of [[Operation Iraqi Freedom]] (2003-2004) and served in the Iowa Army National Guard as well as the U.S. Army Reserves where she rose to the rank of lieutenant colonel.<ref>Twitchy staff (January 15, 2015). [http://twitchy.com/2015/01/15/jackass-luke-russert-writes-off-combat-vet-joni-ernst-as-unknown-pig-farmer/ 'Jackass': Luke Russert writes off combat vet Joni Ernst as 'unknown pig farmer']. Twitchy. Retrieved on January 16, 2015.</ref>

==Political career==
Ernst served as auditor of Montgomery County, Iowa from 2005 to 2011. She was later elected to the 84th and 85th general assembly of the Iowa legislature, (January 2011 to January 2015) her second term as a state senator from District 12, representing six counties in the southwest corner of Iowa.<ref name=Iowaleg/>

===U.S. Senate===
Ernst campaigned in the Republican U.S. Senate primary with the claim "I'll know how to cut pork".<ref>Strong, Jonathan (March 24, 2014). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/03/24/ia-candidate-touts-hog-castrating-experience-for-cutting-pork-barrel-spending/ "Senate candidate: I'll use my hog castrating experience to help end pork barrel spending"]. Breitbart. Retrieved on January 16, 2014</ref>

Ernst received 52% of the vote in November 2014, while her Democratic opponent received only 44%. In her victory, she swept 85 of Iowa's 99 counties.<ref>Pate, Paul D. [Iowa Secretary of State] (December 29, 2014). [http://electionresults.sos.iowa.gov/Views/TabularData.aspx?TabView=StateRaces^Federal%20/%20Statewide%20Races^84&ElectionID=84 "November 4, 2014 general election"]. ''Iowa Secretary of State website.'' Retrieved on January 15, 2015.</ref> She was later chosen to give the rebuttal to the president [[Barack Obama]]'s State of the Union address in 2015.

Ernst has vocally opposed wasteful U.S. federal spending.<ref>Varney, James (September 22, 2019). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/22/joni-ernst-end-year-fiscal-responsibility-act-stop/ Joni Ernst aims to change fed's 'spend it while you have it' mentality]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved September 22, 2019.</ref>

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Ernst, Joni}}
[[Category:Iowa]]
[[Category:United States Veterans]]
[[Category:United States Army]]
[[Category:United States Senators]]
[[Category:114th United States Congress]]
[[Category:115th United States Congress]]
[[Category:116th United States Congress]]
[[Category:State Senators]]
[[Category:Republicans]]
[[Category:Conservatives]]
[[Category:Patriots]]

United States Senate elections, 2020

2020-09-27T22:22:27Z

TemporarysockofLT: /* IA Issues */ added on to a detail

<center>''For the unofficial Conservapedia predictions related to the 2020 Senate elections, [[Conservapedia:Unofficial 2020 Senate predictions|see here]]</center>

The '''2020 United States Senate elections''', coinciding with the [[2020 United States presidential election]] that is held on November 3, 2020, are 33 separate elections for all Class 2 Senate seats in addition to 2 special elections for Class 3 Senate seats.

It is important to note that the rankings for the Senate seats listed in the sections below classify each seat by their vulnerability in terms of political party control and not solely based on whether the incumbent (for all elections where the incumbent is seeking re-election) is projected to win or not.

''<center>There are {{#expr: floor({{days until|2020|11|3}} / 7) }}{{#ifexpr: {{days until|2020|11|3}} / 7 - floor({{days until|2020|11|3}} / 7) > .5 | ½ }} weeks until Election Day 2020. If you live in a state with a Senate election this year, vote in person!</center>''

{{TOC left}}

<div style="float:center">
<center>
{|class="wikitable sortable" style="text-align:center; font-size: 80%;"
!class=unsortable | State
!class=unsortable | Republican primary candidate(s)
!class=unsortable | Democrat primary candidate(s)
!class=unsortable | Independent/ Third Party candidate(s)
!class=unsortable | Republican candidate
!class=unsortable | Democrat candidate
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Alabama|Alabama]]
|[[Jeff Sessions]]
----
[[Tommy Tuberville]]
----
[[Bradley Byrne]]
----
[[Roy Moore]]
----
[[Arnold Mooney]]
|[[Doug Jones]] (incumbent)
|Mike Parrish
----
Jarmal Sanders
|[[Tommy Tuberville]]
|[[Doug Jones]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Alaska|Alaska]]
|[[Dan Sullivan]] (incumbent)
|colspan="2" | [[Al Gross]] ([[Independent voters|Independent]])
----
Chris Cumings ([[Independent voters|Independent]])
----
Edgar Blatchford ([[Democrat]])
----
John Howe (Alaskan Independence)
|[[Dan Sullivan]] (incumbent)
|[[Al Gross]] ([[Independent voters|Independent]])
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Arizona_.28special_election.29|Arizona (special)]]
|[[Martha McSally]] (incumbent)
----
Daniel McCarthy
|[[Mark E. Kelly]]
|Barry Hess
----
Alan White
----
Mohammed Arif
----
Robert Kay
|[[Martha McSally]] (incumbent)
|[[Mark E. Kelly]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Arkansas|Arkansas]]
|[[Tom Cotton]] (incumbent)
|''(none)
|Ricky Dale Harrington, Jr.
----
Dan Whitfield
|[[Tom Cotton]] (incumbent)
|''(none)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Colorado|Colorado]]
|[[Cory Gardner]] (incumbent)
|[[John Hickenlooper]]
----
[[Andrew Romanoff]]
|Raymon Doane
----
Dan Doyle
----
Stephan Evans
|[[Cory Gardner]] (incumbent)
|[[John Hickenlooper]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Delaware|Delaware]]
|Lauren Witzke
----
James DeMartino
|[[Chris Coons]] (incumbent)
----
Jessica Scarane
|Nadine Frost
----
Mark Turley
|TBD
|TBD
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Georgia|Georgia]]
|[[David Perdue]] (incumbent)
|[[Jon Ossoff]]
----
Teresa Tomlinson
----
Sarah Riggs Amico
----
Maya Dillard-Smith
|Shane T. Hazel
----
Tom Jones
----
Clifton Kilby
|[[David Perdue]] (incumbent)
|[[Jon Ossoff]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Georgia_.28special.29|Georgia (special)]]
|colspan="3" | [[Kelly Loeffler]] (incumbent)
----
[[Doug Collins]]
----
Raphael Warnock
----
Matt Lieberman
----
Ed Tarver
|colspan="2" | TBD
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Idaho|Idaho]]
|[[James Risch]] (incumbent)
|Paulette Jordan
----
James Vandermaas
|Ray Writz
----
Natalie Fleming
|[[James Risch]] (incumbent)
|Paulette Jordan
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Illinois|Illinois]]
|Mark Curran
----
Peggy Hubbard
----
Robert Marshall
----
Tom Tarter
----
Casey Chlebek
|[[Richard Durbin]] (incumbent)
|Danny Malouf
----
David F. Black
----
Chad Koppie
----
Patrick Feges
----
Connor Vlakancic
----
Willie Wilson
|Mark Curran
|[[Richard Durbin]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Iowa|Iowa]]
|[[Joni Ernst]] (incumbent)
|Theresa Greenfield
----
Michael T. Franken
----
Kimberly Graham
----
Eddie Mauro
|Rick Stewart
----
Suzanne Herzog
|[[Joni Ernst]] (incumbent)
|Theresa Greenfield
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Kansas_.28open_seat.29|Kansas]]
|[[Roger Marshall]]
----
[[Kris Kobach]]
----
Bob Hamilton
----
Dave Lindstrom
|Barbara Bollier
----
Robert Tillman
|Jason Buckley
----
Paul Tuten
|[[Roger Marshall]]
|Barbara Bollier
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Kentucky|Kentucky]]
|[[Mitch McConnell]] (incumbent)
----
[[C. Wesley Morgan]]
----
Louis Grider
----
Paul John Frangedakis
----
Neren James
|[[Amy McGrath]]
----
Charles Booker
----
Mike Broihier
----
Mary Ann Tobin
|Brad Barron
|[[Mitch McConnell]] (incumbent)
|[[Amy McGrath]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Louisiana|Louisiana]]
|colspan="3" | [[Bill Cassidy]] (incumbent)
----
Dustin Murphy
----
Derrick Edwards
----
Drew Knight
----
Adrian Perkins
----
Antoine Pierce
----
Peter Wenstrup
----
Aaron Sigler
|colspan="2" | TBD
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Maine|Maine]]
|[[Susan Collins]] (incumbent)
|[[Sara Gideon]]
----
Betsy Sweet
----
Bre Kidman
|Lisa Savage
----
Max Linn
|[[Susan Collins]] (incumbent)
|[[Sara Gideon]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Massachusetts|Massachusetts]]
|Shiva Ayyadurai
----
Kevin O'Connor
|[[Ed Markey]] (incumbent)
----
[[Joe Kennedy III]]
|Frederick Mayock
|Kevin O'Connor
|[[Ed Markey]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United States Senate elections, 2020#Michigan|Michigan]]
|[[John E. James]]
|[[Gary Peters]] (incumbent)
|Marcia Squier
|[[John E. James]]
|[[Gary Peters]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Minnesota|Minnesota]]
|[[Jason Lewis]]
----
Cynthia Gail
----
John Berman
----
James Reibestein
|[[Tina Smith]] (incumbent)
----
Steve Carlson
----
Ahmad Hassan
----
Paula Overby
----
Christopher Seymore
|Oliver Steinberg
----
Kevin O'Connor
|[[Jason Lewis]]
|[[Tina Smith]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Mississippi|Mississippi]]
|[[Cindy Hyde-Smith]] (incumbent)
|Mike Espy
----
Tobey Bartee
----
Jensen Bohren
|Jimmy Edwards
|[[Cindy Hyde-Smith]] (incumbent)
|Mike Espy
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Montana|Montana]]
|[[Steve Daines]] (incumbent)
----
John Driscoll
----
Daniel Larson
|[[Steve Bullock]]
----
John Mues
|Wendie Fredrickson
|[[Steve Daines]] (incumbent)
|[[Steve Bullock]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Nebraska|Nebraska]]
|[[Ben Sasse]] (incumbent)
----
[[Matt Innis]]
|Chris Janicek
----
Angie Philips
----
Alisha Shelton
----
Andy Stock
|Gene Siadek
|[[Ben Sasse]] (incumbent)
|Chris Janicek
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#New_Hampshire|New Hampshire]]
|[[Don Bolduc]]
----
Corky Messner
----
Andy Martin
----
Gerald Beloin
|[[Jeanne Shaheen]] (incumbent)
----
Tom Alciere
----
Paul Krautman
|Justin O'Donnell
----
Thomas Sharpe V.
|Corky Messner
|[[Jeanne Shaheen]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#New_Jersey|New Jersey]]
|Rik Mehta
----
Hirsh Singh
----
Tricia Flanagan
|[[Cory Booker]] (incumbent)
----
Lawrence Hamm
|Madelyn Hoffman
|Rik Mehta
|[[Cory Booker]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#New_Mexico_.28open_seat.29|New Mexico]]
|Mark Ronchetti
----
[[Elisa Martinez]]
----
Gavin Clarkson
|[[Ben Ray Luján]]
|Bob Walsh
|Mark Ronchetti
|[[Ben Ray Luján]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#North_Carolina|North Carolina]]
|[[Thom Tillis]] (incumbent)
----
Paul Wright
----
Larry Holmquist
----
Sharon Y. Hudson
|[[Cal Cunningham]]
----
Erica D. Smith
|Shannon Bray
----
Kevin E. Hayes
|[[Thom Tillis]] (incumbent)
|[[Cal Cunningham]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Oklahoma|Oklahoma]]
|[[James Inhofe]] (incumbent)
----
J.J. Stitt
|Abby Broyles
----
Elysabeth Britt
----
Sheila Bilyeu
----
R. O. Joe Cassity, Jr.
|Robert Murphy
----
Joan Farr
----
A. D. Nesbit
|[[James Inhofe]] (incumbent)
|Abby Broyles
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Oregon|Oregon]]
|Jo Rae Perkins
----
Paul J. Romero, Jr.
----
Robert Schwartz
----
John Verbeek
|[[Jeff Merkley]] (incumbent)
|Ibrahim Taher
|Jo Rae Perkins
|[[Jeff Merkley]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Rhode_Island|Rhode Island]]
|Allen Waters
|[[Jack Reed]] (incumbent)
|Lenine Camacho
|Allen Waters
|[[Jack Reed]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#South_Carolina|South Carolina]]
|[[Lindsey Graham]] (incumbent)
----
Michael DaPierre
----
Joe Reynolds
----
Dwayne Buckner
|Jaime Harrison
|Keenan Durham
----
Bill Bledsoe
----
Lloyd Willimas
|[[Lindsey Graham]] (incumbent)
|Jaime Harrison
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#South_Dakota|South Dakota]]
|[[Michael Rounds]] (incumbent)
----
Scyller Borglum
|Daniel Ahlers
|Clayton Walker
|[[Michael Rounds]] (incumbent)
|Daniel Ahlers
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Tennessee_.28open_seat.29|Tennessee]]
|Bill Hagerty
----
Manny Sethi
|Marquita Bradshaw
----
Robin Kimbrough Hayes
----
James Mackler
|Aaron James
----
Kacey Morgan
|Bill Hagerty
|Marquita Bradshaw
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Texas|Texas]]
|[[John Cornyn]] (incumbent)
----
Dwayne Stovall
----
Mark Yancey
|M.J. Hegar
----
Royce West
----
Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez
----
Annie Garcia
----
Amanda Edwards
|Cedric Jefferson
----
James Brumley
|[[John Cornyn]] (incumbent)
|M.J. Hegar
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Virginia|Virginia]]
|[[Daniel Gade]]
----
Thomas Speciale
----
Alissa Baldwin
|[[Mark Warner]] (incumbent)
|Mary Knapp
----
Aldous Mina
|[[Daniel Gade]]
|[[Mark Warner]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#West_Virginia|West Virginia]]
|[[Shelley Moore Capito]] (incumbent)
----
Allen Whitt
----
Larry Butcher
|Paula Jean Swearengin
----
Richard Ojeda
----
Richie Robb
|Franklin Riley
|[[Shelley Moore Capito]] (incumbent)
|Paula Jean Swearengin
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Wyoming_.28open_seat.29|Wyoming]]
|Cynthia Lummis
----
Mark Armstrong
----
Donna Rice
----
Joshua Wheeler
|Merav Ben-David
----
Nathan Wendt
----
Yana Ludwig
----
Rex Wilde
----
Kenneth Casner
|''(none)
|Cynthia Lummis
|Merav Ben-David
|}
</center>
</div>

==Projected safe seats==
[[File:Senator Dan Sullivan official.jpg|thumb|right|165px|Globalist [[RINO]] Dan Sullivan, who opposed Trump in 2016,<ref>https://twitter.com/SenDanSullivan/status/784821049628196864</ref> is running for re-election to a second Senate term.]]
===Alaska===
[[Dan Sullivan]], the incumbent [[Republican]] junior senator from Alaska, is running for re-election to a second term in office.<ref>[https://www.electionprojection.com/alaska-senate-election.php 2020 Alaska Senate Election]</ref> A [[moderate Republican]] backed by [[President Trump]],<ref>[https://www.ktuu.com/content/news/President-Trump-endorses-Sullivan-re-election-as-US-senator-for-Alaska-566307261.html President Trump endorses Sullivan re-election as US senator for Alaska]</ref> Sullivan is expected, according to several mostly fake "election ratings", to be favored in the general election.<ref name="Fake News predictions">Multiple references:
*[http://crystalball.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/2020-senate/ 2020 Senate – Sabito's Crystal Ball]
*[https://insideelections.com/ratings/senate Senate Ratings | Inside Elections]
*[https://cookpolitical.com/ratings/senate-race-ratings 2020 Senate Race ratings]</ref>

The primaries were held on August 18, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Alaska,_2020 United States Senate election in Alaska, 2020]</ref>

====AK Republican primary====
Sullivan ran unopposed in the Republican primary. Initially facing a primary challenge from Adam Master Newman, the latter was later disqualified from the ballot.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/Adam_Master_Newman Adam Master Newman - Ballotpedia]</ref> The incumbent senator easily won with over 40,000 votes.<ref name="2020 PRIMARY ELECTIONElection Summary ReportAugust 18, 2020UNOFFICIAL Results">[https://www.elections.alaska.gov/results/20PRIM/data/sovc/ElectionSummaryReportRPT7.pdf 2020 PRIMARY ELECTIONElection Summary ReportAugust 18, 2020UNOFFICIAL Results]</ref>

====AK Democrat/Libertarian/Alaskan Independence primary====
Candidates from the [[Democrat]], [[Libertarian Party|Libertarian]], and Alaskan Independence parties appeared on the same ballot.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Alaska,_2020_(August_18_Democratic_primary) United States Senate election in Alaska, 2020 (August 18 Democratic primary) - Ballotpedia]</ref> Among them is [[Independent voters|Independent]] candidate [[Al Gross]], whom the Democrat establishment endorsed over his primary opponents in December 2019.<ref>[https://www.dscc.org/news/dscc-endorses-dr-al-gross-in-alaska-senate-race/ DSCC Endorses Dr. Al Gross in Alaska Senate Race]</ref> Gross won the primary with 75% of the votes casted.<ref name="2020 PRIMARY ELECTIONElection Summary ReportAugust 18, 2020UNOFFICIAL Results"/>

====AK Issues====
In late May 2020, Sen. Sullivan joined eight globalist Senate [[RINO]]s in urging [[President Trump]] not to restrict H-2A and H-2B visas ''amidst the [[CCP pandemic]] that left millions of Americans unemployed''.<ref name="Globalist Senate RINOs">Two references:
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/499788-gop-senators-urge-trump-not-to-restrict-guest-worker-visas GOP senators urge Trump not to restrict guest worker visas]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/27/gop-senators-beg-trump-to-import-more-foreign-workers-while-36m-americans-are-jobless/ GOP Senators Beg Trump to Import More Foreign Workers While 36M Americans Are Jobless]</ref> Conservative commentator [[Tucker Carlson]], among furious [[Economic nationalism|economic nationalists]], called for the nine senators to be defeated in the nearest respective primaries.<ref>Two references:
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/05/27/tucker-carlson-republican-senators-foreign-workers/ Here’s Why Tucker Carlson Just Called For Nine GOP Senators To Lose Their Next Primary Race]
*[https://www.westernjournal.com/tucker-carlson-said-9-gop-senators-lose-races/ Tucker Carlson Said These 9 GOP Senators Should Lose Their Races]</ref>

When asked on the matter, Gross failed to provide a direct answer on the issue of combating sexual assault,<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/05/25/independent-alaska-senate-candidate-under-fire-for-metoo-history-n2569406 'Independent' Alaska Senate Candidate Flip-Flops on #MeToo Issues]</ref> a problem for Alaska more so than any other U.S. state.<ref>[https://www.anchoragepress.com/columnists/reasons-for-the-high-rate-of-rape-in-alaska/article_564f37fa-4e4f-11e8-b893-47cba59bd374.html Reasons for the high rate of rape in Alaska]</ref>

Despite running as an "independent Alaskan", Gross admitted in late August 2020 that his values "are to the left" and that he will caucus with Democrats if elected.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/my-values-are-to-the-left-independent-alaska-senate-candidate-tells-dnc-hes-with-them/ ‘My Values Are To The Left’: Independent Alaska Senate Candidate Tells DNC He’s With Them]</ref>

====AK Debates====
The debate(s) hosted by Kodiak for the Senate race between Sullivan and Gross will be held on September 17 and 18.<ref>[https://www.adn.com/business-economy/2020/09/08/us-senate-opponents-sullivan-and-gross-set-to-square-off-in-kodiak-seafood-industry-debate/ US Senate opponents Sullivan and Gross set to square off in Kodiak seafood industry debate]</ref>

[[File:Tom Cotton official Senate photo.jpg|thumb|left|180px|Sen. Tom Cotton is running for re-election.]]

===Arkansas===
Incumbent [[conservative]] senator [[Tom Cotton]] from Arkansas announced in August 2018 his re-election run for a second term in 2020.<ref>[https://apnews.com/10e96b627103416895974f7e5afe9547 Sen. Cotton says he’s running for reelection in 2020]</ref> According to several election ratings, the seat has been marked as safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/> Sen. Cotton is known for being strongly pro-Trump and favoring economically nationalist policies.

The Arkansas Democratic Party failed to successfully recruit a single candidate from their party to challenge Cotton. Their only initial candidate, Joshua Mahony, withdrew before the primaries that were held on March 3, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/Joshua_Mahony Josh Mahony - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====AR Republican primary====
Facing no Republican challengers, Cotton easily won the primary on March 3, 2020.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/485843-tom-cotton-wins-uncontested-gop-senate-primary Tom Cotton wins uncontested GOP Senate primary]</ref>

====AR Libertarian primary====
Ricky Dale Harrington, Jr. was the only candidate who ran in the [[Libertarian Party|Libertarian]] primary to challenge Sen. Cotton.

[[File:Chris-Coons.jpg|thumb|right|215px|Anti-Trump Democrat senator Chris Coons is seeking re-election.]]
===Delaware===
[[Chris Coons]], the incumbent establishment Democrat senator from [[Delaware]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/01/scott-walker-targets-chris-coons-primary/3817902002/ Scott Walker, Democrat again, to wield his homemade signs against Chris Coons for Senate]</ref> While just as [[liberal]] as most of the Senate Democrats,<ref>[https://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Chris_Coons.htm Chris Coons on the Issues]</ref> Sen. Coons was noted by [[Politico]] in early May 2018 as the GOP establishment's “favorite Democrat” for then not consistently obstructing the Trump agenda as much as his colleagues did.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/08/chris-coons-senate-dealmaker-democrats-republicans-569144 Meet the GOP’s favorite Democrat]</ref>

Coons suggested in late January 2020 that [[Donald Trump]] can be impeached for ‘hateful, racist’ tweets.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/01/28/dem-sen-coons-hypothetically-trump-could-be-impeached-for-hateful-racist-tweets/ Dem Sen. Coons: ‘Hypothetically’ Trump Could Be Impeached for ‘Hateful, Racist’ Tweets]</ref>

The primaries will be held on September 15, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Delaware,_2020 United States Senate election in Delaware, 2020]</ref>

While the seat has been regarded by fake election predictions as a safe hold for the Democrats,<ref name="Fake News predictions"/> it's important to note that Delaware has significantly trended Republican in the [[2016 U.S. presidential election]], thus having a possibility to result in a closer-than-expected race in the 2020 Senate election.

====DE Democrat primary====
Coons currently faces a primary challenge from "progressive" Democrat [[Jessica Scarane]],<ref>[https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/18/millennial-progressive-woman-primary-delaware-sen-chris-coons/2580646001/ Sen. Chris Coons faces a primary challenge from a progressive millennial. Does she have a shot?]</ref> a far-leftist who claims that Coons “helps Trump enact his agenda”.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dgz9CrL7nQ4 How Chris Coons—A Democrat—Helps to Enable Trump (w/ Jessica Scarane)]</ref> Note that according to FiveThirtyEight, Sen. Coons has only voted with Trump 18% of the time in the [[116th U.S. Congress]].<ref>[https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/christopher-a-coons/ Tracking Congress In The Age Of Trump]</ref>

====DE Republican primary====
Among the Republicans challenging Sen. Coons include [[Lauren Witzke]], a strong conservative.<ref>[https://www.wmdt.com/2020/01/republican-lauren-witzke-challenging-sen-chris-coons/ https://www.wmdt.com/2020/01/republican-lauren-witzke-challenging-sen-chris-coons/]</ref>

====DE Issues====
As [[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Establishment_opponents|shown below]], Coons is an ally of [[Big Pharma]], favoring patent "reform" measures that suppress [[free market]] competition.

In early April 2020, Whitzke argued that Sen. Coons, along with [[Joe Biden]], are “brought and paid for by China.”<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/radio/2020/04/05/lauren-witzke-joe-biden-chris-coons-bought-paid-china/ Lauren Witzke: Joe Biden, Chris Coons ‘Bought and Paid for by China’]</ref> A few months later, the establishment senator voted against a Republican-led resolution to let Americans sue [[China]] over [[COVID-19]] damages and strip the communist government of its [[sovereign immunity]].<ref name="Dick Durbin Backs GOP Bill Allowing Civil Suits Against China over Coronavirus">[https://www.breitbart.com/asia/2020/07/30/dick-durbin-backs-gop-bill-allowing-civil-suits-against-china-over-coronavirus/ Dick Durbin Backs GOP Bill Allowing Civil Suits Against China over Coronavirus]</ref>

In mid-May 2020 following Democrat Gov. [[John Carney]]'s restrictions of churches, Witzke joined Christians in civilly defying the order, having joined a service at the Glory City Fellowship Church in Delmar.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/05/19/senate-candidate-joins-church-service-in-defiance-of-delaware-lockdown/ Senate Candidate Joins Church Service in Defiance of Delaware Lockdown]</ref>

[[File:James E Risch, official Senate photo portrait, 2009.jpg|thumb|right|210px|Establishment Republican Jim Risch is seeking re-election.]]
===Idaho===
[[Establishment]] conservative [[James Risch]] is running for a third Senate term in 2020, having announced his bid in August 2019.<ref>[https://www.postregister.com/news/government/risch-announces-re-election-bid/article_a196a0b7-ca2b-5796-86b2-aac1d8ce9e10.html Risch announces re-election bid]</ref> His seat has been marked as safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on June 2, 2020.

====ID Republican primary====
Uncontested, Sen. Risch won the Republican primary with just over 200,000 votes.<ref name="Election Night Results - 2020 Idaho primary">[https://www.livevoterturnout.com/Idaho/LiveResults/1/en/Index_112.html Election Night Results - 2020 Idaho primary]</ref>

====ID Democrat primary====
[[Idaho]] Democrat [[Paulette Jordan]] announced in February 2020 her run to seek the Senate seat.<ref>[https://www.idahopress.com/news/local/paulette-jordan-announces-run-for-senate/article_38dd38cf-e675-54f6-83fa-04ae839e2891.html Paulette Jordan announces run for U.S. Senate]</ref> She won the primary with 86% of the vote.<ref name="Election Night Results - 2020 Idaho primary"/>

====ID Issues====
In late May 2020, Risch showed his globalist leanings in joining eight [[Moderate Republican]] senators urging President Trump not to restrict visas amidst the [[CCP virus in the United States]] that caused millions of Americans to become unemployed.<ref name="Globalist Senate RINOs"/>

[[File:Dick Durbin.jpg|thumb|left|180px|[[Richard Durbin]], a racist Democrat, is running for re-election.]]
===Illinois===
[[Dick Durbin]], the left-wing senior senator from [[Illinois]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/423653-dick-durbin-im-running-for-reelection-in-2020 Dick Durbin: I'm running for reelection in 2020]</ref> His seat is considered to be safe, according to several election predictions.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

====IL-Democrat primary====
Durbin ran unopposed in the [[Democrat]] primary.<ref name="Illinois Primary Results 2020">[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/illinois/ Illinois Primary Results 2020]</ref>

====IL-Republican primary====
Republicans [[Mark Curran]], Peggy Hubbard, and Robert Marshall ran in their party line primary that was held on March 17, 2020.<ref name="Illinois Primary Results 2020"/> Curran won the primary, garnering just under 42% of the vote.

====IL Issues====
A racist Democrat, Sen. Durbin referred to a police reform bill introduced by [[Tim Scott]] as a “token” measure,<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/17/tim-scott-slams-dick-durbin-for-referring-to-his-police-reform-bill-as-a-token-measure/# Tim Scott Slams Dick Durbin for Referring to His Police Reform Bill as a ‘Token’ Measure]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/503176-tim-scott-responds-to-durbins-warning-about-token-half-hearted-approach-to Tim Scott responds to Durbin's warning about 'token, half-hearted approach' to police reform]</ref> although he soon apologized.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.nationalreview.com/news/sen-dick-durbin-apologizes-to-sen-tim-scott-for-token-comment-on-police-reform-bill/ Sen. Dick Durbin Apologizes to Sen. Tim Scott for ‘Token’ Comment on Police Reform Bill]
*[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senator-dick-durbin-apologizes-after-token-remark-about-tim-scott-led-police-reform-bill/
Durbin apologizes after "token" remark about Tim Scott-led police reform bill]
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dick-durbin-tim-scott-apology-token-comment-police-reform-bill Dick Durbin apologizes to Tim Scott for 'token' comment on police reform bill]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/17/durbin-scott-apology-326538 Dick Durbin apologizes to Tim Scott after 'token' remark]</ref>

In late July 2020, Durbin backed a GOP-led bill that would let Americans sue China over [[coronavirus]] damages.<ref name="Dick Durbin Backs GOP Bill Allowing Civil Suits Against China over Coronavirus"/>

[[File:Robertsofficialphoto.jpg|thumb|right|175px|[[Pat Roberts]] is retiring.]]

===Kansas (open seat)===
[[File:Roger Marshall official portrait.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Establishment-leaning Republican representative [[Roger Marshall]] is running to succeed Roberts.]]
[[Establishment]] Republican [[Pat Roberts]] announced in January 2019 that he would not seek re-election in 2020.<ref>Multiple sources:
*[https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2019/01/04/GOP-Kansas-Sen-Pat-Roberts-announces-retirement-in-2020/9971546624740/ GOP Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts announces retirement in 2020]
*[https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/04/senator-pat-roberts-retirement/ EXCLUSIVE: Sen Pat Roberts Will Announce Retirement]
*[https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/04/pat-roberts-announce-2020-plans-1081334 Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts to retire in 2020]</ref> Establishment representative [[Roger Marshall]] and anti-establishment conservative [[Kris Kobach]] ran in their respective strong efforts to succeed Sen. Roberts. Rep. Marshall is noted for his globalist leanings, having won election to the U.S. House after defeating anti-establishment then-representative [[Tim Huelskamp]] in a Republican primary with the backing of the establishment and having somewhat broke with Trump over immigration in 2017.<ref>[https://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article154096699.html Congressman breaks with Trump on border wall, young immigrants]</ref>

The primaries were held on August 4, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Kansas,_2020 United States Senate election in Kansas, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====KS Republican primary====
[[Kris Kobach]], a strong [[conservative]] from Kansas, was among 11 Republican candidates who ran for the vacated Senate seat.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/451971-kris-kobach-to-run-for-senate-in-kansas Kobach to run for Senate in Kansas]</ref> He lost the primary with 26% of the vote, finishing second place to Rep. Marshall, who had garnered 40% of the votes casted.<ref name="Unofficial Kansas Election Results - 2020">[https://ent.sos.ks.gov/kssos_ent.html Unofficial Kansas Election Results - 2020]</ref> This was after Kobach faced pushback from the GOP establishment, which backed Marshall.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/disgusting-gop-group-mcconnells-blessing-spending-2-million-pro-trump-senatorial-candidate-kris-kobach-kansas-video/ Disgusting! GOP Group with McConnell’s Blessing is Spending $2 Million Against Pro-Trump Senatorial Candidate Kris Kobach in Kansas (VIDEO)]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/07/mitch-mcconnell-linked-pac-to-spend-3m-on-ads-attacking-kris-kobach/ Mitch McConnell-Linked PAC to Spend $3M on Ads Attacking Kris Kobach]</ref> The [[Democrat]] establishment wasted $5 million meddling in the primary in attempting to boost Kobach, who they believed could lose the general election if becoming the nominee.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/dems-waste-5-million-on-failed-attempt-to-sway-gop-primary/ Dems Waste $5 Million on Failed Attempt to Sway GOP Primary]</ref>

====KS Democrat primary====
Former [[Obama administration]] secretary [[Kathleen Sebelius]] declined a run for the Senate seat.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/09/sebelius-wont-run-for-senate-in-kansas-1404154 Sebelius won't run for Senate in Kansas]</ref> The Democrat primary was ultimately won by Barbara Bollier, who garnered 85% of the vote.<ref name="Unofficial Kansas Election Results - 2020"/>

====KS Issues====
In late February 2020, Kobach criticized a bill passed by the Democrat-controlled House that “would turn every city in America into a sanctuary city.”<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/02/21/kris-kobach-new-way-forward-act-turn-every-city-america/ Kris Kobach: New Way Forward Act ‘Would Turn Every City in America into a Sanctuary City’]</ref>

[[File:McConnell.jpg|thumb|left|195px|[[Establishment]] [[RINO Backer]] senator [[Mitch McConnell]] is running for re-election.]]

===Kentucky===
[[Mitch McConnell]], a lifelong [[RINO]] who arguably became more [[conservative]]<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/13/mitch-mcconnell-anti-abortion-bills-114925 McConnell forces Senate votes on anti-abortion bills]</ref> after the [[2018 midterm elections]] and whose approval rating has gone up after defending Donald Trump from the [[Trump impeachment|impeachment coup]],<ref>[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/mitch_mcconnell_favorableunfavorable-6672.html#polls Mitch McConnell: Favorable/Unfavorable]</ref> is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.rollcall.com/2018/08/06/mitch-mcconnell-is-already-running-for-re-election-in-2020/ Mitch McConnell Is Already Running for Re-Election — In 2020]</ref>

====KY Republican primary====
McConnell easily won his party's primary with over 80% of the vote over several challengers.<ref name="Live results: 2020 Kentucky Senate primaries">[https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/election-results/kentucky-senate-primary-live-results/ Live results: 2020 Kentucky Senate primaries]</ref>

====KY Democrat primary====
[[Amy McGrath]], a far-left<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMbqhRvmNkI Welcome - YouTube]</ref> Democrat from Kentucky, is seeking to challenge McConnell for the Senate seat. Liberals in a massive effort to attempt unseating McConnell have donated $10.7 million to McGrath's campaign by October 2019.<ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/10/10/amy-mcgrath-raises-10-7-million-race-against-mitch-mcconnell/3934531002/ Democrat running against Mitch McConnell raises $10.7 million in third quarter]</ref> McGrath has been criticized for inconsistencies over the [[Kavanaugh smear]]<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/48-hours-in-amy-mcgrath-has-already-flip-flopped-on-brett-kavanaugh-again 48 hours in, Amy McGrath has already flip-flopped on Brett Kavanaugh ... again]</ref> and her self-admitted radical agenda. In addition, she has been called out by coal miners who have been used in one of her campaign ads without their permission.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2019/09/05/kentucky-miners-outraged-over-amy-mcgrath-campaign-ad-uses-them/2225584001/ Kentucky miners issue a cease and desist letter to Amy McGrath for using them in a TV ad]
*[https://freebeacon.com/politics/amy-mcgrath-accused-of-using-coal-miners-as-political-pawns/ Amy McGrath Accused of Using Coal Miners as ‘Political Pawns’]
*[https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/09/coal-miners-ask-amy-mcgrath-to-remove-them-from-attack-ad.html Amy McGrath Is Wasting Her Chance to Beat Mitch McConnell]</ref> Facing the more progressive Charles Booker in the primary held on June 23, 2020, McGrath narrowly won by less than 3 percentage points.<ref name="Live results: 2020 Kentucky Senate primaries"/> The racist Democrat establishment heavily backed McGrath over Booker, a black candidate who was arguably more qualified.<ref name="Democrats Spent Tens of Millions to Destroy the Hopes and Dreams of These Qualified Black Candidates">[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/democrats-against-black-candidates/ Democrats Spent Tens of Millions to Destroy the Hopes and Dreams of These Qualified Black Candidates]</ref>

====KY Issues====
Despite multiple establishment media outlets reporting Mitch McConnell's approval rating in late 2019 to be at only 18% in [[Kentucky]],<ref>Two sources:
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/347362-poll-mcconnells-approval-in-kentucky-at-18-percent Poll: McConnell's approval in Kentucky at 18 percent]
*[https://bipartisanreport.com/2019/10/31/new-mitch-mcconnell-re-election-polls-show-a-2020-blue-wave/ New Mitch McConnell Re-Election Polls Show A 2020 Blue Wave]</ref> his approval ratings have risen after the [[Trump impeachment|impeachment hoax]] against [[Donald Trump]], with even the progressive [[Newsweek]] admitting that McConnell's approval among all U.S. adults increased from 27% to 33% between October 2019 and February 2020 in addition to Republican support rising from 47% to 62% during the same time period.<ref>[https://www.newsweek.com/more-americans-favor-republicans-mitch-mcconnell-after-impeachment-new-poll-shows-1491455 More Americans Favor Republicans, Mitch McConnell After Impeachment, New Poll Shows]</ref> However, it is important to note that from a statistical standpoint, the conclusions may be somewhat inaccurate given the margin of error of the polls being at ±4%.<ref>[https://news.gallup.com/poll/287633/approval-congressional-republicans-tops-democrats.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_content=morelink&utm_campaign=syndication Approval of U.S. Congressional Republicans Tops Democrats]</ref>

McGrath has been criticized by Republican governors [[Mike DeWine]] and [[Larry Hogan]] for using their pictures in an ad attacking McConnell.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/05/18/gop-govs-pummel-amy-mcgraths-new-ad-n2569028 GOP Governors Rip McConnell Challenger for Partisan Attack Ad]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/498124-dewine-asks-mcgrath-to-keep-him-out-of-attack-ads DeWine asks McGrath to keep him out of attack ads]
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/govs-dewine-hogan-rebuke-mcconnell-challenger-for-using-their-images-in-attack-ad/ Govs. DeWine, Hogan Rebuke McConnell Challenger for Using Their Images in Attack Ad]</ref>

[[Project Veritas]] reported in mid-September 2020 that a staffer for McGrath admitted that their campaign strategy is to deceive voters by "not talking about policy."<ref>https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1306216266315845637</ref>

====KY Debate(s)====
In late August 2020, McConnell changed McGrath to a debate,<ref>[https://www.wkyt.com/2020/08/19/mcconnell-challenges-mcgrath-to-debate/ McConnell challenges McGrath to debate]</ref> eliciting a bizarre response from the latter.<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/08/19/cocaine-mitch-n2574682 Mitch McConnell's Debate Challenge Triggers Unusual Response from Dem. Challenger]</ref> The longtime senator also accepted an offer to participate in a forum hosted by the Kentucky Farm Bureau, which McGrath declined.<ref>[https://apnews.com/1755507b1028a6c9b04a02d0ef672d57 McConnell, McGrath jockey over debates in Senate race]</ref>

[[File:Bill Cassidy official Senate photo.jpg|thumb|right|180px|Sen. Bill Cassidy is running for re-election.]]

===Louisiana===
[[Bill Cassidy]], the conservative senior U.S. senator from [[Louisiana]], is running for re-election to a second term in office.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/sen-bill-cassidy-announces-bid-for-reelection/ar-BB10aj8O Sen. Bill Cassidy announces bid for reelection]</ref> His seat, according to several ratings, has been marked as safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

====Jungle primary====
Under state law, all candidates (irrespective of party affiliation) participate in a [[jungle primary]] set on the general election date.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Louisiana,_2020 United States Seante election in Louisiana, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref> Such that no candidate receives a majority of the vote, the top two performers will face off in a runoff on December 5, 2020.

====LA Issues====
Sen. Cassidy denounced violent anarchists that exploited the death of [[George Floyd]] to initiate a [[2020 Leftwing insurrection|left-wing insurrection]], asserting that “we are with the peaceful protesters”.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/06/03/gop-sen-cassidy-we-are-with-the-peaceful-protesters-coddling-the-rioters-terrible-for-peaceful-protest-movement/ GOP Sen. Cassidy: ‘We Are with the Peaceful Protesters’ – ‘Coddling’ the Rioters ‘Terrible’ for Peaceful Protest Movement]
*[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/06/04/sen_cassidy_coddling_criminals_and_anarchists_is_terrible_for_the_community.html Sen. Cassidy: "Coddling Criminals And Anarchists Is Terrible For The Community"]</ref>

In late July 2020, Cassidy, along with [[GOP]] senators Daines, Rubio, and Romney, introduced a coronavirus stimulus bill that would create a second wave of monetary provisions for the American people.<ref>[https://thehill.com/policy/finance/509846-gop-senators-propose-stimulus-checks-of-1000-for-both-adults-and-children GOP senators propose stimulus checks of $1,000 for both adults and children]</ref>

[[File:Markey Ed-092013-18046-0006.jpg|thumb|left|225px|Running for re-election as a progressive Democrat senator, Ed Markey faced a tough challenge from U.S. representative Joe Kennedy III.]]
===Massachusetts===
[[Progressive]] Democrat [[Ed Markey]] from [[Massachusetts]] is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.wbur.org/news/2018/10/05/markey-2020-re-election Markey Confirms Plans To Run For Re-Election In 2020]</ref> Markey's Senate seat is considered to be safe, according to several election ratings.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on September 1, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Massachusetts,_2020 United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2020]</ref>

[[File:Joe Kennedy III, official portrait, 116th Congress.jpg|thumb|right|240px|Rep. Kennedy lost the primary in a major blow to his family's political dynasty.]]
====MA Democrat primary====
Sen. Markey faced a strong challenge in the [[Democrat]] primary by Rep. [[Joe Kennedy III]],<ref>Two references:
*[https://nypost.com/2019/08/26/joe-kennedy-has-filed-to-run-for-us-senate-in-2020/ Joe Kennedy has filed to run for US Senate in 2020]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/09/21/joe-kennedy-iii-formally-launches-senate-bid-despite-warrens-endorsement-of-markey/ Joe Kennedy III Launches Senate Bid in Massachusetts]</ref> who arguably was even more staunchly far-left than the incumbent senator is.

In late July 2020, the campaign for Joe Kennedy (who, like his elite family members, are highly privileged) strongly criticized the [[Boston Globe]] for siding with the "[[establishment]]" in their endorsement of Markey,<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/29/joe-kennedy-boston-globe-endorsement-snub-386099 Kennedy unloads on Boston Globe over endorsement snub]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/30/joe-kennedy-campaign-lashes-out-at-establishment-boston-globe-for-endorsing-opponent/]</ref>

A poll conducted for the Democrat primary that was released in late July showed a close race between Markey and Kennedy.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/31/poll-tight-senate-primary-race-between-ed-markey-joe-kennedy/ Poll: Tight Senate Primary Race Between Ed Markey, Joe Kennedy]</ref> dealing a major blow to the Kennedy political dynasty; the representative is now the first member of his family to lose a race in [[Massachusetts]].

Markey ultimately won his party's primary over Kennedy by 11 points.<ref name="2020 Massachusetts primary results"/>

====MA Republican primary====
The two candidates running against Markey in the Republican primary were Shiva Ayyadurai and Kevin O'Connor.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Massachusetts,_2020_(September_1_Republican_primary) United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2020 (September 1 Republican primary)]</ref> The primary was won by O'Connor with 60% of the vote.<ref name="2020 Massachusetts primary results">[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/massachusetts/ 2020 Massachusetts primary results]</ref>

====MA Issues====
On June 1, 2020, Sen. Markey sent a tweet calling [[Donald Trump]] “scum”<ref>Multiple references:
*https://twitter.com/EdMarkey/status/1267510047552176133
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/500519-markey-calls-trump-scum-amid-george-floyd-protests Markey calls Trump 'scum' over comments on George Floyd protests]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/01/sen-ed-markey-calls-donald-trump-scum-for-fueling-violence/ Sen. Ed Markey Calls Donald Trump ‘Scum’ for ‘Fueling’ Violence]
*[https://www.businessinsider.com.au/sen-ed-markey-calls-trump-scum-george-floyd-protest-comments-2020-6 Sen. Ed Markey calls Trump 'scum' in pointed tweet on 'fuelling racist hate and violence in our country']</ref> over calls for [[law and order]].

While opponents in the primary, both Markey and Kennedy have supported [[defunding the police]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/09/massachusetts-democrat-senate-candidates-both-back-defunding-police/ Massachusetts Democrat Senate Candidates Both Back Defunding Police]</ref>

====MA Debate====
The debate for the Senate election will be held on October 5, 2020 between Markey and O'Connor.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/debate-in-massachusetts-us-senate-race-scheduled-for-oct-5/ar-BB191tsU Debate in Massachusetts' US Senate Race Scheduled for Oct. 5]
*[https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/massachusetts/articles/2020-09-13/debate-in-states-us-senate-race-scheduled-for-oct-5 Debate in State's U.S. Senate Race Scheduled for Oct. 5]</ref>

[[File:Cindy Hyde-Smith.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Cindy Hyde-Smith is running for re-election to a full Senate term.]]

===Mississippi===
Incumbent [[conservative]] Republican [[Cindy Hyde-Smith]] is running for re-election to a full Senate term.<ref>[https://yallpolitics.com/2020/01/03/senator-cindy-hyde-smith-files-for-reelection-in-her-current-senate-seat/ Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith files for reelection in her current Senate seat]</ref> According to conclusions from several polls, her seat can be considered ''mostly'' safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

It was reported by the Clarion Ledger in mid-July 2020 that Espy had out-raised Hyde-Smith by a three-to-one ratio between April and June.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/mike-espy-outraises-sen-cindy-hyde-smith-3-to-1-but-hyde-smith-still-has-money-advantage/ar-BB16PqHc Mike Espy outraises Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith 3-to-1, but Hyde-Smith still has money advantage ]</ref>

====MS Republican primary====
Unopposed, Sen. Hyde-Smith easily won the Republican primary.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mississippi-primary-espy-incumbents-win-in-congressional-races/ar-BB110ZwR Mississippi primary: Espy, incumbents win in congressional races]</ref>

====MS Democrat primary====
[[Mike Espy]], the 2018 loser to Hyde-Smith in the Senate special election, won the Democrat primary to contest the senator once again.<ref>[https://www.kansascity.com/news/business/national-international/article241081206.html Espy wins Mississippi US Senate race; will face Hyde-Smith]</ref>

====MS Issues====
Amidst the [[CCP pandemic]] in the [[United States]] that oversaw massive Democrat exploitations of a tragedy to enact a far-left agenda, Hyde-Smith joined [[Republicans]] in urging President Trump to maintain strongly [[pro-life]] policies.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/20/republicans-urge-trump-to-maintain-pro-life-policies-during-pandemic/ Republicans Urge Trump to Maintain Pro-Life Policies During Pandemic]</ref> This is in contrast to her opponent Espy, who previously was noted for holding very [[pro-abortion]] viewpoints.<ref>Two references:
*[https://freebeacon.com/politics/pro-life-group-targets-espy-over-extreme-abortion-views/ Pro-Life Group Targets Espy Over ‘Extreme’ Abortion Views]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/11/20/pro-life-ad-exposes-mike-espy-support-for-abortion-until-birth/ Watch: Mike Espy Support for Abortion Until Birth Focus of Pro-Life Ad]</ref>

In early July 2020, Hyde-Smith supported an amendment made by [[Conservative of the Year 2019]] [[Josh Hawley]] that would remove a requirement of renaming military bases from a defense bill.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/03/house-committee-advances-bill-to-rename-military-bases-setting-up-fight-with-senate-trump/ House Committee Advances Bill to Rename Military Bases, Setting Up Fight with Senate, Trump]</ref>

After President Trump tweeted a suggestion of delaying the 2020 elections amidst concerns over election fraud, a spokesperson for Hyde-Smith asserted that the senator “has confidence in the ability of our state’s election officials to conduct a general election this fall that safeguards the integrity of Mississippians’ right to vote while protecting voters and election workers.”<ref>[https://www.wjtv.com/news/mississippi-leaders-react-to-president-trumps-remark-to-delay-2020-election/ Mississippi leaders react to President Trump’s remark to delay 2020 election]</ref> This was in contrast to her establishment [[RINO]] colleague [[Roger Wicker]], who outright dismissed Trump's suggestion.

In early August 2020, Hyde-Smith, a member of the Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, welcomed a $14 million federal grant to improve rural water infrastructure in the Alcorn and Pontotoc counties.<ref>[https://yallpolitics.com/2020/08/03/hyde-smith-welcomes-14-million-in-rural-water-improvements-in-alcorn-pontotoc-counties/]</ref>

[[File:Ben Sasse.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Establishment [[anti-Trump]]er Ben Sasse is seeking re-election.]]
===Nebraska===
[[Ben Sasse]], the [[anti-Trump]] establishment Republican senator from Nebraska, announced on August 10, 2019 his run for re-election.<ref>[http://netnebraska.org/article/news/1185486/us-senator-ben-sasse-nebraska-announces-re-election-bid U.S. Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska Announces Re-election Bid]</ref>

====NE Republican primary====
Sasse faced a primary on May 12, 2020 challenged by [[conservative]], pro-Trump [[Matt Innis]], the former chairman of the Lancaster County Republican Party in Nebraska.<ref>[https://journalstar.com/news/state-and-regional/federal-politics/matt-innis-will-oppose-sasse-in-gop-primary/article_6f3d0417-0443-5644-82e2-c06007686661.html Matt Innis will oppose Sasse in 2020 GOP primary]</ref><ref>[https://www.mattinnis4senate.com/ Home - Matt Innis for U.S. Senate]</ref> Holding advantage as an incumbent, the senator easily won the primary with 75% of the vote.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/election-results/nebraska-senate-primary-live-results/ Live results: 2020 Nebraska Senate primary results]</ref>

Innis, an opponent of the [[GOP establishment]], was reported to the [[Federal Elections Commission]] by the chairwoman of the Douglas County Republican Party for spending a mere $457 that he didn't mention in campaign spending reports.<ref>[https://www.omaha.com/news/local/douglas-county-republican-party-files-complaints-against-matt-innis-sasse/article_40372eb2-ea63-5a4f-9093-436b91d9f90e.html#anchor_item_1 Douglas County Republican Party files complaints against Matt Innis, Sasse's GOP challenger]</ref>

====NE Democrat primary====
The Democratic Party primary was won by Chris Janicek, who garnered a plurality of just over 30% of the vote.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/nebraska/ Nebraska Primary Results 2020]</ref>

====NE Issues====
Janicek faced calls by his own party in mid-June 2020 to drop out of the race after being faced with a sexual harassment complaint, which he refused to do.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/06/16/sasse-opponent-chris-janicek-sexually-explicit-messages-staffers/ Chris Janicek Reportedly Sent Sexually Explicit Text Messages To Staffers In Group Chat]
*[https://www.wowt.com/content/news/US-Senate-candidate-says-he-wont-drop-out-following-sexual-harassment-complaint--571304541.html U.S. Senate candidate says he won't drop out following sexual harassment complaint]
*[https://www.1011now.com/content/news/NDP-calls-on-US-Senate-candidate-to-drop-out-after-reported-sexual-harassment-complaint-571292401.html NDP calls on U.S. Senate candidate to drop out after reported sexual harassment complaint]
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/dem-senate-candidate-refuses-to-bow-out-amid-sexual-harassment-scandal/ Nebraska Dem Refuses to Bow Out of Senate Race Amid Sexual Harassment Scandal]</ref>

After misleading charges of Russian bounties were hurled at [[President Trump]], Sasse was none too soon in demanding an explanation despite high fake news reporting surrounding the matter.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/505145-gop-senator-congress-must-find-out-what-trump-knew-of-russian-bounties-and GOP senator: Congress must find out what Trump knew of Russian bounties, and when]</ref>

In late July 2020, Sen. Sasse criticized [[Nancy Pelosi]] and [[Steven Mnuchin]] over coronavirus stimulus negotiations, calling them “two big government Democrats”.<ref>[https://www.axios.com/ben-sasse-steven-mnuchin-stimulus-b68d22fd-bc4f-43e3-8bfa-c11b7877cdc5.html GOP Sen. Sasse slams Mnuchin and Pelosi as "big government Democrats"]</ref>

Sasse continued to criticize Trump after pretending to cooperate in order to fend off Innis in the primary.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/gop-sen-sasse-zips-his-criticism-of-trump-to-fend-off-primary-threat GOP Sen. Sasse zips his criticism of Trump to fend off primary threat]</ref>

====NE Debate====
A debate for the Senate race was held on September 4, 2020.<ref>[https://www.c-span.org/video/?475385-1/nebraska-us-senate-debate Nebraska U.S. Senate Debate]</ref>

[[File:Cory Booker, official portrait, 114th Congress.jpg|thumb|right|215px|Failed presidential candidate Cory Booker is running for re-election to another Senate term.]]

===New Jersey===
Failed Democrat [[2020 presidential candidate]] [[Cory Booker]] is running for re-election in 2020 to another Senate term.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/article/2013/jan/11/booker-run-senate-more-likely-see-how-newarks-mayo/ Cory Booker files paperwork for U.S. Senate; how's he done against the Truth-O-Meter?]</ref> Booker condemned Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden for Biden's racist and [[segregation]]ist views.<ref>https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-20/biden-doubles-down-after-reminding-everyone-democrats-owned-slaves</ref> Booker's seat has been ranked as safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on July 7, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_New_Jersey,_2020 United States Senate election in New Jersey, 2020]</ref>

====NJ Democrat primary====
Sen. Booker easily won the Democrat primary with nearly 90% of the vote.<ref name="New Jersey U.S. Senate Primary Election Results">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/07/us/elections/results-new-jersey-senate-primary-election.html New Jersey U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

====NJ Republican primary====
The Republican primary was won by Rikin Mehta, who fended off a strong opponent in garnering a plurality of 38.7% of the vote.<ref name="New Jersey U.S. Senate Primary Election Results"/>

====NJ Issues====
On March 2, 2020, Booker told [[Israel]] supporters at the Israel Public Affairs Committee that traditional [[Judaism]] supports the creation of a [[Palestinian]] state.<ref>[https://www.nj.com/politics/2020/03/booker-tells-pro-israel-conference-jewish-tradition-supports-independent-palestinian-state.html Booker tells pro-Israel conference Jewish tradition supports independent Palestinian state]</ref>

Booker claimed in mid-June 2020 that [[Donald Trump]] was “callous” over plans to hold a campaign rally on the [[Juneteenth]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/06/11/booker-trump-is-callous-disrespectful-for-holding-rally-on-juneteenth/ Booker: Trump Is ‘Callous,’ ‘Disrespectful’ for Holding Rally on Juneteenth]</ref>

In late July 2020, Sen. Booker voted against a Republican-led bill that would let Americans sue [[China]] over [[COVID-19]] damages.<ref name="Dick Durbin Backs GOP Bill Allowing Civil Suits Against China over Coronavirus"/>

[[File:000tom udall official.jpg|thumb|left|140px|Sen. [[Tom Udall]] announced in March 2019 his retirement from Congress.<ref>[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-congress-udall-idUSKCN1R61VL U.S. Senator Udall announces retirement from Congress]</ref>]]

===New Mexico (open seat)===
Democrat Sen. [[Tom Udall]] is retiring. The primaries were held on June 2, 2020. Republican [[Mark Ronchetti]] will face Democrat establishment figure [[Ben Ray Luján]] in a contest which could make either candidate a senator for the next six years.

====NM Democrat primary====
Rep. [[Ben Ray Luján]] announced his candidacy. Luján is the Assistant Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives for [[Nancy Pelosi]] and former chair of the [[DCCC]] which engineered the Democrats' [[2018 Midterm]] House takeover. Luján won the Democrat primary uncontested.<ref name="New Mexico U.S. Senate Primary Election Results">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/02/us/elections/results-new-mexico-senate-primary-election.html New Mexico U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

[[File:Luhan.PNG|thumb|right|175px|[[Establishment]] Democrat representative Ben Ray Luján is running for U.S. Senate to succeed Udall.]]
====NM Republican primary====
Gavin Clarkson,<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsTK7_iBL6M</ref> an enrolled member of the Choctaw Nation and Trump deputy assistant secretary at the Bureau of Indian Affairs,<ref>https://nativenewsonline.net/currents/dr-gavin-clarkson-choctaw-named-deputy-assistant-secretary-indian-affairs/</ref> and former TV weatherman [[Mark Ronchetti]] have announced their candidacies.

[[Conservative]] Navajo Nation member [[Elisa Martinez]] announced in November 2019 her bid for the Senate seat.<ref>[https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/new-mexico/articles/2019-11-20/gop-navajo-nation-member-joins-us-senate-race-in-new-mexico GOP Navajo Nation Member Joins US Senate Race in New Mexico]</ref> A genuine [[Native American]] unlike [[Elizabeth Warren]],<ref>[https://dailycaller.com/2020/01/14/elisa-martinez-u-s-senate-candidate-new-mexico/ Exclusive: Elisa Martinez Is On A Mission To Become The First ‘Real’ Native American Woman In The Senate]</ref> Martinez' campaign website has called out leftists like [[Ben Ray Luján]] for being "out of touch elites".<ref>[https://www.elisafornm.com/ Elisa Martinez for New Mexico]</ref>

The Republican primary was ultimately won by Ronchetti, who garnered 56% of the vote.<ref name="New Mexico U.S. Senate Primary Election Results"/> Following his victory, Martinez and Clarkson announced their support for the former in hopes of flipping the seat red.<ref>[https://nmpoliticalreport.com/2020/06/02/ronchetti-wins-republican-primary-for-u-s-senate/ Ronchetti wins Republican primary for U.S. Senate]</ref>

====NM Issues====
Extremely [[pro-abortion]], Luján joined extremist [[Democrat]] colleagues in blocking the [[Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act]] for the 80th time in early August 2019.<ref>[https://www.nmallianceforlife.org/infanticide-vote-blocked-by-nm-congress-members.html Infanticide Vote Blocked by NM Congress Members]</ref>

[[File:Inhofe.jpg|thumb|left|160px|Sen. James Inhofe is running for re-election to another term in office.]]

===Oklahoma===
Incumbent conservative Republican senator [[Jim Inhofe]] of [[Oklahoma]] initially had not announced whether he would run for re-election or not.<ref>[https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/at-sen-jim-inhofe-hasn-t-said-he-s-running/article_764b5a94-1da6-5f3d-a6c6-4cd4cbde4f3b.html At 84, Sen. Jim Inhofe hasn't said he's running for re-election, but he's raising money as if he is]</ref> However, the senator finally announced on March 5, 2020 his re-election campaign.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://oklahoman.com/article/5656619/inhofe-announces-re-election-bid Inhofe announces re-election bid]
*[https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/government-and-politics/sen-jim-inhofe-announces-he-s-running-again-for-reelection/article_7afd8b7b-8092-5c4a-b055-0d7297e26948.html#8 Sen. Jim Inhofe, 85, announces he's running again for reelection]
*[https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/oklahoma/articles/2020-03-05/us-sen-jim-inhofe-85-of-oklahoma-to-seek-another-term US Sen. Jim Inhofe, 85, of Oklahoma to Seek Another Term]
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/5/us-sen-jim-inhofe-85-of-oklahoma-to-seek-another-t/ Oklahoma's Jim Inhofe, 85, to seek another Senate term]</ref>

The primaries were held on June 30, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Oklahoma,_2020 United States Senate election in Oklahoma, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====OK Republican primary====
Inhofe easily won the Republican Party primary with nearly three-quarters of the votes casted.<ref name="Live results: 2020 Oklahoma Senate primaries">[https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/election-results/oklahoma-senate-primary-live-results/ Live results: 2020 Oklahoma Senate primaries]</ref>

====OK Democrat primary====
The Democrat primary was won by Abby Broyles, who garnered 60% of the vote.<ref name="Live results: 2020 Oklahoma Senate primaries"/>

====OK Issues====
Sen. Inhofe faced scrutiny in March 2020 amidst the [[CCP pandemic]] after it was reported that he "conveniently" benefited from large stock trades before the market crashed.<ref>[https://nypost.com/2020/03/20/richard-burr-kelly-loeffler-urged-to-resign-for-selling-stocks-after-coronavirus-briefing/ Sens. Dianne Feinstein, Jim Inhofe made stock trades before coronavirus pandemic]</ref> Other implications included [[Kelly Loeffler]], [[Richard Burr]], and [[Dianne Feinstein]]. Despite being initially investigated, the [[DOJ]] dropped later dropped the case against Inhofe.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/26/doj-drops-insider-trading-investigations-into-three-senators/# DOJ Drops Insider Trading Investigations into Three Senators]</ref>

On March 5, 2020, Inhofe co-sponsored a resolution by [[Josh Hawley]] to condemn threats made by [[Charles Schumer]] against Supreme Court justices [[Neil Gorsuch]] and [[Brett Kavanaugh]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/05/josh-hawley-14-gop-senators-move-to-censure-chuck-schumer-for-threatening-justices/ Josh Hawley, 14 GOP Senators Move to Censure Chuck Schumer for Threatening Justices]</ref>

[[File:000merkleyofficialphoto.jpg|thumb|right|225px|Leftist Jeff Merkley is seeking another Senate term.]]

===Oregon===
[[Jeff Merkley]], the left-wing junior senator from [[Oregon]], has announced in March 2019 his run for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.rollcall.com/2019/03/05/sen-jeff-merkley-will-run-for-re-election-instead-of-president/ Sen. Jeff Merkley will run for re-election instead of president]</ref> His seat has been marked as safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primary elections were held on May 19, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Oregon,_2020 United States Senate election in Oregon, 2020]</ref>

====OR Democrat primary====
Sen. Merkley won the Democrat primary uncontested.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/election-results/oregon-senate-primary-live-results/ Live results: 2020 Oregon Senate primaries]</ref>

====OR Republican primary====
The Republican primary was won by Jo Rae Perkins, who garnered nearly 50% of the vote.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/election-results/oregon-senate-primary-live-results/ Live results: 2020 Oregon Senate primaries]</ref> A staunch conservative, Perkins was subject to harsh attacks by the liberal media over her support<ref>[https://heavy.com/news/2020/05/jo-rae-perkins-qanon-conspiracy-theorist-wins-gop-support-in-u-s-senate-race/ Jo Rae Perkins: QAnon Conspiracy Theorist Wins GOP Support in U.S. Senate Race]</ref> for the [[QAnon]] conspiracy theory.

====OR Issues====
In May 2020, Sen. Merkley ridiculously claimed that the opposition to mail-in voting from many [[Republicans]] is somehow an attempt to suppress the vote of minorities.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/media/merkley-mail-in-ballots-voting-people-of-color Senate Democrat: Mail-in ballots needed because GOP trying to stop 'people of color from voting']
*[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/05/20/merkley-republicans-opposing-mail-in-voting-to-stop-people-of-color-from-voting/ Merkley: Republicans Opposing Mail-In Voting ‘to Stop People of Color from Voting’]</ref>

After flying on a crowded airplane, Merkley introduced a bill that would ban airlines from booking middle seats to passengers.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.businessinsider.com/senate-bill-would-ban-airlines-from-booking-middle-seats-2020-7 A US senator just introduced a bill banning airlines from booking middle seats or charging passengers for switching seats]
*[https://www.rollcall.com/2020/07/23/merkley-bill-would-stop-airlines-sale-of-middle-seats/ Merkley bill would stop airlines’ sale of middle seats]</ref>

Amidst a lawless [[2020 Leftist Insurrection|left-wing insurrection]] in [[Portland, Oregon]], Merkley claimed that the rioters and anarchists vandalizing property were “peaceful”.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/19/watch-sen-merkley-says-bill-will-stop-peaceful-protester-arrests/ Watch: Sen. Merkley Says Bill Will Stop ‘Peaceful Protester’ Arrests]
*[https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2020/08/04/democrats-continue-whitewash-antifa-rioters-as-peaceful-protesters-n751250 Ted Cruz Video Eviscerates Democrats' False Narrative About 'Peaceful Protesters']</ref>

[[File:Reed.jpg|thumb|right|215px|Democrat senator Jack Reed is seeking re-election.]]
===Rhode Island===
[[Jack Reed]], the liberal [[Democrat]] senior senator from [[Rhode Island]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.wpri.com/news/sen-reed-has-1-8m-for-2020-re-election-race-2/ Sen. Reed has $1.8M for 2020 re-election race]</ref> Several ratings have marked his Senate seat as safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on September 8, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Rhode_Island,_2020 United States Senate election in Rhode Island, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====RI Democrat primary====
Sen. Reed ran uncontested in the Democrat primary in seeking a fifth Senate term.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Rhode_Island,_2020_(September_8_Democratic_primary) United States Senate election in Rhode Island, 2020 (September 8 Democratic primary) - Ballotpedia]</ref><ref name="Rhode Island Primary Results 2020">[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/rhode-island/ Rhode Island Primary Results 2020]</ref>

====RI Republican primary====
The only [[Republican]] running to challenge Reed is Allen Waters.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Rhode_Island,_2020_(September_8_Republican_primary) United States Senate election in Rhode Island, 2020 (September 8 Republican primary)]</ref>

While initially backed by the Rhode Island GOP, Waters' endorsement was rescinded in late June 2020 after reports surfaced of a domestic disturbance he was involved in a year ago.<ref>Two references:
*[http://www.ri.gop/rhode_island_republican_party_withdraws_endorsement_for_allen_waters Rhode Island Republican Party Withdraws Endorsement for Allen Waters]
*[https://www.providencejournal.com/news/20200625/ri-gop-rescinds-endorsement-of-us-senate-candidate-allen-waters R.I. GOP rescinds endorsement of U.S. Senate candidate Allen Waters]</ref>

Waters won the Republican nomination uncontested.<ref name="Rhode Island Primary Results 2020"/>

====RI Issues====
Obsessed with renaming military bases, Sen. Reed blocked an amendment proposed by Josh Hawley for a defense bill that would remove language associated with such in the legislation.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/508486-senate-poised-to-pass-defense-bill-with-plan-changing-confederate-named-bases Senate poised to pass defense bill with plan changing Confederate-named bases]</ref>
{{Image Thumbnail left|File:M. Michael Rounds.gif|200px|Sen. Mike Rounds is running for re-election.}}
===South Dakota===
[[Mike Rounds]], the mostly [[conservative]] senator from [[South Dakota]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.dakotanewsnow.com/content/news/Sen-Mike-Rounds-announces-bid-for-second-term-567616381.html Sen. Mike Rounds announces bid for second term]</ref>

The primaries were held on June 2, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_South_Dakota,_2020 United States Senate election in South Dakota, 2020]</ref>

====SD Republican primary====
Sen. Rounds won the Republican primary over challenger Scyller Borglum with 75% of the vote.<ref name="Live: South Dakota State Primary Election Results 2020">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/02/us/elections/results-south-dakota-primary-elections.html Live: South Dakota State Primary Election Results 2020]</ref>

====SD Democrat primary====
The Democrat primary was won by Daniel Ahlers, who ran uncontested.<ref name="Live: South Dakota State Primary Election Results 2020"/>

====SD Issues====
Rounds joined several Senate globalist RINOs in late May 2020 in signing a letter urging Donald Trump not to restrict migrant visas.<ref name="Globalist Senate RINOs"/>

In late July 2020, Sen. Rounds asserted an approval of using federal agents against violent protesters when federal property is being vandalized.<ref>[https://www.cnsnews.com/article/washington/andrew-davenport/sen-cornyn-okay-use-dhs-agents-against-protesters-if-used Sen. Cornyn: Okay to Use DHS Agents Against Protesters if Used to ‘Enforce Federal Law’]</ref>

====SD Debate====
A planned debate at the South Dakota State Fair was cancelled after doctors found cancer cells in Sen. Rounds' wife.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/dakota-news-now-to-host-south-dakota-senate-race-debate-at-state-fair/ar-BB18E32X Senate Debate at South Dakota State Fair cancelled]
*[https://www.keloland.com/news/local-news/senate-debate-cancelled-at-state-fair/ Senate debate cancelled at State Fair]</ref>

===Tennessee (open seat)===
[[File:250px-Lamar Alexander official portrait.jpg|thumb|right|150px|Tennessee senator [[Lamar Alexander]] is retiring.]]
[[Lamar Alexander]], the current RINO establishment senior senator from [[Tennessee]], announced in December 2018 that he wouldn't run for re-election in 2020.<ref>Multiple sources:
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/17/lamar-alexander-announces-retirement-senate/ Lamar Alexander announces retirement from Senate]
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tennessee-gop-senator-lamar-alexander-announces-retirement Tennessee GOP senator Lamar Alexander announces retirement]
*[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2018/12/17/sen-lamar-alexander-tennessee/2276521002/ Tennessee US Sen. Lamar Alexander will not seek re-election in 2020]</ref>

The primaries were held on August 6, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Tennessee,_2020 United States Senate election in Tennessee, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====TN Republican primary====
Among the Republicans who ran for the open seat included former U.S. Ambassador to Japan [[Bill Hagerty]]<ref>[https://teamhagerty.com/ Home - Hagerty for U.S. Senate]</ref> and surgeon [[Manny Sethi]].<ref>[https://www.drmannyforsenate.com/ Dr. Manny for U.S. Senate]</ref><ref>[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/03/manny-sethi-2020-senate-bid-tennessee-republican-lamar-alexander/1292498001/ Nashville trauma surgeon Manny Sethi launches 2020 U.S. Senate bid]</ref>

It was reported by [[Breitbart]] in late July 2020 that Sethi's campaign had comprised of many [[Never Trump]]ers.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/22/divisive-short-fingered-vulgarian-never-trumpers-comprise-tennessees-manny-sethi-entire-senior-campaign-staff/ ‘Divisive, Short-Fingered Vulgarian’: Never Trumpers Comprise Tennessee’s Manny Sethi’s Entire Senior Campaign Staff]</ref>

The primary was ultimately won by Hagerty, who garnered just over 50% of the vote.<ref name="August 6, 2020 Unofficial Election Results">[https://elections.tn.gov/results.php?ByOffice=United%20States%20Senate August 6, 2020 Unofficial Election Results]</ref>

====TN Democrat primary====
The [[Democrat]] primary was won by Marquita Bradshaw, who garnered just over 35% of the votes.<ref name="August 6, 2020 Unofficial Election Results"/>

====TN Issues====
Amidst the [[CCP pandemic]], Hagerty asserted in late March 2020 the importance of holding [[China]] accountable.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/22/tennessee-senate-bill-hagerty-chinese/ Tennessee Senate Candidate Amb. Bill Hagerty: ‘The Chinese Have Got to Be Held Accountable’]</ref>

[[File:Sen Cornyn - Official Portrait FeaturedPhoto.jpg|thumb|left|180px|Establishment Sen. John Cornyn is seeking a fourth Senate term.]]

===Texas===
[[RINO Backer]] and [[establishment]] moderate [[John Cornyn]], the senior senator from [[Texas]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/352149-cornyn-to-run-for-re-election-in-2020 Cornyn to run for reelection in 2020]</ref> His seat is considered to be ''mostly'' safe, according to several election ratings.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on March 3, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Texas,_2020 United States Senate election in Texas, 2020]</ref> For the races in which no candidate received a majority of the votes casted, runoffs were held on July 14.

====TX Republican primary====
Cornyn won the [[Republican]] primary that was held on March 3, 2020.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/485848-cornyn-wins-senate-primary-in-texas Cornyn wins Senate primary in Texas]</ref>

====TX Democrat primary====
Among the dozen candidates in the Democrat primary included Mary Jennings Hegar, Royce West, and Annie Garcia. No candidate received a majority of the votes,<ref>[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/texas/ Texas Primary Results 2020]</ref> and a runoff followed; Hegar won the latter with just over half of the votes casted. Black Democrats, including West, accused their party's establishment of "rigging" the primary when they had announced their endorsement of Hegar in December 2019.<ref name="Democrats Spent Tens of Millions to Destroy the Hopes and Dreams of These Qualified Black Candidates"/>

====TX Issues====
Cornyn criticized [[Democrats]] in May 2020 for exploiting the coronavirus outbreak to attempt legislating a left-wing agenda.<Ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/03/24/gop-sen-cornyn-blasts-dems-for-including-wish-list-in-coronavirus-relief-package-just-shameful/ GOP Sen. Cornyn Blasts Dems for Including ‘Wish List’ in Coronavirus Relief Package — ‘Just Shameful’]</ref>

Sen. Cornyn was part of nine [[globalist]] GOP senators in late May 2020 who sent a letter to President Trump urging him not to restrict migrant visas while Americans lost their jobs amidst the [[CCP virus in the United States]].<ref name="Globalist Senate RINOs"/>

Hegar has ridiculously compared American immigration policies to concentration camps in [[China]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/cornyn-challenger-equates-u-s-border-policies-to-chinese-concentration-camps/ Cornyn Challenger Equates U.S. Border Policies to Chinese Concentration Camps]
*[https://www.newsmax.com/politics/mj-hegar-john-cornyn-texas-uighurs/2020/07/16/id/977494/ Dem Candidate Compares Border Policies to China's Concentration Camps]
*[https://pjmedia.com/election/bryan-preston/2020/07/16/democrat-senate-candidate-hegar-compares-u-s-border-facilities-to-chinas-concentration-camps-as-ghastly-footage-resurfaces-n653963 Democrat Senate Candidate Hegar Compares U.S. Border Facilities to China's Concentration Camps As Ghastly Footage Resurfaces]</ref>

[[File:Mark-warner.jpg|thumb|right|180px|[[Deep state]]r Mark Warner from Virginia is running for re-election.]]

===Virginia===
[[File:Daniel Gade.jpeg|thumb|left|185px|Republican [[Daniel Gade]] is running to unseat Warner.]]
[[Deep state]] ally and "[[centrist]]" Democrat [[Mark Warner]] is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jul/8/mark-warner-posts-18m-second-quarter-fundraising/ Sen. Mark Warner posts $1.8M second-quarter fundraising haul]</ref>

The primaries were held on June 23, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Virginia,_2020 United States Senate election in Virginia, 2020]</ref>

====VA Democrat primary====
Sen. Warner ran unopposed in the Democrat primary.

====VA Republican primary====
[[Daniel Gade]], Thomas Speciale, and Alissa Baldwin ran in the Republican primary; Gade won with around two-thirds of the vote,<ref>[https://results.elections.virginia.gov/vaelections/2020%20June%20Republican%20Primary/Site/Congress.html 2020 June Republican Primary]</ref> while Baldwin and Speciale finished respectively with 18% and 14% of the votes casted.

====VA Issues====
In late July 2020, Sen. Warner and his colleague [[Tim Kaine]] introduced [[gun control]] legislation.<ref>[https://www.wdbj7.com/2020/07/22/kaine-and-warner-introduce-gun-legislation-take-virginia-plan-to-congress/ Kaine and Warner introduce gun legislation, take “Virginia Plan” to Congress]</ref>

====VA Debate(s)====
The first Senate debate between the [[Deep state]]r and the U.S. Army veteran will be held on September 23, 2020, hosted by the Northern Virginia Chamber of Commerce, and moderated by partisan [[NBC]] hack [[Chuck Todd]].<ref>[https://patch.com/virginia/mclean/first-debate-virginia-u-s-senate-race-scheduled-nova First Debate For Virginia U.S. Senate Race Scheduled In NoVA]</ref>

[[File:Shelley Moore Capito official Senate photo.jpg|thumb|left|240px|Sen. Capito is seeking re-election.]]

===West Virginia===
Establishment moderate [[conservative]] [[Shelley Moore Capito]], the junior senator from [[West Virginia]], is running for re-election to a second term in the Senate.<ref>[https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/west-virginia/articles/2020-01-17/capito-files-for-reelection-setting-up-race-with-ojeda Capito Files for Reelection, Faces Potential Race With Ojeda]</ref> Her seat is considered safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on June 9, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_West_Virginia,_2020 United States Senate election in West Virginia, 2020]</ref>

====WV Republican primary====
Capito easily won her party's primary with over 80% of the vote, defeating two challengers.<ref name="West Virginia U.S. Senate Primary Election Results">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/09/us/elections/results-west-virginia-senate-primary-election.html West Virginia U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

====WV Democrat primary====
The Democrat primary was won by Paula Jean Swearengin with 38% of the vote, defeating opponents Richard Ojeda and Richie Robb.<ref name="West Virginia U.S. Senate Primary Election Results"/>

====WV Issues====
Amidst spars between many [[conservative]] Republicans and [[Anthony Fauci]], Sen. Capito sided with the latter.<ref>Two references:
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/491363-gop-senator-trump-should-let-healthcare-professionals-guide-coronavirus GOP senator: Trump should let health care professionals 'guide' coronavirus response]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/12/anthony-fauci-republicans-coronavirus-251919 Fauci fatigue sets in among some Republicans]</ref>

In mid-June 2020, Capito bucked with her party line on a Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) nomination.<ref>[https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/503256-key-republican-jeopardizes-nomination-of-trump-consumer-safety-pick Key Republican jeopardizes nomination of Trump consumer safety pick]</ref>

[[File:Enzi.jpg|thumb|right|180px|Sen. Mike Enzi is retiring.]]
===Wyoming (open seat)===
Establishment conservative [[Mike Enzi]] announced on May 4, 2019 that he wouldn't be running for re-election in 2020.<ref>Two sources:
*[https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/04/wyoming-sen-mike-enzi-will-not-run-for-reelection-next-year-1301637 Wyoming Sen. Mike Enzi won't run for reelection]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/442132-wyomings-enzi-to-retire-from-senate-at-end-of-term Mike Enzi announces he'll retire from Senate after 2020]</ref>

The primary elections will be held on August 18, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Wyoming,_2020 United States Senate election in Wyoming, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====WY Republican primary====
While Wyoming's U.S. representative [[Liz Cheney]] of the at-large district was initially a potential to run for the Senate seat, she later declined, preferring to run for re-election to the [[U.S. House of Representatives]].<ref>Two sources:
*[https://localnews8.com/news/2020/01/16/liz-cheney-wont-run-for-us-senate-seat-from-wyoming/ Liz Cheney won’t run for US Senate seat from Wyoming]
*[https://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/wyoming-rep-liz-cheney-will-not-run-for-senate/article_fda975a9-dd8a-5295-8abc-3cb2afac9a57.html Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney will not run for Senate]</ref> Cheney's predecessor in the U.S. House, Cynthia Lummis, ran in the election; the latter ultimately won the [[Republican]] primary.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/512187-cynthia-lummis-wins-gop-senate-primary-in-wyoming Cynthia Lummis wins GOP Senate primary in Wyoming]</ref>

====WY Democrat primary====
Among the Democrats who ran in the [[Democrat]] primary include Merav Ben-David, Nathan Wendt and Rex Wilde. Ben-David ultimately won the primary.<ref>[https://forward.com/fast-forward/452866/merav-ben-david-an-israeli-american-scientist-wins-wyoming-s-democratic/ Merav Ben-David, an Israeli-American scientist, wins Wyoming’s Democratic senate primary]</ref>

====WY Issues====
In December 2019, Lummis wrote an article for [[Breitbart]], in it praising [[President Trump]] for being a “Disruptor-in-Chief” of [[Washington, D.C.]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/01/exclusive-cynthia-lummis-disruptor-in-chief-donald-trump-has-changed-washington-for-the-better/# Exclusive–Cynthia Lummis: Disruptor-in-Chief Donald Trump Has Changed Washington for the Better]</ref>

==Potential vulnerable seats==
[[File:DavidPerdue2015.jpg|thumb|right|210px|Sen. David Perdue is running for re-election.]]
===Georgia===
[[David Perdue]], the incumbent [[conservative]] senior senator from [[Georgia]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/inside-david-perdue-2020-race-for-another-senate-term/pTFQ5GdliIK0ljaIu8j5qN/ Inside David Perdue’s 2020 race for another U.S. Senate term]</ref>

The primaries were held on June 9, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Georgia,_2020 United States Senate election in Georgia, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====GA Republican primary====
Sen. Perdue ran unopposed in his party's primary.<ref name="Georgia Primary Results 2020">[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/georgia/ Georgia Primary Results 2020]</ref>

====GA Democrat primary====
The Democrat primary was won by [[Jon Ossoff]] with just over 50% of the vote, who defeated challengers Teresa Tomlinson and Sarah Riggs Amico.<ref name="Georgia Primary Results 2020"/>

====GA Issues====
Ossoff has been criticized<ref>[https://www.dailywire.com/news/tinseltown-liberal-friends-gop-smacks-jon-ossoff-over-hollywood-ties-in-georgia-senate-race ‘Tinseltown Liberal Friends’: GOP Smacks Jon Ossoff Over Hollywood Ties In Georgia Senate Race]</ref> for previously representing his national security credentials when running for U.S. House in a 2017 special election.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/politics/ossoff-admits-he-misrepresented-national-security-credentials/ Ossoff Admits He Misrepresented National Security Credentials]</ref>

Despite denouncing corporate PACs, Ossoff has indirectly taken thousands of dollars from such groups.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/ossoff-says-corporate-pac-money-kills-as-he-rakes-in-thousands-from-them/ Ossoff Says Corporate PAC Money ‘Kills’ As He Rakes In Thousands From Them]</ref>

[[File:Kelly Loeffler.jpg|thumb|left|145px|[[Kelly Loeffler]] is running for election to a full Senate term.]]

===Georgia (special)===
[[File:Doug Collins official photo.jpg|thumb|right|170px|Rep. [[Doug Collins]] is running against [[Kelly Loeffler]].]]
Georgia will hold a special election to fiil seat of Johnny Isakson who resigned in December 2019. A normal primary election will not occur; instead, all candidates, regardless of party, will be placed on the same ballot for a jungle primary election in November 3, 2020. Party labels will be printed on the ballot and if no candidate receives a majority of the vote, the top two finishers will advance to a run-off election, to be held on January 5, 2021.

Governor Brian Kemp appointed Kelly Loeffler to serve as Isakson's replacement, effective January 6, 2020.

Loeffler, being the incumbent junior senator from [[Georgia]], is running for election to a full Senate term. Among her endorsements include former ambassador [[Nikki Haley]].<ref>[https://dailycaller.com/2020/03/09/nikki-haley-endorses-kelly-loeffler-georgia/ ‘She Understands American Leadership’: Nikki Haley Chooses A Side In Heated Georgia Senate Race]</ref>

Rep. [[Doug Collins]] of Georgia's 9th district is running for the seat. Collins was among the fiercest defenders of [[President Trump]] amidst the [[impeachment coup]].

====GA (special) candidates====
Loeffler, backed by the GOP establishment,<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/27/rep-doug-collins-expected-to-run-for-senate-107085 Rep. Doug Collins expected to run for Senate, setting up GOP clash]</ref> is facing a primary challenged by representative Collins.<ref>[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doug-collins-us-house-georgia-republican-announces-senate-run/ Republican Congressman Doug Collins announces Senate run]</ref> According to a poll by the Public Policy Polling in December 2019, the preference for Collins is three times greater than the preference for Loeffler.<ref>[https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jl2nP_tWyw482tIlenbd1Els2Mq-6KUP/view PPP Georgia GOP.pdf]</ref> In February 2020, Collins has released an ad strongly criticizing Loeffler for being backed by the anti-Trump<ref>[https://www.clubforgrowth.org/club-for-growth-launches-anti-trump-ad-in-wisconsin/ Club for Growth Launches Anti-Trump Ad in Wisconsin]</ref> [[Club for Growth]]<ref>[https://twitter.com/CollinsforGA/status/1224364335004180480?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Doug Collins on Twitter: "The original..."]</ref> as well as another one criticizing Loeffler for backing [[RINO]] [[Mitt Romney]] in 2012.<ref>[https://twitter.com/CollinsforGA/status/1225840271851769856?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Doug Collins on Twitter: "@kloeffler stood with Mitt Romney..."]</ref> This, in turn, led the GOP establishment and the [[Club for Growth]] to further their already-increasing opposition to Collins.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/28/gop-establishment-prepares-to-battle-doug-collins-108450 GOP establishment prepares to battle Doug Collins]</ref><ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/30/collins-georgia-club-for-growth-109411 Conservative group will launch ad broadside against Collins in Georgia]</ref>

[[Pro-life]] leaders urged Gov. Kemp not to appoint Loeffler because of her ties to the Grady Memorial Hospital,<ref>[https://www.lifenews.com/2019/12/02/georgia-gov-brian-kemp-names-planned-parenthood-activist-kelly-loeffler-to-open-senate-seat/ Georgia GOP Gov. Brian Kemp Names Planned Parenthood Activist Kelly Loeffler to Open Senate Seat]</ref> one of the largest abortion providers in the state, and the WNBA, which partners with [[Planned Parenthood]]. However, Kemp appointed Loeffler anyway. Loeffler sits on the board of Grady and has donated thousands of dollars to liberal and pro-abortion Democrats.<ref>[https://www.foxbusiness.com/money/georgia-kelly-loeffler-donations-republicans-democrats Georgia's Kelly Loeffler and her husband have donated to Republican and Democratic candidates]</ref> Grady Memorial Hospital is one of the largest purveyors of abortion in Georgia and a training ground for abortionists. In February 2020, the Georgia Life Alliance announced it would spend at least $3 million on an ad blitz to back Loeffler. Rep. Collins commented, “What I think is happening is they got a large infusion of cash from Kelly. They’ve hardly raised $50,000 and then they suddenly announce a $3 million ad buy?”<ref>[https://www.lifenews.com/2019/12/04/new-republican-senator-kelly-loeffler-says-shes-pro-life-will-vote-against-abortion/ New Republican Senator Kelly Loeffler Says She’s Pro-Life, Will Vote Against Abortion]</ref>

Among the Democrats running in the race include Raphael Warnock, a pastor, and Matt Lieberman, son of former moderate senator [[Joe Lieberman]]. In early August 2020, Lieberman faced calls to drop out of the race over an authored novel that some argued to contain “racist and discriminatory” tropes.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/matt-lieberman-calls-drop-georgia-senate-race Matt Lieberman faces calls to drop out of Georgia Senate race over 'racist and discriminatory' tropes in 2018 book]
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/democratic-candidate-faces-calls-to-drop-out-of-georgia-senate-race-over-racist-tropes-in-self-published-book Democratic candidate faces calls to drop out of Georgia Senate race over 'racist' tropes in self-published book]
*[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/georgia-democrat-faces-calls-to-drop-out-of-senate-race-over-racist-novel/ar-BB17Je8I Georgia Democrat Faces Calls to Drop Out of Senate Race Over 'Racist' Novel]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/511170-matt-lieberman-faces-calls-to-drop-out-of-georgia-senate-race-over-racist Matt Lieberman faces calls to drop out of Georgia Senate race over 'racist and discriminatory' tropes in 2018 book]</ref>

====GA (special) Issues====
On January 24, 2020, Loeffler received a briefing on the [[Wuhan coronavirus]];<ref>[https://www.thedailybeast.com/sen-kelly-loeffler-dumped-millions-in-stock-after-coronavirus-briefing Sen. Kelly Loeffler Dumped Millions in Stock After Coronavirus Briefing]</ref> that day she began selling stock. Over the next three weeks Loeffler sold up to more than $3 million in stock. Loeffler has been accused of [[insider trading]],<ref>[https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-anchor-ed-henry-grills-kelly-loeffler-on-her-stock-dump-asks-how-this-wasnt-insider-trading Fox News Grills Sen. Kelly Loeffler on Her Stock Dump: How Was This Not Insider Trading?]</ref> selling stock based on information not available to the public. The stock market crashed in March, losing more than 20% due to Wuhan coronavirus fears and the lockdown. Loeffler's husband Jeffrey Sprecher, the chair of the [[New York Stock Exchange]], was reported in May 2020 to also have dumped stock prior to the economic devastation caused by the [[CCP pandemic]].<ref>[https://www.thedailybeast.com/sen-kelly-loefflers-husband-nyse-boss-dumped-his-own-stock-before-coronavirus-crisis-report-says Sen. Loeffler’s Husband, NYSE Boss, Dumped His Own Stock Before Coronavirus Crisis: Report]</ref>

In opposition to Sen. Loeffler, a co-owner of a WNBA league, players wore shirts advocating for one of her [[Democrat]] opponents, with the messages reading ‘Vote Warnock’.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/bulls/wnba-players-wear-vote-warnock-shirts-continued-stand-against-kelly-loeffler WNBA players wear ‘Vote Warnock’ shirts in continued stand against Kelly Loeffler]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/wnba/2020/08/04/wnba-players-vote-warnock-shirts-kelly-loeffler-opponent-atlanta-dream/3294951001/ WNBA players wear shirts backing political opponent of Atlanta Dream co-owner Kelly Loeffler]
*[https://www.huffpost.com/entry/wnba-vote-raphael-warnock-kelly-loeffler-shirts_n_5f29dab9c5b68fbfc888fa0d WNBA Players Back Kelly Loeffler’s Senate Opponent With ‘Vote Warnock’ Shirts]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/510574-wnba-players-wear-vote-warnock-shirts-in-support-of-loeffler-democratic WNBA players wear 'Vote Warnock' shirts in support of Loeffler Democratic challenger]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/sports/2020/08/05/wnba-players-wear-vote-warnock-shirts-supporting-loefflers-democratic-challenger/ WNBA Players Wear ‘Vote Warnock’ Shirts, Supporting Loeffler’s Democratic Challenger]</ref>

In late September 2020, Warnock ridiculously compared police officers to "thugs".<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/georgia-senate-candidate-said-police-behave-like-thugs-and-gangsters/ Georgia Senate Candidate Said Police Behave Like Thugs and Gangsters]
*[https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/22/democratic-georgia-senate-candidate-compares-police-to-gangsters-and-thugs/ Democratic Georgia Senate Candidate Compares Police To Gangsters And Thugs]
*[https://pjmedia.com/election/tyler-o-neil/2020/09/22/democrat-senate-candidate-called-police-gangsters-thugs-bullies-a-danger-to-children-n954846 Democrat Senate Candidate Called Police Gangsters, Thugs, Bullies, a 'Danger' to Children]</ref>

[[File:Joni Ernst Official photo portrait 114th Congress.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Sen. Joni Ernst is seeking re-election.]]

===Iowa===
[[Joni Ernst]], the pro-Trump, strongly [[conservative]] junior senator from [[Iowa]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/420411-iowas-ernst-will-run-for-reelection-in-2020 Iowa’s Ernst will run for reelection in 2020]</ref>

The primaries were held on June 2, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Iowa,_2020 United States Senate election in Iowa, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====IA Republican primary====
Ernst ran unopposed in the Republican primary.<ref name="Iowa U.S. Senate Primary Election Results">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/02/us/elections/results-iowa-senate-primary-election.html Iowa U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

====IA Democrat primary====
The Democrat primary was won by [[Theresa Greenfield]], who garnered a plurality of 48% of the votes casted.<ref name="Iowa U.S. Senate Primary Election Results"/>

====IA Issues====
Despite promising in 2019 not to take any corporate [[PAC]] dollars for her campaign, Greenfield was reported to have done exactly that;<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/27/watch-joni-ernsts-campaign-exposes-theresa-greenfields-anti-corporate-pac-hypocrisy/ Watch: Joni Ernst’s Campaign Exposes Theresa Greenfield’s Anti-Corporate PAC Hypocrisy]</ref> she downplayed criticism by fellow Democrats over the matter by calling them “Republican talking points”.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/iowa-dem-criticized-by-fellow-dems-for-violating-corporate-pac-pledge/ Iowa Dem Criticized by Fellow Dems for Violating Corporate PAC Pledge]</ref> Greenfield also received an ethics complaint that was filed by outside groups.<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/04/08/schumer-candidate-on-pac-spending-i-cant-control-what-outside-groups-do-n2566485 IA Senate: Greenfield Says She 'Cannot Control What Outside Groups Do' After Ethics Complaint]</ref>

Despite having claimed to be a champion for small businesses and workers, Greenfield supported Aldi in the latter's 2015 effort to evict small businesses, as reported in early May 2020.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/01/report-iowa-democrat-theresa-greenfield-evicted-local-businesses-for-corporate-chain/ Report: Iowa Democrat Theresa Greenfield Evicted Local Businesses for Corporate Chain]
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/iowa-dem-evicted-local-businesses-to-make-way-for-multinational-chain/ Iowa Dem Evicted Local Businesses to Make Way for Multinational Chain]</ref> Iowa small business owners and entrepreneurs expressed concerns over this matter a month later.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/small-business-owners-deeply-troubled-by-iowa-dems-eviction-record/ Small Business Owners ‘Deeply Troubled’ by Iowa Dem’s Eviction Record]</ref>

While strongly [[conservative]], Ernst joined an unnecessary, [[politically correct]], [[establishment]]/[[Democrat]]-favored push to rename military bases in early July 2020.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.newsmax.com/politics/ernst-militarybill-trump/2020/07/05/id/975759/ Ernst Urges Trump To Sign Bill That Includes Renaming Bases Honoring Confederates]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/505925-ernst-says-trump-should-sign-defense-policy-bill Ernst says Trump should sign defense policy bill with military base renaming provision]</ref> This elicited criticism from her supporters, as she later asserted to have received "crap" from Republican voters,<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/07/10/ernst-renaming-bases-honoring-confederates-right-thing-to-do-despite-crap-from-gop-voters/# Ernst: Renaming Bases Honoring Confederates ‘Right Thing to Do’ Despite ‘Crap’ from GOP Voters]
*[https://www.newsmax.com/politics/ernst-confederate-militarybases/2020/07/10/id/976657/ Joni Ernst Getting 'Heck' From GOP For Base Renaming]</ref> yet nevertheless insisted that such was the "right thing" to do.

In late July 2020, Sen. Ernst introduced the Ending Taxpayer Funding for Anarchy Act, which would end all federal funding for cities and states that allow for and/or promote far-left anarchist uprisings.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/22/joni-ernst-urges-trump-to-ban-federal-funds-for-cities-allowing-anarchy/ Joni Ernst Urges Trump to Ban Federal Funds for Cities Allowing Anarchy]
*[https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2020/06/25/joni-ernst-bill-would-deny-federal-funds-cities-states-allowing-autonomous-zones-she-calls-anarchy/3258791001/ Sen. Joni Ernst bill would deny federal funds to cities, states allowing autonomous zones]
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ernst-feds-to-block-taxpayer-funds-states-cities-anarchy Sen. Ernst urges feds to block taxpayer funds for states, cities allowing 'anarchy']</ref>

It was reported in late July 2020 that Greenfield had deleted mentions of her ‘deeply troubling’ business record from her campaign website.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/27/democrat-theresa-greenfield-scrubs-campaign-site-of-her-deeply-troubling-business-record/ Democrat Theresa Greenfield Scrubs Campaign Site of Her ‘Deeply Troubling’ Business Record]
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/iowa-dem-scrubs-business-experience-from-campaign-site-after-local-business-owners-slam-her-record/ Iowa Dem Scrubs Business Experience From Campaign Site After Local Business Owners Slam Her Record]</ref>

In early August 2020, Ernst requested a unanimous consent for the U.S. Senate to move forward with Sarah's Law, a bill that would strengthen punishments imposed on illegal aliens who commit crimes; the legislation was named after Sarah Root, an Iowan who was killed by a drunk-driving illegal alien. The bill was ultimately blocked by Democrat Sen. [[Tom Udall]], who ridiculously claimed that it “paints immigrants as more dangerous than other people;”<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2020/08/06/joni-ernst-sarahs-law-n2573850 Sen. Ernst's Bill Would Punish Violent Illegal Immigrants. Democrats Still Opposed.]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/08/06/tom-udall-blocks-joni-ernstd-bill-strengthen-ice-detention-illegal-immigrants/ Tom Udall Blocks Joni Ernst’s Bill to Strengthen ICE Detention of Illegal Immigrants]
*[https://www.kcci.com/article/ernsts-immigration-bill-named-after-killed-iowa-woman-blocked-by-democrats/33550801 Ernst's immigration bill, named after killed Iowa woman, blocked by Democrats]</ref> ''it's important to note the distinction between illegal aliens and legal immigrants''.

====IA Debate====
It was reported by the [[Free Beacon]] in late August 2020 that Greenfield apparently chose to skip a debate with Sen. Ernst as part of an overall "windowless basement" strategy shared by [[Joe Biden]] in the latter's [[Joe Biden 2020 presidential campaign|presidential campaign]].<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/iowa-democrat-theresa-greenfield-to-skip-first-debate/ Iowa Democrat Theresa Greenfield To Skip First Debate]</ref> However, the two candidates will participate in a debate on October 15, 2020.<ref>[https://wgem.com/2020/08/06/wgem-to-broadcast-iowa-u-s-senate-debate/ WGEM to Broadcast Iowa U.S. Senate Debate]</ref>

[[File:Gary Peters 2008.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Gary Peters is running for re-election.]]

===Michigan===
[[Gary Peters]], the incumbent Democrat senator from [[Michigan]], is facing re-election in a projected swing state that voted for Donald Trump in the [[2016 U.S. presidential election]].

The only Republican running to oppose Peters is [[movement conservative]] [[John E. James]],<ref>[https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2019/06/john-james-announces-2020-campaign-for-us-senate.html John James announces 2020 campaign for U.S. Senate]</ref> a U.S. combat veteran who ran against [[Debbie Stabenow]] for Senate in 2018 and lost<ref>[https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/michigan/ Michigan Election Results 2018]</ref> during a blue wave year due to Stabenow's strong backing by Michigan farmers that generally vote Republican.<ref>[https://www.mlive.com/news/2018/10/why_the_michigan_farm_bureau_w.html Why Debbie Stabenow has staying power with Michigan farmers]</ref>

[[File:John E James.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Conservative veteran John James is running to unseat Gary Peters.]]
The primaries were held on August 4, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Michigan,_2020 United States Senate election in Michigan, 2020]</ref>

====MI Democrat primary====
Sen. Peters won the Democrat primary uncontested with 1.177 million votes.<ref name="2020 Michigan Unofficial Primary Election Results - Secretary of State of Michigan">[https://mielections.us/election/results/2020PRI_CENR.html 2020 Michigan Unofficial Primary Election Results - Secretary of State of Michigan]</ref>

====MI Republican primary====
The Republican primary was won by James, who ran uncontested and garnered just over 1 million votes.<ref name="2020 Michigan Unofficial Primary Election Results - Secretary of State of Michigan"/>

====MI Issues====
Peters, a Democrat partisan leftist who voted to remove Trump<ref>[https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/02/04/senator-gary-peters-vote-convict-president-trump/4656176002/ Michigan Sen. Gary Peters says he will vote to convict Trump]</ref> and is suspected of supporting [[Medicare for All]],<ref>[https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/17/gary-peters-dodges-questions-medicare-for-all/ Swing State Democrat Senator Up For Re-Election Dodges Questions On Medicare-For-All]</ref><ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/08/01/watch-gary-peters-backs-medicare-for-all-eliminating-private-health-insurance/ Watch–Gary Peters Backs Medicare for All, Eliminating Private Health Insurance]</ref> was at one point unknown among 36% of Michiganders, according to a poll in mid-2019.<ref>[https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/29/peters-name-recognition-senate-reelection-campaign/2704862002/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTkRGa01UUmpZbVprT0RndyIsInQiOiJcLzA0YUExUTY5OUlwK0RQTlRTdTJhbUp4T0dSUjB5Z2ExdFwvV0JRUWRxd3N4YWV6RTJnTWtJSkRpc1V6TE5kR1wvTjBGS1VwMzdxN3lxa2twSjhVbEpxN0p6ak9MYWR2RW1aRU4rYUwzM3E0K3J5ZFF5bm1ub01VZ0VLVEFsSzU1RSJ9 Poll: Peters starts re-election campaign with low name identification]</ref>

Sen. Peters praised [[China]] in March 2020 amidst the [[CCP pandemic]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/thinking-strategically-democratic-senator-praises-chinese-government-response-to-coronavirus 'Thinking strategically': Democratic senator praises Chinese response to coronavirus]
*[https://100percentfedup.com/dem-senator-gary-peters-praises-the-chinese-government-as-the-deadly-coronavirus-spreads/ Dem Senator Gary Peters Praises the Chinese Government as the Deadly Coronavirus Spreads]
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/03/24/gary-peters-praised-chinese-government-response-to-coronavirus/ Sen. Gary Peters Praised The Chinese Government’s Response To Coronavirus]</ref> Two months later, the Better Future MI Fund [[super PAC]] released an ad calling out the senator for “double dipping” on taxpayer dollars while his home state suffers from both the [[coronavirus]] in addition to the incompetent gubernatorial tenure of [[Gretchen Whitmer]].<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sZvQxHyAto Peters Double Dips While Michigan Suffers]</ref>

James met with [[President Trump]] when the latter visited a Ford assembly plant in May 2020, where he accurately called out the incumbent Sen. Peters over “ultra-partisanship”.<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/05/21/john-james-trump-n2569255 John James Meets with President Trump, Hits Sen. Peters for 'Ultra Partisanship']</ref>

Peters has falsely claimed that he "never" voted against pay raises for veterans despite having done exactly that.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/gary-peters-falsely-claims-he-never-voted-against-a-pay-raise-for-service-members/ Gary Peters Falsely Claims He ‘Never Voted Against a Pay Raise for Service Members’]</ref>

A [[liberal hypocrisy|liberal hypocrite]], Sen. Peters asserted tough stances on China despite taking tens of thousands of dollars in donations from companies tied to the [[CCP]].<ref>Two references:
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/07/07/sen-peters-china-n2572043 Sen. Peters Talks Tough on China While Taking Donations from Companies with Ties to Chinese Government]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/08/gary-peters-collects-over-65000-in-donations-from-employees-lobbyists-paid-by-chinese-communist-government/ Gary Peters Collects Over $65,000 in Donations from Employees, Lobbyists, Paid by Chinese Communist Government]</ref>

As reported in mid-June 2020, a poll found that only 19% of Michiganders believed that Sen. Peters deserved to be re-elected;<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/16/michigan-poll-81-either-want-someone-new-or-unsure-if-democrat-gary-peters-deserves-reelection/ Michigan Poll: 81% Either Want Someone New or Unsure if Democrat Gary Peters Deserves Reelection]
*[https://americandigest.com/election-shocker-gary-peters/ Election shocker: Only 19 percent of Michigan voters support re-election of Democrat Sen. Gary Peters]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/06/16/mi-poll-only-19-percent-of-voters-say-sen-peters-deserves-a-second-term-n2570732 MI Poll: Only 19 Percent of Voters Say Sen. Peters Deserves a Second Term]</ref> around a third preferred a different candidate, and half were unsure.

[[File:Tina Smith.PNG|thumb|left|235px|Pro-abortion Sen. Tina Smith is seeking re-election to a full Senate term.]]

===Minnesota===
[[Tina Smith]], the incumbent [[DFL]] junior senator from Minnesota who was appointed to the seat and won a special election in 2018 to succeed the disgraced sexual predator [[Al Franken]],<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/minnesota-senate-special Minnesota U.S. Senate Special Election Results]</ref> is running for election to a full term in 2020.<ref>[https://tinaforminnesota.com/talking-points-sen-tina-smith-talks-health-care-2020-election/ Talking Points: Sen. Tina Smith Talks Health Care, 2020 Election]</ref> A leftist and pro-abortion radical,<ref>[https://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Tina_Smith.htm Tina Smith on the Issues]</ref> Smith has participated in the [[Abortion|murder of unborn children]] when she had in the past worked for [[Planned Parenthood]].<ref>[http://www.startribune.com/sen-tina-smith-stands-behind-her-work-with-planned-parenthood/470303403/ Sen. Tina Smith stands behind her work with Planned Parenthood]</ref>

The primaries will be held on August 11, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Minnesota,_2020 United States Senate election in Minnesota, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====MN Democrat (DFL) primary====
Sen. Smith faced four challengers in the [[Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party]] primary. She easily won with nearly 90% of the vote.<ref name="Minnesota U.S. Senate Primary Election Results">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/08/11/us/elections/results-minnesota-senate-primary-election.html Minnesota U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

====MN Republican primary====
Among the [[Republicans]] who ran to challenge Smith include [[Jason Lewis]], a conservative radio show host and former U.S. representative from Minnesota's 2nd district who served for one House term in the [[115th U.S. Congress]] before being defeated for re-election by Democrat [[Angie Craig]] during the [[2018 midterms]]. Lewis decisively won the primary with 78% of the votes casted.<ref name="Minnesota U.S. Senate Primary Election Results"/>

====MN Issues====
In late March 2020, Smith joined all Senate Democrats in blocking a bi-partisan coronavirus relief bill aimed at providing aid to Americans hurt by the [[CCP pandemic]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://nypost.com/2020/03/23/senate-democrats-block-1-8-trillion-coronavirus-aid-bill/ Senate Democrats block $1.8 trillion coronavirus aid bill]
*[https://www.westernjournal.com/democrats-block-coronavirus-relief-plan-senate/ Democrats Block Coronavirus Relief Plan in Senate]
*[https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/coronavirus-relief-democrats-block-job-saving-program/ Democrats Block Job-Saving Program]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/23/four-swing-state-senate-democrats-voted-against-coronavirus-relief-for-american-workers/ Four Swing-State Senate Democrats Voted Against Coronavirus Relief for American Workers]</ref>

Although mostly a far-left partisan, Sen. Smith surprisingly broke with many Democrats in mid-April 2020 along with Sen. [[Kyrsten Sinema]] in calling for swift actions to re-fund the Paycheck Protection Program.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/senate-democrats-join-obama-small-business-chief-to-break-with-pelosi-and-call-for-more-loan-funding-immediately Senate Democrats join Obama small-business chief to break with Pelosi and call for more loan funding immediately]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2020/04/16/sinema-ppp-n2567056 Kyrsten Sinema Breaks With Dem Leaders and Urges Additional PPP Funding ASAP]</ref>

In late May 2020, Smith signed onto a race-baiting resolution authored by [[Kamala Harris]] that would condemn the use of the term "Wuhan virus" as being "racist".<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/sres580/BILLS-116sres580is.pdf BILLS-116sres580is.pdf]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/juliorosas/2020/05/21/democratic-senators-introduce-resolution-condemning-calling-covid19-as-wuhan-virus-as-racist-n2569168 Kamala Harris Makes Move to Condemn Calling COVID-19 the 'Wuhan Virus']</ref>

[[File:Steve Daines, Official Portrait, 116th Congress.jpg|thumb|right|205px|Sen. Steve Daines is running for re-election to a second term in office.]]

===Montana===
[[Steve Daines]], the incumbent junior senator from [[Montana]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://missoulian.com/opinion/letters/daines-is-spineless-and-up-for-re-election/article_08b56df7-a1be-5f31-94f4-c9ffc042ba71.html Daines is spineless, and up for re-election]</ref> According to several polls, his seat is most likely safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on June 2, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Montana,_2020 United States Senate election in Montana, 2020]</ref>

====MT Republican primary====
Sen. Daines easily won his party's primary, garnering 88% of the vote.<ref name="Montana Secretary of State">[https://electionresults.mt.gov/resultsSW.aspx?type=FED&map=CTY Montana Secretary of State]</ref>

[[File:Bullocks3 (2).jpg|thumb|left|255px|Democrat Steve Bullock is challenging Daines for the Senate seat in a strongly contested race.]]
====MT Democrat primary====
The Democrat primary was won by the current far-left Democrat Governor of Montana [[Steve Bullock]], who garnered 95% of the votes casted.<ref name="Montana Secretary of State"/> A failed 2020 presidential candidate who initially vowed not to run for the seat,<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/4/steve-bullock-montana-governor-backtracks-senate-r/ Former Democratic presidential candidate backtracks on refusal to run for Senate]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/02/steve-bullock-suspends-presidential-campaign-074729 Steve Bullock ends presidential bid, won't run for Senate]
*[https://freebeacon.com/issues/bullied-into-senate-race-montanas-bullock-says-he-wont-answer-to-party-bosses/ Pressured Into Senate Race by Top Dems, Montana’s Bullock Says He ‘Won’t Answer to Party Bosses’]</ref> he flip-flopped when announcing his run for the office on the very last possible day to file his candidacy for the election.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/montana-gov-steve-bullock-announces-run-senate-n1153016 Montana Gov. Steve Bullock announces run for Senate]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/03/09/bullock-senate-n2564079 MT Senate: Bullock Makes it Official, NRSC Comes Out Swinging]
*[https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/03/09/steve-bullock-montanas-governor-launches-senate-bid/4999173002/ Montana Gov. Steve Bullock launches Senate bid after failed presidential run]
*[https://apnews.com/b2f44b5ed00f8fd987daa4825972541a Montana Gov. Steve Bullock to run for Senate against Daines]</ref>

====MT Issues====
It was reported in late July 2020 that Gov. Bullock allegedly threatened and intimidated whistleblowers who questioned welfare fraud present in his administration.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/07/29/report-bullock-accused-of-intimidating-montana-auditors-over-potential-welfare-fraud/ Report: Bullock Accused of ‘Intimidating’ Montana Auditors over Potential Welfare Fraud]
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/former-official-accuses-steve-bullock-of-fraud-intimidation/ Former Official Accuses Steve Bullock of Fraud, Intimidation]</ref>

It was reported in early August 2020 that a staffer for Bullock was fired over bigoted tweets.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/08/02/report-montana-democrat-steve-bullock-staffer-fired-racist-sexist-tweets/ Report: Montana Democrat Steve Bullock Staffer Fired for Racist, Sexist Tweets]
*[https://apnews.com/bac9a931e8d86549df139a24cc4082b7 Bullock staffer fired after offensive tweets surface]
*[https://freebeacon.com/politics/bullock-staffer-fired-after-free-beacon-report/ Bullock Staffer Fired After Free Beacon Report]</ref>

On August 7, 2020, an ad was released attacking Sen. Daines for supposedly siding with [[Big Pharma]] despite the fact that he has supported measures to reduce drug prices.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/aug/25/duty-and-honor/misleading-ad-montana-senate-race-casts-steve-dain/ Misleading ad in Montana Senate race casts Steve Daines as soft on drug companies]</ref>

Gov. Bullock has faced allegations of sexual misconduct.<ref>Two references:
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/17/steve-bullock-montana-me-too-grabbed-butt/ Girl Says Bullock Grabbed Her Butt, Governor Denies Her Claim]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/08/18/steve-bullock-metoo-n2574569 MT Gov. Steve Bullock Faces #MeToo Allegations as Senate Race Heats Up]</ref>

As governor, Bullock has paid female staffers less than he paid male staffers<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/bullock-paid-women-less-than-men-as-governor/ As Governor, Bullock Paid Women Less Than Men]</ref> despite celebrating Women's Equality Day.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/bullock-pays-women-less-than-men-even-as-he-celebrates-womens-equality-day/ Bullock Pays Women Less Than Men Even As He Celebrates ‘Women’s Equality Day’]</ref>

In a campaign ad, Bullock claims to be supportive of [[gun rights]],<ref>[https://mycmag.kantarmediana.com/KMIcmagvidbin2/USSEN_MT_BULLOCK_GUN_RIGHTS.html USSEN_MT_BULLOCK_GUN_RIGHTS]</ref> despite the fact that he has an "F" rating from the [[NRA]].<ref>Two references:
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/montana-dem-goes-pro-gun-in-latest-ad-despite-f-rating-from-nra/ Montana Dem Goes Pro-Gun in Latest Ad Despite ‘F’ Rating From NRA]
*[https://www.newsmax.com/politics/stevebullock-montana/2020/08/27/id/984093/ Dem Steve Bullock Backs Gun Rights Despite NRA Score]</ref>

Bullock was sued in early September after issuing an executive order allowing Montana counties to conduct universal voting by mail;<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/dem-bullock-changed-voting-rules-as-he-eyes-senate-seat/ Dem Bullock Changes Voting Rules As He Eyes Senate Seat]
*[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-montana-idUSKBN25U04S Trump campaign sues Democratic Montana governor to limit mail-in voting]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/09/true-the-vote-sues-montana-governor-for-allowing-universal-mail-in-voting/ True the Vote Sues Montana Governor for Allowing Universal Mail-In Voting]
*[https://www.aol.com/article/news/2020/09/03/gop-trump-campaign-sue-montana-over-all-mail-voting-option/24609722/ GOP, Trump campaign sue Montana over all-mail voting option]</ref> this was after an earlier poll showed him slightly trailing Sen. Daines.<ref>[https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/montana-2020-trump-holds-strong-as-biden-coalesces-support Montana 2020: Trump Holds Strong as Biden Coalesces Support]</ref>

====MT Debates====
Bullock's campaign announced in late July 2020 that the [[left-wing]] governor has agreed to three debate challenges proposed by Sen. Daines.<ref>[https://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/2020/07/29/bullock-agrees-3-senate-debates-daines-montana/5541019002/ Bullock agrees to 3 Senate debates with Daines]</ref> The first debate was held on August 8, 2020 ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svRsyy15blU full video here]).

[[File:000shaheen.jpg|thumb|left|225px|Jeanne Shaheen, the left-wing senator from New Hampshire, is seeking re-election.]]

===New Hampshire===
[[Jeanne Shaheen]], the incumbent [[liberal]] Democrat senator from [[New Hampshire]], is running for re-election to a third term in 2020.<ref>[https://www.wmur.com/article/shaheen-running-for-re-election-in-2020/26051139# Shaheen running for re-election in 2020]</ref> According to several ratings between January and February 2020, the seat is most likely going to be retained,<ref name="Fake News predictions"/> although an upset is possible, given President Trump being a potential to win the state in the [[United States presidential election, 2020|coinciding presidential election]].

The primaries were held on September 8, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_New_Hampshire,_2020 United States Senate election in New Hampshire, 2020]</ref>

====NH Democrat primary====
Shaheen faced two Democrat challengers in her party's primary leading up to the general election, easily winning.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_New_Hampshire,_2020_(September_8_Democratic_primary) United States Senate election in New Hampshire, 2020 (September 8 Democratic primary) - Ballotpedia]</ref>

[[File:Donald C. Bolduc.jpg|thumb|right|180px|Among the Republicans who ran to challenge Sen. Shaheen included [[Don Bolduc]] (shown above).]]
====NH Republican primary====
Among the Republicans running to challenge Sen. Shaheen included retired Army Brigadier General [[Don Bolduc]] and Army Ranger Corky Messner. The latter candidate received the endorsement of [[President Trump]] in mid-June 2020,<ref>[https://www.wmur.com/article/trump-endorses-messner-tweets-hell-be-fantastic-us-senator/32854490# Trump endorses Messner, tweets he’ll be ‘fantastic US Senator']</ref> a matter that elicited criticism from Bolduc and others.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-endorsements-cause-uproar-in-nh-gop-primaries Trump endorsements cause uproar in New Hampshire GOP primaries]</ref> Bolduc was backed by the [[Senate Conservatives Fund]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.senateconservatives.com/post/3949/endorsement-general-don-bolduc Support General Don Bolduc]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/25/don-bolduc-receives-senate-conservative-fund-endorsement-top-priority-race/ Don Bolduc Receives Senate Conservatives Fund Endorsement in ‘Top Priority’ Race]</ref>

Messner won the primary election over Bolduc by eight percentage points;<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_New_Hampshire,_2020_(September_8_Republican_primary) United States Senate election in New Hampshire, 2020 (September 8 Republican primary)]</ref> after losing, the latter announced that he will not endorse Messner over the general election.<ref>[https://www.wmur.com/article/don-bolduc-i-will-not-disgrace-my-name-to-support-a-man-like-corky-messner/33966350 Bolduc on Messner: 'I will not disgrace my name to support a man like that']</ref>

====NH Issues====
While Shaheen was a proponent of the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), speculations of potential conflicts of interests arose when it was reported that businesses tied to her husband received at least hundreds of thousands of loans from the program.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/08/husband-of-democrat-senator-pushing-to-expand-ppp-received-millions-in-loans-from-program/ Husband of Democrat Senator Pushing to Expand PPP Received Millions in Loans from Program]
*[https://www.concordmonitor.com/Data-Congress-created-virus-aid-then-reaped-the-benefits-35130400 Law firm of Sen. Shaheen’s husband among PPP loan recipients]
*[https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2020/07/19/congress-ppp-loans/#38ab85ec71d6 https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2020/07/19/congress-ppp-loans/#38ab85ec71d6]
*[https://www.unionleader.com/news/health/coronavirus/top-politicians-family-firms-got-ppp-loans/article_53bc3f35-b007-54dd-a771-45441f7b393b.html Top politicians’ family firms got PPP loans]</ref>

[[File:GrahamSC.jpg|thumb|left|155px|RINO senator Lindsey Graham is seeking re-election.]]
===South Carolina===
[[Lindsey Graham]], the [[Moderate Republican]] senior senator from [[South Carolina]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.postandcourier.com/politics/ahead-of-re-election-lindsey-graham-s-challenge-shifts-from/article_ea44940a-2635-11e9-bdc9-8b57192462f7.html Ahead of 2020 re-election, Lindsey Graham’s challenge shifts from right to left]</ref>

At a Trump rally in South Carolina on February 28, 2020, Graham made an appearance to praise Trump for his [[Donald Trump achievements|many accomplishments]] and for his perseverance in dealing with the "NEVER-ENDING BULL****" that the latter had to deal with in his presidency.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no0MnomPzLw LIVE: President Trump in North Charleston, SC]</ref>

The primaries were held on June 9, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_South_Carolina,_2020 United States Senate election in South Carolina, 2020]</ref>

====SC Republican primary====
Sen. Graham faced three challengers in the Republican primary, and won with only around two-thirds of the votes casted.<ref>[https://www.enr-scvotes.org/SC/103402/Web02-state.250556/#/ SC - Election Night Reporting - 2020]</ref>

====SC Democrat primary====
Jaime Harrison was the only Democrat who ran in his party's primary election, thus winning uncontested.

====SC Issues====
Although being the chair of the [[Senate Judiciary Committee]], Sen. Graham refused to subpoena [[Barack Obama]] amidst an investigation into the origins of the [[Trump-Russia collusion hoax]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/media/lindsey-graham-obama-senate-russia-investigation-hearings Lindsey Graham on why he's not in favor of calling Obama to testify]
*[https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/14/lindsey-graham-rejects-trump-demand-that-obama-testify-on-russia-probe.html GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham rejects Trump demand that Obama testify on Russia probe]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/14/lindsey-graham-rejects-trumps-call-for-obama-to-testify-not-a-good-idea/ Lindsey Graham Rejects Trump’s Call for Obama to Testify: ‘I Don’t Think That’s a Good Idea’]</ref>

In late May 2020, Graham was part of nine globalist [[RINO]] senators who sent a letter to Trump urging him not to restrict migrant visas amidst the [[CCP pandemic]] that left many Americans unemployed.<ref name="Globalist Senate RINOs"/>

Graham asserted in early July 2020 that he would be willing to increase the minimum wage.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/07/02/graham-im-willing-to-do-a-minimum-wage-increase/ Graham: I’m ‘Willing to Do a Minimum Wage Increase’]</ref>

In mid-July, Sen. Graham defended [[Anthony Fauci]] amidst the latter's spars with President Trump.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lindsey-graham-efforts-to-undercut-anthony-fauci-are-not-going-to-be-productive/ Graham warns efforts to undercut Fauci are "not going to be productive"]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/507264-graham-we-dont-have-a-fauci-problem Graham: 'We don't have a Dr. Fauci problem']
*[https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2020/07/14/in-break-with-trump-sen-lindsey-graham-praises-dr-anthony-fauci/#2d9d26702142 In Break With Trump, Sen. Lindsey Graham Praises Dr. Anthony Fauci]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/07/14/lindsey-graham-defends-fauci-trying-to-undermine-him-isnt-productive/ Lindsey Graham Defends Fauci — Trying to ‘Undermine Him’ Isn’t Productive]</ref>

Graham has been blamed by [[conservative]] pundit [[Tucker Carlson]] for pushing [[President Trump]] to meet with [[Bob Woodward]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2020/09/10/blames-lindsey-graham-for-the-bob-woodward-book/ Tucker Carlson blames Lindsey Graham for the Bob Woodward book]
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/sep/10/tucker-carlson-rips-lindsey-graham-supposed-republ/ Tucker Carlson rips Lindsey Graham, 'supposed' Republican, for recommending Trump talk to Woodward]
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/09/lindsey-graham-brokered-donald-trump-bob-woodward-meeting-tucker-carlson-source/ Lindsey Graham Reportedly ‘Brokered’ Trump-Woodward Meeting, Tucker Carlson Says]</ref>

==Tossup elections==
===Arizona (special election)===
:''See main article: [[United States Senate special election in Arizona, 2020]]
[[File:Martha McSally.jpg|thumb|right|350px|U.S. Air Force combat veteran [[Martha McSally]].]]
[[Martha McSally]], the current Republican junior senator from [[Arizona]] who was gubernatorially appointed, will be running for election to a full term in 2020.<ref>[https://ktar.com/story/2503502/martha-mcsally-confirms-2020-senate-run-likely-to-face-democrat-mark-kelly/ Martha McSally confirms 2020 Senate run, likely to face Democrat Mark Kelly]</ref> A [[conservative]]-turned-establishmentarian moderate<ref>[https://representmeaz.com/mcsally-on-trump/ McSally on Trump]</ref>-turned pro-Trump conservative,<ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/10/20/trump-campaigns-mcsally-sinema-doesnt-seek-spotlight/1704817002/ As Donald Trump campaigned with Martha McSally, Kyrsten Sinema didn't compete for spotlight]</ref> McSally is expected to face an uphill battle in normally Republican Arizona that voted for [[Kyrsten Sinema]] over her in 2018 by a margin of less than 3%.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/arizona/senate/ Arizona Senate Election Results 2018]</ref>

According to a high-sampled (n=2523) [[NBC News]]/Marist poll administered between March 10, 2020 and March 15, 2020, McSally trailed potential [[Democrat]] opponent [[Mark Kelly]] by only three percentage points, compared to many low-sampled fake "poll" conclusions.<ref>[http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/NBC-News_Marist-Poll_AZ-NOS-and-Tables_2003160825.pdf NBC-News-Marist-Poll_AZ]</ref>

====AZ Republican primary====
Sen. McSally faced a moderately strong primary challenge from Daniel McCarthy, a Glendale businessman.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2019/08/28/businessman-daniel-mccarthy-mounts-republican-primary-challenge-against-martha-mcsally/2142684001/ Sen. Martha McSally gets primary challenge from businessman Daniel McCarthy]
*[https://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/martha-mcsally-picks-up-primary-challenge-from-daniel-mccarthy Martha McSally picks up primary challenge from Daniel McCarthy]</ref> Running to the right of McSally, he has claimed that the incumbent senator is part of the [[establishment]]. McCarthy has also proposed the possibility of an annexation of [[Mexico]].<ref>[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/09/18/mcsallys_gop_senate_challenger_wants_toannex_mexico__141291.html#! McSally's GOP Senate Challenger Wants to...Annex Mexico]</ref> He has been criticized by some conservatives<ref>[https://seeingredaz.wordpress.com/2020/07/12/why-is-az-senate-challenger-daniel-mccarthy-allowed-to-use-slogan-on-ballot/ Why is AZ Senate challenger Daniel McCarthy allowed to use slogan on ballot?]</ref> for using his campaign slogan on the primary election ballot,<ref name="Arizona Primary Results 2020">[https://results.arizona.vote/#/featured/17/0 Arizona Primary Election Results 2020]</ref> as well as for refusing to answer whether his business has failed to bring jobs from [[China]] to America.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nU42LetSR2E Republican candidate's business claimed it's moving jobs out of China. It didn't.]</ref>

McSally easily won the primary held on August 4, 2020 with three-quarters of the votes cast.<ref>[https://apps.npr.org/elections20-primaries/states/AZ.html Arizona Primary Results 2020]</ref> This was after McCarthy had claimed that "the Lord will provide the resources needed" for him to win.<ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2019/12/16/daniel-mccarthy-worst-u-s-senate-candidate-ever/2665271001/ Is Daniel McCarthy hoping for a Senate seat or a spot on Saturday Night Live?]</ref>

====AZ Democrat primary====
Kelly won his party's primary uncontested.<ref name="Arizona Primary Results 2020"/>

[[File:Mark Kelly.PNG|thumb|left|200px|Democrat candidate [[Mark Kelly]] has been noted for his hypocrisy.]]
====AZ Issues====
Martha McSally, who has shifted towards supporting Donald Trump since after the [[2016 presidential election]], has been seen by some as becoming more thoroughly conservative, especially after calling a [[CNN]] reporter a "liberal hack".<ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/01/16/sen-martha-mcsally-calls-cnn-reporter-liberal-hack-manu-raju/4489076002/ Arizona Sen. Martha McSally calls CNN reporter 'liberal hack' in hallway dust-up]</ref> Her first campaign ad was one criticizing her potential left-wing opponent [[Mark Kelly]]<ref>[https://www.facebook.com/MarthaMcSally/videos/865342913894990/?ref=tahoe Martha McSally - Senator McSally]</ref> for supporting the impeachment coup against Trump.<ref>[https://abcnews.go.com/theview/video/mark-kelly-trump-impeachment-inquiry-ukraine-call-investigated-65856530 Mark Kelly says Trump impeachment inquiry and Ukraine call ‘should be investigated’]</ref>

[[President Trump]]'s visit at a rally in [[Phoenix, Arizona]] on February 19, 2020 included McSally's appearance to help boost Republican re-election efforts, with McSally receiving an endorsement from the president and drawing applause from the crowd as a populist, conservative patriot.<ref name="February 2020 Trump rally in Arizona">[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9e8mjUJcSb8 LIVE: President Trump in Phoenix, AZ]</ref>

Kelly has been criticized for being tied to an ambulance company that engaged in corrupt price gouging and surprise billing on patients.<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/06/23/mark-kelly-is-a-bw-n2571173 Arizona Dem Mark Kelly Tied to Company Accused of 'Surprise Billing' and 'Price Gouging' Corruption]</ref>

A [[liberal hypocrisy|liberal hypocrite]], Kelly criticized the Paycheck Protection Program during the [[coronavirus]] outbreak yet took $2 million from the program for his company.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/arizona-dems-business-took-ppp-loan-after-he-criticized-program/?utm_source=actengage&utm_campaign=FreedomMail&utm_medium=email</ref>

Kelly has been accused by Rep. [[Paul Gosar]] of condoning violence<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/gop-rep-paul-gosar-accuses-arizona-democrat-mark-kelly-of-condoning-death-threats GOP Rep. Paul Gosar accuses Arizona Democrat Mark Kelly of condoning death threats]</ref> after a supporter of the former threatened death against Gosar.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/06/mark-kelly-supporter-allegedly-threatens-rep-paul-gosar-head/ Mark Kelly Supporter Allegedly Threatens to Shoot Rep. Paul Gosar in the Head]</ref>

====AZ Debate====
The debate for the Senate race, which will be the only official one, is to be held on October 6, 2020 in [[Phoenix, Arizona|Phoenix]] and hosted by the [[liberal]] [[Arizona Republic]] in addition to state public radios and television stations.<ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/09/10/martha-mcsally-mark-kelly-meet-oct-6-only-us-senate-debate/3459914001/ Martha McSally, Mark Kelly to meet Oct. 6 in only US Senate debate in Arizona]</ref><ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/08/05/sen-martha-mcsally-debate-mark-kelly-oct-6-phoenix/3297101001/ McSally-Kelly debate planned for Phoenix]</ref>

[[File:Cory Gardner official Senate portrait.jpeg|210px|thumb|right|Senator [[Cory Gardner]].]]

===Colorado===
:''See main article: [[United States Senate election in Colorado, 2020]]
[[Cory Gardner]], the incumbent mostly conservative Republican senator from [[Colorado]] with some [[RINO]] leanings, is running for re-election in what is considered by many to be among the most random, vulnerable tossups.<ref>[https://www.rollcall.com/2019/03/05/the-most-vulnerable-republican-senator-in-2020/ The most vulnerable Republican senator in 2020]</ref> Gardner's approval ratings have remained relatively steady, with a poll in January 2020 finding roughly equal approval/disapproval numbers.<ref>[https://www.denverpost.com/2020/01/16/cory-gardner-approval-rating-2020-senate/ Cory Gardner’s approval rating didn’t move during impeachment, still tops Trump’s]</ref>

On August 19, 2019, Ambassador [[Nikki Haley]] made a visit to Colorado to praise Gardner for his common-sense regulatory policies and his effective bipartisanship efforts in the [[U.S. Senate]] to unite both parties on certain non-partisan issues.<ref>[https://villagerpublishing.com/nikki-haley-comes-to-colorado-for-cory-gardner/ Nikki Haley comes to Colorado for Cory Gardner]</ref> Gardner is also supported by Vice President [[Mike Pence]], who said that the senator has done much to help advance the Trump agenda.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/vice-president-mike-pence-explains-why-he-supports-cory-gardners-reelection-bid/vi-BB10fBPC Vice President Mike Pence Explains Why He Supports Cory Gardner's Reelection Bid]</ref>

At a Trump rally in [[Colorado Springs]], Colorado on February 20, 2020, Gardner made an appearance where he spoke briefly to strongly emphasize on Donald Trump's [[Donald Trump achievements|many great achievements]] and rebuked left-wing Democrats for being too radical.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEJ99-7Rm_k LIVE: President Trump in Colorado Springs, CO]</ref>

[[File:Hickenlooper.jpg|thumb|left|250px|John Hickenlooper won the Democrat nomination to challenge Sen. Gardner despite being charged with ethics violations.]]
====CO Republican primary====
Sen. Gardner won his party's primary uncontested.<ref name="Colorado U.S. Senate Primary Election Results">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/30/us/elections/results-colorado-senate-primary-election.html Colorado U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

[[File:Andrew Romanoff.jpg|thumb|right|150px|A far-left progressive, Romanoff lost the primary to the establishment-backed Hickenlooper.]]
====CO Democrat primary====
Although over a dozen Democrat candidates initially ran for the Senate seat, only [[John Hickenlooper]] and [[Andrew Romanoff]] were left by the time of the primary election. The establishment-backed Hickenlooper, the former governor of [[Colorado]] who briefly ran for president, has faced criticism from both the left and the right after flip-flopping over whether he would run for the seat,<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2019/08/22/nrsc-mocks-hickenlooper-for-reversing-course-running-for-senate-n2552056 NRSC Mocks Hickenlooper for Now Running for Job He Said He Couldn't Do]</ref> admitting to having once took his mother to see a pornographic movie,<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dem-hickenloopers-tale-of-taking-his-mom-to-see-deep-throat-has-town-hall-audience-roaring Dem Hickenlooper's tale of taking his mom to see 'Deep Throat' has town hall audience roaring]
*[https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/20/politics/john-hickenlooper-x-rated-movie/index.html John Hickenlooper explains why he went to see an X-rated movie with his mother]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2019/03/21/john-hickenlooper-took-mom-see-adult-movie-deep-throat/3231629002/ Presidential candidate John Hickenlooper said he watched 'Deep Throat' with his mom]</ref> and being fined by an independent commission for two ethics violations while governor.<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/06/05/hickenlooper-found-guilty-n2570160 Independent Commission Finds Hickenlooper Guilty on Two Ethics Violations]</ref> On the other hand, Romanoff was an openly [[far-left]] candidate who called for enacting a [[Green New Deal]] and [[defund the police|defunding the police]].<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXTm75xi9R4 John Hickenlooper, Andrew Romanoff face off in 9NEWS Democratic Senate Debate]</ref>

Despite obvious setbacks, Hickenlooper managed to win the primary election over Romanoff by over fifteen points, carrying all but one county.<ref name="Colorado U.S. Senate Primary Election Results"/>

====CO Issues====
In early August 2020, [[President Trump]] signed into law the [[Great American Outdoors Act]], a landmark [[conservation]] bill sponsored by Sen. Gardner that would ensure federal allocations for the Land and Water Conservation Fund.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://denver.cbslocal.com/2020/08/04/democrat-republic-success-sen-cory-gardner-celebrates-great-american-outdoors-act-becoming-law/ ‘Democrat & Republic Success’: Sen. Cory Gardner Celebrates Great American Outdoors Act Becoming Law]
*[https://www.coloradopolitics.com/news/trump-signs-cory-gardners-great-american-outdoors-act/article_b82fd4da-d5e7-11ea-b3a8-6fcf59c89ee8.html Trump signs Cory Gardner's Great American Outdoors Act]
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/aug/4/steve-daines-cory-gardner-cheer-trump-great-americ/ GOP senators hail Trump's signature on historic $10 billion Outdoors Act]</ref>

===Maine===
:''See main article: [[United States Senate election in Maine, 2020]]
[[File:SenatorCollins.jpg|265px|thumb|left|Four-term [[RINO]] Susan Collins is running for re-election.]]
[[Susan Collins]], the four-term [[RINO]] senior senator from liberal Maine, is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/susan-collins-announces-reelection-bid-for-fifth-term-in-us-senate Susan Collins announces bid for fifth term in Senate]</ref> She has been unpopular in her home state after voting with Republicans to confirm [[Brett Kavanaugh]] amidst the [[Kavanaugh smear|smear against the latter]], having her approval rating tank<ref>[https://hillreporter.com/susan-collins-maine-approval-rating-has-dipped-17-in-last-year-37707 Susan Collins’ Maine Approval Rating has Dipped 17% in Last Year]</ref> and eliciting condemnation from the far-left hate group [[Occupy Democrats]].<ref>[https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fpics.me.me%2Flets-never-forget-that-susan-collins-called-for-al-frankens-36809218.png&f=1&nofb=1 (PNG Image, 500 x 142 pixels)]</ref> Further disdain from liberals like [[Stephen King]]<ref>[https://twitter.com/StephenKing/status/1143269919871700998?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Stephen King on Twitter: "It's time..."]</ref> and those in Maine may cause lead the general election anywhere from leaning Republican to a tossup,<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.ibtimes.com/will-susan-collins-lose-2020-election-trump-impeachment-may-mean-democrats-finally-2905302 Will Susan Collins Lose In 2020 Election? Trump Impeachment May Mean Democrats Finally Flip Senate Seat]
*[https://bipartisanreport.com/2019/06/01/susan-collins-2020-re-election-chances-take-devastating-blow/ Susan Collins 2020 Re-Election Chances Take Devastating Blow]</ref> a prediction that several polls have affirmed.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/> According to the [[Washington Times]], Democrat representative [[Jared Golden]] could provide cover for Collins if he voted against both articles of impeachment against [[Donald Trump]].<ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/dec/16/jared-golden-impeachment-vote-could-cover-susan-co/ Jared Golden's vote against impeachment could give Susan Collins cover in 2020 election]</ref> One day later, however, Golden had a split vote on the articles of impeachment, voting in favor of the first one but against the second one.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/17/democrat-jared-golden-to-vote-for-one-article-of-impeachment-against-the-other/ Democrat Jared Golden to Vote for One Article of Impeachment, Against the Other]</ref>

It was reported on February 18, 2020 that, according to a poll, Collins was almost tied with potential Democrat opponent [[Sara Gideon]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://bangordailynews.com/2020/02/18/politics/new-maine-poll-shows-susan-collins-and-sara-gideon-nearly-tied-in-2020-race/ New Maine poll shows Susan Collins and Sara Gideon nearly tied in 2020 race] from Bangor Daily News
*[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/new-maine-poll-shows-susan-collins-and-sara-gideon-nearly-tied-in-2020-race/ar-BB108eUu New Maine poll shows Susan Collins and Sara Gideon nearly tied in 2020 race] from MSN
*[https://www.pressherald.com/2020/02/18/colby-college-polls-shows-collins-gideon-tied-in-hypothetical-match-up/ Colby College poll shows Collins, Gideon tied in hypothetical match-up]</ref>

Having voted to confirm [[Brett Kavanaugh]] and many other [[pro-life]] judicial nominees, Collins was reportedly ditched by [[Planned Parenthood]], an organization that in the past has endorsed her numerous times.<ref>[https://americanindependent.com/planned-parenthood-endorsement-sara-gideon-maine-senate-susan-collins-2020-election/ Planned Parenthood finally ditches Sen. Susan Collins]</ref>

====ME Republican primary====
Collins was reportedly, as of February 1, 2020, running unopposed in the Republican primaries.<ref>[https://twitter.com/colgrove11/status/1223580761724530688 George Colgrove III on Twitter]</ref> Her re-election bid was endorsed by moderate liberal Democrat [[Joe Manchin]].<ref>[https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/11/joe-manchin-endorses-susan-collins-1271151 Joe Manchin endorses Susan Collins for reelection]</ref> In addition, Collins is backed by [[Lindsey Graham]]<ref>[https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1208133195205660675 Lindsey Graham on Twitter: "My friend...]</ref> and [[Donald Trump]]<ref>[https://mobile.twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1209259291217141760 Donald J. Trump on Twitter: "I...]</ref> for her refusal to cave into the [[liberal hysteria]] surrounding the [[Kavanaugh smear]].

Running unopposed aside from a single write-in candidate, Collins easily on her party's primary.<ref name="Maine Primary Results 2020">[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/maine/ Maine Primary Results 2020]</ref>

====ME Democrat primary====
[[File:Sara Gideon.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Far-left Democrat [[Sara Gideon]] is running to challenge Sen. Collins.]]
Democrat [[Sara Gideon]], the current Speaker of the Maine House of Representatives, announced her Senate campaign on June 24, 2019.<ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/24/politics/susan-collins-challenger-sara-gideon/index.html Democrat Sara Gideon announces run against Susan Collins]</ref> Gideon, with a voting record even more liberal than Susan Collin's, has pushed for [[abortion]] "rights" and [[Medicaid]] expansion within Maine.<ref>[https://www.thecut.com/2019/06/sara-gideon-senate-campaign-susan-collins-maine.html Susan Collins Has a New Democratic Challenger]</ref> In addition, she is a [[hypocrite]] (see [[liberal hypocrisy]]) who has denounced corporate money in politics while accepting donations that include corporate donors.<ref>[https://www.pressherald.com/2020/02/27/gideon-targeted-for-stance-on-corporate-pac-donations/ Gideon decries corporate money in politics while taking PAC donations that include it]</ref>

Democrat primary candidate Bre Kidman, a Bernie backer who claims to be "non-binary", unveiled a [[guillotine]] as the logo for her US Senate campaign.<ref>[https://www.theblaze.com/news/guillotine_symbol_democrats Dem U.S. Senate candidate unveils campaign logo: The guillotine as 'a symbol of the work we have to do'] at The Blaze</ref> When grilled about the use of a guillotine as campaign symbolism, Kidman claimed that the guillotine was not meant to be taken literally, despite its notorious use as a method of execution by [[the Left]] against its opponents during the [[French Revolution]]; Kidman was subsequently criticized on her Twitter account for what her critics called a poor taste campaign stunt at best and a not-so-veiled threat of [[violence]] against opponents and critics at worst.<ref>[https://twitter.com/BeeKay4ME/status/1225177542853828608 Bre Kidman: "I was gonna wait until tomorrow to show off these beauties, but Trump got acquitted and I feel like folks could use something to look forward to"] at Twitter</ref>

The Democrat primary was won by Gideon with 70% of the vote.<ref name="Maine Primary Results 2020"/>

====ME Issues====
Amidst the [[CCP pandemic]], Sen. Collins worked on securing federal funding to statewide small businesses hit hard by the economic devastation caused by the [[coronavirus]] via the Paycheck Protection Program.<ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jul/7/susan-collins-sara-gideon-maine-senate-race-takes-/ Susan Collins' 'toss-up' Senate race takes nasty turn under national spotlight]</ref> For this, she was subject to massive attacks by the liberal media, who falsely claimed that such was a corporate bailout, a notion that was refuted even by the [[Washington Compost]].<ref>[https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2020/06/15/susan-collins-sara-gideon-ad Fact check: Democratic ad misleadingly attacks Susan Collins on the Paycheck Protection Program]</ref> On the other hand, Gideon adjourned the [[Maine]] legislature despite other states keeping theirs' open, and some liberals have even acted as apologists for her actions in ignoring constituents amidst a pandemic as the state House speaker.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/07/great-ad-for-sara-gideon-susan-collinss-new-on-dem-opponent-massively-backfires/ ‘Great ad for Sara Gideon’: Susan Collins’s new attack on Dem opponent massively backfires]</ref> Furthermore, despite attacking the PPP, Gideon's husband's law firm took up to $2 million from the program.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/aug/14/susan-collins/key-us-senate-race-susan-collins-attack-rival-over/ In key US Senate race, Susan Collins’ attack on rival over COVID program partly correct]</ref><ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/maine-dems-husband-benefited-from-small-business-relief-she-criticized/ Maine Dem’s Husband Benefited From Small Business Relief She Criticized]</ref>

====ME Debate(s)====
At the first Senate debate hosted by Bangor Daily News, News Center Maine, and the Portland Press Herald and held on September 11, 2020, the 19th anniversary of the [[9/11|tragic event]], Sen. Collins, state House speaker Gideon, and [[independent voters|independent]] candidates Max Linn and Lisa Savage debated over several key issues for around one hour;<ref>[https://bangordailynews.com/2020/09/11/politics/susan-collins-and-sara-gideon-clash-over-health-care-and-trump-in-first-us-senate-debate/ Susan Collins and Sara Gideon clash over health care and Trump in first US Senate debate]</ref> Collins managed to stump Gideon near the end by asking the latter whether she would have voted to confirm [[John Roberts]] to the Supreme Court after facing criticism over her vote to confirm [[Brett Kavanaugh]].<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/09/14/watch-sen-collins-schools-gideon-with-one-question-n2576153 Watch: Sen. Collins Schools Democrat Challenger With One Key Question]</ref>

===North Carolina===
[[File:Thom Tillis Official Photo.jpg|thumb|right|240px|Establishment RINO [[Thom Tillis]] is running for re-election.]]
[[Thom Tillis]], a Feinstein gun control bill-backing<ref>[https://www.secondamendmentdaily.com/2017/11/heres-list-mcconnell-9-republicans-support-feinstein-gun-control/ Here’s The List: McConnell, 9 Republicans Support Feinstein Gun Control]</ref> [[RINO]] who opposed Donald Trump's firing of an impeachment "witness" out of fear of "looking bad",<ref>[https://www.deseret.com/indepth/2020/2/10/21128051/trump-fires-witnesses-sondland-vindman-graham-collins Trump firing of impeachment witnesses causes concern among some Republicans]</ref> is running for re-election in swing state North Carolina that may be a pure tossup in the general election. Tillis' approval rating was reported in July 2019 to be a mere 33% statewide,<ref>[https://sandysmithnc.com/2019/07/19/poll-thom-tillis-approval-rating-lowest-in-the-u-s-senate/ POLL: THOM TILLIS APPROVAL RATING LOWEST IN THE U.S. SENATE]</ref> and polling in January 2020 found that he was trailing a potential Democrat opponent by 2%.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000016f-cac3-d4c8-ad7f-ebf73a070000 PDF File]</ref>

[[File:James 'Cal' Cunningham (cropped).jpg|thumb|left|230px|Former state Sen. [[Cal Cunningham]] is running to unseat Tillis.]]
====NC Republican primary====
Tillis, with his [[RINO]] record, was initially facing a primary challenged by conservative, pro-Trump [[Sandy Smith]].<ref>[https://politicselections.com/pro-trump-republican-sandy-smith-announces-senatorial-run/ Pro-Trump Republican Sandy Smith Announces Senatorial Run]</ref> However, Smith later changed course and decided to run for North Carolina's 1st congressional district instead.<ref>[https://sandysmithnc.com/ Join Sandy - Sandy Smith for Congress]</ref>

Tillis, realizing months ago that he needed [[Donald Trump]]'s support in order to garner the [[conservative]] support to win, made an appearance at the Trump rally in [[Charlotte, North Carolina]] on March 2, 2020 to support the president.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89ewdfbqGxo LIVE: President Trump in Charlotte, NC]</ref>

Sen. Tillis won the Republican primary that was held on March 3, 2020 to proceed in being the Republican nominee running for re-election.<ref>Two references:
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/485810-tillis-wins-nc-senate-primary Tillis wins North Carolina Senate primary]
*[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/03/03/us/elections/results-north-carolina-senate-primary-election.html North Carolina U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

====NC Democrat primary====
Establishment [[Democrat]] [[Cal Cunningham]] announced in June 2019 his campaign to run for the Senate seat.<ref>[https://apnews.com/7c2c41b703714676a3039203430b997b Cunningham: Voters led him to switch to US Senate campaign]</ref>

Cunningham won the Democrat primary that was held on March 3, 2020 to be the [[Democrat]] nominee for the general election in the Senate race.<ref>[https://www.businessinsider.com/north-carolina-senate-democratic-primary-live-results-vote-counts-2020-3 Cal Cunningham claims a victory in the North Carolina Senate Democratic primary]</ref> His party's racist [[establishment]] strongly backed him over a more qualified black Democrat lawmaker and engineer who also ran for a seat.<ref name="Democrats Spent Tens of Millions to Destroy the Hopes and Dreams of These Qualified Black Candidates"/> After winning, Cunningham later explained his commitment to diversity.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/cal-cunningham-diversity/ Schumer-Backed N.C. Senate Candidate Who Crushed Black Female Challenger Awkwardly Explains Commitment to Diversity]</ref>

====NC Issues====
Tillis was criticized by [[Republican]] representative [[Matt Gaetz]] on March 20, 2020 for having a “low-energy [[establishment]] Senate response” after the former's [[Deep state]]r colleague [[Richard Burr]] “conveniently” sold a large sum of money in stock via non-public information ''right before the stock market crashed due to the coronavirus''.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gaetz-slams-thom-tillis-for-e2-80-98low-energy-e2-80-99-response-to-insider-trading-allegation-against-fellow-nc-senator/ar-BB11tFPs Gaetz Slams Thom Tillis for ‘Low-Energy’ Response to Insider Trading Allegation against Fellow N.C. Senator]</ref>

After [[Cal Cunningham]] sent out a tweet claiming that Sen. [[Thom Tillis]] “agreed” to [[Mitch McConnell]]'s wanting “states to go bankrupt”,<ref>https://twitter.com/CalforNC/status/1253779395099144193</ref> the mostly [[liberal]]-biased [[PolitiFact]] rated the statement as “Mostly False” for it being very misleading,<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/may/12/cal-cunningham/nc-democrat-misrepresents-tillis-position-aid-stat/ Cal Cunningham stated on April 24, 2020 in a tweet: "Mitch McConnell said he wanted states to go bankrupt instead of the federal government providing relief. Today, Thom Tillis agreed."]</ref> noting that Tillis never concurred with ''wanting'' states to go bankrupt, rather only arguing for a case-by-case basis and allowing for the option to do so.

Similar to several other Senate [[Democrat]] candidates, Cunningham is a [[liberal hypocrisy|liberal hypocrite]] who said regarding the PPP that "we’ve seen that money end up in some of the wrong hands," ''despite taking up to $2 million in a PPP loan for his company''.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/07/08/senate-democrat-candidates-criticize-ppp-loans-yet-benefit-loans/ Democrat Senate Candidates Benefited from PPP Loans While Criticizing Program]</ref>

The [[Democrat]] establishment released an ad in late July 2020 running a misleading attack against Tillis over hand-washing regulations; even [[liberal]] [[PolitiFact]] rated it "False".<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jul/25/majority-forward/tillis-never-said-restaurant-workers-shouldnt-have/ Tillis never said restaurant workers shouldn't have to wash their hands ]</ref>

====NC Debate(s)====
A general election debate for the Senate race between Tillis and Cunningham was held on September 14, 2020, moderated by a news anchor from WRAL ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2cgcfqBHTY full video here]). In it, Tillis criticized Cunningham on inconsistencies over issues such as the Paycheck Protection Program, while the latter struck back at the incumbent [[moderate Republican]] senator over alleged false/misleading statements as well as for being a shill for [[Big Pharma]], notably efforts against lowering drug costs. Tillis followed the cue initiated by [[Trump's inept advisers]] when he accused Cunningham of promoting "anti-vaccine" rhetoric after the latter expressed a degree of skepticism over a potential [[coronavirus vaccine]]. This narrative was also repeated by a spokesperson for a GOP establishment [[super PAC]] tied to [[Mitch McConnell]].<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/516420-dem-senate-candidate-hesitant-to-get-covid-19-vaccine-if-approved-this-year Democratic Senate candidate 'hesitant' to get COVID-19 vaccine if approved this year]</ref> Tillis had also accurately noted that the former state senator voted in favor of tax hikes,<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/aug/13/national-republican-senatorial-committee/attack-ad-right-about-cunninghams-2001-budget-vote/ Attack ad right about Cunningham's 2001 budget vote]
*[https://www.wfmynews2.com/article/news/local/2-wants-to-know/cal-cunningham-raise-taxes-thom-tillis-claim-north-carolina-senate-race/83-93950f80-95d8-461d-b9a8-29ed4796f6cb FACT CHECK: Cunningham did raise taxes ... 19 years ago. Here's why]</ref> though such were partially associated with budget complications following [[9/11]].

==Projected seat flips==
[[File:Doug Jones 2017.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Sen. Doug Jones is expected to lose re-election after voting to remove Trump.]]
===Alabama===
[[Doug Jones]], the left-wing [[Democrat]] senator from [[Alabama]], is running for election to a full term in 2020.<ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jul/21/doug-jones-faces-uphill-battle-for-reelection-in-a/ Doug Jones faces uphill battle for reelection in Alabama]</ref> His net approval rating prior his vote to remove<ref>[https://dailycaller.com/2020/02/05/doug-jones-impeachment-trump/ Doug Jones Will Vote To Remove Trump From Office]</ref> [[Donald Trump]] was 2%, which had fell by 20% since he took office.<ref>[https://www.gop.com/doug-jones-abysmal-approval-in-alabama/ Doug Jones' Abysmal Approval in Alabama]</ref> Voting to remove a president that won his home state of Alabama in 2016 by 28% of the vote,<ref>[https://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president/alabama/ 2016 Alabama Presidential Election Results]</ref> Jones is expected to lose the general election in November.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

As reported by [[Politico]] on May 3, 2020, the Democrat [[establishment]] had not yet then allocated a significant amount of money to bolster Sen. Jones' 2020 re-election campaign.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/03/senate-democrats-alabama-doug-jones-229073 Democrats leave Doug Jones hanging as Senate map takes shape]</ref>

[[File:Jeff Sessions official portrait.jpg|thumb|left|170px|Sessions lost the primary runoff following anger from many Republicans.]]
====AL Republican primary====
Among the Republicans who ran for the Senate seat included former [[Attorney General]] [[Jeff Sessions]],<ref>[https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/jeff-sessions-announces-senate-run-n1078561 Jeff Sessions announces Senate run]</ref> representative [[Bradley Byrne]],<ref>[https://www.al.com/election/2019/02/bradley-byrne-announces-run-for-senate-in-2020-vowing-to-fight-for-alabama.html Bradley Byrne announces run for Senate in 2020, vowing to ‘fight for Alabama’]</ref> former Alabama Supreme Court chief justice [[Roy Moore]],<ref>[https://www.newsweek.com/roy-moore-will-announce-2020-senate-run-source-1444887 Roy Moore is Running For Senate in 2020, But Republicans Say Embattled Judge Is Starting the Race 'Underwater']</ref> and football coach [[Tommy Tuberville]].<ref>[https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/tommy-tuberville-will-run-for-u-s-senate-in-alabama-with-sean-spicer-on-his-campaign-team/ Tommy Tuberville will run for U.S. Senate in Alabama with Sean Spicer on his campaign team]</ref> Byrne and Tuberville have criticized Sessions for his weak leadership as the Attorney General under Donald Trump, with an ad by Byrnes stating: "And Hillary still ain't in jail."<ref>Two sources:
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/feb/17/bradley-byrne-tommy-tuberville-jab-at-jeff-session/ Bradley Byrne, Tommy Tuberville attack Jeff Sessions as man who let Trump down, got fired]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/483258-alabama-senate-contender-hits-sessions-in-new-ad-hillary-still-aint-in-jail Alabama Senate contender hits Sessions in new ad: 'Hillary still ain't in jail']</ref>

[[File:Tommy Tuberville.jpg|thumb|right|150px|The Republican primary runoff was won by Tuberville, who was endorsed by Trump.]]
In the initial primary that was held on March 3, 2020, no candidate won a majority of the votes casted, with Tuberville garnering a plurality of 33.4% of the vote, Sessions at 31.6%, and Rep. Byrne and 25%;<ref>[https://data.montgomeryadvertiser.com/election-results/race/al-us-senate--gop-2020-03-03-primary/20200303AL2073/ Alabama U.S. Senate Primary Race (GOP) - 2020]</ref> the latter only managed to garner a majority of the votes in the counties included in his district. Since no candidate got 50% of the vote, a runoff between Tuberville and Sessions followed; while the latter election was initially set for March 31, it was postponed by Gov. [[Kay Ivey]] to July 14 due to the [[CCP pandemic]].<ref>Two references:
*[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Alabama,_2020_(March_3_Republican_primary) United States Senate election in Alabama, 2020 (March 3 Republican primary)]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/18/alabama-senate-runoff-postponed-coronavirus-135557 Alabama Senate runoff postponed until July]</ref>

Trump, who had loathed Sessions following the latter's inept handling of the [[Russian collusion hoax]], endorsed Tuberville over Sessions amidst the then-upcoming runoff.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/10/trump-endorses-sessions-opponent-in-alabama-senate-primary-125316 Trump endorses Sessions' opponent in Alabama Senate primary]
*[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-endorses-tommy-tuberville-in-alabama-in-a-blow-to-jeff-sessions/
Trump endorses Tommy Tuberville in Alabama, in a blow to Jeff Sessions]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/03/10/trump-endorses-tommy-tuberville-over-sessions-alabama-senate-race/5017743002/ Trump endorses Jeff Sessions' opponent, Tommy Tuberville, in Alabama Senate runoff]
*[https://www.nationalreview.com/news/president-trump-endorses-tommy-tuberville-over-jeff-sessions-in-alabama-senate-runoff/ Trump Endorses Tommy Tuberville over Jeff Sessions in Alabama Senate Runoff]
*[https://www.al.com/politics/2020/03/trump-endorses-tommy-tuberville-over-jeff-sessions-in-alabama-senate-race.html Trump endorses Tommy Tuberville over Jeff Sessions in Alabama Senate race]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/486949-trump-endorses-tuberville-over-sessions-in-alabama-senate-runoff Trump endorses Tuberville over Sessions in Alabama Senate runoff]
*[https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/10/politics/trump-endorses-tommy-tuberville-over-jeff-sessions-alabama-us-senate/index.html Trump endorses Tuberville over Jeff Sessions ahead of Alabama runoff]</ref> Following anger toward the former attorney general in his tenure, Tuberville won the primary runoff by just over 20% of the vote.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/14/us/elections/results-alabama-election-runoff-primary.html Live: Alabama State Primary Runoff Election Results 2020]</ref>

====AL Democrat primary====
Sen. Jones, running opposed, won the Democrat primary that was held on March 3, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Alabama,_2020_(March_3_Democratic_primary) United States Senate election in Alabama, 2020 (March 3 Democratic primary)]</ref>

====AL Issues====
As reported in mid-February 2020, Tuberville had previously blamed Donald Trump in late 2019 over illegal immigration problems and had said that he was "p*ssed off at Trump" over a supposed failure to sufficiently help veterans.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/02/17/tommy-tuberville-in-unearthed-remarks-were-paying-for-illegals-to-come-over-here-thats-donald-trumps-fault/ Tommy Tuberville in Unearthed Remarks: ‘We’re Paying for Illegals to Come Over Here … That’s Donald Trump’s Fault’]
*[https://www.al.com/politics/2020/02/tommy-tuberville-discusses-pissed-off-at-donald-trump-comment.html Tommy Tuberville discusses ‘pissed off at Donald Trump’ comment]</ref>

Despite representing a very [[conservative]] state, Sen. Jones voted in late February 2020 against banning late-term abortions.<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/27666/71280/176464/pain-capable-unborn-child-protection-act#71280 S 3275 - Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act - National Key Vote]</ref>

Although [[anti-Trump]], Jones praised a travel ban policy enacted by the president in mid-March 2020, noting it to be a "good step".<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/12/tammy-duckworth-doug-jones-praise-trumps-e-u-travel-ban-its-a-wise-move/# Tammy Duckworth, Doug Jones Praise Trump’s E.U. Travel Ban: ‘It’s a Wise Move’]</ref>

In April 2020, Jones claimed that a push by Sen. [[Mitch McConnell]] for an additional $250 billion in funding for small businesses was a "political stunt".<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/04/09/dem-sen-jones-slams-mcconnell-for-pushing-for-additional-250-billion-in-small-business-funding-a-political-stunt/ Jones Slams McConnell for Pushing for Additional $250 Billion in Small Business Funding — ‘A Political Stunt’]</ref>

==[[Establishment media]]/Democrat collusion==
:''See also: [[Fake news in the 2020 presidential election]]
[[File:N.jpg|thumb|left|500px|The [[liberal media]] has colluded with Democrats in attempting to unfairly influence the 2020 Senate elections.]]
On July 8, 2019, an article by the "[[progressive]]" site "The American Independent" was published criticizing [[Republican]] senator [[Thom Tillis]] for praising [[Donald Trump]] after the latter's "racist rally in North Carolina".<ref>[https://americanindependent.com/thom-tillis-trump-racist-rally-north-carolina/ GOP senator wastes no time praising Trump after racist rally in North Carolina]</ref> The article claimed that Trump was being a "racist" for rebuking the anti-Semitic [[Ilhan Omar]], despite the obvious [[irony]] that the writer of the article was the one who was obsessed over race.

On January 24, 2020, a biased article by the left-wing "Indy Week" was published to attack Tillis over liberal trolls smearing the senator on his Twitter account.<ref>[https://indyweek.com/news/northcarolina/thom-tillis-ratioed-twitter/ Thom Tillis Can’t Stop Getting Owned on Twitter] '''(Warning: Article contains foul language)'''</ref>

An Arizona Central "opinion" article was written on January 27, 2020 as a [[strawman]] attack against [[Martha McSally]] for correctly calling out [[CNN]] reporter Manu Raju a "liberal hack".<ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2020/01/27/martha-mcsally-liberal-hack-criticized-because-woman-oh-please/4588988002/ Sen. Martha McSally hints 'liberal hack' blow back is because she's a woman? Oh, please...]</ref> Having an extremely skewed headline, the article was filled with [[conspiracy theory]] assumptions and was an example of the [[lamestream media]]'s imposing of a [[Morton's fork]] standard on conservative public officeholders for anything they say. In addition, the article did not mention Raju's long, biased record of being what McSally called a "liberal hack".[https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/862333694899621889] [https://thefederalist.com/2018/03/06/media-fight-for-democrats-in-washington-leak-wars/]

A hysteric [[CNN]] liberal ran an op-ed "opinion" article on January 28, 2020 targeting [[Joni Ernst]], claiming that she "gave away" the Republican's "disgraceful game [against Joe Biden]".<ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/28/opinions/joni-ernst-gop-game-biden-filipovic/index.html Joni Ernst and the GOP's disgraceful game]</ref> As typical with [[liberal media bias]], the author assumed mind-reading powers to "conclude" the supposed "true intentions" of [[Donald Trump]]'s "quid pro quo". The article did not mention Biden's self-admitted [[quid pro joe]] ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_xXx0yUvSw see this video (warning: foul language)]), instead making a [[conspiracy theory]] rant about Trump's "corruption" and having to bring up irrelevant topics to attempt justifying its talking points.

An article by "The American Independent" on February 3, 2020 attacked [[Martha McSally]] for supposedly doing little to lower drug prices, despite the fact that during the time the article was published, the Senate was dealing with the [[Trump impeachment]].<ref>[https://americanindependent.com/martha-mcsally-prescription-drug-prices-legislation-costs-gop-senate-arizona/ GOP senator hits Congress for high drug prices but offers no solutions]</ref> In addition, this was before McSally made and kept a promise to introduce a bill that would potentially lower drug prices.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mcsally-unveils-bill-to-lower-drug-prices-amid-tough-campaign/ar-BB10fRqU McSally unveils bill to lower drug prices amid tough campaign]</ref>

The mainstream media have tried to influence the upcoming Senate elections via heavy coverage of the Senate Republicans, such as focusing on the GOP blockade of Democrat partisan "election security" bills.<ref>Multiple sources:
*[https://www.salon.com/2020/02/13/senate-gop-blocks-election-security-bills-as-intel-report-warns-of-russian-meddling-in-2020/ Senate GOP blocks election security bills as intel report warns of Russian meddling in 2020]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/house/482569-senate-gop-blocks-three-election-security-bills Senate GOP blocks three election security bills]
*[https://www.scmagazine.com/home/security-news/blackburn-blocks-vote-on-trio-of-election-security-bills-in-senate/ Blackburn blocks vote on trio of election security bills in Senate]
*[https://www.ajc.com/news/senate-republicans-just-blocked-bills-boost-election-security/m5mnmrjgqpeCgNoKeALgqN/ Senate Republicans just blocked 3 bills to boost election security]</ref>

As concurrent with [[liberal media bias]], an article by the Navy Times ran a skewed headline saying "Sen. McSally ad blasts Navy vet running against her"<ref>[https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2020/02/12/sen-mcsally-ad-blasts-navy-vet-running-against-her/ Sen. McSally ad blasts Navy vet running against her]</ref> despite McSally also having served in the U.S. military.

An article by The New Indian Express ran a headline skewed in favor of [[Sara Gideon]], saying she is an "Indian-origin politician".<ref>[https://www.newindianexpress.com/world/2020/feb/13/indian-origin-politician-sara-gideon-raises-over-usd-7-million-for-us-senate-race-2102880.html Indian-origin politician Sara Gideon raises over USD 7 million for US Senate race]</ref> Although her father was an immigrant from [[India]],<ref>[https://heavy.com/news/2018/10/sara-gideon/ Sara Gideon: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know]</ref> Gideon's mother is from [[Armenia]] and she was born in [[Rhode Island]], thus making the "Indian-origin" claim somewhat misleading.

[[File:Newsweek logo.jpg|thumb|right|400px|Editors in the [[progressive]] site [[Newsweek]] have worked overtime in collusion with the Democrat establishment to unfairly influence the 2020 elections.]]
After [[Senate Majority Leader]] [[Mitch McConnell]] announced on February 14, 2020 that 395 partisan Democrat bills passed by House will not pass through the Senate, an article by the [[Mitch Derangement Syndrome]]-consumed [[Newsweek]] called the senator the 'Grim Reaper'.<ref>[https://www.newsweek.com/mitch-mcconnell-grim-reaper-395-house-bills-senate-wont-pass-1487401 'Grim Reaper' Mitch McConnell Admits There Are 395 House Bills Sitting in the Senate: 'We're Not Going to Pass Those']</ref>

The left-wing, hysteric [[Salon]] ran a biased article against [[Joni Ernst]] for her fiscally conservative viewpoints regarding [[Medicare]] and [[Medicaid]], saying she's willing to "push our families into poverty with a smile."<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2020/02/15/audio-shows-gop-sen-joni-ernst-telling-donors-she-wants-changes-to-medicare-medicaid/ Audio shows GOP Sen. Joni Ernst telling donors she wants "changes" to Medicare, Medicaid]</ref> In actuality, Ernst merely addressed the focus on controlling non-discretionary spending and emphasized on "honoring the commitments".<ref>[https://soundcloud.com/user-87991124/joni-ernst-on-debt-social-security-medicare/s-0zyge Joni Ernst On Debt, Social Security & Medicare]</ref>

An article by MSN on February 19, 2020 ran a headline claiming that [[Mark Kelly]] was ahead of [[Martha McSally]] by 6.7 points for the upcoming Senate special election in Arizona, citing a poll by the High Grounds Public Affairs Consultants.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mark-kelly-is-up-67-points-over-sen-martha-mcsally-in-new-poll-despite-trumps-support/ar-BB10aECH Mark Kelly is up 6.7 points over Sen. Martha McSally in new poll despite Trump's support]</ref> The poll was an outlier compared to three other polls that were conducted between late 2019 and January 2020,<ref>Multiple sources:
*[https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/arizona-2020-toss-ups-in-presidential-and-senate-races Arizona 2020: Toss-Ups in Presidential and Senate Races]
*[https://www.dropbox.com/s/4mbv7c2auwqck54/Senate_Report.pdf?dl=0 Senate_Report.pdf]
*[https://www.publicpolicypolling.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/ArizonaJanuary2020.pdf ArizonaJanuary2020.pdf]</ref> as it had a margin of error at ±4.9% and a sample size of only n=400,<ref>[https://www.azhighground.com/blog/post/breaking--mcsally-trailing-as-trump-comes-to-town Breaking: McSally Trailing as Trump Comes to Town]</ref> and thus could be unreliable and inaccurate.

On February 20, 2020, an article by the Detroit Free Press was published citing a Quinnipiac poll which "concluded" that [[Gary Peters]] was leading [[John James]] by 6 percentage points.<ref>[https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/02/20/poll-shows-gary-peters-leading-john-james/4820919002/ Gary Peters leading John James in new poll of Michigan Senate race]</ref> Although the sample size was at n=845 and the margin of error was at a moderate ±3.4%, the partisan breakdown of the polling sample stated that only 28% of the respondents were Republicans, compared to 31% that were Democrats and 35% that were Independents.

[[File:800px-NewYorkTimes.svg.png|thumb|left|750px|<big>The [[New York Times]] is known for its consistent and persistent [[liberal bias]].</big>]]
Articles by the AFP, [[The New York Times]], and Vanity Fair on February 20–21, 2020 repeated the [[Trump-Russia conspiracy theory]] talking points made by "lawmakers" who concurred with potential Deep state allies that have claimed that Russia was supposedly "meddling in our elections" in 2020.<ref>Multiple sources:
*[https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2020/02/20/us/politics/20reuters-usa-trump-russia.html U.S. Intelligence Told Lawmakers of Russian Bid to Boost Trump Re-election: Source]
*[https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/02/russia-trying-to-reelect-trump-2020-intelligence-briefing Trump Didn’t Want Democrats to Find Out Russia Is Trying to Get Him Reelected]
*[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-meddling-in-us-election-to-boost-trump-lawmakers-told/ar-BB10dn0x Russia meddling in US election to boost Trump, lawmakers told]</ref>

After the [[RNC]] transferred over half a million dollars to the Arizona State Republican Party, an article by the "progressive" Raw Story was published on February 24, 2020 running a biased headline against conservatives and Republicans, assuming without providing any reliable justification that [[Republicans]] are supposedly desperate with "panic" over the 2020 elections because GOP re-election efforts are somehow "in peril".<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/02/gop-flooding-this-red-state-with-cash-over-panic-may-flip-on-trump-report/ GOP flooding this red state with cash over panic it may flip on Trump: report]</ref> It is also important to note that much of the polling that concludes in favor of Democrats have relatively low sample sizes of only around several hundred people in addition to moderate to high margins of error, making most of them unreliable.

On February 27, 2020, a gun control group spent $43,000 on ads to attack [[Martha McSally]] over her gun policy, saying in the ads that they will "hold Senator Martha McSally accountable" over her refusal to forward the House-passed H.R. 8,<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gun-control-groups-target-mcsally-with-dollar43k-ad-buy/ar-BB10rp8w Gun-Control Groups Target McSally With $43K Ad Buy]</ref> a bill that was reported by [[Steve Scalise]] to contain an unjust double standard regarding punishments.<ref>[https://twitter.com/NRA/status/1100770175480156160 NRA on Twitter:]</ref>

[[File:PolitiFact logo.svg.png|thumb|right|500px|[[PolitiFact]], known for their [[left-wing]] skew in their “ratings”, has worked overtime in the upcoming 2020 elections in unfairly siding against [[Republicans]].]]
On March 2, 2020, a biased "fact check" by [[PolitiFact]] was focused on an ad by [[Thom Tillis]]' Democrat opponent [[Cal Cunningham]], who claimed that the Republican senator has voted to take away coverage for patients with pre-existing conditions.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/mar/02/cal-cunningham/cunningham-says-tills-voted-take-away-coverage-pre/ Cunningham stated on February 5, 2020 in a campaign ad:]</ref> While correctly stating that Tillis' vote to repeal [[ObamaCare]] would, if succeeded, lead to inadequate protection for patients with pre-existing conditions, PolitiFact still concurred with the ad's highly misleading and deceptive portrayal of Tillis, giving a rating of "Mostly True".

The liberal progressive site Raw Story published an article on March 2, 2020 highlighting how Sen. [[Martha McSally]] is supposedly being "annihilated" in voter reviews,<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/03/senator-martha-mcsally-annihilated-by-her-voters-in-reviews-for-her-senate-offices/ Senator Martha McSally annihilated by her voters in reviews for her Senate offices]</ref> despite a major problem with the narrative. According to the link that the page provided ([https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS816US818&sxsrf=ALeKk01nOW6QN_tkG6Bh7f_SWZSINmF6ZQ%3A1583164062215&ei=nipdXprgDPylytMP6IWVgA8&q=Mcsally%2C+407+W.+Congress+St.+Suite+103+Tucson%2C+AZ+85701&oq=Mcsally%2C+407+W.+Congress+St.+Suite+103+Tucson%2C+AZ+85701&gs_l=psy-ab.3...3914.9404..9634...0.2..1.206.826.10j0j1......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i71.Zi-VrBjY44Y&ved=0ahUKEwiap7LckfznAhX8knIEHehCBfAQ4dUDCAs&uact=5#lrd=0x86d67103e84819b5:0x9af65c6346b66d82,1 here]), there have been only 48 reviews as of March 4, 2020, thus making the article's conclusion extremely reliable on a statistical standpoint given the minuscule sample size.

[[File:281px-The Hill (2020-01-15).svg.png|thumb|left|300px|Despite supposedly being less biased than most [[mainstream news]] sources, [[The Hill]] has repeatedly cited unreliable polling that “concludes” in [[Republican]] candidates trailing [[Democrat]] opponents.]]
Two establishment media sources published articles on March 5, 2020 supporting the narrative that McSally is trailing [[Mark Kelly]] in the upcoming 2020 Senate election in [[Arizona]],<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.newsweek.com/republicans-susan-collins-martha-mcsally-are-serious-danger-losing-their-senate-seats-1490730 Republicans Susan Collins And Martha McSally Are In Serious Danger Of Losing Their Senate Seats To Democratic Challengers]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/486186-poll-democrat-kelly-leads-gop-incumbent-mcsally-by-5-points-in-arizona-senate Poll: Kelly leads GOP incumbent McSally by five points in Arizona Senate race]</ref> citing a poll by the Public Policy Polling. However, the poll may potentially be very inaccurate, as it had a high margin of error at ±3.8%.<ref>[https://www.publicpolicypolling.com/polls/democrats-lead-by-at-least-4-in-4-gop-held-senate-seats/ Democrats lead by at least 4 in 4 GOP held Senate seats]</ref>

Several establishment media outlets published articles around March 7, 2020 citing a poll that "concluded" that Sen. Ernst's approval rating has fell by 10%.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/03/republican-joni-ernst-poll-numbers-plunge-after-voting-against-trumps-impeachment/ Republican Joni Ernst poll numbers plunge after voting against Trump’s impeachment]
*[https://www.thehawkeye.com/news/20200307/iowa-poll-joni-ernsts-approval-rating-slips-as-she-mounts-reelection-campaign Iowa Poll: Joni Ernst’s approval rating slips as she mounts reelection campaign]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/486515-joni-ernsts-approval-rating-dips-10-points-poll Joni Ernst's approval rating drops 10 points: poll]</ref> However, from a statistical standpoint, the conclusions may be inaccurate because of the fact that of the 800 people surveyed, only 667 (83% of 800) were ''likely voters'' (not proven voters), in addition to the fact that the margin of error for the ''likely voters'' is at ±3.8%.<ref>[https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2020/03/07/joni-ernst-job-approval-below-50-but-plurality-of-likely-voters-say-they-would-definitely-re-elect-h/4977479002/ Iowa Poll: Joni Ernst's approval rating slips as she mounts reelection campaign]</ref>

Two media outlets, [[Newsweek]] and [[The Hill]], both published articles on March 11, 2020 citing a poll that "concluded" that Sen. McSally was trailing [[Mark Kelly]] by 7 percentage points.<ref>Two references:
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/486968-kelly-leads-mcsally-by-7-points-in-arizona-senate-poll Kelly leads McSally by 7 points in Arizona Senate poll]
*[https://www.newsweek.com/former-astronaut-mark-kelly-increases-lead-over-republican-martha-mcsally-finish-john-mccains-1491716 Former Astronaut Mark Kelly Increases Lead Over Republican Martha McSally to Finish John McCain's Senate Term, New Poll Shows]</ref> As similar with most articles on election prediction "polling", several blatant problems are present. The Newsweek article didn't mention certain statistical details of the poll (see: [[liberal media bias]]) and didn't even provide a link to the actual polling report, while The Hill falsely concluded that the "poll surveyed 600 likely Arizona voters" while the actual description of the poll on OH Predictive Insights clearly stated that the sample size was "600 ''completed'' surveys",<ref>[https://ohpredictive.com/press-releases/ Category: Press Releases]</ref> not necessarily a total of 600 people asked. In addition, it is important to note that a sample size of on n=600 isn't a large enough sample size to be entirely conclusive, in addition to the high margin of error at ±4.0% and the fact that the surveyed sample were only ''likely voters'', not determined registered voters.<ref>[https://www.dropbox.com/s/vccjq6d7uphr1ne/AZPOP%20Senate%20Race%20Poll%20Report_.pdf?dl=0 AZPOP Senate Race Poll Report_.pdf]</ref>

An "opinion" article from AZ Central was written on April 7, 2020 attacking Sen. McSally for supposedly being a shill for [[President Trump]]'s supposed “slow reaction” to the [[coronavirus]] outbreak.<ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2020/04/07/arizona-sen-martha-mcsally-has-quarantined-herself-trumps-pocket/2967280001/ Sen. Martha McSally has quarantined herself in Trump's pocket]</ref> Largely misleading with its [[anti-Trump]] bias, the op-ed focuses on the severity of the [[coronavirus]] as something preventable had only [[President Trump]] took better action, vastly downplaying the massive scale of the [[CCP coverup]] in addition to [[WHO]] corruption.

According to the [[far-left]] Raw Story on April 10, 2020, Sen. McSally's push for an additional 100 ventilators to [[Arizona]] amidst the [[CCP virus in the United States]] was "patronage" because the effort to save lives was somehow only a ploy for political purposes.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/04/gop-senator-ridiculed-for-groveling-to-trump-on-twitter-for-receiving-ventilators-patronage-is-disgusting/ GOP senator ridiculed for groveling to Trump on Twitter for receiving ventilators: ‘Patronage is disgusting’]</ref>

''[[The Hill]]'' published an article on April 15, 2020 citing a poll conducted by the OH Predictive Insights which had concluded in [[Mark Kelly]] leading incumbent senator [[Martha McSally]] by nine points in the upcoming [[Arizona]] Senate race.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/492830-kelly-expands-lead-over-mcsally-in-arizona Kelly expands lead over McSally in Arizona]</ref> The article did not provide a link to the actual poll, and as the official PDF for the polling methodology/results showed, the sample size was at a moderately low n=600 and the margin of error at a high ±4.0%.<ref>[https://www.dropbox.com/s/363wfkrzsxs6e8t/Arizona%20Public%20Opinion%20Pulse%20-%20Senate.pdf?dl=0 Arizona Public Opinion Pulse - Senate.pdf]</ref>

An article by Raw Story was published on May 5, 2020 attacking [[Susan Collins]] and [[Mitch McConnell]] over the latter helping the former's re-election campaign via an alleged dark money group.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/05/mitch-mcconnell-is-pouring-dark-money-into-maine-to-save-susan-collins-from-electoral-doom/ Mitch McConnell is pouring dark money into Maine to save Susan Collins from electoral doom]</ref> This is despite the website having previously blatantly ignoring<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/03/right-wing-news-site-gave-50000-to-super-pac-backing-susan-collins-while-attacking-her-opponents-big-money/ Right-wing news site gave $50,000 to super PAC backing Susan Collins — while attacking her opponent’s ‘big money’]</ref> Collins' opponent [[Sara Gideon]] having a campaign also bolstered by dark money groups.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/politics/maine-dark-money-group-behind-false-ad-tied-to-sara-gideon/ Maine Dark Money Group Behind False Ad Tied to Sara Gideon]</ref>

In a letter to the editor on Kennebec Journal as published on May 14, 2020, a commentator absurdly implied [[Susan Collins]] to be a shill for [[Donald Trump]] while asserting [[Sara Gideon]] to be “non-partisan”.<ref>[https://www.centralmaine.com/2020/05/14/attacks-on-gideon-show-shes-a-threat/ Attacks on Gideon show she’s a threat]</ref> This is despite Sen. Collins being ranked the most bi-partsian senator in the [[116th United States Congress]]<ref>[https://www.collins.senate.gov/newsroom/senator-collins-ranked-most-bipartisan-senator-116th-congress Senator Collins Ranked as Most Bipartisan Senator of 116th Congress]</ref> compared to Gideon's [[far-left]] voting record in the [[Maine]] House of Representatives.<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/137334/sara-gideon Sara Gideon's Voting Records]</ref>

The Arizona Republic ran an "opinion" article on May 18, 2020 attacking Sen. [[Martha McSally]] for having strongly criticized [[China]] over the [[coronavirus pandemic]], insisting that the blame ought to lie on [[Donald Trump]].<ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/ej-montini/2020/05/18/martha-mcsallys-hail-mary-play-blame-china/5205211002/ Sen. Martha McSally’s 'Hail Mary' play – blame China]</ref> The op-ed also made an unnecessarily strong focus on Trump's tweets, in addition to having spelling/grammar errors when initially published.

An article was published by Raw Story on May 21, 2020 claiming that [[Mark Kelly]] is a “[[conservative Democrat]]”.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/05/trump-pulled-mcconnell-aside-to-express-his-alarm-with-arizonas-gop-senator-martha-mcsally-report/ Trump pulled McConnell aside to express his alarm with Arizona’s GOP Senator Martha McSally: report]</ref> This is despite [[On the Issues]] clearly highlighting Kelly as a [[pro-abortion]], gun-grabbing [[liberal]] who considers [[healthcare]] as a “human right”.<ref>[https://ontheissues.org/Senate/Mark_Kelly.htm Mark Kelly on the Issues]</ref>
{{Image Thumbnail right|File:155px-Salon Logo 2019.svg.png|235px|[[Salon]] is known for continuously running fake news articles attacking and smearing Republicans.}}
A [[Salon]] article was published on May 28, 2020 citing a [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/20200528_ME.pdf poll] which had "concluded" that [[Susan Collins]] was trailing [[Sara Gideon]] by nine points in the [[United States Senate election in Maine, 2020|2020 Maine Senate race]].<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2020/05/28/aligned-with-radical-president-susan-collins-trails-likely-democratic-challenger-by-nine-points_partner/ Aligned with "radical president," Susan Collins trails likely Democratic challenger by nine points]</ref> According to a thorough analysis by Sen. Collins' campaign website, the firm had nearly no previous history of campaign polling, the poll was commissioned by [[far-left]]ists, and the leaders of the commissioner had suspiciously close ties to [[Democrat]] primary challenger Betsy Sweet, whom the poll claimed was leading Collins by 1% despite having spent a relatively very low amount of money for her campaign.<ref>[https://www.susancollins.com/fake_poll_alert FAKE POLL ALERT: GIDEON & ALLIES PUSHING MAKE-BELIEVE POLL FROM ILLINOIS BILLBOARD/SELF-STORAGE COMPANY]</ref>

A [[Fox News]] "poll" was published on June 3, 2020 asserting that Sen. McSally was trailing [[Mark Kelly]] in the 2020 Arizona Senate race by 13 points.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-biden-ahead-in-arizona-kelly-trouncing-mcsally-in-senate-race Fox News Poll: Biden ahead in Arizona, Kelly trouncing McSally in Senate race]</ref> According to the polling data, ''20%'' of self-identified [[conservatives]] supposedly would vote for the left-wing [[Joe Biden]] over [[Donald Trump]], and ''25% would supposedly vote for Kelly over McSally''.<ref>[https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2020/06/35199d36-Fox_May-30-June-2-2020_Complete_Arizona_Topline_June-3-Release.pdf Fox News Poll - AZ...]</ref> Despite this notion being highly dubious in practical terms, this was still cited by establishment/liberal media outlets, including Raw Story<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/fox-news-poll-spells-doom-for-gop-in-arizona/ Fox News poll spells doom for GOP in Arizona]</ref> and Tuscon Weekly.<ref>[https://www.tucsonweekly.com/TheRange/archives/2020/06/04/fox-news-poll-kelly-trouncing-mcsally-by-13-points-in-az-senate-race-trump-trails-biden-in-state Fox News Poll: Kelly "Trouncing" McSally by 13 Points in AZ Senate Race, Trump Trails Biden in State]</ref>

After Sen. McSally introduced a bill in late June 2020 to utilize tax credits as a means to incentivize travel amidst economic disasters caused by the [[CCP pandemic]], many fake news media sources exhibited a biased reporting on the legislation.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.newsweek.com/martha-mcsally-4000-tourism-tax-credit-1512804 McSally Proposes $4,000 Tax Credit for Travel More Than 50 Miles From Home]
*[https://www.vox.com/2020/6/24/21300543/martha-mcsally-trip-act-explained Martha McSally’s bailout proposal for the travel industry, explained]
*[https://reason.com/2020/06/24/theres-something-for-everyone-to-hate-in-sen-martha-mcsallys-plan-for-federally-subsidized-vacations/ There's Something for Everyone To Hate in Sen. Martha McSally's Plan for Federally Subsidized Vacations]
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sen-mcsally-give-americans-4000-to-take-a-vacation This senator wants to give you a big tax credit to take a vacation]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/26/fact-check-americans-may-get-4-000-tax-credit-travel-stimulus/3262911001/ Fact check: Americans could get a $4,000 tax credit for domestic travel in stimulus]
*[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/arizonas-martha-mcsally-wants-to-pay-you-4000-to-take-a-coronavirus-vacation-sort-of/ Arizona’s Martha McSally wants to pay you $4,000 to take a coronavirus vacation — sort of]</ref> Some sources claimed that the aim was to give Americans $4,000, which would assume individual wealth belongs to the federal government.

After Sen. McSally's campaign released an ad highlighting [[Democrat]] opponent [[Mark E. Kelly]]'s hypocrisy for criticizing the Paycheck Protection Program despite taking loans from it,<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmsVSGkkWdc Cheap Shots]</ref> [[PolitiFake]] claimed that the assertions were "Mostly False" despite its own gathered information proving McSally's points to be mostly valid.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/aug/06/martha-mcsally/fact-checking-arizona-senate-race-claim-about-mark/ Fact-checking Arizona Senate race claim about Mark Kelly, PPP loan]</ref>

Raw Story, a site reeking of [[Collins Derangement Syndrome]], published an article on September 13, 2020 attacking former senator [[Joe Lieberman]] because he endorsed Sen. Collins amidst the latter's strong re-election efforts.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/09/worthless-joe-lieberman-ridiculed-over-his-endorsement-of-susan-collins-shes-done-for/ ‘Worthless’ Joe Lieberman ridiculed over his endorsement of Susan Collins: ‘She’s done for’]</ref>

In mid-September 2020, [[The New Republic]] published a sexist attack against Sen. [[Joni Ernst]], invoking her past abusive husband in claiming that "her Senate career may not survive an abusive president."<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/media/the-new-republic-blasted-for-tweet-invoking-joni-ernsts-abusive-husband-to-attack-senator The New Republic blasted for tweet using Joni Ernst's abusive husband to slam senator]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/17/new-republic-uses-ernsts-abusive-husband-to-promote-election-story/ The New Republic Invokes Joni Ernst’s ‘Abusive Husband’ to Promote Election Story]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/09/18/gross-attack-on-joni-ernst-n2576420 Sen. Ernst Responds to Sexist Attack from Liberal Magazine]</ref>

==Left-wing smears==
:''See also: [[Liberal Smear Machine]]
===Against Cory Gardner===
A far-left site called "F*** Cory Gardner" has been created to smear the senator amidst the upcoming election in Colorado.<ref>[https://fuckcorygardner.org/ F*** Cory Gardner] '''(Warning: The entirety of the website is a vulgar smear)'''</ref>

A [[Chuck Schumer]]-affiliated [[super PAC]] released an ad in late April 2020 attacking [[Cory Gardner]] as an elitist, making highly misleading points about the senator.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/schumer-aligned-pac-portrays-colorado-sen-cory-gardner-as-hobnobbing-with-the-rich-amid-coronavirus Schumer-aligned PAC portrays Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner as hobnobbing with the rich amid coronavirus]</ref>

===Against Martha McSally===
:''See also: [[McSally Derangement Syndrome]]
Phony "conservatives" colluding with the [[Democrat Party]] have tried smearing Martha McSally, such as one video by an anti-Trump website calling itself "The Lincoln Project".<ref>[https://lincolnproject.us/news/mcsally-release/ MARTHA MCSALLY, TRUMP HACK]</ref> The video, in resemblance of mainstream fake news, claimed that McSally lost in 2018 "badly" (McSally lost by 2.4%) and that [[John McCain]] was a "hero" (McCain betrayed fellow POWs<ref>[http://jimbovard.com/blog/2008/09/27/mccains-great-betrayal-of-fellow-pows/ McCain’s Great Betrayal of Fellow POWs]</ref>). It is also important to note that the website, despite supposedly and seemingly standing up for justice and integrity, includes the bigoted [[George T. Conway III]] among its advisors.<ref>[https://lincolnproject.us/ Dedicated Americans Protecting Democracy]</ref>

A website calling itself "Honest Arizona" made cherry-picked, deceptively misleading claims about McSally, such as saying that she allegedly voted "twice" to cut [[Medicare]].<ref>[https://www.honestarizona.org/ Honest Arizona]</ref> This is likely a parallel to [[Kyrsten Sinema]]'s 2018 campaign's claim that McSally allegedly voted to cut [[Social Security]] and Medicare funding,<ref>[https://kyrstensinema.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Medicare.pdf Medicare.pdf]</ref> something that even the liberal [[PolitiFact]] only deems "half true",<ref name="PolitiFact on McSally's vote on Medicare">[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/aug/14/kyrsten-sinema/fact-checking-kyrsten-sinemas-claim-about-medicare/ PolitiFact | Fact or False]</ref> as McSally's votes on certain bills '''''may indirectly''''' lead to Medicare cuts and Social Security restructuring, although that would only have a lessened effect on the already unsustainable programs. In addition, it is important to note that McSally voted in favor of HR 849,<ref>[https://votesmart.org/bill/24081/61674/137299/protecting-seniors-access-to-medicare-act#61674 HR 849 - Protecting Seniors Access to Medicare Act - National Key Vote]</ref> a bill that would repeal the [[ObamaCare]]-established [[Independent Payment Advisory Board]], also known as the IPAB, which is a bureaucratic fifteen-member board that is able to make recommendations on Medicare cuts without congressional approval.<ref>[https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr849/summary H.R. 849 (115th): Protecting Seniors Access to Medicare Act]</ref> Many critics considered the IPAB to be a "[[death panel]]".<ref>[https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelcannon/2014/04/15/more-reasons-why-ipab-obamacares-death-panel-is-relevant-to-sylvia-burwells-nomination/#45689f1271d8 More Reasons Why IPAB, ObamaCare's 'Death Panel,' Is Relevant To Sylvia Burwell's Nomination]</ref>

A left-wing website whose title directly purports Sen. McSally to be a "hack" has made extremely deceptive claims about the senator, such as claiming that she cut "billions in guaranteed benefits for seniors".<ref>[https://www.mcsallyisthehack.org/ Martha McSally is the Hack]</ref> Very similar to the [[Medicare]] claim made by "Honest Arizona", this is extremely misleading.<ref name="PolitiFact on McSally's vote on Medicare"/> In addition, a document file linked from the page has claimed that [[President Trump]]'s border wall was "unnecessary"<ref>[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mc4oEOUqWb6YJbgBfeBtpqFm2oigk0TLGqCBz5_B0Q8/edit McSally is a Hack - Google Documents]</ref> and that the cause of the [[Recession of 2008]] was owed to unrestrained dangerous banking practices despite the fact that such was ordered by left-wing [[Alinsky]]ites in the federal government.

===Against Mitch McConnell===
:''See also: [[Moscow Mitch Syndrome]]
On February 25, 2020, as McConnell moved to swiftly force the Senate to vote on the [[Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act]] ([[United States Senate elections, 2020#Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act vote/impact|see below]]), radical [[pro-abortion]] leftists quickly came to oppose it, arguing that it's meant to "go after women" and that it's "unnecessary" because anti-infanticide laws are already in place.<ref>[https://www.newsweek.com/mcconnell-faces-backlash-over-bid-force-votes-anti-abortion-laws-1488928 Mitch McConnell Faces Backlash Over Bid To Force Senate Votes On Anti-Abortion Laws: 'The First Thing We Do Is Go After Women?']</ref> While the [[Born-Alive Infants Protection Act]] passed both houses of Congress in 2002,<ref>[https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/the-facts-on-the-born-alive-debate/ The Facts on the Born-Alive Debate]</ref> accurate predictions on infants who are murdered after surviving abortions conclude that every year, there are likely several hundred infants who survive abortions, and that many are likely left to die based on known testimonies by abortion clinic workers.<ref>[https://www.liveaction.org/news/1200-too-many-a-look-at-born-alive-abortion-statistics/ 1,200 too many: A look at born-alive abortion statistics]</ref> Since the already-illegal cold-blooded murder of infants has occurred numerous times even after the 2002 Born-Alive Infants Protection Act was passed, the [[progressive]] narrative on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act being supposedly "unnecessary" is effectively discredited.

===Against Susan Collins===
:''See also: [[Collins Derangement Syndrome]]
An article by the [[far-left]] magazine Esquire on February 25, 2020 ran a headline that read "Susan Collins Is a Ridiculous Politician", with the subject largely attacking the senator for her slight right-ward shift during the Trump era in addition to meaninglessly name-calling former [[conservative]] governor [[Paul LePage]].<ref>[https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a31094154/susan-collins-praise-paul-lepage-maine/ Susan Collins Is a Ridiculous Politician]</ref>

==Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act vote/impact==
[[File:Baby.jpg|thumb|right|400px|An [[unborn child]]. Democrats now don't care if they are killed in or out of the womb.]]
===Background (2019)===
The [[Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act]], originally introduced in 2019 by [[Ben Sasse]], was a measure to provide absolute protection to infants who survive [[abortions]], though it was blocked by [[pro-abortion]] Senate [[Democrats]].<ref>[https://www.lifenews.com/2019/02/25/senate-democrats-block-bill-to-stop-infanticide-and-care-for-babies-born-alive-after-abortions/ Senate Democrats Block Bill to Stop Infanticide and Care for Babies Born Alive After Abortions] from 2019</ref>

===Necessity===
Although the murder of abortion-surviving infants has been prohibited in the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act passed in 2002, the bill had lacked enforcement provisions and specifications on punishments for simply leaving infants to die.<ref>[https://townhall.com/columnists/patrinamosley/2020/02/25/why-we-need-the-bornalive-abortion-survivors-protection-act-n2561807 Why We Need the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act]</ref>

===Vote results===
The vote on the [[Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act]] was held on February 25, 2020. 56 senators voted for the bill; every Republican voted for the bill in addition to Democrats [[Bob Casey Jr.]], [[Doug Jones]], and [[Joe Manchin]].<ref>[https://www.lifenews.com/2020/02/25/senate-democrats-block-bill-to-stop-infanticide-care-for-babies-born-alive-after-abortions/ Senate Democrats Block Bill to Stop Infanticide, Care for Babies Born Alive After Abortions] from 2020</ref> However, despite [[Bernie Sanders]], [[Elizabeth Warren]], and [[Amy Klobuchar]] not voting on the legislation, 40 Democrat senators in addition to [[Angus King]] filibustered the bill with just enough members to prevent cloture, effectively blocking the bill from being brought up for a vote.

===Impact on unborn children===
Since the bill did not make it through the filibuster, no law is currently in place to punish doctors who intentionally neglect and leave to die infants that survive abortions.

===2020 elections impact===
McConnell's decision to force a Senate vote on the bill may potentially swing the 2020 Senate elections in favor of the Republicans once many [[Americans]] realize how radical the [[Democrat Party]] has become in their [[pro-abortion]] extremism. However, given very low factual reporting from the liberal [[lamestream media]] on the matter, this may not necessarily be the case, especially given the low emphasis by the [[MSM]] on the issue of [[abortion]] overall.

==Drug price control legislations==
Prescription drug prices are a major issue for many senators up for re-election, as a corporate monopoly within the [[pharmaceutical]] industry suppresses competition and thus is able to sustain high drug prices that support their profits but hurt ordinary Americans. The Senate is divided between the [[establishment]] majority that engages in cronyism with [[Big Pharma]] and a small minority of populists and libertarians who oppose such [[elitism]].

===Proponents===
[[John Cornyn]], along with Democrat [[Richard Blumenthal]], introduced the Affordable Prescriptions for Patients Act, a legislation that would clarify tricks used by the pharmaceutical industry to make for easier federal prosecuting over violations.<ref name="Senators Who Led Pro-Pharma Patent Reform Get Drugmaker Cash">[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/senators-who-led-pro-pharma-patent-reform-get-drugmaker-cash/ar-BB11wT6E Senators Who Led Pro-Pharma Patent Reform Get Drugmaker Cash]</ref> However, the [[pharmaceutical]] industry heavily lobbied against it, successfully removing the main provisions, and there has still yet to be a vote on the bill.

[[Martha McSally]] (R-AZ) has promised<ref name="February 2020 Trump rally in Arizona"/> and later did so regarding sponsoring [[S.3384]], a bill to reduce drug prices ([https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3384?s=2&r=3 information here]). The legislation, if passed and signed, would allow for the importation of cheaper drugs from [[Canada]], thus being able to reduce drug prices to a more affordable amount. However, a Senate vote has yet to be held.

Senator [[Joni Ernst]], along with her colleague [[Chuck Grassley]], have backed the [https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/2543/text Prescription Drug Pricing Reduction Act], a bill that would prevent price gouging and also shut down a loophole currently used by the pharmaceutical industry.<ref>[https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/iowa-view/2020/03/18/chuck-grassley-joni-ernst-prescription-drug-bill-holds-big-pharma-accountable/2864515001/ Prescription drug bill backed by Grassley and Ernst holds Big Pharma accountable]</ref>

===Establishment opponents===
Sen. [[Mitch McConnell]], the [[Senate Majority Leader]] in the [[116th United States Congress]], was criticized by [[Chuck Grassley]] in December 2019 for halting a bill sponsored by the latter that would lower drug prices.<ref>[https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/475183-grassley-accuses-mcconnell-of-blocking-progress-on-drug-pricing-bill Grassley accuses McConnell of blocking progress on drug pricing bill]</ref> As the Majority Leader, McConnell wields the power to effectively block any legislation he opposes and has done so numerously, frequently blocking [[leftist]]-backed bills, but also oftentimes stalling important legislations that would have great benefits for ordinary Americans.

It was reported in March 2020 that establishment senators [[Thom Tillis]] (R-NC) and [[Chris Coons]] (D-DE) received plentiful donations from the [[pharmaceutical]] lobby after leading an anti-[[free market]] patent "reform" that would unfairly target and hurt businesses that compete against the pharmaceutical industry.<ref name="Senators Who Led Pro-Pharma Patent Reform Get Drugmaker Cash"/>

==Coronavirus impact/Democrat obstructions==
[[File:COVID19 virus.jpg|thumb|right|325px|[[Coronavirus]] cells. While the [[COVID-19]] strain has and currently is killed hundreds, Democrats seek to exploit the ‘tremendous opportunity’ to ‘restructure’ [[America]] in their radical worldview, as [[Jim Clyburn]] admitted.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/economy/2020/03/23/democrat-clyburn-on-coronavirus-bill-this-is-a-tremendous-opportunity-to-restructure-things-to-fit-our-vision/ Democrat Clyburn on Coronavirus Bill: ‘This Is a Tremendous Opportunity to Restructure Things to Fit Our Vision’]</ref>]]
Amid the [[coronavirus]] outbreak in the [[U.S.]] and the hundreds of deaths that followed, a [[bi-partisan]] relief bill was written by Senate [[Republicans]] and [[Democrats]] to provide funding for hospitals as a necessary emergency measure in a crisis. However, a ‘phase three’ Republican measure to provide aid was blocked by Senate Democrats,<ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/23/senate-democrats-again-block-procedural-vote-coron/ Senate Democrats again block procedural vote on coronavirus bill]</ref> many of whom, along with the [[liberal media]], falsely claimed that the legislation was a “bailout”.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-republican-corporate-bailout-is-obscene/ar-BB11BhoK The Republican Corporate Bailout Is Obscene]</ref> The Democrat blockade was strongly condemned by Senate Republicans, including [[Lindsey Graham]], [[John Neely Kennedy|John Kennedy]], [[John Barrasso]], and [[Ted Cruz]].<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osQbpRTkszQ&t= Dems Block Coronavirus Relief Bill, Delaying Key Aid to American Families]</ref>

While the [[Republican]] measure was being blocked, [[Nancy Pelosi]] flew in her private jet from [[California]] to [[Washington D.C.]] to introduce an irrelevant $2.5 trillion far-left ‘wish list’ that sought to require allowing early voting, raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour, and enact [[affirmative action]] programs.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/23/nancy-pelosi-coronavirus-stimulus-package-socialis/ GOP details Pelosi's $2.5 trillion 'socialist wish list' in coronavirus aid package]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2020/03/23/here-are-the-details-of-nancy-pelosis-leftist-wish-list-and-it-has-nothing-to-do-with-wuhan-coronavirus-n2565543 Here is the Far-Left Wish List Nancy Pelosi Just Blew Everything Up For]
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/shame-on-you-republicans-slam-pelosi-economic-aid-package-as-a-liberal-wish-list 'Shame on you': Republicans slam Pelosi economic aid package as a liberal wish list]
*[https://www.nationalreview.com/news/taking-hostages-sasse-slams-pelosi-for-adding-liberal-wish-list-to-emergency-coronavirus-bill/ ‘Taking Hostages’: Sasse Slams Pelosi for Adding ‘Liberal Wish List’ to Coronavirus Bill]
*[https://www.foxnews.com/media/pelosi-defends-coronavirus-relief-bill-wish-list Pelosi defends coronavirus 'wish list' on CNN, says climate measure brings 'shared value']</ref> The sheer partisan effort was strongly condemned by Senate [[Republicans]] such as [[Tom Cotton]] and [[Ted Cruz]].<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BYHO3iZbrQ Tom Cotton Unleashes On The Democrats]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ls26rmOl91Y Ted Cruz Rages Against Dems For Blocking Coronavirus Aid Bill]</ref>

During the debate in the Senate chamber held on March 23, 2020, [[Senate Minority Leader]] [[Chuck Schumer]] objected to the floor being yielded to [[Susan Collins]] in an attempt to block her from speaking ([https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1242129378852720641 video clip here (warning: profanity)]), prompting outrage from the latter and other Republicans, such as Sen. [[Tom Cotton]], who called it ‘bull****’.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/susan-collins-tears-into-schumer-democrats-in-floor-speech-ahead-monday-vote-on-coronavirus-bill Sen. Collins unloads on Dems in coronavirus floor speech: ‘We don't have another minute to delay acting’]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/23/senate-coronavirus-rescue-package-144233 ‘This is bulls---’: Bitterness takes over Senate as lawmakers clash on rescue]</ref>

Senate Democrats on September 10, 2020 blocked a [[GOP]]-led [[coronavirus]] relief proposal.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/10/coronavirus-stimulus-update-senate-relief-bill-fails.html Senate Republicans fail to advance coronavirus stimulus bill as stalemate drags on]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/09/10/coronavirus-senate-set-vote-bill-democrats-vow-block/5762727002/ Senate Democrats block $300 billion coronavirus stimulus package, leaving little hope for relief before November]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/515867-senate-democrats-block-gop-relief-bill Senate Democrats block GOP relief bill]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/10/senate-coronavirus-relief-package-411635 Senate Democrats block Republican Covid relief proposal]
*[https://nypost.com/2020/09/10/dems-block-gop-covid-19-bill-that-included-unemployment-relief/ Senate Democrats block GOP COVID-19 bill that included unemployment relief]</ref>

===Other events/occurrences===
It was reported on March 22, 2020 that [[Rand Paul]] tested positive for the [[coronavirus]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sen-rand-paul-tests-positive-for-coronavirus Sen. Rand Paul tests positive for coronavirus]
*[https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2020-03-22/rand-paul-is-1st-senator-to-report-positive-test-for-virus Rand Paul Is 1st Senator to Report Positive Test for Virus]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/22/sen-rand-paul-tests-positive-for-coronavirus-142326 Sen. Rand Paul tests positive for coronavirus and more GOP senators quarantine]</ref> It was later announced on April 7, 2020 that the senator had tested negative in an indication of having fully recovered, and quickly proceeded to volunteer at a local [[Kentucky]] hospital to help others who have the coronavirus.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/together-we-will-overcome-coronavirus-free-rand-paul-volunteers-at-hospital-after-testing-negative 'Together we will overcome!': Coronavirus-free Rand Paul volunteers at hospital after testing negative]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/07/rand-paul-recovers-coronavirus-171969 'I am negative': Rand Paul recovers from coronavirus]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/491573-rand-paul-volunteering-at-hospital-after-negative-coronavirus-test Rand Paul volunteering at hospital after negative coronavirus test]</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:United States Senate]]
[[Category:United States Politics]]
[[Category:2020s]]

United States Senate elections, 2020

2020-09-27T22:20:02Z

TemporarysockofLT: /* IA Issues */ added a detail

<center>''For the unofficial Conservapedia predictions related to the 2020 Senate elections, [[Conservapedia:Unofficial 2020 Senate predictions|see here]]</center>

The '''2020 United States Senate elections''', coinciding with the [[2020 United States presidential election]] that is held on November 3, 2020, are 33 separate elections for all Class 2 Senate seats in addition to 2 special elections for Class 3 Senate seats.

It is important to note that the rankings for the Senate seats listed in the sections below classify each seat by their vulnerability in terms of political party control and not solely based on whether the incumbent (for all elections where the incumbent is seeking re-election) is projected to win or not.

''<center>There are {{#expr: floor({{days until|2020|11|3}} / 7) }}{{#ifexpr: {{days until|2020|11|3}} / 7 - floor({{days until|2020|11|3}} / 7) > .5 | ½ }} weeks until Election Day 2020. If you live in a state with a Senate election this year, vote in person!</center>''

{{TOC left}}

<div style="float:center">
<center>
{|class="wikitable sortable" style="text-align:center; font-size: 80%;"
!class=unsortable | State
!class=unsortable | Republican primary candidate(s)
!class=unsortable | Democrat primary candidate(s)
!class=unsortable | Independent/ Third Party candidate(s)
!class=unsortable | Republican candidate
!class=unsortable | Democrat candidate
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Alabama|Alabama]]
|[[Jeff Sessions]]
----
[[Tommy Tuberville]]
----
[[Bradley Byrne]]
----
[[Roy Moore]]
----
[[Arnold Mooney]]
|[[Doug Jones]] (incumbent)
|Mike Parrish
----
Jarmal Sanders
|[[Tommy Tuberville]]
|[[Doug Jones]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Alaska|Alaska]]
|[[Dan Sullivan]] (incumbent)
|colspan="2" | [[Al Gross]] ([[Independent voters|Independent]])
----
Chris Cumings ([[Independent voters|Independent]])
----
Edgar Blatchford ([[Democrat]])
----
John Howe (Alaskan Independence)
|[[Dan Sullivan]] (incumbent)
|[[Al Gross]] ([[Independent voters|Independent]])
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Arizona_.28special_election.29|Arizona (special)]]
|[[Martha McSally]] (incumbent)
----
Daniel McCarthy
|[[Mark E. Kelly]]
|Barry Hess
----
Alan White
----
Mohammed Arif
----
Robert Kay
|[[Martha McSally]] (incumbent)
|[[Mark E. Kelly]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Arkansas|Arkansas]]
|[[Tom Cotton]] (incumbent)
|''(none)
|Ricky Dale Harrington, Jr.
----
Dan Whitfield
|[[Tom Cotton]] (incumbent)
|''(none)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Colorado|Colorado]]
|[[Cory Gardner]] (incumbent)
|[[John Hickenlooper]]
----
[[Andrew Romanoff]]
|Raymon Doane
----
Dan Doyle
----
Stephan Evans
|[[Cory Gardner]] (incumbent)
|[[John Hickenlooper]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Delaware|Delaware]]
|Lauren Witzke
----
James DeMartino
|[[Chris Coons]] (incumbent)
----
Jessica Scarane
|Nadine Frost
----
Mark Turley
|TBD
|TBD
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Georgia|Georgia]]
|[[David Perdue]] (incumbent)
|[[Jon Ossoff]]
----
Teresa Tomlinson
----
Sarah Riggs Amico
----
Maya Dillard-Smith
|Shane T. Hazel
----
Tom Jones
----
Clifton Kilby
|[[David Perdue]] (incumbent)
|[[Jon Ossoff]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Georgia_.28special.29|Georgia (special)]]
|colspan="3" | [[Kelly Loeffler]] (incumbent)
----
[[Doug Collins]]
----
Raphael Warnock
----
Matt Lieberman
----
Ed Tarver
|colspan="2" | TBD
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Idaho|Idaho]]
|[[James Risch]] (incumbent)
|Paulette Jordan
----
James Vandermaas
|Ray Writz
----
Natalie Fleming
|[[James Risch]] (incumbent)
|Paulette Jordan
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Illinois|Illinois]]
|Mark Curran
----
Peggy Hubbard
----
Robert Marshall
----
Tom Tarter
----
Casey Chlebek
|[[Richard Durbin]] (incumbent)
|Danny Malouf
----
David F. Black
----
Chad Koppie
----
Patrick Feges
----
Connor Vlakancic
----
Willie Wilson
|Mark Curran
|[[Richard Durbin]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Iowa|Iowa]]
|[[Joni Ernst]] (incumbent)
|Theresa Greenfield
----
Michael T. Franken
----
Kimberly Graham
----
Eddie Mauro
|Rick Stewart
----
Suzanne Herzog
|[[Joni Ernst]] (incumbent)
|Theresa Greenfield
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Kansas_.28open_seat.29|Kansas]]
|[[Roger Marshall]]
----
[[Kris Kobach]]
----
Bob Hamilton
----
Dave Lindstrom
|Barbara Bollier
----
Robert Tillman
|Jason Buckley
----
Paul Tuten
|[[Roger Marshall]]
|Barbara Bollier
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Kentucky|Kentucky]]
|[[Mitch McConnell]] (incumbent)
----
[[C. Wesley Morgan]]
----
Louis Grider
----
Paul John Frangedakis
----
Neren James
|[[Amy McGrath]]
----
Charles Booker
----
Mike Broihier
----
Mary Ann Tobin
|Brad Barron
|[[Mitch McConnell]] (incumbent)
|[[Amy McGrath]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Louisiana|Louisiana]]
|colspan="3" | [[Bill Cassidy]] (incumbent)
----
Dustin Murphy
----
Derrick Edwards
----
Drew Knight
----
Adrian Perkins
----
Antoine Pierce
----
Peter Wenstrup
----
Aaron Sigler
|colspan="2" | TBD
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Maine|Maine]]
|[[Susan Collins]] (incumbent)
|[[Sara Gideon]]
----
Betsy Sweet
----
Bre Kidman
|Lisa Savage
----
Max Linn
|[[Susan Collins]] (incumbent)
|[[Sara Gideon]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Massachusetts|Massachusetts]]
|Shiva Ayyadurai
----
Kevin O'Connor
|[[Ed Markey]] (incumbent)
----
[[Joe Kennedy III]]
|Frederick Mayock
|Kevin O'Connor
|[[Ed Markey]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United States Senate elections, 2020#Michigan|Michigan]]
|[[John E. James]]
|[[Gary Peters]] (incumbent)
|Marcia Squier
|[[John E. James]]
|[[Gary Peters]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Minnesota|Minnesota]]
|[[Jason Lewis]]
----
Cynthia Gail
----
John Berman
----
James Reibestein
|[[Tina Smith]] (incumbent)
----
Steve Carlson
----
Ahmad Hassan
----
Paula Overby
----
Christopher Seymore
|Oliver Steinberg
----
Kevin O'Connor
|[[Jason Lewis]]
|[[Tina Smith]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Mississippi|Mississippi]]
|[[Cindy Hyde-Smith]] (incumbent)
|Mike Espy
----
Tobey Bartee
----
Jensen Bohren
|Jimmy Edwards
|[[Cindy Hyde-Smith]] (incumbent)
|Mike Espy
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Montana|Montana]]
|[[Steve Daines]] (incumbent)
----
John Driscoll
----
Daniel Larson
|[[Steve Bullock]]
----
John Mues
|Wendie Fredrickson
|[[Steve Daines]] (incumbent)
|[[Steve Bullock]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Nebraska|Nebraska]]
|[[Ben Sasse]] (incumbent)
----
[[Matt Innis]]
|Chris Janicek
----
Angie Philips
----
Alisha Shelton
----
Andy Stock
|Gene Siadek
|[[Ben Sasse]] (incumbent)
|Chris Janicek
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#New_Hampshire|New Hampshire]]
|[[Don Bolduc]]
----
Corky Messner
----
Andy Martin
----
Gerald Beloin
|[[Jeanne Shaheen]] (incumbent)
----
Tom Alciere
----
Paul Krautman
|Justin O'Donnell
----
Thomas Sharpe V.
|Corky Messner
|[[Jeanne Shaheen]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#New_Jersey|New Jersey]]
|Rik Mehta
----
Hirsh Singh
----
Tricia Flanagan
|[[Cory Booker]] (incumbent)
----
Lawrence Hamm
|Madelyn Hoffman
|Rik Mehta
|[[Cory Booker]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#New_Mexico_.28open_seat.29|New Mexico]]
|Mark Ronchetti
----
[[Elisa Martinez]]
----
Gavin Clarkson
|[[Ben Ray Luján]]
|Bob Walsh
|Mark Ronchetti
|[[Ben Ray Luján]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#North_Carolina|North Carolina]]
|[[Thom Tillis]] (incumbent)
----
Paul Wright
----
Larry Holmquist
----
Sharon Y. Hudson
|[[Cal Cunningham]]
----
Erica D. Smith
|Shannon Bray
----
Kevin E. Hayes
|[[Thom Tillis]] (incumbent)
|[[Cal Cunningham]]
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Oklahoma|Oklahoma]]
|[[James Inhofe]] (incumbent)
----
J.J. Stitt
|Abby Broyles
----
Elysabeth Britt
----
Sheila Bilyeu
----
R. O. Joe Cassity, Jr.
|Robert Murphy
----
Joan Farr
----
A. D. Nesbit
|[[James Inhofe]] (incumbent)
|Abby Broyles
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Oregon|Oregon]]
|Jo Rae Perkins
----
Paul J. Romero, Jr.
----
Robert Schwartz
----
John Verbeek
|[[Jeff Merkley]] (incumbent)
|Ibrahim Taher
|Jo Rae Perkins
|[[Jeff Merkley]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Rhode_Island|Rhode Island]]
|Allen Waters
|[[Jack Reed]] (incumbent)
|Lenine Camacho
|Allen Waters
|[[Jack Reed]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#South_Carolina|South Carolina]]
|[[Lindsey Graham]] (incumbent)
----
Michael DaPierre
----
Joe Reynolds
----
Dwayne Buckner
|Jaime Harrison
|Keenan Durham
----
Bill Bledsoe
----
Lloyd Willimas
|[[Lindsey Graham]] (incumbent)
|Jaime Harrison
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#South_Dakota|South Dakota]]
|[[Michael Rounds]] (incumbent)
----
Scyller Borglum
|Daniel Ahlers
|Clayton Walker
|[[Michael Rounds]] (incumbent)
|Daniel Ahlers
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Tennessee_.28open_seat.29|Tennessee]]
|Bill Hagerty
----
Manny Sethi
|Marquita Bradshaw
----
Robin Kimbrough Hayes
----
James Mackler
|Aaron James
----
Kacey Morgan
|Bill Hagerty
|Marquita Bradshaw
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Texas|Texas]]
|[[John Cornyn]] (incumbent)
----
Dwayne Stovall
----
Mark Yancey
|M.J. Hegar
----
Royce West
----
Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez
----
Annie Garcia
----
Amanda Edwards
|Cedric Jefferson
----
James Brumley
|[[John Cornyn]] (incumbent)
|M.J. Hegar
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Virginia|Virginia]]
|[[Daniel Gade]]
----
Thomas Speciale
----
Alissa Baldwin
|[[Mark Warner]] (incumbent)
|Mary Knapp
----
Aldous Mina
|[[Daniel Gade]]
|[[Mark Warner]] (incumbent)
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#West_Virginia|West Virginia]]
|[[Shelley Moore Capito]] (incumbent)
----
Allen Whitt
----
Larry Butcher
|Paula Jean Swearengin
----
Richard Ojeda
----
Richie Robb
|Franklin Riley
|[[Shelley Moore Capito]] (incumbent)
|Paula Jean Swearengin
|-
|[[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Wyoming_.28open_seat.29|Wyoming]]
|Cynthia Lummis
----
Mark Armstrong
----
Donna Rice
----
Joshua Wheeler
|Merav Ben-David
----
Nathan Wendt
----
Yana Ludwig
----
Rex Wilde
----
Kenneth Casner
|''(none)
|Cynthia Lummis
|Merav Ben-David
|}
</center>
</div>

==Projected safe seats==
[[File:Senator Dan Sullivan official.jpg|thumb|right|165px|Globalist [[RINO]] Dan Sullivan, who opposed Trump in 2016,<ref>https://twitter.com/SenDanSullivan/status/784821049628196864</ref> is running for re-election to a second Senate term.]]
===Alaska===
[[Dan Sullivan]], the incumbent [[Republican]] junior senator from Alaska, is running for re-election to a second term in office.<ref>[https://www.electionprojection.com/alaska-senate-election.php 2020 Alaska Senate Election]</ref> A [[moderate Republican]] backed by [[President Trump]],<ref>[https://www.ktuu.com/content/news/President-Trump-endorses-Sullivan-re-election-as-US-senator-for-Alaska-566307261.html President Trump endorses Sullivan re-election as US senator for Alaska]</ref> Sullivan is expected, according to several mostly fake "election ratings", to be favored in the general election.<ref name="Fake News predictions">Multiple references:
*[http://crystalball.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/2020-senate/ 2020 Senate – Sabito's Crystal Ball]
*[https://insideelections.com/ratings/senate Senate Ratings | Inside Elections]
*[https://cookpolitical.com/ratings/senate-race-ratings 2020 Senate Race ratings]</ref>

The primaries were held on August 18, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Alaska,_2020 United States Senate election in Alaska, 2020]</ref>

====AK Republican primary====
Sullivan ran unopposed in the Republican primary. Initially facing a primary challenge from Adam Master Newman, the latter was later disqualified from the ballot.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/Adam_Master_Newman Adam Master Newman - Ballotpedia]</ref> The incumbent senator easily won with over 40,000 votes.<ref name="2020 PRIMARY ELECTIONElection Summary ReportAugust 18, 2020UNOFFICIAL Results">[https://www.elections.alaska.gov/results/20PRIM/data/sovc/ElectionSummaryReportRPT7.pdf 2020 PRIMARY ELECTIONElection Summary ReportAugust 18, 2020UNOFFICIAL Results]</ref>

====AK Democrat/Libertarian/Alaskan Independence primary====
Candidates from the [[Democrat]], [[Libertarian Party|Libertarian]], and Alaskan Independence parties appeared on the same ballot.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Alaska,_2020_(August_18_Democratic_primary) United States Senate election in Alaska, 2020 (August 18 Democratic primary) - Ballotpedia]</ref> Among them is [[Independent voters|Independent]] candidate [[Al Gross]], whom the Democrat establishment endorsed over his primary opponents in December 2019.<ref>[https://www.dscc.org/news/dscc-endorses-dr-al-gross-in-alaska-senate-race/ DSCC Endorses Dr. Al Gross in Alaska Senate Race]</ref> Gross won the primary with 75% of the votes casted.<ref name="2020 PRIMARY ELECTIONElection Summary ReportAugust 18, 2020UNOFFICIAL Results"/>

====AK Issues====
In late May 2020, Sen. Sullivan joined eight globalist Senate [[RINO]]s in urging [[President Trump]] not to restrict H-2A and H-2B visas ''amidst the [[CCP pandemic]] that left millions of Americans unemployed''.<ref name="Globalist Senate RINOs">Two references:
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/499788-gop-senators-urge-trump-not-to-restrict-guest-worker-visas GOP senators urge Trump not to restrict guest worker visas]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/27/gop-senators-beg-trump-to-import-more-foreign-workers-while-36m-americans-are-jobless/ GOP Senators Beg Trump to Import More Foreign Workers While 36M Americans Are Jobless]</ref> Conservative commentator [[Tucker Carlson]], among furious [[Economic nationalism|economic nationalists]], called for the nine senators to be defeated in the nearest respective primaries.<ref>Two references:
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/05/27/tucker-carlson-republican-senators-foreign-workers/ Here’s Why Tucker Carlson Just Called For Nine GOP Senators To Lose Their Next Primary Race]
*[https://www.westernjournal.com/tucker-carlson-said-9-gop-senators-lose-races/ Tucker Carlson Said These 9 GOP Senators Should Lose Their Races]</ref>

When asked on the matter, Gross failed to provide a direct answer on the issue of combating sexual assault,<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/05/25/independent-alaska-senate-candidate-under-fire-for-metoo-history-n2569406 'Independent' Alaska Senate Candidate Flip-Flops on #MeToo Issues]</ref> a problem for Alaska more so than any other U.S. state.<ref>[https://www.anchoragepress.com/columnists/reasons-for-the-high-rate-of-rape-in-alaska/article_564f37fa-4e4f-11e8-b893-47cba59bd374.html Reasons for the high rate of rape in Alaska]</ref>

Despite running as an "independent Alaskan", Gross admitted in late August 2020 that his values "are to the left" and that he will caucus with Democrats if elected.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/my-values-are-to-the-left-independent-alaska-senate-candidate-tells-dnc-hes-with-them/ ‘My Values Are To The Left’: Independent Alaska Senate Candidate Tells DNC He’s With Them]</ref>

====AK Debates====
The debate(s) hosted by Kodiak for the Senate race between Sullivan and Gross will be held on September 17 and 18.<ref>[https://www.adn.com/business-economy/2020/09/08/us-senate-opponents-sullivan-and-gross-set-to-square-off-in-kodiak-seafood-industry-debate/ US Senate opponents Sullivan and Gross set to square off in Kodiak seafood industry debate]</ref>

[[File:Tom Cotton official Senate photo.jpg|thumb|left|180px|Sen. Tom Cotton is running for re-election.]]

===Arkansas===
Incumbent [[conservative]] senator [[Tom Cotton]] from Arkansas announced in August 2018 his re-election run for a second term in 2020.<ref>[https://apnews.com/10e96b627103416895974f7e5afe9547 Sen. Cotton says he’s running for reelection in 2020]</ref> According to several election ratings, the seat has been marked as safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/> Sen. Cotton is known for being strongly pro-Trump and favoring economically nationalist policies.

The Arkansas Democratic Party failed to successfully recruit a single candidate from their party to challenge Cotton. Their only initial candidate, Joshua Mahony, withdrew before the primaries that were held on March 3, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/Joshua_Mahony Josh Mahony - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====AR Republican primary====
Facing no Republican challengers, Cotton easily won the primary on March 3, 2020.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/485843-tom-cotton-wins-uncontested-gop-senate-primary Tom Cotton wins uncontested GOP Senate primary]</ref>

====AR Libertarian primary====
Ricky Dale Harrington, Jr. was the only candidate who ran in the [[Libertarian Party|Libertarian]] primary to challenge Sen. Cotton.

[[File:Chris-Coons.jpg|thumb|right|215px|Anti-Trump Democrat senator Chris Coons is seeking re-election.]]
===Delaware===
[[Chris Coons]], the incumbent establishment Democrat senator from [[Delaware]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/01/scott-walker-targets-chris-coons-primary/3817902002/ Scott Walker, Democrat again, to wield his homemade signs against Chris Coons for Senate]</ref> While just as [[liberal]] as most of the Senate Democrats,<ref>[https://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Chris_Coons.htm Chris Coons on the Issues]</ref> Sen. Coons was noted by [[Politico]] in early May 2018 as the GOP establishment's “favorite Democrat” for then not consistently obstructing the Trump agenda as much as his colleagues did.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/08/chris-coons-senate-dealmaker-democrats-republicans-569144 Meet the GOP’s favorite Democrat]</ref>

Coons suggested in late January 2020 that [[Donald Trump]] can be impeached for ‘hateful, racist’ tweets.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/01/28/dem-sen-coons-hypothetically-trump-could-be-impeached-for-hateful-racist-tweets/ Dem Sen. Coons: ‘Hypothetically’ Trump Could Be Impeached for ‘Hateful, Racist’ Tweets]</ref>

The primaries will be held on September 15, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Delaware,_2020 United States Senate election in Delaware, 2020]</ref>

While the seat has been regarded by fake election predictions as a safe hold for the Democrats,<ref name="Fake News predictions"/> it's important to note that Delaware has significantly trended Republican in the [[2016 U.S. presidential election]], thus having a possibility to result in a closer-than-expected race in the 2020 Senate election.

====DE Democrat primary====
Coons currently faces a primary challenge from "progressive" Democrat [[Jessica Scarane]],<ref>[https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/18/millennial-progressive-woman-primary-delaware-sen-chris-coons/2580646001/ Sen. Chris Coons faces a primary challenge from a progressive millennial. Does she have a shot?]</ref> a far-leftist who claims that Coons “helps Trump enact his agenda”.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dgz9CrL7nQ4 How Chris Coons—A Democrat—Helps to Enable Trump (w/ Jessica Scarane)]</ref> Note that according to FiveThirtyEight, Sen. Coons has only voted with Trump 18% of the time in the [[116th U.S. Congress]].<ref>[https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/christopher-a-coons/ Tracking Congress In The Age Of Trump]</ref>

====DE Republican primary====
Among the Republicans challenging Sen. Coons include [[Lauren Witzke]], a strong conservative.<ref>[https://www.wmdt.com/2020/01/republican-lauren-witzke-challenging-sen-chris-coons/ https://www.wmdt.com/2020/01/republican-lauren-witzke-challenging-sen-chris-coons/]</ref>

====DE Issues====
As [[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Establishment_opponents|shown below]], Coons is an ally of [[Big Pharma]], favoring patent "reform" measures that suppress [[free market]] competition.

In early April 2020, Whitzke argued that Sen. Coons, along with [[Joe Biden]], are “brought and paid for by China.”<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/radio/2020/04/05/lauren-witzke-joe-biden-chris-coons-bought-paid-china/ Lauren Witzke: Joe Biden, Chris Coons ‘Bought and Paid for by China’]</ref> A few months later, the establishment senator voted against a Republican-led resolution to let Americans sue [[China]] over [[COVID-19]] damages and strip the communist government of its [[sovereign immunity]].<ref name="Dick Durbin Backs GOP Bill Allowing Civil Suits Against China over Coronavirus">[https://www.breitbart.com/asia/2020/07/30/dick-durbin-backs-gop-bill-allowing-civil-suits-against-china-over-coronavirus/ Dick Durbin Backs GOP Bill Allowing Civil Suits Against China over Coronavirus]</ref>

In mid-May 2020 following Democrat Gov. [[John Carney]]'s restrictions of churches, Witzke joined Christians in civilly defying the order, having joined a service at the Glory City Fellowship Church in Delmar.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/05/19/senate-candidate-joins-church-service-in-defiance-of-delaware-lockdown/ Senate Candidate Joins Church Service in Defiance of Delaware Lockdown]</ref>

[[File:James E Risch, official Senate photo portrait, 2009.jpg|thumb|right|210px|Establishment Republican Jim Risch is seeking re-election.]]
===Idaho===
[[Establishment]] conservative [[James Risch]] is running for a third Senate term in 2020, having announced his bid in August 2019.<ref>[https://www.postregister.com/news/government/risch-announces-re-election-bid/article_a196a0b7-ca2b-5796-86b2-aac1d8ce9e10.html Risch announces re-election bid]</ref> His seat has been marked as safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on June 2, 2020.

====ID Republican primary====
Uncontested, Sen. Risch won the Republican primary with just over 200,000 votes.<ref name="Election Night Results - 2020 Idaho primary">[https://www.livevoterturnout.com/Idaho/LiveResults/1/en/Index_112.html Election Night Results - 2020 Idaho primary]</ref>

====ID Democrat primary====
[[Idaho]] Democrat [[Paulette Jordan]] announced in February 2020 her run to seek the Senate seat.<ref>[https://www.idahopress.com/news/local/paulette-jordan-announces-run-for-senate/article_38dd38cf-e675-54f6-83fa-04ae839e2891.html Paulette Jordan announces run for U.S. Senate]</ref> She won the primary with 86% of the vote.<ref name="Election Night Results - 2020 Idaho primary"/>

====ID Issues====
In late May 2020, Risch showed his globalist leanings in joining eight [[Moderate Republican]] senators urging President Trump not to restrict visas amidst the [[CCP virus in the United States]] that caused millions of Americans to become unemployed.<ref name="Globalist Senate RINOs"/>

[[File:Dick Durbin.jpg|thumb|left|180px|[[Richard Durbin]], a racist Democrat, is running for re-election.]]
===Illinois===
[[Dick Durbin]], the left-wing senior senator from [[Illinois]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/423653-dick-durbin-im-running-for-reelection-in-2020 Dick Durbin: I'm running for reelection in 2020]</ref> His seat is considered to be safe, according to several election predictions.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

====IL-Democrat primary====
Durbin ran unopposed in the [[Democrat]] primary.<ref name="Illinois Primary Results 2020">[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/illinois/ Illinois Primary Results 2020]</ref>

====IL-Republican primary====
Republicans [[Mark Curran]], Peggy Hubbard, and Robert Marshall ran in their party line primary that was held on March 17, 2020.<ref name="Illinois Primary Results 2020"/> Curran won the primary, garnering just under 42% of the vote.

====IL Issues====
A racist Democrat, Sen. Durbin referred to a police reform bill introduced by [[Tim Scott]] as a “token” measure,<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/17/tim-scott-slams-dick-durbin-for-referring-to-his-police-reform-bill-as-a-token-measure/# Tim Scott Slams Dick Durbin for Referring to His Police Reform Bill as a ‘Token’ Measure]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/503176-tim-scott-responds-to-durbins-warning-about-token-half-hearted-approach-to Tim Scott responds to Durbin's warning about 'token, half-hearted approach' to police reform]</ref> although he soon apologized.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.nationalreview.com/news/sen-dick-durbin-apologizes-to-sen-tim-scott-for-token-comment-on-police-reform-bill/ Sen. Dick Durbin Apologizes to Sen. Tim Scott for ‘Token’ Comment on Police Reform Bill]
*[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senator-dick-durbin-apologizes-after-token-remark-about-tim-scott-led-police-reform-bill/
Durbin apologizes after "token" remark about Tim Scott-led police reform bill]
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dick-durbin-tim-scott-apology-token-comment-police-reform-bill Dick Durbin apologizes to Tim Scott for 'token' comment on police reform bill]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/17/durbin-scott-apology-326538 Dick Durbin apologizes to Tim Scott after 'token' remark]</ref>

In late July 2020, Durbin backed a GOP-led bill that would let Americans sue China over [[coronavirus]] damages.<ref name="Dick Durbin Backs GOP Bill Allowing Civil Suits Against China over Coronavirus"/>

[[File:Robertsofficialphoto.jpg|thumb|right|175px|[[Pat Roberts]] is retiring.]]

===Kansas (open seat)===
[[File:Roger Marshall official portrait.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Establishment-leaning Republican representative [[Roger Marshall]] is running to succeed Roberts.]]
[[Establishment]] Republican [[Pat Roberts]] announced in January 2019 that he would not seek re-election in 2020.<ref>Multiple sources:
*[https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2019/01/04/GOP-Kansas-Sen-Pat-Roberts-announces-retirement-in-2020/9971546624740/ GOP Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts announces retirement in 2020]
*[https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/04/senator-pat-roberts-retirement/ EXCLUSIVE: Sen Pat Roberts Will Announce Retirement]
*[https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/04/pat-roberts-announce-2020-plans-1081334 Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts to retire in 2020]</ref> Establishment representative [[Roger Marshall]] and anti-establishment conservative [[Kris Kobach]] ran in their respective strong efforts to succeed Sen. Roberts. Rep. Marshall is noted for his globalist leanings, having won election to the U.S. House after defeating anti-establishment then-representative [[Tim Huelskamp]] in a Republican primary with the backing of the establishment and having somewhat broke with Trump over immigration in 2017.<ref>[https://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article154096699.html Congressman breaks with Trump on border wall, young immigrants]</ref>

The primaries were held on August 4, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Kansas,_2020 United States Senate election in Kansas, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====KS Republican primary====
[[Kris Kobach]], a strong [[conservative]] from Kansas, was among 11 Republican candidates who ran for the vacated Senate seat.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/451971-kris-kobach-to-run-for-senate-in-kansas Kobach to run for Senate in Kansas]</ref> He lost the primary with 26% of the vote, finishing second place to Rep. Marshall, who had garnered 40% of the votes casted.<ref name="Unofficial Kansas Election Results - 2020">[https://ent.sos.ks.gov/kssos_ent.html Unofficial Kansas Election Results - 2020]</ref> This was after Kobach faced pushback from the GOP establishment, which backed Marshall.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/disgusting-gop-group-mcconnells-blessing-spending-2-million-pro-trump-senatorial-candidate-kris-kobach-kansas-video/ Disgusting! GOP Group with McConnell’s Blessing is Spending $2 Million Against Pro-Trump Senatorial Candidate Kris Kobach in Kansas (VIDEO)]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/07/mitch-mcconnell-linked-pac-to-spend-3m-on-ads-attacking-kris-kobach/ Mitch McConnell-Linked PAC to Spend $3M on Ads Attacking Kris Kobach]</ref> The [[Democrat]] establishment wasted $5 million meddling in the primary in attempting to boost Kobach, who they believed could lose the general election if becoming the nominee.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/dems-waste-5-million-on-failed-attempt-to-sway-gop-primary/ Dems Waste $5 Million on Failed Attempt to Sway GOP Primary]</ref>

====KS Democrat primary====
Former [[Obama administration]] secretary [[Kathleen Sebelius]] declined a run for the Senate seat.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/09/sebelius-wont-run-for-senate-in-kansas-1404154 Sebelius won't run for Senate in Kansas]</ref> The Democrat primary was ultimately won by Barbara Bollier, who garnered 85% of the vote.<ref name="Unofficial Kansas Election Results - 2020"/>

====KS Issues====
In late February 2020, Kobach criticized a bill passed by the Democrat-controlled House that “would turn every city in America into a sanctuary city.”<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/02/21/kris-kobach-new-way-forward-act-turn-every-city-america/ Kris Kobach: New Way Forward Act ‘Would Turn Every City in America into a Sanctuary City’]</ref>

[[File:McConnell.jpg|thumb|left|195px|[[Establishment]] [[RINO Backer]] senator [[Mitch McConnell]] is running for re-election.]]

===Kentucky===
[[Mitch McConnell]], a lifelong [[RINO]] who arguably became more [[conservative]]<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/13/mitch-mcconnell-anti-abortion-bills-114925 McConnell forces Senate votes on anti-abortion bills]</ref> after the [[2018 midterm elections]] and whose approval rating has gone up after defending Donald Trump from the [[Trump impeachment|impeachment coup]],<ref>[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/mitch_mcconnell_favorableunfavorable-6672.html#polls Mitch McConnell: Favorable/Unfavorable]</ref> is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.rollcall.com/2018/08/06/mitch-mcconnell-is-already-running-for-re-election-in-2020/ Mitch McConnell Is Already Running for Re-Election — In 2020]</ref>

====KY Republican primary====
McConnell easily won his party's primary with over 80% of the vote over several challengers.<ref name="Live results: 2020 Kentucky Senate primaries">[https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/election-results/kentucky-senate-primary-live-results/ Live results: 2020 Kentucky Senate primaries]</ref>

====KY Democrat primary====
[[Amy McGrath]], a far-left<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMbqhRvmNkI Welcome - YouTube]</ref> Democrat from Kentucky, is seeking to challenge McConnell for the Senate seat. Liberals in a massive effort to attempt unseating McConnell have donated $10.7 million to McGrath's campaign by October 2019.<ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/10/10/amy-mcgrath-raises-10-7-million-race-against-mitch-mcconnell/3934531002/ Democrat running against Mitch McConnell raises $10.7 million in third quarter]</ref> McGrath has been criticized for inconsistencies over the [[Kavanaugh smear]]<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/48-hours-in-amy-mcgrath-has-already-flip-flopped-on-brett-kavanaugh-again 48 hours in, Amy McGrath has already flip-flopped on Brett Kavanaugh ... again]</ref> and her self-admitted radical agenda. In addition, she has been called out by coal miners who have been used in one of her campaign ads without their permission.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2019/09/05/kentucky-miners-outraged-over-amy-mcgrath-campaign-ad-uses-them/2225584001/ Kentucky miners issue a cease and desist letter to Amy McGrath for using them in a TV ad]
*[https://freebeacon.com/politics/amy-mcgrath-accused-of-using-coal-miners-as-political-pawns/ Amy McGrath Accused of Using Coal Miners as ‘Political Pawns’]
*[https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/09/coal-miners-ask-amy-mcgrath-to-remove-them-from-attack-ad.html Amy McGrath Is Wasting Her Chance to Beat Mitch McConnell]</ref> Facing the more progressive Charles Booker in the primary held on June 23, 2020, McGrath narrowly won by less than 3 percentage points.<ref name="Live results: 2020 Kentucky Senate primaries"/> The racist Democrat establishment heavily backed McGrath over Booker, a black candidate who was arguably more qualified.<ref name="Democrats Spent Tens of Millions to Destroy the Hopes and Dreams of These Qualified Black Candidates">[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/democrats-against-black-candidates/ Democrats Spent Tens of Millions to Destroy the Hopes and Dreams of These Qualified Black Candidates]</ref>

====KY Issues====
Despite multiple establishment media outlets reporting Mitch McConnell's approval rating in late 2019 to be at only 18% in [[Kentucky]],<ref>Two sources:
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/347362-poll-mcconnells-approval-in-kentucky-at-18-percent Poll: McConnell's approval in Kentucky at 18 percent]
*[https://bipartisanreport.com/2019/10/31/new-mitch-mcconnell-re-election-polls-show-a-2020-blue-wave/ New Mitch McConnell Re-Election Polls Show A 2020 Blue Wave]</ref> his approval ratings have risen after the [[Trump impeachment|impeachment hoax]] against [[Donald Trump]], with even the progressive [[Newsweek]] admitting that McConnell's approval among all U.S. adults increased from 27% to 33% between October 2019 and February 2020 in addition to Republican support rising from 47% to 62% during the same time period.<ref>[https://www.newsweek.com/more-americans-favor-republicans-mitch-mcconnell-after-impeachment-new-poll-shows-1491455 More Americans Favor Republicans, Mitch McConnell After Impeachment, New Poll Shows]</ref> However, it is important to note that from a statistical standpoint, the conclusions may be somewhat inaccurate given the margin of error of the polls being at ±4%.<ref>[https://news.gallup.com/poll/287633/approval-congressional-republicans-tops-democrats.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_content=morelink&utm_campaign=syndication Approval of U.S. Congressional Republicans Tops Democrats]</ref>

McGrath has been criticized by Republican governors [[Mike DeWine]] and [[Larry Hogan]] for using their pictures in an ad attacking McConnell.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/05/18/gop-govs-pummel-amy-mcgraths-new-ad-n2569028 GOP Governors Rip McConnell Challenger for Partisan Attack Ad]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/498124-dewine-asks-mcgrath-to-keep-him-out-of-attack-ads DeWine asks McGrath to keep him out of attack ads]
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/govs-dewine-hogan-rebuke-mcconnell-challenger-for-using-their-images-in-attack-ad/ Govs. DeWine, Hogan Rebuke McConnell Challenger for Using Their Images in Attack Ad]</ref>

[[Project Veritas]] reported in mid-September 2020 that a staffer for McGrath admitted that their campaign strategy is to deceive voters by "not talking about policy."<ref>https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1306216266315845637</ref>

====KY Debate(s)====
In late August 2020, McConnell changed McGrath to a debate,<ref>[https://www.wkyt.com/2020/08/19/mcconnell-challenges-mcgrath-to-debate/ McConnell challenges McGrath to debate]</ref> eliciting a bizarre response from the latter.<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/08/19/cocaine-mitch-n2574682 Mitch McConnell's Debate Challenge Triggers Unusual Response from Dem. Challenger]</ref> The longtime senator also accepted an offer to participate in a forum hosted by the Kentucky Farm Bureau, which McGrath declined.<ref>[https://apnews.com/1755507b1028a6c9b04a02d0ef672d57 McConnell, McGrath jockey over debates in Senate race]</ref>

[[File:Bill Cassidy official Senate photo.jpg|thumb|right|180px|Sen. Bill Cassidy is running for re-election.]]

===Louisiana===
[[Bill Cassidy]], the conservative senior U.S. senator from [[Louisiana]], is running for re-election to a second term in office.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/sen-bill-cassidy-announces-bid-for-reelection/ar-BB10aj8O Sen. Bill Cassidy announces bid for reelection]</ref> His seat, according to several ratings, has been marked as safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

====Jungle primary====
Under state law, all candidates (irrespective of party affiliation) participate in a [[jungle primary]] set on the general election date.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Louisiana,_2020 United States Seante election in Louisiana, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref> Such that no candidate receives a majority of the vote, the top two performers will face off in a runoff on December 5, 2020.

====LA Issues====
Sen. Cassidy denounced violent anarchists that exploited the death of [[George Floyd]] to initiate a [[2020 Leftwing insurrection|left-wing insurrection]], asserting that “we are with the peaceful protesters”.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/06/03/gop-sen-cassidy-we-are-with-the-peaceful-protesters-coddling-the-rioters-terrible-for-peaceful-protest-movement/ GOP Sen. Cassidy: ‘We Are with the Peaceful Protesters’ – ‘Coddling’ the Rioters ‘Terrible’ for Peaceful Protest Movement]
*[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/06/04/sen_cassidy_coddling_criminals_and_anarchists_is_terrible_for_the_community.html Sen. Cassidy: "Coddling Criminals And Anarchists Is Terrible For The Community"]</ref>

In late July 2020, Cassidy, along with [[GOP]] senators Daines, Rubio, and Romney, introduced a coronavirus stimulus bill that would create a second wave of monetary provisions for the American people.<ref>[https://thehill.com/policy/finance/509846-gop-senators-propose-stimulus-checks-of-1000-for-both-adults-and-children GOP senators propose stimulus checks of $1,000 for both adults and children]</ref>

[[File:Markey Ed-092013-18046-0006.jpg|thumb|left|225px|Running for re-election as a progressive Democrat senator, Ed Markey faced a tough challenge from U.S. representative Joe Kennedy III.]]
===Massachusetts===
[[Progressive]] Democrat [[Ed Markey]] from [[Massachusetts]] is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.wbur.org/news/2018/10/05/markey-2020-re-election Markey Confirms Plans To Run For Re-Election In 2020]</ref> Markey's Senate seat is considered to be safe, according to several election ratings.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on September 1, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Massachusetts,_2020 United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2020]</ref>

[[File:Joe Kennedy III, official portrait, 116th Congress.jpg|thumb|right|240px|Rep. Kennedy lost the primary in a major blow to his family's political dynasty.]]
====MA Democrat primary====
Sen. Markey faced a strong challenge in the [[Democrat]] primary by Rep. [[Joe Kennedy III]],<ref>Two references:
*[https://nypost.com/2019/08/26/joe-kennedy-has-filed-to-run-for-us-senate-in-2020/ Joe Kennedy has filed to run for US Senate in 2020]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/09/21/joe-kennedy-iii-formally-launches-senate-bid-despite-warrens-endorsement-of-markey/ Joe Kennedy III Launches Senate Bid in Massachusetts]</ref> who arguably was even more staunchly far-left than the incumbent senator is.

In late July 2020, the campaign for Joe Kennedy (who, like his elite family members, are highly privileged) strongly criticized the [[Boston Globe]] for siding with the "[[establishment]]" in their endorsement of Markey,<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/29/joe-kennedy-boston-globe-endorsement-snub-386099 Kennedy unloads on Boston Globe over endorsement snub]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/30/joe-kennedy-campaign-lashes-out-at-establishment-boston-globe-for-endorsing-opponent/]</ref>

A poll conducted for the Democrat primary that was released in late July showed a close race between Markey and Kennedy.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/31/poll-tight-senate-primary-race-between-ed-markey-joe-kennedy/ Poll: Tight Senate Primary Race Between Ed Markey, Joe Kennedy]</ref> dealing a major blow to the Kennedy political dynasty; the representative is now the first member of his family to lose a race in [[Massachusetts]].

Markey ultimately won his party's primary over Kennedy by 11 points.<ref name="2020 Massachusetts primary results"/>

====MA Republican primary====
The two candidates running against Markey in the Republican primary were Shiva Ayyadurai and Kevin O'Connor.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Massachusetts,_2020_(September_1_Republican_primary) United States Senate election in Massachusetts, 2020 (September 1 Republican primary)]</ref> The primary was won by O'Connor with 60% of the vote.<ref name="2020 Massachusetts primary results">[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/massachusetts/ 2020 Massachusetts primary results]</ref>

====MA Issues====
On June 1, 2020, Sen. Markey sent a tweet calling [[Donald Trump]] “scum”<ref>Multiple references:
*https://twitter.com/EdMarkey/status/1267510047552176133
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/500519-markey-calls-trump-scum-amid-george-floyd-protests Markey calls Trump 'scum' over comments on George Floyd protests]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/01/sen-ed-markey-calls-donald-trump-scum-for-fueling-violence/ Sen. Ed Markey Calls Donald Trump ‘Scum’ for ‘Fueling’ Violence]
*[https://www.businessinsider.com.au/sen-ed-markey-calls-trump-scum-george-floyd-protest-comments-2020-6 Sen. Ed Markey calls Trump 'scum' in pointed tweet on 'fuelling racist hate and violence in our country']</ref> over calls for [[law and order]].

While opponents in the primary, both Markey and Kennedy have supported [[defunding the police]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/09/massachusetts-democrat-senate-candidates-both-back-defunding-police/ Massachusetts Democrat Senate Candidates Both Back Defunding Police]</ref>

====MA Debate====
The debate for the Senate election will be held on October 5, 2020 between Markey and O'Connor.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/debate-in-massachusetts-us-senate-race-scheduled-for-oct-5/ar-BB191tsU Debate in Massachusetts' US Senate Race Scheduled for Oct. 5]
*[https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/massachusetts/articles/2020-09-13/debate-in-states-us-senate-race-scheduled-for-oct-5 Debate in State's U.S. Senate Race Scheduled for Oct. 5]</ref>

[[File:Cindy Hyde-Smith.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Cindy Hyde-Smith is running for re-election to a full Senate term.]]

===Mississippi===
Incumbent [[conservative]] Republican [[Cindy Hyde-Smith]] is running for re-election to a full Senate term.<ref>[https://yallpolitics.com/2020/01/03/senator-cindy-hyde-smith-files-for-reelection-in-her-current-senate-seat/ Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith files for reelection in her current Senate seat]</ref> According to conclusions from several polls, her seat can be considered ''mostly'' safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

It was reported by the Clarion Ledger in mid-July 2020 that Espy had out-raised Hyde-Smith by a three-to-one ratio between April and June.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/mike-espy-outraises-sen-cindy-hyde-smith-3-to-1-but-hyde-smith-still-has-money-advantage/ar-BB16PqHc Mike Espy outraises Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith 3-to-1, but Hyde-Smith still has money advantage ]</ref>

====MS Republican primary====
Unopposed, Sen. Hyde-Smith easily won the Republican primary.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mississippi-primary-espy-incumbents-win-in-congressional-races/ar-BB110ZwR Mississippi primary: Espy, incumbents win in congressional races]</ref>

====MS Democrat primary====
[[Mike Espy]], the 2018 loser to Hyde-Smith in the Senate special election, won the Democrat primary to contest the senator once again.<ref>[https://www.kansascity.com/news/business/national-international/article241081206.html Espy wins Mississippi US Senate race; will face Hyde-Smith]</ref>

====MS Issues====
Amidst the [[CCP pandemic]] in the [[United States]] that oversaw massive Democrat exploitations of a tragedy to enact a far-left agenda, Hyde-Smith joined [[Republicans]] in urging President Trump to maintain strongly [[pro-life]] policies.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/20/republicans-urge-trump-to-maintain-pro-life-policies-during-pandemic/ Republicans Urge Trump to Maintain Pro-Life Policies During Pandemic]</ref> This is in contrast to her opponent Espy, who previously was noted for holding very [[pro-abortion]] viewpoints.<ref>Two references:
*[https://freebeacon.com/politics/pro-life-group-targets-espy-over-extreme-abortion-views/ Pro-Life Group Targets Espy Over ‘Extreme’ Abortion Views]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/11/20/pro-life-ad-exposes-mike-espy-support-for-abortion-until-birth/ Watch: Mike Espy Support for Abortion Until Birth Focus of Pro-Life Ad]</ref>

In early July 2020, Hyde-Smith supported an amendment made by [[Conservative of the Year 2019]] [[Josh Hawley]] that would remove a requirement of renaming military bases from a defense bill.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/03/house-committee-advances-bill-to-rename-military-bases-setting-up-fight-with-senate-trump/ House Committee Advances Bill to Rename Military Bases, Setting Up Fight with Senate, Trump]</ref>

After President Trump tweeted a suggestion of delaying the 2020 elections amidst concerns over election fraud, a spokesperson for Hyde-Smith asserted that the senator “has confidence in the ability of our state’s election officials to conduct a general election this fall that safeguards the integrity of Mississippians’ right to vote while protecting voters and election workers.”<ref>[https://www.wjtv.com/news/mississippi-leaders-react-to-president-trumps-remark-to-delay-2020-election/ Mississippi leaders react to President Trump’s remark to delay 2020 election]</ref> This was in contrast to her establishment [[RINO]] colleague [[Roger Wicker]], who outright dismissed Trump's suggestion.

In early August 2020, Hyde-Smith, a member of the Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, welcomed a $14 million federal grant to improve rural water infrastructure in the Alcorn and Pontotoc counties.<ref>[https://yallpolitics.com/2020/08/03/hyde-smith-welcomes-14-million-in-rural-water-improvements-in-alcorn-pontotoc-counties/]</ref>

[[File:Ben Sasse.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Establishment [[anti-Trump]]er Ben Sasse is seeking re-election.]]
===Nebraska===
[[Ben Sasse]], the [[anti-Trump]] establishment Republican senator from Nebraska, announced on August 10, 2019 his run for re-election.<ref>[http://netnebraska.org/article/news/1185486/us-senator-ben-sasse-nebraska-announces-re-election-bid U.S. Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska Announces Re-election Bid]</ref>

====NE Republican primary====
Sasse faced a primary on May 12, 2020 challenged by [[conservative]], pro-Trump [[Matt Innis]], the former chairman of the Lancaster County Republican Party in Nebraska.<ref>[https://journalstar.com/news/state-and-regional/federal-politics/matt-innis-will-oppose-sasse-in-gop-primary/article_6f3d0417-0443-5644-82e2-c06007686661.html Matt Innis will oppose Sasse in 2020 GOP primary]</ref><ref>[https://www.mattinnis4senate.com/ Home - Matt Innis for U.S. Senate]</ref> Holding advantage as an incumbent, the senator easily won the primary with 75% of the vote.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/election-results/nebraska-senate-primary-live-results/ Live results: 2020 Nebraska Senate primary results]</ref>

Innis, an opponent of the [[GOP establishment]], was reported to the [[Federal Elections Commission]] by the chairwoman of the Douglas County Republican Party for spending a mere $457 that he didn't mention in campaign spending reports.<ref>[https://www.omaha.com/news/local/douglas-county-republican-party-files-complaints-against-matt-innis-sasse/article_40372eb2-ea63-5a4f-9093-436b91d9f90e.html#anchor_item_1 Douglas County Republican Party files complaints against Matt Innis, Sasse's GOP challenger]</ref>

====NE Democrat primary====
The Democratic Party primary was won by Chris Janicek, who garnered a plurality of just over 30% of the vote.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/nebraska/ Nebraska Primary Results 2020]</ref>

====NE Issues====
Janicek faced calls by his own party in mid-June 2020 to drop out of the race after being faced with a sexual harassment complaint, which he refused to do.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/06/16/sasse-opponent-chris-janicek-sexually-explicit-messages-staffers/ Chris Janicek Reportedly Sent Sexually Explicit Text Messages To Staffers In Group Chat]
*[https://www.wowt.com/content/news/US-Senate-candidate-says-he-wont-drop-out-following-sexual-harassment-complaint--571304541.html U.S. Senate candidate says he won't drop out following sexual harassment complaint]
*[https://www.1011now.com/content/news/NDP-calls-on-US-Senate-candidate-to-drop-out-after-reported-sexual-harassment-complaint-571292401.html NDP calls on U.S. Senate candidate to drop out after reported sexual harassment complaint]
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/dem-senate-candidate-refuses-to-bow-out-amid-sexual-harassment-scandal/ Nebraska Dem Refuses to Bow Out of Senate Race Amid Sexual Harassment Scandal]</ref>

After misleading charges of Russian bounties were hurled at [[President Trump]], Sasse was none too soon in demanding an explanation despite high fake news reporting surrounding the matter.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/505145-gop-senator-congress-must-find-out-what-trump-knew-of-russian-bounties-and GOP senator: Congress must find out what Trump knew of Russian bounties, and when]</ref>

In late July 2020, Sen. Sasse criticized [[Nancy Pelosi]] and [[Steven Mnuchin]] over coronavirus stimulus negotiations, calling them “two big government Democrats”.<ref>[https://www.axios.com/ben-sasse-steven-mnuchin-stimulus-b68d22fd-bc4f-43e3-8bfa-c11b7877cdc5.html GOP Sen. Sasse slams Mnuchin and Pelosi as "big government Democrats"]</ref>

Sasse continued to criticize Trump after pretending to cooperate in order to fend off Innis in the primary.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/gop-sen-sasse-zips-his-criticism-of-trump-to-fend-off-primary-threat GOP Sen. Sasse zips his criticism of Trump to fend off primary threat]</ref>

====NE Debate====
A debate for the Senate race was held on September 4, 2020.<ref>[https://www.c-span.org/video/?475385-1/nebraska-us-senate-debate Nebraska U.S. Senate Debate]</ref>

[[File:Cory Booker, official portrait, 114th Congress.jpg|thumb|right|215px|Failed presidential candidate Cory Booker is running for re-election to another Senate term.]]

===New Jersey===
Failed Democrat [[2020 presidential candidate]] [[Cory Booker]] is running for re-election in 2020 to another Senate term.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/article/2013/jan/11/booker-run-senate-more-likely-see-how-newarks-mayo/ Cory Booker files paperwork for U.S. Senate; how's he done against the Truth-O-Meter?]</ref> Booker condemned Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden for Biden's racist and [[segregation]]ist views.<ref>https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-20/biden-doubles-down-after-reminding-everyone-democrats-owned-slaves</ref> Booker's seat has been ranked as safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on July 7, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_New_Jersey,_2020 United States Senate election in New Jersey, 2020]</ref>

====NJ Democrat primary====
Sen. Booker easily won the Democrat primary with nearly 90% of the vote.<ref name="New Jersey U.S. Senate Primary Election Results">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/07/us/elections/results-new-jersey-senate-primary-election.html New Jersey U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

====NJ Republican primary====
The Republican primary was won by Rikin Mehta, who fended off a strong opponent in garnering a plurality of 38.7% of the vote.<ref name="New Jersey U.S. Senate Primary Election Results"/>

====NJ Issues====
On March 2, 2020, Booker told [[Israel]] supporters at the Israel Public Affairs Committee that traditional [[Judaism]] supports the creation of a [[Palestinian]] state.<ref>[https://www.nj.com/politics/2020/03/booker-tells-pro-israel-conference-jewish-tradition-supports-independent-palestinian-state.html Booker tells pro-Israel conference Jewish tradition supports independent Palestinian state]</ref>

Booker claimed in mid-June 2020 that [[Donald Trump]] was “callous” over plans to hold a campaign rally on the [[Juneteenth]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/06/11/booker-trump-is-callous-disrespectful-for-holding-rally-on-juneteenth/ Booker: Trump Is ‘Callous,’ ‘Disrespectful’ for Holding Rally on Juneteenth]</ref>

In late July 2020, Sen. Booker voted against a Republican-led bill that would let Americans sue [[China]] over [[COVID-19]] damages.<ref name="Dick Durbin Backs GOP Bill Allowing Civil Suits Against China over Coronavirus"/>

[[File:000tom udall official.jpg|thumb|left|140px|Sen. [[Tom Udall]] announced in March 2019 his retirement from Congress.<ref>[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-congress-udall-idUSKCN1R61VL U.S. Senator Udall announces retirement from Congress]</ref>]]

===New Mexico (open seat)===
Democrat Sen. [[Tom Udall]] is retiring. The primaries were held on June 2, 2020. Republican [[Mark Ronchetti]] will face Democrat establishment figure [[Ben Ray Luján]] in a contest which could make either candidate a senator for the next six years.

====NM Democrat primary====
Rep. [[Ben Ray Luján]] announced his candidacy. Luján is the Assistant Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives for [[Nancy Pelosi]] and former chair of the [[DCCC]] which engineered the Democrats' [[2018 Midterm]] House takeover. Luján won the Democrat primary uncontested.<ref name="New Mexico U.S. Senate Primary Election Results">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/02/us/elections/results-new-mexico-senate-primary-election.html New Mexico U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

[[File:Luhan.PNG|thumb|right|175px|[[Establishment]] Democrat representative Ben Ray Luján is running for U.S. Senate to succeed Udall.]]
====NM Republican primary====
Gavin Clarkson,<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsTK7_iBL6M</ref> an enrolled member of the Choctaw Nation and Trump deputy assistant secretary at the Bureau of Indian Affairs,<ref>https://nativenewsonline.net/currents/dr-gavin-clarkson-choctaw-named-deputy-assistant-secretary-indian-affairs/</ref> and former TV weatherman [[Mark Ronchetti]] have announced their candidacies.

[[Conservative]] Navajo Nation member [[Elisa Martinez]] announced in November 2019 her bid for the Senate seat.<ref>[https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/new-mexico/articles/2019-11-20/gop-navajo-nation-member-joins-us-senate-race-in-new-mexico GOP Navajo Nation Member Joins US Senate Race in New Mexico]</ref> A genuine [[Native American]] unlike [[Elizabeth Warren]],<ref>[https://dailycaller.com/2020/01/14/elisa-martinez-u-s-senate-candidate-new-mexico/ Exclusive: Elisa Martinez Is On A Mission To Become The First ‘Real’ Native American Woman In The Senate]</ref> Martinez' campaign website has called out leftists like [[Ben Ray Luján]] for being "out of touch elites".<ref>[https://www.elisafornm.com/ Elisa Martinez for New Mexico]</ref>

The Republican primary was ultimately won by Ronchetti, who garnered 56% of the vote.<ref name="New Mexico U.S. Senate Primary Election Results"/> Following his victory, Martinez and Clarkson announced their support for the former in hopes of flipping the seat red.<ref>[https://nmpoliticalreport.com/2020/06/02/ronchetti-wins-republican-primary-for-u-s-senate/ Ronchetti wins Republican primary for U.S. Senate]</ref>

====NM Issues====
Extremely [[pro-abortion]], Luján joined extremist [[Democrat]] colleagues in blocking the [[Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act]] for the 80th time in early August 2019.<ref>[https://www.nmallianceforlife.org/infanticide-vote-blocked-by-nm-congress-members.html Infanticide Vote Blocked by NM Congress Members]</ref>

[[File:Inhofe.jpg|thumb|left|160px|Sen. James Inhofe is running for re-election to another term in office.]]

===Oklahoma===
Incumbent conservative Republican senator [[Jim Inhofe]] of [[Oklahoma]] initially had not announced whether he would run for re-election or not.<ref>[https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/at-sen-jim-inhofe-hasn-t-said-he-s-running/article_764b5a94-1da6-5f3d-a6c6-4cd4cbde4f3b.html At 84, Sen. Jim Inhofe hasn't said he's running for re-election, but he's raising money as if he is]</ref> However, the senator finally announced on March 5, 2020 his re-election campaign.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://oklahoman.com/article/5656619/inhofe-announces-re-election-bid Inhofe announces re-election bid]
*[https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/government-and-politics/sen-jim-inhofe-announces-he-s-running-again-for-reelection/article_7afd8b7b-8092-5c4a-b055-0d7297e26948.html#8 Sen. Jim Inhofe, 85, announces he's running again for reelection]
*[https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/oklahoma/articles/2020-03-05/us-sen-jim-inhofe-85-of-oklahoma-to-seek-another-term US Sen. Jim Inhofe, 85, of Oklahoma to Seek Another Term]
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/5/us-sen-jim-inhofe-85-of-oklahoma-to-seek-another-t/ Oklahoma's Jim Inhofe, 85, to seek another Senate term]</ref>

The primaries were held on June 30, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Oklahoma,_2020 United States Senate election in Oklahoma, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====OK Republican primary====
Inhofe easily won the Republican Party primary with nearly three-quarters of the votes casted.<ref name="Live results: 2020 Oklahoma Senate primaries">[https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/election-results/oklahoma-senate-primary-live-results/ Live results: 2020 Oklahoma Senate primaries]</ref>

====OK Democrat primary====
The Democrat primary was won by Abby Broyles, who garnered 60% of the vote.<ref name="Live results: 2020 Oklahoma Senate primaries"/>

====OK Issues====
Sen. Inhofe faced scrutiny in March 2020 amidst the [[CCP pandemic]] after it was reported that he "conveniently" benefited from large stock trades before the market crashed.<ref>[https://nypost.com/2020/03/20/richard-burr-kelly-loeffler-urged-to-resign-for-selling-stocks-after-coronavirus-briefing/ Sens. Dianne Feinstein, Jim Inhofe made stock trades before coronavirus pandemic]</ref> Other implications included [[Kelly Loeffler]], [[Richard Burr]], and [[Dianne Feinstein]]. Despite being initially investigated, the [[DOJ]] dropped later dropped the case against Inhofe.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/26/doj-drops-insider-trading-investigations-into-three-senators/# DOJ Drops Insider Trading Investigations into Three Senators]</ref>

On March 5, 2020, Inhofe co-sponsored a resolution by [[Josh Hawley]] to condemn threats made by [[Charles Schumer]] against Supreme Court justices [[Neil Gorsuch]] and [[Brett Kavanaugh]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/05/josh-hawley-14-gop-senators-move-to-censure-chuck-schumer-for-threatening-justices/ Josh Hawley, 14 GOP Senators Move to Censure Chuck Schumer for Threatening Justices]</ref>

[[File:000merkleyofficialphoto.jpg|thumb|right|225px|Leftist Jeff Merkley is seeking another Senate term.]]

===Oregon===
[[Jeff Merkley]], the left-wing junior senator from [[Oregon]], has announced in March 2019 his run for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.rollcall.com/2019/03/05/sen-jeff-merkley-will-run-for-re-election-instead-of-president/ Sen. Jeff Merkley will run for re-election instead of president]</ref> His seat has been marked as safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primary elections were held on May 19, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Oregon,_2020 United States Senate election in Oregon, 2020]</ref>

====OR Democrat primary====
Sen. Merkley won the Democrat primary uncontested.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/election-results/oregon-senate-primary-live-results/ Live results: 2020 Oregon Senate primaries]</ref>

====OR Republican primary====
The Republican primary was won by Jo Rae Perkins, who garnered nearly 50% of the vote.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/election-results/oregon-senate-primary-live-results/ Live results: 2020 Oregon Senate primaries]</ref> A staunch conservative, Perkins was subject to harsh attacks by the liberal media over her support<ref>[https://heavy.com/news/2020/05/jo-rae-perkins-qanon-conspiracy-theorist-wins-gop-support-in-u-s-senate-race/ Jo Rae Perkins: QAnon Conspiracy Theorist Wins GOP Support in U.S. Senate Race]</ref> for the [[QAnon]] conspiracy theory.

====OR Issues====
In May 2020, Sen. Merkley ridiculously claimed that the opposition to mail-in voting from many [[Republicans]] is somehow an attempt to suppress the vote of minorities.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/media/merkley-mail-in-ballots-voting-people-of-color Senate Democrat: Mail-in ballots needed because GOP trying to stop 'people of color from voting']
*[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/05/20/merkley-republicans-opposing-mail-in-voting-to-stop-people-of-color-from-voting/ Merkley: Republicans Opposing Mail-In Voting ‘to Stop People of Color from Voting’]</ref>

After flying on a crowded airplane, Merkley introduced a bill that would ban airlines from booking middle seats to passengers.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.businessinsider.com/senate-bill-would-ban-airlines-from-booking-middle-seats-2020-7 A US senator just introduced a bill banning airlines from booking middle seats or charging passengers for switching seats]
*[https://www.rollcall.com/2020/07/23/merkley-bill-would-stop-airlines-sale-of-middle-seats/ Merkley bill would stop airlines’ sale of middle seats]</ref>

Amidst a lawless [[2020 Leftist Insurrection|left-wing insurrection]] in [[Portland, Oregon]], Merkley claimed that the rioters and anarchists vandalizing property were “peaceful”.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/19/watch-sen-merkley-says-bill-will-stop-peaceful-protester-arrests/ Watch: Sen. Merkley Says Bill Will Stop ‘Peaceful Protester’ Arrests]
*[https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2020/08/04/democrats-continue-whitewash-antifa-rioters-as-peaceful-protesters-n751250 Ted Cruz Video Eviscerates Democrats' False Narrative About 'Peaceful Protesters']</ref>

[[File:Reed.jpg|thumb|right|215px|Democrat senator Jack Reed is seeking re-election.]]
===Rhode Island===
[[Jack Reed]], the liberal [[Democrat]] senior senator from [[Rhode Island]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.wpri.com/news/sen-reed-has-1-8m-for-2020-re-election-race-2/ Sen. Reed has $1.8M for 2020 re-election race]</ref> Several ratings have marked his Senate seat as safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on September 8, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Rhode_Island,_2020 United States Senate election in Rhode Island, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====RI Democrat primary====
Sen. Reed ran uncontested in the Democrat primary in seeking a fifth Senate term.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Rhode_Island,_2020_(September_8_Democratic_primary) United States Senate election in Rhode Island, 2020 (September 8 Democratic primary) - Ballotpedia]</ref><ref name="Rhode Island Primary Results 2020">[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/rhode-island/ Rhode Island Primary Results 2020]</ref>

====RI Republican primary====
The only [[Republican]] running to challenge Reed is Allen Waters.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Rhode_Island,_2020_(September_8_Republican_primary) United States Senate election in Rhode Island, 2020 (September 8 Republican primary)]</ref>

While initially backed by the Rhode Island GOP, Waters' endorsement was rescinded in late June 2020 after reports surfaced of a domestic disturbance he was involved in a year ago.<ref>Two references:
*[http://www.ri.gop/rhode_island_republican_party_withdraws_endorsement_for_allen_waters Rhode Island Republican Party Withdraws Endorsement for Allen Waters]
*[https://www.providencejournal.com/news/20200625/ri-gop-rescinds-endorsement-of-us-senate-candidate-allen-waters R.I. GOP rescinds endorsement of U.S. Senate candidate Allen Waters]</ref>

Waters won the Republican nomination uncontested.<ref name="Rhode Island Primary Results 2020"/>

====RI Issues====
Obsessed with renaming military bases, Sen. Reed blocked an amendment proposed by Josh Hawley for a defense bill that would remove language associated with such in the legislation.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/508486-senate-poised-to-pass-defense-bill-with-plan-changing-confederate-named-bases Senate poised to pass defense bill with plan changing Confederate-named bases]</ref>
{{Image Thumbnail left|File:M. Michael Rounds.gif|200px|Sen. Mike Rounds is running for re-election.}}
===South Dakota===
[[Mike Rounds]], the mostly [[conservative]] senator from [[South Dakota]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.dakotanewsnow.com/content/news/Sen-Mike-Rounds-announces-bid-for-second-term-567616381.html Sen. Mike Rounds announces bid for second term]</ref>

The primaries were held on June 2, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_South_Dakota,_2020 United States Senate election in South Dakota, 2020]</ref>

====SD Republican primary====
Sen. Rounds won the Republican primary over challenger Scyller Borglum with 75% of the vote.<ref name="Live: South Dakota State Primary Election Results 2020">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/02/us/elections/results-south-dakota-primary-elections.html Live: South Dakota State Primary Election Results 2020]</ref>

====SD Democrat primary====
The Democrat primary was won by Daniel Ahlers, who ran uncontested.<ref name="Live: South Dakota State Primary Election Results 2020"/>

====SD Issues====
Rounds joined several Senate globalist RINOs in late May 2020 in signing a letter urging Donald Trump not to restrict migrant visas.<ref name="Globalist Senate RINOs"/>

In late July 2020, Sen. Rounds asserted an approval of using federal agents against violent protesters when federal property is being vandalized.<ref>[https://www.cnsnews.com/article/washington/andrew-davenport/sen-cornyn-okay-use-dhs-agents-against-protesters-if-used Sen. Cornyn: Okay to Use DHS Agents Against Protesters if Used to ‘Enforce Federal Law’]</ref>

====SD Debate====
A planned debate at the South Dakota State Fair was cancelled after doctors found cancer cells in Sen. Rounds' wife.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/dakota-news-now-to-host-south-dakota-senate-race-debate-at-state-fair/ar-BB18E32X Senate Debate at South Dakota State Fair cancelled]
*[https://www.keloland.com/news/local-news/senate-debate-cancelled-at-state-fair/ Senate debate cancelled at State Fair]</ref>

===Tennessee (open seat)===
[[File:250px-Lamar Alexander official portrait.jpg|thumb|right|150px|Tennessee senator [[Lamar Alexander]] is retiring.]]
[[Lamar Alexander]], the current RINO establishment senior senator from [[Tennessee]], announced in December 2018 that he wouldn't run for re-election in 2020.<ref>Multiple sources:
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/17/lamar-alexander-announces-retirement-senate/ Lamar Alexander announces retirement from Senate]
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tennessee-gop-senator-lamar-alexander-announces-retirement Tennessee GOP senator Lamar Alexander announces retirement]
*[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2018/12/17/sen-lamar-alexander-tennessee/2276521002/ Tennessee US Sen. Lamar Alexander will not seek re-election in 2020]</ref>

The primaries were held on August 6, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Tennessee,_2020 United States Senate election in Tennessee, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====TN Republican primary====
Among the Republicans who ran for the open seat included former U.S. Ambassador to Japan [[Bill Hagerty]]<ref>[https://teamhagerty.com/ Home - Hagerty for U.S. Senate]</ref> and surgeon [[Manny Sethi]].<ref>[https://www.drmannyforsenate.com/ Dr. Manny for U.S. Senate]</ref><ref>[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/03/manny-sethi-2020-senate-bid-tennessee-republican-lamar-alexander/1292498001/ Nashville trauma surgeon Manny Sethi launches 2020 U.S. Senate bid]</ref>

It was reported by [[Breitbart]] in late July 2020 that Sethi's campaign had comprised of many [[Never Trump]]ers.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/22/divisive-short-fingered-vulgarian-never-trumpers-comprise-tennessees-manny-sethi-entire-senior-campaign-staff/ ‘Divisive, Short-Fingered Vulgarian’: Never Trumpers Comprise Tennessee’s Manny Sethi’s Entire Senior Campaign Staff]</ref>

The primary was ultimately won by Hagerty, who garnered just over 50% of the vote.<ref name="August 6, 2020 Unofficial Election Results">[https://elections.tn.gov/results.php?ByOffice=United%20States%20Senate August 6, 2020 Unofficial Election Results]</ref>

====TN Democrat primary====
The [[Democrat]] primary was won by Marquita Bradshaw, who garnered just over 35% of the votes.<ref name="August 6, 2020 Unofficial Election Results"/>

====TN Issues====
Amidst the [[CCP pandemic]], Hagerty asserted in late March 2020 the importance of holding [[China]] accountable.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/22/tennessee-senate-bill-hagerty-chinese/ Tennessee Senate Candidate Amb. Bill Hagerty: ‘The Chinese Have Got to Be Held Accountable’]</ref>

[[File:Sen Cornyn - Official Portrait FeaturedPhoto.jpg|thumb|left|180px|Establishment Sen. John Cornyn is seeking a fourth Senate term.]]

===Texas===
[[RINO Backer]] and [[establishment]] moderate [[John Cornyn]], the senior senator from [[Texas]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/352149-cornyn-to-run-for-re-election-in-2020 Cornyn to run for reelection in 2020]</ref> His seat is considered to be ''mostly'' safe, according to several election ratings.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on March 3, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Texas,_2020 United States Senate election in Texas, 2020]</ref> For the races in which no candidate received a majority of the votes casted, runoffs were held on July 14.

====TX Republican primary====
Cornyn won the [[Republican]] primary that was held on March 3, 2020.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/485848-cornyn-wins-senate-primary-in-texas Cornyn wins Senate primary in Texas]</ref>

====TX Democrat primary====
Among the dozen candidates in the Democrat primary included Mary Jennings Hegar, Royce West, and Annie Garcia. No candidate received a majority of the votes,<ref>[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/texas/ Texas Primary Results 2020]</ref> and a runoff followed; Hegar won the latter with just over half of the votes casted. Black Democrats, including West, accused their party's establishment of "rigging" the primary when they had announced their endorsement of Hegar in December 2019.<ref name="Democrats Spent Tens of Millions to Destroy the Hopes and Dreams of These Qualified Black Candidates"/>

====TX Issues====
Cornyn criticized [[Democrats]] in May 2020 for exploiting the coronavirus outbreak to attempt legislating a left-wing agenda.<Ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/03/24/gop-sen-cornyn-blasts-dems-for-including-wish-list-in-coronavirus-relief-package-just-shameful/ GOP Sen. Cornyn Blasts Dems for Including ‘Wish List’ in Coronavirus Relief Package — ‘Just Shameful’]</ref>

Sen. Cornyn was part of nine [[globalist]] GOP senators in late May 2020 who sent a letter to President Trump urging him not to restrict migrant visas while Americans lost their jobs amidst the [[CCP virus in the United States]].<ref name="Globalist Senate RINOs"/>

Hegar has ridiculously compared American immigration policies to concentration camps in [[China]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/cornyn-challenger-equates-u-s-border-policies-to-chinese-concentration-camps/ Cornyn Challenger Equates U.S. Border Policies to Chinese Concentration Camps]
*[https://www.newsmax.com/politics/mj-hegar-john-cornyn-texas-uighurs/2020/07/16/id/977494/ Dem Candidate Compares Border Policies to China's Concentration Camps]
*[https://pjmedia.com/election/bryan-preston/2020/07/16/democrat-senate-candidate-hegar-compares-u-s-border-facilities-to-chinas-concentration-camps-as-ghastly-footage-resurfaces-n653963 Democrat Senate Candidate Hegar Compares U.S. Border Facilities to China's Concentration Camps As Ghastly Footage Resurfaces]</ref>

[[File:Mark-warner.jpg|thumb|right|180px|[[Deep state]]r Mark Warner from Virginia is running for re-election.]]

===Virginia===
[[File:Daniel Gade.jpeg|thumb|left|185px|Republican [[Daniel Gade]] is running to unseat Warner.]]
[[Deep state]] ally and "[[centrist]]" Democrat [[Mark Warner]] is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jul/8/mark-warner-posts-18m-second-quarter-fundraising/ Sen. Mark Warner posts $1.8M second-quarter fundraising haul]</ref>

The primaries were held on June 23, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Virginia,_2020 United States Senate election in Virginia, 2020]</ref>

====VA Democrat primary====
Sen. Warner ran unopposed in the Democrat primary.

====VA Republican primary====
[[Daniel Gade]], Thomas Speciale, and Alissa Baldwin ran in the Republican primary; Gade won with around two-thirds of the vote,<ref>[https://results.elections.virginia.gov/vaelections/2020%20June%20Republican%20Primary/Site/Congress.html 2020 June Republican Primary]</ref> while Baldwin and Speciale finished respectively with 18% and 14% of the votes casted.

====VA Issues====
In late July 2020, Sen. Warner and his colleague [[Tim Kaine]] introduced [[gun control]] legislation.<ref>[https://www.wdbj7.com/2020/07/22/kaine-and-warner-introduce-gun-legislation-take-virginia-plan-to-congress/ Kaine and Warner introduce gun legislation, take “Virginia Plan” to Congress]</ref>

====VA Debate(s)====
The first Senate debate between the [[Deep state]]r and the U.S. Army veteran will be held on September 23, 2020, hosted by the Northern Virginia Chamber of Commerce, and moderated by partisan [[NBC]] hack [[Chuck Todd]].<ref>[https://patch.com/virginia/mclean/first-debate-virginia-u-s-senate-race-scheduled-nova First Debate For Virginia U.S. Senate Race Scheduled In NoVA]</ref>

[[File:Shelley Moore Capito official Senate photo.jpg|thumb|left|240px|Sen. Capito is seeking re-election.]]

===West Virginia===
Establishment moderate [[conservative]] [[Shelley Moore Capito]], the junior senator from [[West Virginia]], is running for re-election to a second term in the Senate.<ref>[https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/west-virginia/articles/2020-01-17/capito-files-for-reelection-setting-up-race-with-ojeda Capito Files for Reelection, Faces Potential Race With Ojeda]</ref> Her seat is considered safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on June 9, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_West_Virginia,_2020 United States Senate election in West Virginia, 2020]</ref>

====WV Republican primary====
Capito easily won her party's primary with over 80% of the vote, defeating two challengers.<ref name="West Virginia U.S. Senate Primary Election Results">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/09/us/elections/results-west-virginia-senate-primary-election.html West Virginia U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

====WV Democrat primary====
The Democrat primary was won by Paula Jean Swearengin with 38% of the vote, defeating opponents Richard Ojeda and Richie Robb.<ref name="West Virginia U.S. Senate Primary Election Results"/>

====WV Issues====
Amidst spars between many [[conservative]] Republicans and [[Anthony Fauci]], Sen. Capito sided with the latter.<ref>Two references:
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/491363-gop-senator-trump-should-let-healthcare-professionals-guide-coronavirus GOP senator: Trump should let health care professionals 'guide' coronavirus response]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/12/anthony-fauci-republicans-coronavirus-251919 Fauci fatigue sets in among some Republicans]</ref>

In mid-June 2020, Capito bucked with her party line on a Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) nomination.<ref>[https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/503256-key-republican-jeopardizes-nomination-of-trump-consumer-safety-pick Key Republican jeopardizes nomination of Trump consumer safety pick]</ref>

[[File:Enzi.jpg|thumb|right|180px|Sen. Mike Enzi is retiring.]]
===Wyoming (open seat)===
Establishment conservative [[Mike Enzi]] announced on May 4, 2019 that he wouldn't be running for re-election in 2020.<ref>Two sources:
*[https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/04/wyoming-sen-mike-enzi-will-not-run-for-reelection-next-year-1301637 Wyoming Sen. Mike Enzi won't run for reelection]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/442132-wyomings-enzi-to-retire-from-senate-at-end-of-term Mike Enzi announces he'll retire from Senate after 2020]</ref>

The primary elections will be held on August 18, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Wyoming,_2020 United States Senate election in Wyoming, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====WY Republican primary====
While Wyoming's U.S. representative [[Liz Cheney]] of the at-large district was initially a potential to run for the Senate seat, she later declined, preferring to run for re-election to the [[U.S. House of Representatives]].<ref>Two sources:
*[https://localnews8.com/news/2020/01/16/liz-cheney-wont-run-for-us-senate-seat-from-wyoming/ Liz Cheney won’t run for US Senate seat from Wyoming]
*[https://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/wyoming-rep-liz-cheney-will-not-run-for-senate/article_fda975a9-dd8a-5295-8abc-3cb2afac9a57.html Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney will not run for Senate]</ref> Cheney's predecessor in the U.S. House, Cynthia Lummis, ran in the election; the latter ultimately won the [[Republican]] primary.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/512187-cynthia-lummis-wins-gop-senate-primary-in-wyoming Cynthia Lummis wins GOP Senate primary in Wyoming]</ref>

====WY Democrat primary====
Among the Democrats who ran in the [[Democrat]] primary include Merav Ben-David, Nathan Wendt and Rex Wilde. Ben-David ultimately won the primary.<ref>[https://forward.com/fast-forward/452866/merav-ben-david-an-israeli-american-scientist-wins-wyoming-s-democratic/ Merav Ben-David, an Israeli-American scientist, wins Wyoming’s Democratic senate primary]</ref>

====WY Issues====
In December 2019, Lummis wrote an article for [[Breitbart]], in it praising [[President Trump]] for being a “Disruptor-in-Chief” of [[Washington, D.C.]].<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/01/exclusive-cynthia-lummis-disruptor-in-chief-donald-trump-has-changed-washington-for-the-better/# Exclusive–Cynthia Lummis: Disruptor-in-Chief Donald Trump Has Changed Washington for the Better]</ref>

==Potential vulnerable seats==
[[File:DavidPerdue2015.jpg|thumb|right|210px|Sen. David Perdue is running for re-election.]]
===Georgia===
[[David Perdue]], the incumbent [[conservative]] senior senator from [[Georgia]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/inside-david-perdue-2020-race-for-another-senate-term/pTFQ5GdliIK0ljaIu8j5qN/ Inside David Perdue’s 2020 race for another U.S. Senate term]</ref>

The primaries were held on June 9, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Georgia,_2020 United States Senate election in Georgia, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====GA Republican primary====
Sen. Perdue ran unopposed in his party's primary.<ref name="Georgia Primary Results 2020">[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/georgia/ Georgia Primary Results 2020]</ref>

====GA Democrat primary====
The Democrat primary was won by [[Jon Ossoff]] with just over 50% of the vote, who defeated challengers Teresa Tomlinson and Sarah Riggs Amico.<ref name="Georgia Primary Results 2020"/>

====GA Issues====
Ossoff has been criticized<ref>[https://www.dailywire.com/news/tinseltown-liberal-friends-gop-smacks-jon-ossoff-over-hollywood-ties-in-georgia-senate-race ‘Tinseltown Liberal Friends’: GOP Smacks Jon Ossoff Over Hollywood Ties In Georgia Senate Race]</ref> for previously representing his national security credentials when running for U.S. House in a 2017 special election.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/politics/ossoff-admits-he-misrepresented-national-security-credentials/ Ossoff Admits He Misrepresented National Security Credentials]</ref>

Despite denouncing corporate PACs, Ossoff has indirectly taken thousands of dollars from such groups.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/ossoff-says-corporate-pac-money-kills-as-he-rakes-in-thousands-from-them/ Ossoff Says Corporate PAC Money ‘Kills’ As He Rakes In Thousands From Them]</ref>

[[File:Kelly Loeffler.jpg|thumb|left|145px|[[Kelly Loeffler]] is running for election to a full Senate term.]]

===Georgia (special)===
[[File:Doug Collins official photo.jpg|thumb|right|170px|Rep. [[Doug Collins]] is running against [[Kelly Loeffler]].]]
Georgia will hold a special election to fiil seat of Johnny Isakson who resigned in December 2019. A normal primary election will not occur; instead, all candidates, regardless of party, will be placed on the same ballot for a jungle primary election in November 3, 2020. Party labels will be printed on the ballot and if no candidate receives a majority of the vote, the top two finishers will advance to a run-off election, to be held on January 5, 2021.

Governor Brian Kemp appointed Kelly Loeffler to serve as Isakson's replacement, effective January 6, 2020.

Loeffler, being the incumbent junior senator from [[Georgia]], is running for election to a full Senate term. Among her endorsements include former ambassador [[Nikki Haley]].<ref>[https://dailycaller.com/2020/03/09/nikki-haley-endorses-kelly-loeffler-georgia/ ‘She Understands American Leadership’: Nikki Haley Chooses A Side In Heated Georgia Senate Race]</ref>

Rep. [[Doug Collins]] of Georgia's 9th district is running for the seat. Collins was among the fiercest defenders of [[President Trump]] amidst the [[impeachment coup]].

====GA (special) candidates====
Loeffler, backed by the GOP establishment,<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/27/rep-doug-collins-expected-to-run-for-senate-107085 Rep. Doug Collins expected to run for Senate, setting up GOP clash]</ref> is facing a primary challenged by representative Collins.<ref>[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doug-collins-us-house-georgia-republican-announces-senate-run/ Republican Congressman Doug Collins announces Senate run]</ref> According to a poll by the Public Policy Polling in December 2019, the preference for Collins is three times greater than the preference for Loeffler.<ref>[https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jl2nP_tWyw482tIlenbd1Els2Mq-6KUP/view PPP Georgia GOP.pdf]</ref> In February 2020, Collins has released an ad strongly criticizing Loeffler for being backed by the anti-Trump<ref>[https://www.clubforgrowth.org/club-for-growth-launches-anti-trump-ad-in-wisconsin/ Club for Growth Launches Anti-Trump Ad in Wisconsin]</ref> [[Club for Growth]]<ref>[https://twitter.com/CollinsforGA/status/1224364335004180480?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Doug Collins on Twitter: "The original..."]</ref> as well as another one criticizing Loeffler for backing [[RINO]] [[Mitt Romney]] in 2012.<ref>[https://twitter.com/CollinsforGA/status/1225840271851769856?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Doug Collins on Twitter: "@kloeffler stood with Mitt Romney..."]</ref> This, in turn, led the GOP establishment and the [[Club for Growth]] to further their already-increasing opposition to Collins.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/28/gop-establishment-prepares-to-battle-doug-collins-108450 GOP establishment prepares to battle Doug Collins]</ref><ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/30/collins-georgia-club-for-growth-109411 Conservative group will launch ad broadside against Collins in Georgia]</ref>

[[Pro-life]] leaders urged Gov. Kemp not to appoint Loeffler because of her ties to the Grady Memorial Hospital,<ref>[https://www.lifenews.com/2019/12/02/georgia-gov-brian-kemp-names-planned-parenthood-activist-kelly-loeffler-to-open-senate-seat/ Georgia GOP Gov. Brian Kemp Names Planned Parenthood Activist Kelly Loeffler to Open Senate Seat]</ref> one of the largest abortion providers in the state, and the WNBA, which partners with [[Planned Parenthood]]. However, Kemp appointed Loeffler anyway. Loeffler sits on the board of Grady and has donated thousands of dollars to liberal and pro-abortion Democrats.<ref>[https://www.foxbusiness.com/money/georgia-kelly-loeffler-donations-republicans-democrats Georgia's Kelly Loeffler and her husband have donated to Republican and Democratic candidates]</ref> Grady Memorial Hospital is one of the largest purveyors of abortion in Georgia and a training ground for abortionists. In February 2020, the Georgia Life Alliance announced it would spend at least $3 million on an ad blitz to back Loeffler. Rep. Collins commented, “What I think is happening is they got a large infusion of cash from Kelly. They’ve hardly raised $50,000 and then they suddenly announce a $3 million ad buy?”<ref>[https://www.lifenews.com/2019/12/04/new-republican-senator-kelly-loeffler-says-shes-pro-life-will-vote-against-abortion/ New Republican Senator Kelly Loeffler Says She’s Pro-Life, Will Vote Against Abortion]</ref>

Among the Democrats running in the race include Raphael Warnock, a pastor, and Matt Lieberman, son of former moderate senator [[Joe Lieberman]]. In early August 2020, Lieberman faced calls to drop out of the race over an authored novel that some argued to contain “racist and discriminatory” tropes.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/matt-lieberman-calls-drop-georgia-senate-race Matt Lieberman faces calls to drop out of Georgia Senate race over 'racist and discriminatory' tropes in 2018 book]
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/democratic-candidate-faces-calls-to-drop-out-of-georgia-senate-race-over-racist-tropes-in-self-published-book Democratic candidate faces calls to drop out of Georgia Senate race over 'racist' tropes in self-published book]
*[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/georgia-democrat-faces-calls-to-drop-out-of-senate-race-over-racist-novel/ar-BB17Je8I Georgia Democrat Faces Calls to Drop Out of Senate Race Over 'Racist' Novel]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/511170-matt-lieberman-faces-calls-to-drop-out-of-georgia-senate-race-over-racist Matt Lieberman faces calls to drop out of Georgia Senate race over 'racist and discriminatory' tropes in 2018 book]</ref>

====GA (special) Issues====
On January 24, 2020, Loeffler received a briefing on the [[Wuhan coronavirus]];<ref>[https://www.thedailybeast.com/sen-kelly-loeffler-dumped-millions-in-stock-after-coronavirus-briefing Sen. Kelly Loeffler Dumped Millions in Stock After Coronavirus Briefing]</ref> that day she began selling stock. Over the next three weeks Loeffler sold up to more than $3 million in stock. Loeffler has been accused of [[insider trading]],<ref>[https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-anchor-ed-henry-grills-kelly-loeffler-on-her-stock-dump-asks-how-this-wasnt-insider-trading Fox News Grills Sen. Kelly Loeffler on Her Stock Dump: How Was This Not Insider Trading?]</ref> selling stock based on information not available to the public. The stock market crashed in March, losing more than 20% due to Wuhan coronavirus fears and the lockdown. Loeffler's husband Jeffrey Sprecher, the chair of the [[New York Stock Exchange]], was reported in May 2020 to also have dumped stock prior to the economic devastation caused by the [[CCP pandemic]].<ref>[https://www.thedailybeast.com/sen-kelly-loefflers-husband-nyse-boss-dumped-his-own-stock-before-coronavirus-crisis-report-says Sen. Loeffler’s Husband, NYSE Boss, Dumped His Own Stock Before Coronavirus Crisis: Report]</ref>

In opposition to Sen. Loeffler, a co-owner of a WNBA league, players wore shirts advocating for one of her [[Democrat]] opponents, with the messages reading ‘Vote Warnock’.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/bulls/wnba-players-wear-vote-warnock-shirts-continued-stand-against-kelly-loeffler WNBA players wear ‘Vote Warnock’ shirts in continued stand against Kelly Loeffler]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/wnba/2020/08/04/wnba-players-vote-warnock-shirts-kelly-loeffler-opponent-atlanta-dream/3294951001/ WNBA players wear shirts backing political opponent of Atlanta Dream co-owner Kelly Loeffler]
*[https://www.huffpost.com/entry/wnba-vote-raphael-warnock-kelly-loeffler-shirts_n_5f29dab9c5b68fbfc888fa0d WNBA Players Back Kelly Loeffler’s Senate Opponent With ‘Vote Warnock’ Shirts]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/510574-wnba-players-wear-vote-warnock-shirts-in-support-of-loeffler-democratic WNBA players wear 'Vote Warnock' shirts in support of Loeffler Democratic challenger]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/sports/2020/08/05/wnba-players-wear-vote-warnock-shirts-supporting-loefflers-democratic-challenger/ WNBA Players Wear ‘Vote Warnock’ Shirts, Supporting Loeffler’s Democratic Challenger]</ref>

In late September 2020, Warnock ridiculously compared police officers to "thugs".<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/georgia-senate-candidate-said-police-behave-like-thugs-and-gangsters/ Georgia Senate Candidate Said Police Behave Like Thugs and Gangsters]
*[https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/22/democratic-georgia-senate-candidate-compares-police-to-gangsters-and-thugs/ Democratic Georgia Senate Candidate Compares Police To Gangsters And Thugs]
*[https://pjmedia.com/election/tyler-o-neil/2020/09/22/democrat-senate-candidate-called-police-gangsters-thugs-bullies-a-danger-to-children-n954846 Democrat Senate Candidate Called Police Gangsters, Thugs, Bullies, a 'Danger' to Children]</ref>

[[File:Joni Ernst Official photo portrait 114th Congress.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Sen. Joni Ernst is seeking re-election.]]

===Iowa===
[[Joni Ernst]], the pro-Trump, strongly [[conservative]] junior senator from [[Iowa]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/420411-iowas-ernst-will-run-for-reelection-in-2020 Iowa’s Ernst will run for reelection in 2020]</ref>

The primaries were held on June 2, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Iowa,_2020 United States Senate election in Iowa, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====IA Republican primary====
Ernst ran unopposed in the Republican primary.<ref name="Iowa U.S. Senate Primary Election Results">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/02/us/elections/results-iowa-senate-primary-election.html Iowa U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

====IA Democrat primary====
The Democrat primary was won by [[Theresa Greenfield]], who garnered a plurality of 48% of the votes casted.<ref name="Iowa U.S. Senate Primary Election Results"/>

====IA Issues====
Despite promising in 2019 not to take any corporate [[PAC]] dollars for her campaign, Greenfield was reported to have done exactly that;<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/27/watch-joni-ernsts-campaign-exposes-theresa-greenfields-anti-corporate-pac-hypocrisy/ Watch: Joni Ernst’s Campaign Exposes Theresa Greenfield’s Anti-Corporate PAC Hypocrisy]</ref> she downplayed criticism by fellow Democrats over the matter by calling them “Republican talking points”.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/iowa-dem-criticized-by-fellow-dems-for-violating-corporate-pac-pledge/ Iowa Dem Criticized by Fellow Dems for Violating Corporate PAC Pledge]</ref> Greenfield also received an ethics complaint that was filed by outside groups.<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/04/08/schumer-candidate-on-pac-spending-i-cant-control-what-outside-groups-do-n2566485 IA Senate: Greenfield Says She 'Cannot Control What Outside Groups Do' After Ethics Complaint]</ref>

Despite having claimed to be a champion for small businesses and workers, Greenfield supported Aldi in the latter's 2015 effort to evict small businesses, as reported in early May 2020.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/01/report-iowa-democrat-theresa-greenfield-evicted-local-businesses-for-corporate-chain/ Report: Iowa Democrat Theresa Greenfield Evicted Local Businesses for Corporate Chain]
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/iowa-dem-evicted-local-businesses-to-make-way-for-multinational-chain/ Iowa Dem Evicted Local Businesses to Make Way for Multinational Chain]</ref> Iowa small business owners and entrepreneurs expressed concerns over this matter a month later.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/small-business-owners-deeply-troubled-by-iowa-dems-eviction-record/ Small Business Owners ‘Deeply Troubled’ by Iowa Dem’s Eviction Record]</ref>

While strongly [[conservative]], Ernst joined an unnecessary, [[establishment]]/Democrat favored push to rename military bases in early July 2020.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.newsmax.com/politics/ernst-militarybill-trump/2020/07/05/id/975759/ Ernst Urges Trump To Sign Bill That Includes Renaming Bases Honoring Confederates]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/505925-ernst-says-trump-should-sign-defense-policy-bill Ernst says Trump should sign defense policy bill with military base renaming provision]</ref>

In late July 2020, Sen. Ernst introduced the Ending Taxpayer Funding for Anarchy Act, which would end all federal funding for cities and states that allow for and/or promote far-left anarchist uprisings.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/22/joni-ernst-urges-trump-to-ban-federal-funds-for-cities-allowing-anarchy/ Joni Ernst Urges Trump to Ban Federal Funds for Cities Allowing Anarchy]
*[https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2020/06/25/joni-ernst-bill-would-deny-federal-funds-cities-states-allowing-autonomous-zones-she-calls-anarchy/3258791001/ Sen. Joni Ernst bill would deny federal funds to cities, states allowing autonomous zones]
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ernst-feds-to-block-taxpayer-funds-states-cities-anarchy Sen. Ernst urges feds to block taxpayer funds for states, cities allowing 'anarchy']</ref>

It was reported in late July 2020 that Greenfield had deleted mentions of her ‘deeply troubling’ business record from her campaign website.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/27/democrat-theresa-greenfield-scrubs-campaign-site-of-her-deeply-troubling-business-record/ Democrat Theresa Greenfield Scrubs Campaign Site of Her ‘Deeply Troubling’ Business Record]
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/iowa-dem-scrubs-business-experience-from-campaign-site-after-local-business-owners-slam-her-record/ Iowa Dem Scrubs Business Experience From Campaign Site After Local Business Owners Slam Her Record]</ref>

In early August 2020, Ernst requested a unanimous consent for the U.S. Senate to move forward with Sarah's Law, a bill that would strengthen punishments imposed on illegal aliens who commit crimes; the legislation was named after Sarah Root, an Iowan who was killed by a drunk-driving illegal alien. The bill was ultimately blocked by Democrat Sen. [[Tom Udall]], who ridiculously claimed that it “paints immigrants as more dangerous than other people;”<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2020/08/06/joni-ernst-sarahs-law-n2573850 Sen. Ernst's Bill Would Punish Violent Illegal Immigrants. Democrats Still Opposed.]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/08/06/tom-udall-blocks-joni-ernstd-bill-strengthen-ice-detention-illegal-immigrants/ Tom Udall Blocks Joni Ernst’s Bill to Strengthen ICE Detention of Illegal Immigrants]
*[https://www.kcci.com/article/ernsts-immigration-bill-named-after-killed-iowa-woman-blocked-by-democrats/33550801 Ernst's immigration bill, named after killed Iowa woman, blocked by Democrats]</ref> ''it's important to note the distinction between illegal aliens and legal immigrants''.

====IA Debate====
It was reported by the [[Free Beacon]] in late August 2020 that Greenfield apparently chose to skip a debate with Sen. Ernst as part of an overall "windowless basement" strategy shared by [[Joe Biden]] in the latter's [[Joe Biden 2020 presidential campaign|presidential campaign]].<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/iowa-democrat-theresa-greenfield-to-skip-first-debate/ Iowa Democrat Theresa Greenfield To Skip First Debate]</ref> However, the two candidates will participate in a debate on October 15, 2020.<ref>[https://wgem.com/2020/08/06/wgem-to-broadcast-iowa-u-s-senate-debate/ WGEM to Broadcast Iowa U.S. Senate Debate]</ref>

[[File:Gary Peters 2008.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Gary Peters is running for re-election.]]

===Michigan===
[[Gary Peters]], the incumbent Democrat senator from [[Michigan]], is facing re-election in a projected swing state that voted for Donald Trump in the [[2016 U.S. presidential election]].

The only Republican running to oppose Peters is [[movement conservative]] [[John E. James]],<ref>[https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2019/06/john-james-announces-2020-campaign-for-us-senate.html John James announces 2020 campaign for U.S. Senate]</ref> a U.S. combat veteran who ran against [[Debbie Stabenow]] for Senate in 2018 and lost<ref>[https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/michigan/ Michigan Election Results 2018]</ref> during a blue wave year due to Stabenow's strong backing by Michigan farmers that generally vote Republican.<ref>[https://www.mlive.com/news/2018/10/why_the_michigan_farm_bureau_w.html Why Debbie Stabenow has staying power with Michigan farmers]</ref>

[[File:John E James.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Conservative veteran John James is running to unseat Gary Peters.]]
The primaries were held on August 4, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Michigan,_2020 United States Senate election in Michigan, 2020]</ref>

====MI Democrat primary====
Sen. Peters won the Democrat primary uncontested with 1.177 million votes.<ref name="2020 Michigan Unofficial Primary Election Results - Secretary of State of Michigan">[https://mielections.us/election/results/2020PRI_CENR.html 2020 Michigan Unofficial Primary Election Results - Secretary of State of Michigan]</ref>

====MI Republican primary====
The Republican primary was won by James, who ran uncontested and garnered just over 1 million votes.<ref name="2020 Michigan Unofficial Primary Election Results - Secretary of State of Michigan"/>

====MI Issues====
Peters, a Democrat partisan leftist who voted to remove Trump<ref>[https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/02/04/senator-gary-peters-vote-convict-president-trump/4656176002/ Michigan Sen. Gary Peters says he will vote to convict Trump]</ref> and is suspected of supporting [[Medicare for All]],<ref>[https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/17/gary-peters-dodges-questions-medicare-for-all/ Swing State Democrat Senator Up For Re-Election Dodges Questions On Medicare-For-All]</ref><ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/08/01/watch-gary-peters-backs-medicare-for-all-eliminating-private-health-insurance/ Watch–Gary Peters Backs Medicare for All, Eliminating Private Health Insurance]</ref> was at one point unknown among 36% of Michiganders, according to a poll in mid-2019.<ref>[https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/29/peters-name-recognition-senate-reelection-campaign/2704862002/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTkRGa01UUmpZbVprT0RndyIsInQiOiJcLzA0YUExUTY5OUlwK0RQTlRTdTJhbUp4T0dSUjB5Z2ExdFwvV0JRUWRxd3N4YWV6RTJnTWtJSkRpc1V6TE5kR1wvTjBGS1VwMzdxN3lxa2twSjhVbEpxN0p6ak9MYWR2RW1aRU4rYUwzM3E0K3J5ZFF5bm1ub01VZ0VLVEFsSzU1RSJ9 Poll: Peters starts re-election campaign with low name identification]</ref>

Sen. Peters praised [[China]] in March 2020 amidst the [[CCP pandemic]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/thinking-strategically-democratic-senator-praises-chinese-government-response-to-coronavirus 'Thinking strategically': Democratic senator praises Chinese response to coronavirus]
*[https://100percentfedup.com/dem-senator-gary-peters-praises-the-chinese-government-as-the-deadly-coronavirus-spreads/ Dem Senator Gary Peters Praises the Chinese Government as the Deadly Coronavirus Spreads]
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/03/24/gary-peters-praised-chinese-government-response-to-coronavirus/ Sen. Gary Peters Praised The Chinese Government’s Response To Coronavirus]</ref> Two months later, the Better Future MI Fund [[super PAC]] released an ad calling out the senator for “double dipping” on taxpayer dollars while his home state suffers from both the [[coronavirus]] in addition to the incompetent gubernatorial tenure of [[Gretchen Whitmer]].<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sZvQxHyAto Peters Double Dips While Michigan Suffers]</ref>

James met with [[President Trump]] when the latter visited a Ford assembly plant in May 2020, where he accurately called out the incumbent Sen. Peters over “ultra-partisanship”.<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/05/21/john-james-trump-n2569255 John James Meets with President Trump, Hits Sen. Peters for 'Ultra Partisanship']</ref>

Peters has falsely claimed that he "never" voted against pay raises for veterans despite having done exactly that.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/gary-peters-falsely-claims-he-never-voted-against-a-pay-raise-for-service-members/ Gary Peters Falsely Claims He ‘Never Voted Against a Pay Raise for Service Members’]</ref>

A [[liberal hypocrisy|liberal hypocrite]], Sen. Peters asserted tough stances on China despite taking tens of thousands of dollars in donations from companies tied to the [[CCP]].<ref>Two references:
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/07/07/sen-peters-china-n2572043 Sen. Peters Talks Tough on China While Taking Donations from Companies with Ties to Chinese Government]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/08/gary-peters-collects-over-65000-in-donations-from-employees-lobbyists-paid-by-chinese-communist-government/ Gary Peters Collects Over $65,000 in Donations from Employees, Lobbyists, Paid by Chinese Communist Government]</ref>

As reported in mid-June 2020, a poll found that only 19% of Michiganders believed that Sen. Peters deserved to be re-elected;<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/16/michigan-poll-81-either-want-someone-new-or-unsure-if-democrat-gary-peters-deserves-reelection/ Michigan Poll: 81% Either Want Someone New or Unsure if Democrat Gary Peters Deserves Reelection]
*[https://americandigest.com/election-shocker-gary-peters/ Election shocker: Only 19 percent of Michigan voters support re-election of Democrat Sen. Gary Peters]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/06/16/mi-poll-only-19-percent-of-voters-say-sen-peters-deserves-a-second-term-n2570732 MI Poll: Only 19 Percent of Voters Say Sen. Peters Deserves a Second Term]</ref> around a third preferred a different candidate, and half were unsure.

[[File:Tina Smith.PNG|thumb|left|235px|Pro-abortion Sen. Tina Smith is seeking re-election to a full Senate term.]]

===Minnesota===
[[Tina Smith]], the incumbent [[DFL]] junior senator from Minnesota who was appointed to the seat and won a special election in 2018 to succeed the disgraced sexual predator [[Al Franken]],<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/minnesota-senate-special Minnesota U.S. Senate Special Election Results]</ref> is running for election to a full term in 2020.<ref>[https://tinaforminnesota.com/talking-points-sen-tina-smith-talks-health-care-2020-election/ Talking Points: Sen. Tina Smith Talks Health Care, 2020 Election]</ref> A leftist and pro-abortion radical,<ref>[https://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Tina_Smith.htm Tina Smith on the Issues]</ref> Smith has participated in the [[Abortion|murder of unborn children]] when she had in the past worked for [[Planned Parenthood]].<ref>[http://www.startribune.com/sen-tina-smith-stands-behind-her-work-with-planned-parenthood/470303403/ Sen. Tina Smith stands behind her work with Planned Parenthood]</ref>

The primaries will be held on August 11, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Minnesota,_2020 United States Senate election in Minnesota, 2020 - Ballotpedia]</ref>

====MN Democrat (DFL) primary====
Sen. Smith faced four challengers in the [[Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party]] primary. She easily won with nearly 90% of the vote.<ref name="Minnesota U.S. Senate Primary Election Results">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/08/11/us/elections/results-minnesota-senate-primary-election.html Minnesota U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

====MN Republican primary====
Among the [[Republicans]] who ran to challenge Smith include [[Jason Lewis]], a conservative radio show host and former U.S. representative from Minnesota's 2nd district who served for one House term in the [[115th U.S. Congress]] before being defeated for re-election by Democrat [[Angie Craig]] during the [[2018 midterms]]. Lewis decisively won the primary with 78% of the votes casted.<ref name="Minnesota U.S. Senate Primary Election Results"/>

====MN Issues====
In late March 2020, Smith joined all Senate Democrats in blocking a bi-partisan coronavirus relief bill aimed at providing aid to Americans hurt by the [[CCP pandemic]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://nypost.com/2020/03/23/senate-democrats-block-1-8-trillion-coronavirus-aid-bill/ Senate Democrats block $1.8 trillion coronavirus aid bill]
*[https://www.westernjournal.com/democrats-block-coronavirus-relief-plan-senate/ Democrats Block Coronavirus Relief Plan in Senate]
*[https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/coronavirus-relief-democrats-block-job-saving-program/ Democrats Block Job-Saving Program]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/23/four-swing-state-senate-democrats-voted-against-coronavirus-relief-for-american-workers/ Four Swing-State Senate Democrats Voted Against Coronavirus Relief for American Workers]</ref>

Although mostly a far-left partisan, Sen. Smith surprisingly broke with many Democrats in mid-April 2020 along with Sen. [[Kyrsten Sinema]] in calling for swift actions to re-fund the Paycheck Protection Program.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/senate-democrats-join-obama-small-business-chief-to-break-with-pelosi-and-call-for-more-loan-funding-immediately Senate Democrats join Obama small-business chief to break with Pelosi and call for more loan funding immediately]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2020/04/16/sinema-ppp-n2567056 Kyrsten Sinema Breaks With Dem Leaders and Urges Additional PPP Funding ASAP]</ref>

In late May 2020, Smith signed onto a race-baiting resolution authored by [[Kamala Harris]] that would condemn the use of the term "Wuhan virus" as being "racist".<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/sres580/BILLS-116sres580is.pdf BILLS-116sres580is.pdf]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/juliorosas/2020/05/21/democratic-senators-introduce-resolution-condemning-calling-covid19-as-wuhan-virus-as-racist-n2569168 Kamala Harris Makes Move to Condemn Calling COVID-19 the 'Wuhan Virus']</ref>

[[File:Steve Daines, Official Portrait, 116th Congress.jpg|thumb|right|205px|Sen. Steve Daines is running for re-election to a second term in office.]]

===Montana===
[[Steve Daines]], the incumbent junior senator from [[Montana]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://missoulian.com/opinion/letters/daines-is-spineless-and-up-for-re-election/article_08b56df7-a1be-5f31-94f4-c9ffc042ba71.html Daines is spineless, and up for re-election]</ref> According to several polls, his seat is most likely safe.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

The primaries were held on June 2, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Montana,_2020 United States Senate election in Montana, 2020]</ref>

====MT Republican primary====
Sen. Daines easily won his party's primary, garnering 88% of the vote.<ref name="Montana Secretary of State">[https://electionresults.mt.gov/resultsSW.aspx?type=FED&map=CTY Montana Secretary of State]</ref>

[[File:Bullocks3 (2).jpg|thumb|left|255px|Democrat Steve Bullock is challenging Daines for the Senate seat in a strongly contested race.]]
====MT Democrat primary====
The Democrat primary was won by the current far-left Democrat Governor of Montana [[Steve Bullock]], who garnered 95% of the votes casted.<ref name="Montana Secretary of State"/> A failed 2020 presidential candidate who initially vowed not to run for the seat,<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/4/steve-bullock-montana-governor-backtracks-senate-r/ Former Democratic presidential candidate backtracks on refusal to run for Senate]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/02/steve-bullock-suspends-presidential-campaign-074729 Steve Bullock ends presidential bid, won't run for Senate]
*[https://freebeacon.com/issues/bullied-into-senate-race-montanas-bullock-says-he-wont-answer-to-party-bosses/ Pressured Into Senate Race by Top Dems, Montana’s Bullock Says He ‘Won’t Answer to Party Bosses’]</ref> he flip-flopped when announcing his run for the office on the very last possible day to file his candidacy for the election.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/montana-gov-steve-bullock-announces-run-senate-n1153016 Montana Gov. Steve Bullock announces run for Senate]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/03/09/bullock-senate-n2564079 MT Senate: Bullock Makes it Official, NRSC Comes Out Swinging]
*[https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/03/09/steve-bullock-montanas-governor-launches-senate-bid/4999173002/ Montana Gov. Steve Bullock launches Senate bid after failed presidential run]
*[https://apnews.com/b2f44b5ed00f8fd987daa4825972541a Montana Gov. Steve Bullock to run for Senate against Daines]</ref>

====MT Issues====
It was reported in late July 2020 that Gov. Bullock allegedly threatened and intimidated whistleblowers who questioned welfare fraud present in his administration.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/07/29/report-bullock-accused-of-intimidating-montana-auditors-over-potential-welfare-fraud/ Report: Bullock Accused of ‘Intimidating’ Montana Auditors over Potential Welfare Fraud]
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/former-official-accuses-steve-bullock-of-fraud-intimidation/ Former Official Accuses Steve Bullock of Fraud, Intimidation]</ref>

It was reported in early August 2020 that a staffer for Bullock was fired over bigoted tweets.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/08/02/report-montana-democrat-steve-bullock-staffer-fired-racist-sexist-tweets/ Report: Montana Democrat Steve Bullock Staffer Fired for Racist, Sexist Tweets]
*[https://apnews.com/bac9a931e8d86549df139a24cc4082b7 Bullock staffer fired after offensive tweets surface]
*[https://freebeacon.com/politics/bullock-staffer-fired-after-free-beacon-report/ Bullock Staffer Fired After Free Beacon Report]</ref>

On August 7, 2020, an ad was released attacking Sen. Daines for supposedly siding with [[Big Pharma]] despite the fact that he has supported measures to reduce drug prices.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/aug/25/duty-and-honor/misleading-ad-montana-senate-race-casts-steve-dain/ Misleading ad in Montana Senate race casts Steve Daines as soft on drug companies]</ref>

Gov. Bullock has faced allegations of sexual misconduct.<ref>Two references:
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/17/steve-bullock-montana-me-too-grabbed-butt/ Girl Says Bullock Grabbed Her Butt, Governor Denies Her Claim]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/08/18/steve-bullock-metoo-n2574569 MT Gov. Steve Bullock Faces #MeToo Allegations as Senate Race Heats Up]</ref>

As governor, Bullock has paid female staffers less than he paid male staffers<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/bullock-paid-women-less-than-men-as-governor/ As Governor, Bullock Paid Women Less Than Men]</ref> despite celebrating Women's Equality Day.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/bullock-pays-women-less-than-men-even-as-he-celebrates-womens-equality-day/ Bullock Pays Women Less Than Men Even As He Celebrates ‘Women’s Equality Day’]</ref>

In a campaign ad, Bullock claims to be supportive of [[gun rights]],<ref>[https://mycmag.kantarmediana.com/KMIcmagvidbin2/USSEN_MT_BULLOCK_GUN_RIGHTS.html USSEN_MT_BULLOCK_GUN_RIGHTS]</ref> despite the fact that he has an "F" rating from the [[NRA]].<ref>Two references:
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/montana-dem-goes-pro-gun-in-latest-ad-despite-f-rating-from-nra/ Montana Dem Goes Pro-Gun in Latest Ad Despite ‘F’ Rating From NRA]
*[https://www.newsmax.com/politics/stevebullock-montana/2020/08/27/id/984093/ Dem Steve Bullock Backs Gun Rights Despite NRA Score]</ref>

Bullock was sued in early September after issuing an executive order allowing Montana counties to conduct universal voting by mail;<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/dem-bullock-changed-voting-rules-as-he-eyes-senate-seat/ Dem Bullock Changes Voting Rules As He Eyes Senate Seat]
*[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-montana-idUSKBN25U04S Trump campaign sues Democratic Montana governor to limit mail-in voting]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/09/true-the-vote-sues-montana-governor-for-allowing-universal-mail-in-voting/ True the Vote Sues Montana Governor for Allowing Universal Mail-In Voting]
*[https://www.aol.com/article/news/2020/09/03/gop-trump-campaign-sue-montana-over-all-mail-voting-option/24609722/ GOP, Trump campaign sue Montana over all-mail voting option]</ref> this was after an earlier poll showed him slightly trailing Sen. Daines.<ref>[https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/montana-2020-trump-holds-strong-as-biden-coalesces-support Montana 2020: Trump Holds Strong as Biden Coalesces Support]</ref>

====MT Debates====
Bullock's campaign announced in late July 2020 that the [[left-wing]] governor has agreed to three debate challenges proposed by Sen. Daines.<ref>[https://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/2020/07/29/bullock-agrees-3-senate-debates-daines-montana/5541019002/ Bullock agrees to 3 Senate debates with Daines]</ref> The first debate was held on August 8, 2020 ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svRsyy15blU full video here]).

[[File:000shaheen.jpg|thumb|left|225px|Jeanne Shaheen, the left-wing senator from New Hampshire, is seeking re-election.]]

===New Hampshire===
[[Jeanne Shaheen]], the incumbent [[liberal]] Democrat senator from [[New Hampshire]], is running for re-election to a third term in 2020.<ref>[https://www.wmur.com/article/shaheen-running-for-re-election-in-2020/26051139# Shaheen running for re-election in 2020]</ref> According to several ratings between January and February 2020, the seat is most likely going to be retained,<ref name="Fake News predictions"/> although an upset is possible, given President Trump being a potential to win the state in the [[United States presidential election, 2020|coinciding presidential election]].

The primaries were held on September 8, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_New_Hampshire,_2020 United States Senate election in New Hampshire, 2020]</ref>

====NH Democrat primary====
Shaheen faced two Democrat challengers in her party's primary leading up to the general election, easily winning.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_New_Hampshire,_2020_(September_8_Democratic_primary) United States Senate election in New Hampshire, 2020 (September 8 Democratic primary) - Ballotpedia]</ref>

[[File:Donald C. Bolduc.jpg|thumb|right|180px|Among the Republicans who ran to challenge Sen. Shaheen included [[Don Bolduc]] (shown above).]]
====NH Republican primary====
Among the Republicans running to challenge Sen. Shaheen included retired Army Brigadier General [[Don Bolduc]] and Army Ranger Corky Messner. The latter candidate received the endorsement of [[President Trump]] in mid-June 2020,<ref>[https://www.wmur.com/article/trump-endorses-messner-tweets-hell-be-fantastic-us-senator/32854490# Trump endorses Messner, tweets he’ll be ‘fantastic US Senator']</ref> a matter that elicited criticism from Bolduc and others.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-endorsements-cause-uproar-in-nh-gop-primaries Trump endorsements cause uproar in New Hampshire GOP primaries]</ref> Bolduc was backed by the [[Senate Conservatives Fund]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.senateconservatives.com/post/3949/endorsement-general-don-bolduc Support General Don Bolduc]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/25/don-bolduc-receives-senate-conservative-fund-endorsement-top-priority-race/ Don Bolduc Receives Senate Conservatives Fund Endorsement in ‘Top Priority’ Race]</ref>

Messner won the primary election over Bolduc by eight percentage points;<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_New_Hampshire,_2020_(September_8_Republican_primary) United States Senate election in New Hampshire, 2020 (September 8 Republican primary)]</ref> after losing, the latter announced that he will not endorse Messner over the general election.<ref>[https://www.wmur.com/article/don-bolduc-i-will-not-disgrace-my-name-to-support-a-man-like-corky-messner/33966350 Bolduc on Messner: 'I will not disgrace my name to support a man like that']</ref>

====NH Issues====
While Shaheen was a proponent of the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), speculations of potential conflicts of interests arose when it was reported that businesses tied to her husband received at least hundreds of thousands of loans from the program.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/08/husband-of-democrat-senator-pushing-to-expand-ppp-received-millions-in-loans-from-program/ Husband of Democrat Senator Pushing to Expand PPP Received Millions in Loans from Program]
*[https://www.concordmonitor.com/Data-Congress-created-virus-aid-then-reaped-the-benefits-35130400 Law firm of Sen. Shaheen’s husband among PPP loan recipients]
*[https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2020/07/19/congress-ppp-loans/#38ab85ec71d6 https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2020/07/19/congress-ppp-loans/#38ab85ec71d6]
*[https://www.unionleader.com/news/health/coronavirus/top-politicians-family-firms-got-ppp-loans/article_53bc3f35-b007-54dd-a771-45441f7b393b.html Top politicians’ family firms got PPP loans]</ref>

[[File:GrahamSC.jpg|thumb|left|155px|RINO senator Lindsey Graham is seeking re-election.]]
===South Carolina===
[[Lindsey Graham]], the [[Moderate Republican]] senior senator from [[South Carolina]], is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.postandcourier.com/politics/ahead-of-re-election-lindsey-graham-s-challenge-shifts-from/article_ea44940a-2635-11e9-bdc9-8b57192462f7.html Ahead of 2020 re-election, Lindsey Graham’s challenge shifts from right to left]</ref>

At a Trump rally in South Carolina on February 28, 2020, Graham made an appearance to praise Trump for his [[Donald Trump achievements|many accomplishments]] and for his perseverance in dealing with the "NEVER-ENDING BULL****" that the latter had to deal with in his presidency.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no0MnomPzLw LIVE: President Trump in North Charleston, SC]</ref>

The primaries were held on June 9, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_South_Carolina,_2020 United States Senate election in South Carolina, 2020]</ref>

====SC Republican primary====
Sen. Graham faced three challengers in the Republican primary, and won with only around two-thirds of the votes casted.<ref>[https://www.enr-scvotes.org/SC/103402/Web02-state.250556/#/ SC - Election Night Reporting - 2020]</ref>

====SC Democrat primary====
Jaime Harrison was the only Democrat who ran in his party's primary election, thus winning uncontested.

====SC Issues====
Although being the chair of the [[Senate Judiciary Committee]], Sen. Graham refused to subpoena [[Barack Obama]] amidst an investigation into the origins of the [[Trump-Russia collusion hoax]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/media/lindsey-graham-obama-senate-russia-investigation-hearings Lindsey Graham on why he's not in favor of calling Obama to testify]
*[https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/14/lindsey-graham-rejects-trump-demand-that-obama-testify-on-russia-probe.html GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham rejects Trump demand that Obama testify on Russia probe]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/14/lindsey-graham-rejects-trumps-call-for-obama-to-testify-not-a-good-idea/ Lindsey Graham Rejects Trump’s Call for Obama to Testify: ‘I Don’t Think That’s a Good Idea’]</ref>

In late May 2020, Graham was part of nine globalist [[RINO]] senators who sent a letter to Trump urging him not to restrict migrant visas amidst the [[CCP pandemic]] that left many Americans unemployed.<ref name="Globalist Senate RINOs"/>

Graham asserted in early July 2020 that he would be willing to increase the minimum wage.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/07/02/graham-im-willing-to-do-a-minimum-wage-increase/ Graham: I’m ‘Willing to Do a Minimum Wage Increase’]</ref>

In mid-July, Sen. Graham defended [[Anthony Fauci]] amidst the latter's spars with President Trump.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lindsey-graham-efforts-to-undercut-anthony-fauci-are-not-going-to-be-productive/ Graham warns efforts to undercut Fauci are "not going to be productive"]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/507264-graham-we-dont-have-a-fauci-problem Graham: 'We don't have a Dr. Fauci problem']
*[https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2020/07/14/in-break-with-trump-sen-lindsey-graham-praises-dr-anthony-fauci/#2d9d26702142 In Break With Trump, Sen. Lindsey Graham Praises Dr. Anthony Fauci]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/07/14/lindsey-graham-defends-fauci-trying-to-undermine-him-isnt-productive/ Lindsey Graham Defends Fauci — Trying to ‘Undermine Him’ Isn’t Productive]</ref>

Graham has been blamed by [[conservative]] pundit [[Tucker Carlson]] for pushing [[President Trump]] to meet with [[Bob Woodward]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2020/09/10/blames-lindsey-graham-for-the-bob-woodward-book/ Tucker Carlson blames Lindsey Graham for the Bob Woodward book]
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/sep/10/tucker-carlson-rips-lindsey-graham-supposed-republ/ Tucker Carlson rips Lindsey Graham, 'supposed' Republican, for recommending Trump talk to Woodward]
*[https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/09/lindsey-graham-brokered-donald-trump-bob-woodward-meeting-tucker-carlson-source/ Lindsey Graham Reportedly ‘Brokered’ Trump-Woodward Meeting, Tucker Carlson Says]</ref>

==Tossup elections==
===Arizona (special election)===
:''See main article: [[United States Senate special election in Arizona, 2020]]
[[File:Martha McSally.jpg|thumb|right|350px|U.S. Air Force combat veteran [[Martha McSally]].]]
[[Martha McSally]], the current Republican junior senator from [[Arizona]] who was gubernatorially appointed, will be running for election to a full term in 2020.<ref>[https://ktar.com/story/2503502/martha-mcsally-confirms-2020-senate-run-likely-to-face-democrat-mark-kelly/ Martha McSally confirms 2020 Senate run, likely to face Democrat Mark Kelly]</ref> A [[conservative]]-turned-establishmentarian moderate<ref>[https://representmeaz.com/mcsally-on-trump/ McSally on Trump]</ref>-turned pro-Trump conservative,<ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/10/20/trump-campaigns-mcsally-sinema-doesnt-seek-spotlight/1704817002/ As Donald Trump campaigned with Martha McSally, Kyrsten Sinema didn't compete for spotlight]</ref> McSally is expected to face an uphill battle in normally Republican Arizona that voted for [[Kyrsten Sinema]] over her in 2018 by a margin of less than 3%.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/arizona/senate/ Arizona Senate Election Results 2018]</ref>

According to a high-sampled (n=2523) [[NBC News]]/Marist poll administered between March 10, 2020 and March 15, 2020, McSally trailed potential [[Democrat]] opponent [[Mark Kelly]] by only three percentage points, compared to many low-sampled fake "poll" conclusions.<ref>[http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/NBC-News_Marist-Poll_AZ-NOS-and-Tables_2003160825.pdf NBC-News-Marist-Poll_AZ]</ref>

====AZ Republican primary====
Sen. McSally faced a moderately strong primary challenge from Daniel McCarthy, a Glendale businessman.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2019/08/28/businessman-daniel-mccarthy-mounts-republican-primary-challenge-against-martha-mcsally/2142684001/ Sen. Martha McSally gets primary challenge from businessman Daniel McCarthy]
*[https://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/martha-mcsally-picks-up-primary-challenge-from-daniel-mccarthy Martha McSally picks up primary challenge from Daniel McCarthy]</ref> Running to the right of McSally, he has claimed that the incumbent senator is part of the [[establishment]]. McCarthy has also proposed the possibility of an annexation of [[Mexico]].<ref>[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/09/18/mcsallys_gop_senate_challenger_wants_toannex_mexico__141291.html#! McSally's GOP Senate Challenger Wants to...Annex Mexico]</ref> He has been criticized by some conservatives<ref>[https://seeingredaz.wordpress.com/2020/07/12/why-is-az-senate-challenger-daniel-mccarthy-allowed-to-use-slogan-on-ballot/ Why is AZ Senate challenger Daniel McCarthy allowed to use slogan on ballot?]</ref> for using his campaign slogan on the primary election ballot,<ref name="Arizona Primary Results 2020">[https://results.arizona.vote/#/featured/17/0 Arizona Primary Election Results 2020]</ref> as well as for refusing to answer whether his business has failed to bring jobs from [[China]] to America.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nU42LetSR2E Republican candidate's business claimed it's moving jobs out of China. It didn't.]</ref>

McSally easily won the primary held on August 4, 2020 with three-quarters of the votes cast.<ref>[https://apps.npr.org/elections20-primaries/states/AZ.html Arizona Primary Results 2020]</ref> This was after McCarthy had claimed that "the Lord will provide the resources needed" for him to win.<ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2019/12/16/daniel-mccarthy-worst-u-s-senate-candidate-ever/2665271001/ Is Daniel McCarthy hoping for a Senate seat or a spot on Saturday Night Live?]</ref>

====AZ Democrat primary====
Kelly won his party's primary uncontested.<ref name="Arizona Primary Results 2020"/>

[[File:Mark Kelly.PNG|thumb|left|200px|Democrat candidate [[Mark Kelly]] has been noted for his hypocrisy.]]
====AZ Issues====
Martha McSally, who has shifted towards supporting Donald Trump since after the [[2016 presidential election]], has been seen by some as becoming more thoroughly conservative, especially after calling a [[CNN]] reporter a "liberal hack".<ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/01/16/sen-martha-mcsally-calls-cnn-reporter-liberal-hack-manu-raju/4489076002/ Arizona Sen. Martha McSally calls CNN reporter 'liberal hack' in hallway dust-up]</ref> Her first campaign ad was one criticizing her potential left-wing opponent [[Mark Kelly]]<ref>[https://www.facebook.com/MarthaMcSally/videos/865342913894990/?ref=tahoe Martha McSally - Senator McSally]</ref> for supporting the impeachment coup against Trump.<ref>[https://abcnews.go.com/theview/video/mark-kelly-trump-impeachment-inquiry-ukraine-call-investigated-65856530 Mark Kelly says Trump impeachment inquiry and Ukraine call ‘should be investigated’]</ref>

[[President Trump]]'s visit at a rally in [[Phoenix, Arizona]] on February 19, 2020 included McSally's appearance to help boost Republican re-election efforts, with McSally receiving an endorsement from the president and drawing applause from the crowd as a populist, conservative patriot.<ref name="February 2020 Trump rally in Arizona">[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9e8mjUJcSb8 LIVE: President Trump in Phoenix, AZ]</ref>

Kelly has been criticized for being tied to an ambulance company that engaged in corrupt price gouging and surprise billing on patients.<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/06/23/mark-kelly-is-a-bw-n2571173 Arizona Dem Mark Kelly Tied to Company Accused of 'Surprise Billing' and 'Price Gouging' Corruption]</ref>

A [[liberal hypocrisy|liberal hypocrite]], Kelly criticized the Paycheck Protection Program during the [[coronavirus]] outbreak yet took $2 million from the program for his company.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/arizona-dems-business-took-ppp-loan-after-he-criticized-program/?utm_source=actengage&utm_campaign=FreedomMail&utm_medium=email</ref>

Kelly has been accused by Rep. [[Paul Gosar]] of condoning violence<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/gop-rep-paul-gosar-accuses-arizona-democrat-mark-kelly-of-condoning-death-threats GOP Rep. Paul Gosar accuses Arizona Democrat Mark Kelly of condoning death threats]</ref> after a supporter of the former threatened death against Gosar.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/06/mark-kelly-supporter-allegedly-threatens-rep-paul-gosar-head/ Mark Kelly Supporter Allegedly Threatens to Shoot Rep. Paul Gosar in the Head]</ref>

====AZ Debate====
The debate for the Senate race, which will be the only official one, is to be held on October 6, 2020 in [[Phoenix, Arizona|Phoenix]] and hosted by the [[liberal]] [[Arizona Republic]] in addition to state public radios and television stations.<ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/09/10/martha-mcsally-mark-kelly-meet-oct-6-only-us-senate-debate/3459914001/ Martha McSally, Mark Kelly to meet Oct. 6 in only US Senate debate in Arizona]</ref><ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/08/05/sen-martha-mcsally-debate-mark-kelly-oct-6-phoenix/3297101001/ McSally-Kelly debate planned for Phoenix]</ref>

[[File:Cory Gardner official Senate portrait.jpeg|210px|thumb|right|Senator [[Cory Gardner]].]]

===Colorado===
:''See main article: [[United States Senate election in Colorado, 2020]]
[[Cory Gardner]], the incumbent mostly conservative Republican senator from [[Colorado]] with some [[RINO]] leanings, is running for re-election in what is considered by many to be among the most random, vulnerable tossups.<ref>[https://www.rollcall.com/2019/03/05/the-most-vulnerable-republican-senator-in-2020/ The most vulnerable Republican senator in 2020]</ref> Gardner's approval ratings have remained relatively steady, with a poll in January 2020 finding roughly equal approval/disapproval numbers.<ref>[https://www.denverpost.com/2020/01/16/cory-gardner-approval-rating-2020-senate/ Cory Gardner’s approval rating didn’t move during impeachment, still tops Trump’s]</ref>

On August 19, 2019, Ambassador [[Nikki Haley]] made a visit to Colorado to praise Gardner for his common-sense regulatory policies and his effective bipartisanship efforts in the [[U.S. Senate]] to unite both parties on certain non-partisan issues.<ref>[https://villagerpublishing.com/nikki-haley-comes-to-colorado-for-cory-gardner/ Nikki Haley comes to Colorado for Cory Gardner]</ref> Gardner is also supported by Vice President [[Mike Pence]], who said that the senator has done much to help advance the Trump agenda.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/vice-president-mike-pence-explains-why-he-supports-cory-gardners-reelection-bid/vi-BB10fBPC Vice President Mike Pence Explains Why He Supports Cory Gardner's Reelection Bid]</ref>

At a Trump rally in [[Colorado Springs]], Colorado on February 20, 2020, Gardner made an appearance where he spoke briefly to strongly emphasize on Donald Trump's [[Donald Trump achievements|many great achievements]] and rebuked left-wing Democrats for being too radical.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEJ99-7Rm_k LIVE: President Trump in Colorado Springs, CO]</ref>

[[File:Hickenlooper.jpg|thumb|left|250px|John Hickenlooper won the Democrat nomination to challenge Sen. Gardner despite being charged with ethics violations.]]
====CO Republican primary====
Sen. Gardner won his party's primary uncontested.<ref name="Colorado U.S. Senate Primary Election Results">[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/30/us/elections/results-colorado-senate-primary-election.html Colorado U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

[[File:Andrew Romanoff.jpg|thumb|right|150px|A far-left progressive, Romanoff lost the primary to the establishment-backed Hickenlooper.]]
====CO Democrat primary====
Although over a dozen Democrat candidates initially ran for the Senate seat, only [[John Hickenlooper]] and [[Andrew Romanoff]] were left by the time of the primary election. The establishment-backed Hickenlooper, the former governor of [[Colorado]] who briefly ran for president, has faced criticism from both the left and the right after flip-flopping over whether he would run for the seat,<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2019/08/22/nrsc-mocks-hickenlooper-for-reversing-course-running-for-senate-n2552056 NRSC Mocks Hickenlooper for Now Running for Job He Said He Couldn't Do]</ref> admitting to having once took his mother to see a pornographic movie,<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dem-hickenloopers-tale-of-taking-his-mom-to-see-deep-throat-has-town-hall-audience-roaring Dem Hickenlooper's tale of taking his mom to see 'Deep Throat' has town hall audience roaring]
*[https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/20/politics/john-hickenlooper-x-rated-movie/index.html John Hickenlooper explains why he went to see an X-rated movie with his mother]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2019/03/21/john-hickenlooper-took-mom-see-adult-movie-deep-throat/3231629002/ Presidential candidate John Hickenlooper said he watched 'Deep Throat' with his mom]</ref> and being fined by an independent commission for two ethics violations while governor.<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/06/05/hickenlooper-found-guilty-n2570160 Independent Commission Finds Hickenlooper Guilty on Two Ethics Violations]</ref> On the other hand, Romanoff was an openly [[far-left]] candidate who called for enacting a [[Green New Deal]] and [[defund the police|defunding the police]].<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXTm75xi9R4 John Hickenlooper, Andrew Romanoff face off in 9NEWS Democratic Senate Debate]</ref>

Despite obvious setbacks, Hickenlooper managed to win the primary election over Romanoff by over fifteen points, carrying all but one county.<ref name="Colorado U.S. Senate Primary Election Results"/>

====CO Issues====
In early August 2020, [[President Trump]] signed into law the [[Great American Outdoors Act]], a landmark [[conservation]] bill sponsored by Sen. Gardner that would ensure federal allocations for the Land and Water Conservation Fund.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://denver.cbslocal.com/2020/08/04/democrat-republic-success-sen-cory-gardner-celebrates-great-american-outdoors-act-becoming-law/ ‘Democrat & Republic Success’: Sen. Cory Gardner Celebrates Great American Outdoors Act Becoming Law]
*[https://www.coloradopolitics.com/news/trump-signs-cory-gardners-great-american-outdoors-act/article_b82fd4da-d5e7-11ea-b3a8-6fcf59c89ee8.html Trump signs Cory Gardner's Great American Outdoors Act]
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/aug/4/steve-daines-cory-gardner-cheer-trump-great-americ/ GOP senators hail Trump's signature on historic $10 billion Outdoors Act]</ref>

===Maine===
:''See main article: [[United States Senate election in Maine, 2020]]
[[File:SenatorCollins.jpg|265px|thumb|left|Four-term [[RINO]] Susan Collins is running for re-election.]]
[[Susan Collins]], the four-term [[RINO]] senior senator from liberal Maine, is running for re-election in 2020.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/susan-collins-announces-reelection-bid-for-fifth-term-in-us-senate Susan Collins announces bid for fifth term in Senate]</ref> She has been unpopular in her home state after voting with Republicans to confirm [[Brett Kavanaugh]] amidst the [[Kavanaugh smear|smear against the latter]], having her approval rating tank<ref>[https://hillreporter.com/susan-collins-maine-approval-rating-has-dipped-17-in-last-year-37707 Susan Collins’ Maine Approval Rating has Dipped 17% in Last Year]</ref> and eliciting condemnation from the far-left hate group [[Occupy Democrats]].<ref>[https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fpics.me.me%2Flets-never-forget-that-susan-collins-called-for-al-frankens-36809218.png&f=1&nofb=1 (PNG Image, 500 x 142 pixels)]</ref> Further disdain from liberals like [[Stephen King]]<ref>[https://twitter.com/StephenKing/status/1143269919871700998?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Stephen King on Twitter: "It's time..."]</ref> and those in Maine may cause lead the general election anywhere from leaning Republican to a tossup,<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.ibtimes.com/will-susan-collins-lose-2020-election-trump-impeachment-may-mean-democrats-finally-2905302 Will Susan Collins Lose In 2020 Election? Trump Impeachment May Mean Democrats Finally Flip Senate Seat]
*[https://bipartisanreport.com/2019/06/01/susan-collins-2020-re-election-chances-take-devastating-blow/ Susan Collins 2020 Re-Election Chances Take Devastating Blow]</ref> a prediction that several polls have affirmed.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/> According to the [[Washington Times]], Democrat representative [[Jared Golden]] could provide cover for Collins if he voted against both articles of impeachment against [[Donald Trump]].<ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/dec/16/jared-golden-impeachment-vote-could-cover-susan-co/ Jared Golden's vote against impeachment could give Susan Collins cover in 2020 election]</ref> One day later, however, Golden had a split vote on the articles of impeachment, voting in favor of the first one but against the second one.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/17/democrat-jared-golden-to-vote-for-one-article-of-impeachment-against-the-other/ Democrat Jared Golden to Vote for One Article of Impeachment, Against the Other]</ref>

It was reported on February 18, 2020 that, according to a poll, Collins was almost tied with potential Democrat opponent [[Sara Gideon]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://bangordailynews.com/2020/02/18/politics/new-maine-poll-shows-susan-collins-and-sara-gideon-nearly-tied-in-2020-race/ New Maine poll shows Susan Collins and Sara Gideon nearly tied in 2020 race] from Bangor Daily News
*[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/new-maine-poll-shows-susan-collins-and-sara-gideon-nearly-tied-in-2020-race/ar-BB108eUu New Maine poll shows Susan Collins and Sara Gideon nearly tied in 2020 race] from MSN
*[https://www.pressherald.com/2020/02/18/colby-college-polls-shows-collins-gideon-tied-in-hypothetical-match-up/ Colby College poll shows Collins, Gideon tied in hypothetical match-up]</ref>

Having voted to confirm [[Brett Kavanaugh]] and many other [[pro-life]] judicial nominees, Collins was reportedly ditched by [[Planned Parenthood]], an organization that in the past has endorsed her numerous times.<ref>[https://americanindependent.com/planned-parenthood-endorsement-sara-gideon-maine-senate-susan-collins-2020-election/ Planned Parenthood finally ditches Sen. Susan Collins]</ref>

====ME Republican primary====
Collins was reportedly, as of February 1, 2020, running unopposed in the Republican primaries.<ref>[https://twitter.com/colgrove11/status/1223580761724530688 George Colgrove III on Twitter]</ref> Her re-election bid was endorsed by moderate liberal Democrat [[Joe Manchin]].<ref>[https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/11/joe-manchin-endorses-susan-collins-1271151 Joe Manchin endorses Susan Collins for reelection]</ref> In addition, Collins is backed by [[Lindsey Graham]]<ref>[https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1208133195205660675 Lindsey Graham on Twitter: "My friend...]</ref> and [[Donald Trump]]<ref>[https://mobile.twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1209259291217141760 Donald J. Trump on Twitter: "I...]</ref> for her refusal to cave into the [[liberal hysteria]] surrounding the [[Kavanaugh smear]].

Running unopposed aside from a single write-in candidate, Collins easily on her party's primary.<ref name="Maine Primary Results 2020">[https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/maine/ Maine Primary Results 2020]</ref>

====ME Democrat primary====
[[File:Sara Gideon.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Far-left Democrat [[Sara Gideon]] is running to challenge Sen. Collins.]]
Democrat [[Sara Gideon]], the current Speaker of the Maine House of Representatives, announced her Senate campaign on June 24, 2019.<ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/24/politics/susan-collins-challenger-sara-gideon/index.html Democrat Sara Gideon announces run against Susan Collins]</ref> Gideon, with a voting record even more liberal than Susan Collin's, has pushed for [[abortion]] "rights" and [[Medicaid]] expansion within Maine.<ref>[https://www.thecut.com/2019/06/sara-gideon-senate-campaign-susan-collins-maine.html Susan Collins Has a New Democratic Challenger]</ref> In addition, she is a [[hypocrite]] (see [[liberal hypocrisy]]) who has denounced corporate money in politics while accepting donations that include corporate donors.<ref>[https://www.pressherald.com/2020/02/27/gideon-targeted-for-stance-on-corporate-pac-donations/ Gideon decries corporate money in politics while taking PAC donations that include it]</ref>

Democrat primary candidate Bre Kidman, a Bernie backer who claims to be "non-binary", unveiled a [[guillotine]] as the logo for her US Senate campaign.<ref>[https://www.theblaze.com/news/guillotine_symbol_democrats Dem U.S. Senate candidate unveils campaign logo: The guillotine as 'a symbol of the work we have to do'] at The Blaze</ref> When grilled about the use of a guillotine as campaign symbolism, Kidman claimed that the guillotine was not meant to be taken literally, despite its notorious use as a method of execution by [[the Left]] against its opponents during the [[French Revolution]]; Kidman was subsequently criticized on her Twitter account for what her critics called a poor taste campaign stunt at best and a not-so-veiled threat of [[violence]] against opponents and critics at worst.<ref>[https://twitter.com/BeeKay4ME/status/1225177542853828608 Bre Kidman: "I was gonna wait until tomorrow to show off these beauties, but Trump got acquitted and I feel like folks could use something to look forward to"] at Twitter</ref>

The Democrat primary was won by Gideon with 70% of the vote.<ref name="Maine Primary Results 2020"/>

====ME Issues====
Amidst the [[CCP pandemic]], Sen. Collins worked on securing federal funding to statewide small businesses hit hard by the economic devastation caused by the [[coronavirus]] via the Paycheck Protection Program.<ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jul/7/susan-collins-sara-gideon-maine-senate-race-takes-/ Susan Collins' 'toss-up' Senate race takes nasty turn under national spotlight]</ref> For this, she was subject to massive attacks by the liberal media, who falsely claimed that such was a corporate bailout, a notion that was refuted even by the [[Washington Compost]].<ref>[https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2020/06/15/susan-collins-sara-gideon-ad Fact check: Democratic ad misleadingly attacks Susan Collins on the Paycheck Protection Program]</ref> On the other hand, Gideon adjourned the [[Maine]] legislature despite other states keeping theirs' open, and some liberals have even acted as apologists for her actions in ignoring constituents amidst a pandemic as the state House speaker.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/07/great-ad-for-sara-gideon-susan-collinss-new-on-dem-opponent-massively-backfires/ ‘Great ad for Sara Gideon’: Susan Collins’s new attack on Dem opponent massively backfires]</ref> Furthermore, despite attacking the PPP, Gideon's husband's law firm took up to $2 million from the program.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/aug/14/susan-collins/key-us-senate-race-susan-collins-attack-rival-over/ In key US Senate race, Susan Collins’ attack on rival over COVID program partly correct]</ref><ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/maine-dems-husband-benefited-from-small-business-relief-she-criticized/ Maine Dem’s Husband Benefited From Small Business Relief She Criticized]</ref>

====ME Debate(s)====
At the first Senate debate hosted by Bangor Daily News, News Center Maine, and the Portland Press Herald and held on September 11, 2020, the 19th anniversary of the [[9/11|tragic event]], Sen. Collins, state House speaker Gideon, and [[independent voters|independent]] candidates Max Linn and Lisa Savage debated over several key issues for around one hour;<ref>[https://bangordailynews.com/2020/09/11/politics/susan-collins-and-sara-gideon-clash-over-health-care-and-trump-in-first-us-senate-debate/ Susan Collins and Sara Gideon clash over health care and Trump in first US Senate debate]</ref> Collins managed to stump Gideon near the end by asking the latter whether she would have voted to confirm [[John Roberts]] to the Supreme Court after facing criticism over her vote to confirm [[Brett Kavanaugh]].<ref>[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/09/14/watch-sen-collins-schools-gideon-with-one-question-n2576153 Watch: Sen. Collins Schools Democrat Challenger With One Key Question]</ref>

===North Carolina===
[[File:Thom Tillis Official Photo.jpg|thumb|right|240px|Establishment RINO [[Thom Tillis]] is running for re-election.]]
[[Thom Tillis]], a Feinstein gun control bill-backing<ref>[https://www.secondamendmentdaily.com/2017/11/heres-list-mcconnell-9-republicans-support-feinstein-gun-control/ Here’s The List: McConnell, 9 Republicans Support Feinstein Gun Control]</ref> [[RINO]] who opposed Donald Trump's firing of an impeachment "witness" out of fear of "looking bad",<ref>[https://www.deseret.com/indepth/2020/2/10/21128051/trump-fires-witnesses-sondland-vindman-graham-collins Trump firing of impeachment witnesses causes concern among some Republicans]</ref> is running for re-election in swing state North Carolina that may be a pure tossup in the general election. Tillis' approval rating was reported in July 2019 to be a mere 33% statewide,<ref>[https://sandysmithnc.com/2019/07/19/poll-thom-tillis-approval-rating-lowest-in-the-u-s-senate/ POLL: THOM TILLIS APPROVAL RATING LOWEST IN THE U.S. SENATE]</ref> and polling in January 2020 found that he was trailing a potential Democrat opponent by 2%.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000016f-cac3-d4c8-ad7f-ebf73a070000 PDF File]</ref>

[[File:James 'Cal' Cunningham (cropped).jpg|thumb|left|230px|Former state Sen. [[Cal Cunningham]] is running to unseat Tillis.]]
====NC Republican primary====
Tillis, with his [[RINO]] record, was initially facing a primary challenged by conservative, pro-Trump [[Sandy Smith]].<ref>[https://politicselections.com/pro-trump-republican-sandy-smith-announces-senatorial-run/ Pro-Trump Republican Sandy Smith Announces Senatorial Run]</ref> However, Smith later changed course and decided to run for North Carolina's 1st congressional district instead.<ref>[https://sandysmithnc.com/ Join Sandy - Sandy Smith for Congress]</ref>

Tillis, realizing months ago that he needed [[Donald Trump]]'s support in order to garner the [[conservative]] support to win, made an appearance at the Trump rally in [[Charlotte, North Carolina]] on March 2, 2020 to support the president.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89ewdfbqGxo LIVE: President Trump in Charlotte, NC]</ref>

Sen. Tillis won the Republican primary that was held on March 3, 2020 to proceed in being the Republican nominee running for re-election.<ref>Two references:
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/485810-tillis-wins-nc-senate-primary Tillis wins North Carolina Senate primary]
*[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/03/03/us/elections/results-north-carolina-senate-primary-election.html North Carolina U.S. Senate Primary Election Results]</ref>

====NC Democrat primary====
Establishment [[Democrat]] [[Cal Cunningham]] announced in June 2019 his campaign to run for the Senate seat.<ref>[https://apnews.com/7c2c41b703714676a3039203430b997b Cunningham: Voters led him to switch to US Senate campaign]</ref>

Cunningham won the Democrat primary that was held on March 3, 2020 to be the [[Democrat]] nominee for the general election in the Senate race.<ref>[https://www.businessinsider.com/north-carolina-senate-democratic-primary-live-results-vote-counts-2020-3 Cal Cunningham claims a victory in the North Carolina Senate Democratic primary]</ref> His party's racist [[establishment]] strongly backed him over a more qualified black Democrat lawmaker and engineer who also ran for a seat.<ref name="Democrats Spent Tens of Millions to Destroy the Hopes and Dreams of These Qualified Black Candidates"/> After winning, Cunningham later explained his commitment to diversity.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/cal-cunningham-diversity/ Schumer-Backed N.C. Senate Candidate Who Crushed Black Female Challenger Awkwardly Explains Commitment to Diversity]</ref>

====NC Issues====
Tillis was criticized by [[Republican]] representative [[Matt Gaetz]] on March 20, 2020 for having a “low-energy [[establishment]] Senate response” after the former's [[Deep state]]r colleague [[Richard Burr]] “conveniently” sold a large sum of money in stock via non-public information ''right before the stock market crashed due to the coronavirus''.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gaetz-slams-thom-tillis-for-e2-80-98low-energy-e2-80-99-response-to-insider-trading-allegation-against-fellow-nc-senator/ar-BB11tFPs Gaetz Slams Thom Tillis for ‘Low-Energy’ Response to Insider Trading Allegation against Fellow N.C. Senator]</ref>

After [[Cal Cunningham]] sent out a tweet claiming that Sen. [[Thom Tillis]] “agreed” to [[Mitch McConnell]]'s wanting “states to go bankrupt”,<ref>https://twitter.com/CalforNC/status/1253779395099144193</ref> the mostly [[liberal]]-biased [[PolitiFact]] rated the statement as “Mostly False” for it being very misleading,<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/may/12/cal-cunningham/nc-democrat-misrepresents-tillis-position-aid-stat/ Cal Cunningham stated on April 24, 2020 in a tweet: "Mitch McConnell said he wanted states to go bankrupt instead of the federal government providing relief. Today, Thom Tillis agreed."]</ref> noting that Tillis never concurred with ''wanting'' states to go bankrupt, rather only arguing for a case-by-case basis and allowing for the option to do so.

Similar to several other Senate [[Democrat]] candidates, Cunningham is a [[liberal hypocrisy|liberal hypocrite]] who said regarding the PPP that "we’ve seen that money end up in some of the wrong hands," ''despite taking up to $2 million in a PPP loan for his company''.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/07/08/senate-democrat-candidates-criticize-ppp-loans-yet-benefit-loans/ Democrat Senate Candidates Benefited from PPP Loans While Criticizing Program]</ref>

The [[Democrat]] establishment released an ad in late July 2020 running a misleading attack against Tillis over hand-washing regulations; even [[liberal]] [[PolitiFact]] rated it "False".<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jul/25/majority-forward/tillis-never-said-restaurant-workers-shouldnt-have/ Tillis never said restaurant workers shouldn't have to wash their hands ]</ref>

====NC Debate(s)====
A general election debate for the Senate race between Tillis and Cunningham was held on September 14, 2020, moderated by a news anchor from WRAL ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2cgcfqBHTY full video here]). In it, Tillis criticized Cunningham on inconsistencies over issues such as the Paycheck Protection Program, while the latter struck back at the incumbent [[moderate Republican]] senator over alleged false/misleading statements as well as for being a shill for [[Big Pharma]], notably efforts against lowering drug costs. Tillis followed the cue initiated by [[Trump's inept advisers]] when he accused Cunningham of promoting "anti-vaccine" rhetoric after the latter expressed a degree of skepticism over a potential [[coronavirus vaccine]]. This narrative was also repeated by a spokesperson for a GOP establishment [[super PAC]] tied to [[Mitch McConnell]].<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/516420-dem-senate-candidate-hesitant-to-get-covid-19-vaccine-if-approved-this-year Democratic Senate candidate 'hesitant' to get COVID-19 vaccine if approved this year]</ref> Tillis had also accurately noted that the former state senator voted in favor of tax hikes,<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/aug/13/national-republican-senatorial-committee/attack-ad-right-about-cunninghams-2001-budget-vote/ Attack ad right about Cunningham's 2001 budget vote]
*[https://www.wfmynews2.com/article/news/local/2-wants-to-know/cal-cunningham-raise-taxes-thom-tillis-claim-north-carolina-senate-race/83-93950f80-95d8-461d-b9a8-29ed4796f6cb FACT CHECK: Cunningham did raise taxes ... 19 years ago. Here's why]</ref> though such were partially associated with budget complications following [[9/11]].

==Projected seat flips==
[[File:Doug Jones 2017.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Sen. Doug Jones is expected to lose re-election after voting to remove Trump.]]
===Alabama===
[[Doug Jones]], the left-wing [[Democrat]] senator from [[Alabama]], is running for election to a full term in 2020.<ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jul/21/doug-jones-faces-uphill-battle-for-reelection-in-a/ Doug Jones faces uphill battle for reelection in Alabama]</ref> His net approval rating prior his vote to remove<ref>[https://dailycaller.com/2020/02/05/doug-jones-impeachment-trump/ Doug Jones Will Vote To Remove Trump From Office]</ref> [[Donald Trump]] was 2%, which had fell by 20% since he took office.<ref>[https://www.gop.com/doug-jones-abysmal-approval-in-alabama/ Doug Jones' Abysmal Approval in Alabama]</ref> Voting to remove a president that won his home state of Alabama in 2016 by 28% of the vote,<ref>[https://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president/alabama/ 2016 Alabama Presidential Election Results]</ref> Jones is expected to lose the general election in November.<ref name="Fake News predictions"/>

As reported by [[Politico]] on May 3, 2020, the Democrat [[establishment]] had not yet then allocated a significant amount of money to bolster Sen. Jones' 2020 re-election campaign.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/03/senate-democrats-alabama-doug-jones-229073 Democrats leave Doug Jones hanging as Senate map takes shape]</ref>

[[File:Jeff Sessions official portrait.jpg|thumb|left|170px|Sessions lost the primary runoff following anger from many Republicans.]]
====AL Republican primary====
Among the Republicans who ran for the Senate seat included former [[Attorney General]] [[Jeff Sessions]],<ref>[https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/jeff-sessions-announces-senate-run-n1078561 Jeff Sessions announces Senate run]</ref> representative [[Bradley Byrne]],<ref>[https://www.al.com/election/2019/02/bradley-byrne-announces-run-for-senate-in-2020-vowing-to-fight-for-alabama.html Bradley Byrne announces run for Senate in 2020, vowing to ‘fight for Alabama’]</ref> former Alabama Supreme Court chief justice [[Roy Moore]],<ref>[https://www.newsweek.com/roy-moore-will-announce-2020-senate-run-source-1444887 Roy Moore is Running For Senate in 2020, But Republicans Say Embattled Judge Is Starting the Race 'Underwater']</ref> and football coach [[Tommy Tuberville]].<ref>[https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/tommy-tuberville-will-run-for-u-s-senate-in-alabama-with-sean-spicer-on-his-campaign-team/ Tommy Tuberville will run for U.S. Senate in Alabama with Sean Spicer on his campaign team]</ref> Byrne and Tuberville have criticized Sessions for his weak leadership as the Attorney General under Donald Trump, with an ad by Byrnes stating: "And Hillary still ain't in jail."<ref>Two sources:
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/feb/17/bradley-byrne-tommy-tuberville-jab-at-jeff-session/ Bradley Byrne, Tommy Tuberville attack Jeff Sessions as man who let Trump down, got fired]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/483258-alabama-senate-contender-hits-sessions-in-new-ad-hillary-still-aint-in-jail Alabama Senate contender hits Sessions in new ad: 'Hillary still ain't in jail']</ref>

[[File:Tommy Tuberville.jpg|thumb|right|150px|The Republican primary runoff was won by Tuberville, who was endorsed by Trump.]]
In the initial primary that was held on March 3, 2020, no candidate won a majority of the votes casted, with Tuberville garnering a plurality of 33.4% of the vote, Sessions at 31.6%, and Rep. Byrne and 25%;<ref>[https://data.montgomeryadvertiser.com/election-results/race/al-us-senate--gop-2020-03-03-primary/20200303AL2073/ Alabama U.S. Senate Primary Race (GOP) - 2020]</ref> the latter only managed to garner a majority of the votes in the counties included in his district. Since no candidate got 50% of the vote, a runoff between Tuberville and Sessions followed; while the latter election was initially set for March 31, it was postponed by Gov. [[Kay Ivey]] to July 14 due to the [[CCP pandemic]].<ref>Two references:
*[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Alabama,_2020_(March_3_Republican_primary) United States Senate election in Alabama, 2020 (March 3 Republican primary)]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/18/alabama-senate-runoff-postponed-coronavirus-135557 Alabama Senate runoff postponed until July]</ref>

Trump, who had loathed Sessions following the latter's inept handling of the [[Russian collusion hoax]], endorsed Tuberville over Sessions amidst the then-upcoming runoff.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/10/trump-endorses-sessions-opponent-in-alabama-senate-primary-125316 Trump endorses Sessions' opponent in Alabama Senate primary]
*[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-endorses-tommy-tuberville-in-alabama-in-a-blow-to-jeff-sessions/
Trump endorses Tommy Tuberville in Alabama, in a blow to Jeff Sessions]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/03/10/trump-endorses-tommy-tuberville-over-sessions-alabama-senate-race/5017743002/ Trump endorses Jeff Sessions' opponent, Tommy Tuberville, in Alabama Senate runoff]
*[https://www.nationalreview.com/news/president-trump-endorses-tommy-tuberville-over-jeff-sessions-in-alabama-senate-runoff/ Trump Endorses Tommy Tuberville over Jeff Sessions in Alabama Senate Runoff]
*[https://www.al.com/politics/2020/03/trump-endorses-tommy-tuberville-over-jeff-sessions-in-alabama-senate-race.html Trump endorses Tommy Tuberville over Jeff Sessions in Alabama Senate race]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/486949-trump-endorses-tuberville-over-sessions-in-alabama-senate-runoff Trump endorses Tuberville over Sessions in Alabama Senate runoff]
*[https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/10/politics/trump-endorses-tommy-tuberville-over-jeff-sessions-alabama-us-senate/index.html Trump endorses Tuberville over Jeff Sessions ahead of Alabama runoff]</ref> Following anger toward the former attorney general in his tenure, Tuberville won the primary runoff by just over 20% of the vote.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/14/us/elections/results-alabama-election-runoff-primary.html Live: Alabama State Primary Runoff Election Results 2020]</ref>

====AL Democrat primary====
Sen. Jones, running opposed, won the Democrat primary that was held on March 3, 2020.<ref>[https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Alabama,_2020_(March_3_Democratic_primary) United States Senate election in Alabama, 2020 (March 3 Democratic primary)]</ref>

====AL Issues====
As reported in mid-February 2020, Tuberville had previously blamed Donald Trump in late 2019 over illegal immigration problems and had said that he was "p*ssed off at Trump" over a supposed failure to sufficiently help veterans.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/02/17/tommy-tuberville-in-unearthed-remarks-were-paying-for-illegals-to-come-over-here-thats-donald-trumps-fault/ Tommy Tuberville in Unearthed Remarks: ‘We’re Paying for Illegals to Come Over Here … That’s Donald Trump’s Fault’]
*[https://www.al.com/politics/2020/02/tommy-tuberville-discusses-pissed-off-at-donald-trump-comment.html Tommy Tuberville discusses ‘pissed off at Donald Trump’ comment]</ref>

Despite representing a very [[conservative]] state, Sen. Jones voted in late February 2020 against banning late-term abortions.<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/bill/27666/71280/176464/pain-capable-unborn-child-protection-act#71280 S 3275 - Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act - National Key Vote]</ref>

Although [[anti-Trump]], Jones praised a travel ban policy enacted by the president in mid-March 2020, noting it to be a "good step".<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/12/tammy-duckworth-doug-jones-praise-trumps-e-u-travel-ban-its-a-wise-move/# Tammy Duckworth, Doug Jones Praise Trump’s E.U. Travel Ban: ‘It’s a Wise Move’]</ref>

In April 2020, Jones claimed that a push by Sen. [[Mitch McConnell]] for an additional $250 billion in funding for small businesses was a "political stunt".<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/04/09/dem-sen-jones-slams-mcconnell-for-pushing-for-additional-250-billion-in-small-business-funding-a-political-stunt/ Jones Slams McConnell for Pushing for Additional $250 Billion in Small Business Funding — ‘A Political Stunt’]</ref>

==[[Establishment media]]/Democrat collusion==
:''See also: [[Fake news in the 2020 presidential election]]
[[File:N.jpg|thumb|left|500px|The [[liberal media]] has colluded with Democrats in attempting to unfairly influence the 2020 Senate elections.]]
On July 8, 2019, an article by the "[[progressive]]" site "The American Independent" was published criticizing [[Republican]] senator [[Thom Tillis]] for praising [[Donald Trump]] after the latter's "racist rally in North Carolina".<ref>[https://americanindependent.com/thom-tillis-trump-racist-rally-north-carolina/ GOP senator wastes no time praising Trump after racist rally in North Carolina]</ref> The article claimed that Trump was being a "racist" for rebuking the anti-Semitic [[Ilhan Omar]], despite the obvious [[irony]] that the writer of the article was the one who was obsessed over race.

On January 24, 2020, a biased article by the left-wing "Indy Week" was published to attack Tillis over liberal trolls smearing the senator on his Twitter account.<ref>[https://indyweek.com/news/northcarolina/thom-tillis-ratioed-twitter/ Thom Tillis Can’t Stop Getting Owned on Twitter] '''(Warning: Article contains foul language)'''</ref>

An Arizona Central "opinion" article was written on January 27, 2020 as a [[strawman]] attack against [[Martha McSally]] for correctly calling out [[CNN]] reporter Manu Raju a "liberal hack".<ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2020/01/27/martha-mcsally-liberal-hack-criticized-because-woman-oh-please/4588988002/ Sen. Martha McSally hints 'liberal hack' blow back is because she's a woman? Oh, please...]</ref> Having an extremely skewed headline, the article was filled with [[conspiracy theory]] assumptions and was an example of the [[lamestream media]]'s imposing of a [[Morton's fork]] standard on conservative public officeholders for anything they say. In addition, the article did not mention Raju's long, biased record of being what McSally called a "liberal hack".[https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/862333694899621889] [https://thefederalist.com/2018/03/06/media-fight-for-democrats-in-washington-leak-wars/]

A hysteric [[CNN]] liberal ran an op-ed "opinion" article on January 28, 2020 targeting [[Joni Ernst]], claiming that she "gave away" the Republican's "disgraceful game [against Joe Biden]".<ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/28/opinions/joni-ernst-gop-game-biden-filipovic/index.html Joni Ernst and the GOP's disgraceful game]</ref> As typical with [[liberal media bias]], the author assumed mind-reading powers to "conclude" the supposed "true intentions" of [[Donald Trump]]'s "quid pro quo". The article did not mention Biden's self-admitted [[quid pro joe]] ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_xXx0yUvSw see this video (warning: foul language)]), instead making a [[conspiracy theory]] rant about Trump's "corruption" and having to bring up irrelevant topics to attempt justifying its talking points.

An article by "The American Independent" on February 3, 2020 attacked [[Martha McSally]] for supposedly doing little to lower drug prices, despite the fact that during the time the article was published, the Senate was dealing with the [[Trump impeachment]].<ref>[https://americanindependent.com/martha-mcsally-prescription-drug-prices-legislation-costs-gop-senate-arizona/ GOP senator hits Congress for high drug prices but offers no solutions]</ref> In addition, this was before McSally made and kept a promise to introduce a bill that would potentially lower drug prices.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mcsally-unveils-bill-to-lower-drug-prices-amid-tough-campaign/ar-BB10fRqU McSally unveils bill to lower drug prices amid tough campaign]</ref>

The mainstream media have tried to influence the upcoming Senate elections via heavy coverage of the Senate Republicans, such as focusing on the GOP blockade of Democrat partisan "election security" bills.<ref>Multiple sources:
*[https://www.salon.com/2020/02/13/senate-gop-blocks-election-security-bills-as-intel-report-warns-of-russian-meddling-in-2020/ Senate GOP blocks election security bills as intel report warns of Russian meddling in 2020]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/house/482569-senate-gop-blocks-three-election-security-bills Senate GOP blocks three election security bills]
*[https://www.scmagazine.com/home/security-news/blackburn-blocks-vote-on-trio-of-election-security-bills-in-senate/ Blackburn blocks vote on trio of election security bills in Senate]
*[https://www.ajc.com/news/senate-republicans-just-blocked-bills-boost-election-security/m5mnmrjgqpeCgNoKeALgqN/ Senate Republicans just blocked 3 bills to boost election security]</ref>

As concurrent with [[liberal media bias]], an article by the Navy Times ran a skewed headline saying "Sen. McSally ad blasts Navy vet running against her"<ref>[https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2020/02/12/sen-mcsally-ad-blasts-navy-vet-running-against-her/ Sen. McSally ad blasts Navy vet running against her]</ref> despite McSally also having served in the U.S. military.

An article by The New Indian Express ran a headline skewed in favor of [[Sara Gideon]], saying she is an "Indian-origin politician".<ref>[https://www.newindianexpress.com/world/2020/feb/13/indian-origin-politician-sara-gideon-raises-over-usd-7-million-for-us-senate-race-2102880.html Indian-origin politician Sara Gideon raises over USD 7 million for US Senate race]</ref> Although her father was an immigrant from [[India]],<ref>[https://heavy.com/news/2018/10/sara-gideon/ Sara Gideon: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know]</ref> Gideon's mother is from [[Armenia]] and she was born in [[Rhode Island]], thus making the "Indian-origin" claim somewhat misleading.

[[File:Newsweek logo.jpg|thumb|right|400px|Editors in the [[progressive]] site [[Newsweek]] have worked overtime in collusion with the Democrat establishment to unfairly influence the 2020 elections.]]
After [[Senate Majority Leader]] [[Mitch McConnell]] announced on February 14, 2020 that 395 partisan Democrat bills passed by House will not pass through the Senate, an article by the [[Mitch Derangement Syndrome]]-consumed [[Newsweek]] called the senator the 'Grim Reaper'.<ref>[https://www.newsweek.com/mitch-mcconnell-grim-reaper-395-house-bills-senate-wont-pass-1487401 'Grim Reaper' Mitch McConnell Admits There Are 395 House Bills Sitting in the Senate: 'We're Not Going to Pass Those']</ref>

The left-wing, hysteric [[Salon]] ran a biased article against [[Joni Ernst]] for her fiscally conservative viewpoints regarding [[Medicare]] and [[Medicaid]], saying she's willing to "push our families into poverty with a smile."<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2020/02/15/audio-shows-gop-sen-joni-ernst-telling-donors-she-wants-changes-to-medicare-medicaid/ Audio shows GOP Sen. Joni Ernst telling donors she wants "changes" to Medicare, Medicaid]</ref> In actuality, Ernst merely addressed the focus on controlling non-discretionary spending and emphasized on "honoring the commitments".<ref>[https://soundcloud.com/user-87991124/joni-ernst-on-debt-social-security-medicare/s-0zyge Joni Ernst On Debt, Social Security & Medicare]</ref>

An article by MSN on February 19, 2020 ran a headline claiming that [[Mark Kelly]] was ahead of [[Martha McSally]] by 6.7 points for the upcoming Senate special election in Arizona, citing a poll by the High Grounds Public Affairs Consultants.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mark-kelly-is-up-67-points-over-sen-martha-mcsally-in-new-poll-despite-trumps-support/ar-BB10aECH Mark Kelly is up 6.7 points over Sen. Martha McSally in new poll despite Trump's support]</ref> The poll was an outlier compared to three other polls that were conducted between late 2019 and January 2020,<ref>Multiple sources:
*[https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/arizona-2020-toss-ups-in-presidential-and-senate-races Arizona 2020: Toss-Ups in Presidential and Senate Races]
*[https://www.dropbox.com/s/4mbv7c2auwqck54/Senate_Report.pdf?dl=0 Senate_Report.pdf]
*[https://www.publicpolicypolling.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/ArizonaJanuary2020.pdf ArizonaJanuary2020.pdf]</ref> as it had a margin of error at ±4.9% and a sample size of only n=400,<ref>[https://www.azhighground.com/blog/post/breaking--mcsally-trailing-as-trump-comes-to-town Breaking: McSally Trailing as Trump Comes to Town]</ref> and thus could be unreliable and inaccurate.

On February 20, 2020, an article by the Detroit Free Press was published citing a Quinnipiac poll which "concluded" that [[Gary Peters]] was leading [[John James]] by 6 percentage points.<ref>[https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/02/20/poll-shows-gary-peters-leading-john-james/4820919002/ Gary Peters leading John James in new poll of Michigan Senate race]</ref> Although the sample size was at n=845 and the margin of error was at a moderate ±3.4%, the partisan breakdown of the polling sample stated that only 28% of the respondents were Republicans, compared to 31% that were Democrats and 35% that were Independents.

[[File:800px-NewYorkTimes.svg.png|thumb|left|750px|<big>The [[New York Times]] is known for its consistent and persistent [[liberal bias]].</big>]]
Articles by the AFP, [[The New York Times]], and Vanity Fair on February 20–21, 2020 repeated the [[Trump-Russia conspiracy theory]] talking points made by "lawmakers" who concurred with potential Deep state allies that have claimed that Russia was supposedly "meddling in our elections" in 2020.<ref>Multiple sources:
*[https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2020/02/20/us/politics/20reuters-usa-trump-russia.html U.S. Intelligence Told Lawmakers of Russian Bid to Boost Trump Re-election: Source]
*[https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/02/russia-trying-to-reelect-trump-2020-intelligence-briefing Trump Didn’t Want Democrats to Find Out Russia Is Trying to Get Him Reelected]
*[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-meddling-in-us-election-to-boost-trump-lawmakers-told/ar-BB10dn0x Russia meddling in US election to boost Trump, lawmakers told]</ref>

After the [[RNC]] transferred over half a million dollars to the Arizona State Republican Party, an article by the "progressive" Raw Story was published on February 24, 2020 running a biased headline against conservatives and Republicans, assuming without providing any reliable justification that [[Republicans]] are supposedly desperate with "panic" over the 2020 elections because GOP re-election efforts are somehow "in peril".<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/02/gop-flooding-this-red-state-with-cash-over-panic-may-flip-on-trump-report/ GOP flooding this red state with cash over panic it may flip on Trump: report]</ref> It is also important to note that much of the polling that concludes in favor of Democrats have relatively low sample sizes of only around several hundred people in addition to moderate to high margins of error, making most of them unreliable.

On February 27, 2020, a gun control group spent $43,000 on ads to attack [[Martha McSally]] over her gun policy, saying in the ads that they will "hold Senator Martha McSally accountable" over her refusal to forward the House-passed H.R. 8,<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gun-control-groups-target-mcsally-with-dollar43k-ad-buy/ar-BB10rp8w Gun-Control Groups Target McSally With $43K Ad Buy]</ref> a bill that was reported by [[Steve Scalise]] to contain an unjust double standard regarding punishments.<ref>[https://twitter.com/NRA/status/1100770175480156160 NRA on Twitter:]</ref>

[[File:PolitiFact logo.svg.png|thumb|right|500px|[[PolitiFact]], known for their [[left-wing]] skew in their “ratings”, has worked overtime in the upcoming 2020 elections in unfairly siding against [[Republicans]].]]
On March 2, 2020, a biased "fact check" by [[PolitiFact]] was focused on an ad by [[Thom Tillis]]' Democrat opponent [[Cal Cunningham]], who claimed that the Republican senator has voted to take away coverage for patients with pre-existing conditions.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/mar/02/cal-cunningham/cunningham-says-tills-voted-take-away-coverage-pre/ Cunningham stated on February 5, 2020 in a campaign ad:]</ref> While correctly stating that Tillis' vote to repeal [[ObamaCare]] would, if succeeded, lead to inadequate protection for patients with pre-existing conditions, PolitiFact still concurred with the ad's highly misleading and deceptive portrayal of Tillis, giving a rating of "Mostly True".

The liberal progressive site Raw Story published an article on March 2, 2020 highlighting how Sen. [[Martha McSally]] is supposedly being "annihilated" in voter reviews,<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/03/senator-martha-mcsally-annihilated-by-her-voters-in-reviews-for-her-senate-offices/ Senator Martha McSally annihilated by her voters in reviews for her Senate offices]</ref> despite a major problem with the narrative. According to the link that the page provided ([https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS816US818&sxsrf=ALeKk01nOW6QN_tkG6Bh7f_SWZSINmF6ZQ%3A1583164062215&ei=nipdXprgDPylytMP6IWVgA8&q=Mcsally%2C+407+W.+Congress+St.+Suite+103+Tucson%2C+AZ+85701&oq=Mcsally%2C+407+W.+Congress+St.+Suite+103+Tucson%2C+AZ+85701&gs_l=psy-ab.3...3914.9404..9634...0.2..1.206.826.10j0j1......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i71.Zi-VrBjY44Y&ved=0ahUKEwiap7LckfznAhX8knIEHehCBfAQ4dUDCAs&uact=5#lrd=0x86d67103e84819b5:0x9af65c6346b66d82,1 here]), there have been only 48 reviews as of March 4, 2020, thus making the article's conclusion extremely reliable on a statistical standpoint given the minuscule sample size.

[[File:281px-The Hill (2020-01-15).svg.png|thumb|left|300px|Despite supposedly being less biased than most [[mainstream news]] sources, [[The Hill]] has repeatedly cited unreliable polling that “concludes” in [[Republican]] candidates trailing [[Democrat]] opponents.]]
Two establishment media sources published articles on March 5, 2020 supporting the narrative that McSally is trailing [[Mark Kelly]] in the upcoming 2020 Senate election in [[Arizona]],<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.newsweek.com/republicans-susan-collins-martha-mcsally-are-serious-danger-losing-their-senate-seats-1490730 Republicans Susan Collins And Martha McSally Are In Serious Danger Of Losing Their Senate Seats To Democratic Challengers]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/486186-poll-democrat-kelly-leads-gop-incumbent-mcsally-by-5-points-in-arizona-senate Poll: Kelly leads GOP incumbent McSally by five points in Arizona Senate race]</ref> citing a poll by the Public Policy Polling. However, the poll may potentially be very inaccurate, as it had a high margin of error at ±3.8%.<ref>[https://www.publicpolicypolling.com/polls/democrats-lead-by-at-least-4-in-4-gop-held-senate-seats/ Democrats lead by at least 4 in 4 GOP held Senate seats]</ref>

Several establishment media outlets published articles around March 7, 2020 citing a poll that "concluded" that Sen. Ernst's approval rating has fell by 10%.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/03/republican-joni-ernst-poll-numbers-plunge-after-voting-against-trumps-impeachment/ Republican Joni Ernst poll numbers plunge after voting against Trump’s impeachment]
*[https://www.thehawkeye.com/news/20200307/iowa-poll-joni-ernsts-approval-rating-slips-as-she-mounts-reelection-campaign Iowa Poll: Joni Ernst’s approval rating slips as she mounts reelection campaign]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/486515-joni-ernsts-approval-rating-dips-10-points-poll Joni Ernst's approval rating drops 10 points: poll]</ref> However, from a statistical standpoint, the conclusions may be inaccurate because of the fact that of the 800 people surveyed, only 667 (83% of 800) were ''likely voters'' (not proven voters), in addition to the fact that the margin of error for the ''likely voters'' is at ±3.8%.<ref>[https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2020/03/07/joni-ernst-job-approval-below-50-but-plurality-of-likely-voters-say-they-would-definitely-re-elect-h/4977479002/ Iowa Poll: Joni Ernst's approval rating slips as she mounts reelection campaign]</ref>

Two media outlets, [[Newsweek]] and [[The Hill]], both published articles on March 11, 2020 citing a poll that "concluded" that Sen. McSally was trailing [[Mark Kelly]] by 7 percentage points.<ref>Two references:
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/486968-kelly-leads-mcsally-by-7-points-in-arizona-senate-poll Kelly leads McSally by 7 points in Arizona Senate poll]
*[https://www.newsweek.com/former-astronaut-mark-kelly-increases-lead-over-republican-martha-mcsally-finish-john-mccains-1491716 Former Astronaut Mark Kelly Increases Lead Over Republican Martha McSally to Finish John McCain's Senate Term, New Poll Shows]</ref> As similar with most articles on election prediction "polling", several blatant problems are present. The Newsweek article didn't mention certain statistical details of the poll (see: [[liberal media bias]]) and didn't even provide a link to the actual polling report, while The Hill falsely concluded that the "poll surveyed 600 likely Arizona voters" while the actual description of the poll on OH Predictive Insights clearly stated that the sample size was "600 ''completed'' surveys",<ref>[https://ohpredictive.com/press-releases/ Category: Press Releases]</ref> not necessarily a total of 600 people asked. In addition, it is important to note that a sample size of on n=600 isn't a large enough sample size to be entirely conclusive, in addition to the high margin of error at ±4.0% and the fact that the surveyed sample were only ''likely voters'', not determined registered voters.<ref>[https://www.dropbox.com/s/vccjq6d7uphr1ne/AZPOP%20Senate%20Race%20Poll%20Report_.pdf?dl=0 AZPOP Senate Race Poll Report_.pdf]</ref>

An "opinion" article from AZ Central was written on April 7, 2020 attacking Sen. McSally for supposedly being a shill for [[President Trump]]'s supposed “slow reaction” to the [[coronavirus]] outbreak.<ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2020/04/07/arizona-sen-martha-mcsally-has-quarantined-herself-trumps-pocket/2967280001/ Sen. Martha McSally has quarantined herself in Trump's pocket]</ref> Largely misleading with its [[anti-Trump]] bias, the op-ed focuses on the severity of the [[coronavirus]] as something preventable had only [[President Trump]] took better action, vastly downplaying the massive scale of the [[CCP coverup]] in addition to [[WHO]] corruption.

According to the [[far-left]] Raw Story on April 10, 2020, Sen. McSally's push for an additional 100 ventilators to [[Arizona]] amidst the [[CCP virus in the United States]] was "patronage" because the effort to save lives was somehow only a ploy for political purposes.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/04/gop-senator-ridiculed-for-groveling-to-trump-on-twitter-for-receiving-ventilators-patronage-is-disgusting/ GOP senator ridiculed for groveling to Trump on Twitter for receiving ventilators: ‘Patronage is disgusting’]</ref>

''[[The Hill]]'' published an article on April 15, 2020 citing a poll conducted by the OH Predictive Insights which had concluded in [[Mark Kelly]] leading incumbent senator [[Martha McSally]] by nine points in the upcoming [[Arizona]] Senate race.<ref>[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/492830-kelly-expands-lead-over-mcsally-in-arizona Kelly expands lead over McSally in Arizona]</ref> The article did not provide a link to the actual poll, and as the official PDF for the polling methodology/results showed, the sample size was at a moderately low n=600 and the margin of error at a high ±4.0%.<ref>[https://www.dropbox.com/s/363wfkrzsxs6e8t/Arizona%20Public%20Opinion%20Pulse%20-%20Senate.pdf?dl=0 Arizona Public Opinion Pulse - Senate.pdf]</ref>

An article by Raw Story was published on May 5, 2020 attacking [[Susan Collins]] and [[Mitch McConnell]] over the latter helping the former's re-election campaign via an alleged dark money group.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/05/mitch-mcconnell-is-pouring-dark-money-into-maine-to-save-susan-collins-from-electoral-doom/ Mitch McConnell is pouring dark money into Maine to save Susan Collins from electoral doom]</ref> This is despite the website having previously blatantly ignoring<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/03/right-wing-news-site-gave-50000-to-super-pac-backing-susan-collins-while-attacking-her-opponents-big-money/ Right-wing news site gave $50,000 to super PAC backing Susan Collins — while attacking her opponent’s ‘big money’]</ref> Collins' opponent [[Sara Gideon]] having a campaign also bolstered by dark money groups.<ref>[https://freebeacon.com/politics/maine-dark-money-group-behind-false-ad-tied-to-sara-gideon/ Maine Dark Money Group Behind False Ad Tied to Sara Gideon]</ref>

In a letter to the editor on Kennebec Journal as published on May 14, 2020, a commentator absurdly implied [[Susan Collins]] to be a shill for [[Donald Trump]] while asserting [[Sara Gideon]] to be “non-partisan”.<ref>[https://www.centralmaine.com/2020/05/14/attacks-on-gideon-show-shes-a-threat/ Attacks on Gideon show she’s a threat]</ref> This is despite Sen. Collins being ranked the most bi-partsian senator in the [[116th United States Congress]]<ref>[https://www.collins.senate.gov/newsroom/senator-collins-ranked-most-bipartisan-senator-116th-congress Senator Collins Ranked as Most Bipartisan Senator of 116th Congress]</ref> compared to Gideon's [[far-left]] voting record in the [[Maine]] House of Representatives.<ref>[https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/137334/sara-gideon Sara Gideon's Voting Records]</ref>

The Arizona Republic ran an "opinion" article on May 18, 2020 attacking Sen. [[Martha McSally]] for having strongly criticized [[China]] over the [[coronavirus pandemic]], insisting that the blame ought to lie on [[Donald Trump]].<ref>[https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/ej-montini/2020/05/18/martha-mcsallys-hail-mary-play-blame-china/5205211002/ Sen. Martha McSally’s 'Hail Mary' play – blame China]</ref> The op-ed also made an unnecessarily strong focus on Trump's tweets, in addition to having spelling/grammar errors when initially published.

An article was published by Raw Story on May 21, 2020 claiming that [[Mark Kelly]] is a “[[conservative Democrat]]”.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/05/trump-pulled-mcconnell-aside-to-express-his-alarm-with-arizonas-gop-senator-martha-mcsally-report/ Trump pulled McConnell aside to express his alarm with Arizona’s GOP Senator Martha McSally: report]</ref> This is despite [[On the Issues]] clearly highlighting Kelly as a [[pro-abortion]], gun-grabbing [[liberal]] who considers [[healthcare]] as a “human right”.<ref>[https://ontheissues.org/Senate/Mark_Kelly.htm Mark Kelly on the Issues]</ref>
{{Image Thumbnail right|File:155px-Salon Logo 2019.svg.png|235px|[[Salon]] is known for continuously running fake news articles attacking and smearing Republicans.}}
A [[Salon]] article was published on May 28, 2020 citing a [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/20200528_ME.pdf poll] which had "concluded" that [[Susan Collins]] was trailing [[Sara Gideon]] by nine points in the [[United States Senate election in Maine, 2020|2020 Maine Senate race]].<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2020/05/28/aligned-with-radical-president-susan-collins-trails-likely-democratic-challenger-by-nine-points_partner/ Aligned with "radical president," Susan Collins trails likely Democratic challenger by nine points]</ref> According to a thorough analysis by Sen. Collins' campaign website, the firm had nearly no previous history of campaign polling, the poll was commissioned by [[far-left]]ists, and the leaders of the commissioner had suspiciously close ties to [[Democrat]] primary challenger Betsy Sweet, whom the poll claimed was leading Collins by 1% despite having spent a relatively very low amount of money for her campaign.<ref>[https://www.susancollins.com/fake_poll_alert FAKE POLL ALERT: GIDEON & ALLIES PUSHING MAKE-BELIEVE POLL FROM ILLINOIS BILLBOARD/SELF-STORAGE COMPANY]</ref>

A [[Fox News]] "poll" was published on June 3, 2020 asserting that Sen. McSally was trailing [[Mark Kelly]] in the 2020 Arizona Senate race by 13 points.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-biden-ahead-in-arizona-kelly-trouncing-mcsally-in-senate-race Fox News Poll: Biden ahead in Arizona, Kelly trouncing McSally in Senate race]</ref> According to the polling data, ''20%'' of self-identified [[conservatives]] supposedly would vote for the left-wing [[Joe Biden]] over [[Donald Trump]], and ''25% would supposedly vote for Kelly over McSally''.<ref>[https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2020/06/35199d36-Fox_May-30-June-2-2020_Complete_Arizona_Topline_June-3-Release.pdf Fox News Poll - AZ...]</ref> Despite this notion being highly dubious in practical terms, this was still cited by establishment/liberal media outlets, including Raw Story<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/fox-news-poll-spells-doom-for-gop-in-arizona/ Fox News poll spells doom for GOP in Arizona]</ref> and Tuscon Weekly.<ref>[https://www.tucsonweekly.com/TheRange/archives/2020/06/04/fox-news-poll-kelly-trouncing-mcsally-by-13-points-in-az-senate-race-trump-trails-biden-in-state Fox News Poll: Kelly "Trouncing" McSally by 13 Points in AZ Senate Race, Trump Trails Biden in State]</ref>

After Sen. McSally introduced a bill in late June 2020 to utilize tax credits as a means to incentivize travel amidst economic disasters caused by the [[CCP pandemic]], many fake news media sources exhibited a biased reporting on the legislation.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.newsweek.com/martha-mcsally-4000-tourism-tax-credit-1512804 McSally Proposes $4,000 Tax Credit for Travel More Than 50 Miles From Home]
*[https://www.vox.com/2020/6/24/21300543/martha-mcsally-trip-act-explained Martha McSally’s bailout proposal for the travel industry, explained]
*[https://reason.com/2020/06/24/theres-something-for-everyone-to-hate-in-sen-martha-mcsallys-plan-for-federally-subsidized-vacations/ There's Something for Everyone To Hate in Sen. Martha McSally's Plan for Federally Subsidized Vacations]
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sen-mcsally-give-americans-4000-to-take-a-vacation This senator wants to give you a big tax credit to take a vacation]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/26/fact-check-americans-may-get-4-000-tax-credit-travel-stimulus/3262911001/ Fact check: Americans could get a $4,000 tax credit for domestic travel in stimulus]
*[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/arizonas-martha-mcsally-wants-to-pay-you-4000-to-take-a-coronavirus-vacation-sort-of/ Arizona’s Martha McSally wants to pay you $4,000 to take a coronavirus vacation — sort of]</ref> Some sources claimed that the aim was to give Americans $4,000, which would assume individual wealth belongs to the federal government.

After Sen. McSally's campaign released an ad highlighting [[Democrat]] opponent [[Mark E. Kelly]]'s hypocrisy for criticizing the Paycheck Protection Program despite taking loans from it,<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmsVSGkkWdc Cheap Shots]</ref> [[PolitiFake]] claimed that the assertions were "Mostly False" despite its own gathered information proving McSally's points to be mostly valid.<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/aug/06/martha-mcsally/fact-checking-arizona-senate-race-claim-about-mark/ Fact-checking Arizona Senate race claim about Mark Kelly, PPP loan]</ref>

Raw Story, a site reeking of [[Collins Derangement Syndrome]], published an article on September 13, 2020 attacking former senator [[Joe Lieberman]] because he endorsed Sen. Collins amidst the latter's strong re-election efforts.<ref>[https://www.rawstory.com/2020/09/worthless-joe-lieberman-ridiculed-over-his-endorsement-of-susan-collins-shes-done-for/ ‘Worthless’ Joe Lieberman ridiculed over his endorsement of Susan Collins: ‘She’s done for’]</ref>

In mid-September 2020, [[The New Republic]] published a sexist attack against Sen. [[Joni Ernst]], invoking her past abusive husband in claiming that "her Senate career may not survive an abusive president."<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/media/the-new-republic-blasted-for-tweet-invoking-joni-ernsts-abusive-husband-to-attack-senator The New Republic blasted for tweet using Joni Ernst's abusive husband to slam senator]
*[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/17/new-republic-uses-ernsts-abusive-husband-to-promote-election-story/ The New Republic Invokes Joni Ernst’s ‘Abusive Husband’ to Promote Election Story]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2020/09/18/gross-attack-on-joni-ernst-n2576420 Sen. Ernst Responds to Sexist Attack from Liberal Magazine]</ref>

==Left-wing smears==
:''See also: [[Liberal Smear Machine]]
===Against Cory Gardner===
A far-left site called "F*** Cory Gardner" has been created to smear the senator amidst the upcoming election in Colorado.<ref>[https://fuckcorygardner.org/ F*** Cory Gardner] '''(Warning: The entirety of the website is a vulgar smear)'''</ref>

A [[Chuck Schumer]]-affiliated [[super PAC]] released an ad in late April 2020 attacking [[Cory Gardner]] as an elitist, making highly misleading points about the senator.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/schumer-aligned-pac-portrays-colorado-sen-cory-gardner-as-hobnobbing-with-the-rich-amid-coronavirus Schumer-aligned PAC portrays Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner as hobnobbing with the rich amid coronavirus]</ref>

===Against Martha McSally===
:''See also: [[McSally Derangement Syndrome]]
Phony "conservatives" colluding with the [[Democrat Party]] have tried smearing Martha McSally, such as one video by an anti-Trump website calling itself "The Lincoln Project".<ref>[https://lincolnproject.us/news/mcsally-release/ MARTHA MCSALLY, TRUMP HACK]</ref> The video, in resemblance of mainstream fake news, claimed that McSally lost in 2018 "badly" (McSally lost by 2.4%) and that [[John McCain]] was a "hero" (McCain betrayed fellow POWs<ref>[http://jimbovard.com/blog/2008/09/27/mccains-great-betrayal-of-fellow-pows/ McCain’s Great Betrayal of Fellow POWs]</ref>). It is also important to note that the website, despite supposedly and seemingly standing up for justice and integrity, includes the bigoted [[George T. Conway III]] among its advisors.<ref>[https://lincolnproject.us/ Dedicated Americans Protecting Democracy]</ref>

A website calling itself "Honest Arizona" made cherry-picked, deceptively misleading claims about McSally, such as saying that she allegedly voted "twice" to cut [[Medicare]].<ref>[https://www.honestarizona.org/ Honest Arizona]</ref> This is likely a parallel to [[Kyrsten Sinema]]'s 2018 campaign's claim that McSally allegedly voted to cut [[Social Security]] and Medicare funding,<ref>[https://kyrstensinema.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Medicare.pdf Medicare.pdf]</ref> something that even the liberal [[PolitiFact]] only deems "half true",<ref name="PolitiFact on McSally's vote on Medicare">[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/aug/14/kyrsten-sinema/fact-checking-kyrsten-sinemas-claim-about-medicare/ PolitiFact | Fact or False]</ref> as McSally's votes on certain bills '''''may indirectly''''' lead to Medicare cuts and Social Security restructuring, although that would only have a lessened effect on the already unsustainable programs. In addition, it is important to note that McSally voted in favor of HR 849,<ref>[https://votesmart.org/bill/24081/61674/137299/protecting-seniors-access-to-medicare-act#61674 HR 849 - Protecting Seniors Access to Medicare Act - National Key Vote]</ref> a bill that would repeal the [[ObamaCare]]-established [[Independent Payment Advisory Board]], also known as the IPAB, which is a bureaucratic fifteen-member board that is able to make recommendations on Medicare cuts without congressional approval.<ref>[https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr849/summary H.R. 849 (115th): Protecting Seniors Access to Medicare Act]</ref> Many critics considered the IPAB to be a "[[death panel]]".<ref>[https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelcannon/2014/04/15/more-reasons-why-ipab-obamacares-death-panel-is-relevant-to-sylvia-burwells-nomination/#45689f1271d8 More Reasons Why IPAB, ObamaCare's 'Death Panel,' Is Relevant To Sylvia Burwell's Nomination]</ref>

A left-wing website whose title directly purports Sen. McSally to be a "hack" has made extremely deceptive claims about the senator, such as claiming that she cut "billions in guaranteed benefits for seniors".<ref>[https://www.mcsallyisthehack.org/ Martha McSally is the Hack]</ref> Very similar to the [[Medicare]] claim made by "Honest Arizona", this is extremely misleading.<ref name="PolitiFact on McSally's vote on Medicare"/> In addition, a document file linked from the page has claimed that [[President Trump]]'s border wall was "unnecessary"<ref>[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mc4oEOUqWb6YJbgBfeBtpqFm2oigk0TLGqCBz5_B0Q8/edit McSally is a Hack - Google Documents]</ref> and that the cause of the [[Recession of 2008]] was owed to unrestrained dangerous banking practices despite the fact that such was ordered by left-wing [[Alinsky]]ites in the federal government.

===Against Mitch McConnell===
:''See also: [[Moscow Mitch Syndrome]]
On February 25, 2020, as McConnell moved to swiftly force the Senate to vote on the [[Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act]] ([[United States Senate elections, 2020#Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act vote/impact|see below]]), radical [[pro-abortion]] leftists quickly came to oppose it, arguing that it's meant to "go after women" and that it's "unnecessary" because anti-infanticide laws are already in place.<ref>[https://www.newsweek.com/mcconnell-faces-backlash-over-bid-force-votes-anti-abortion-laws-1488928 Mitch McConnell Faces Backlash Over Bid To Force Senate Votes On Anti-Abortion Laws: 'The First Thing We Do Is Go After Women?']</ref> While the [[Born-Alive Infants Protection Act]] passed both houses of Congress in 2002,<ref>[https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/the-facts-on-the-born-alive-debate/ The Facts on the Born-Alive Debate]</ref> accurate predictions on infants who are murdered after surviving abortions conclude that every year, there are likely several hundred infants who survive abortions, and that many are likely left to die based on known testimonies by abortion clinic workers.<ref>[https://www.liveaction.org/news/1200-too-many-a-look-at-born-alive-abortion-statistics/ 1,200 too many: A look at born-alive abortion statistics]</ref> Since the already-illegal cold-blooded murder of infants has occurred numerous times even after the 2002 Born-Alive Infants Protection Act was passed, the [[progressive]] narrative on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act being supposedly "unnecessary" is effectively discredited.

===Against Susan Collins===
:''See also: [[Collins Derangement Syndrome]]
An article by the [[far-left]] magazine Esquire on February 25, 2020 ran a headline that read "Susan Collins Is a Ridiculous Politician", with the subject largely attacking the senator for her slight right-ward shift during the Trump era in addition to meaninglessly name-calling former [[conservative]] governor [[Paul LePage]].<ref>[https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a31094154/susan-collins-praise-paul-lepage-maine/ Susan Collins Is a Ridiculous Politician]</ref>

==Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act vote/impact==
[[File:Baby.jpg|thumb|right|400px|An [[unborn child]]. Democrats now don't care if they are killed in or out of the womb.]]
===Background (2019)===
The [[Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act]], originally introduced in 2019 by [[Ben Sasse]], was a measure to provide absolute protection to infants who survive [[abortions]], though it was blocked by [[pro-abortion]] Senate [[Democrats]].<ref>[https://www.lifenews.com/2019/02/25/senate-democrats-block-bill-to-stop-infanticide-and-care-for-babies-born-alive-after-abortions/ Senate Democrats Block Bill to Stop Infanticide and Care for Babies Born Alive After Abortions] from 2019</ref>

===Necessity===
Although the murder of abortion-surviving infants has been prohibited in the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act passed in 2002, the bill had lacked enforcement provisions and specifications on punishments for simply leaving infants to die.<ref>[https://townhall.com/columnists/patrinamosley/2020/02/25/why-we-need-the-bornalive-abortion-survivors-protection-act-n2561807 Why We Need the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act]</ref>

===Vote results===
The vote on the [[Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act]] was held on February 25, 2020. 56 senators voted for the bill; every Republican voted for the bill in addition to Democrats [[Bob Casey Jr.]], [[Doug Jones]], and [[Joe Manchin]].<ref>[https://www.lifenews.com/2020/02/25/senate-democrats-block-bill-to-stop-infanticide-care-for-babies-born-alive-after-abortions/ Senate Democrats Block Bill to Stop Infanticide, Care for Babies Born Alive After Abortions] from 2020</ref> However, despite [[Bernie Sanders]], [[Elizabeth Warren]], and [[Amy Klobuchar]] not voting on the legislation, 40 Democrat senators in addition to [[Angus King]] filibustered the bill with just enough members to prevent cloture, effectively blocking the bill from being brought up for a vote.

===Impact on unborn children===
Since the bill did not make it through the filibuster, no law is currently in place to punish doctors who intentionally neglect and leave to die infants that survive abortions.

===2020 elections impact===
McConnell's decision to force a Senate vote on the bill may potentially swing the 2020 Senate elections in favor of the Republicans once many [[Americans]] realize how radical the [[Democrat Party]] has become in their [[pro-abortion]] extremism. However, given very low factual reporting from the liberal [[lamestream media]] on the matter, this may not necessarily be the case, especially given the low emphasis by the [[MSM]] on the issue of [[abortion]] overall.

==Drug price control legislations==
Prescription drug prices are a major issue for many senators up for re-election, as a corporate monopoly within the [[pharmaceutical]] industry suppresses competition and thus is able to sustain high drug prices that support their profits but hurt ordinary Americans. The Senate is divided between the [[establishment]] majority that engages in cronyism with [[Big Pharma]] and a small minority of populists and libertarians who oppose such [[elitism]].

===Proponents===
[[John Cornyn]], along with Democrat [[Richard Blumenthal]], introduced the Affordable Prescriptions for Patients Act, a legislation that would clarify tricks used by the pharmaceutical industry to make for easier federal prosecuting over violations.<ref name="Senators Who Led Pro-Pharma Patent Reform Get Drugmaker Cash">[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/senators-who-led-pro-pharma-patent-reform-get-drugmaker-cash/ar-BB11wT6E Senators Who Led Pro-Pharma Patent Reform Get Drugmaker Cash]</ref> However, the [[pharmaceutical]] industry heavily lobbied against it, successfully removing the main provisions, and there has still yet to be a vote on the bill.

[[Martha McSally]] (R-AZ) has promised<ref name="February 2020 Trump rally in Arizona"/> and later did so regarding sponsoring [[S.3384]], a bill to reduce drug prices ([https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3384?s=2&r=3 information here]). The legislation, if passed and signed, would allow for the importation of cheaper drugs from [[Canada]], thus being able to reduce drug prices to a more affordable amount. However, a Senate vote has yet to be held.

Senator [[Joni Ernst]], along with her colleague [[Chuck Grassley]], have backed the [https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/2543/text Prescription Drug Pricing Reduction Act], a bill that would prevent price gouging and also shut down a loophole currently used by the pharmaceutical industry.<ref>[https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/iowa-view/2020/03/18/chuck-grassley-joni-ernst-prescription-drug-bill-holds-big-pharma-accountable/2864515001/ Prescription drug bill backed by Grassley and Ernst holds Big Pharma accountable]</ref>

===Establishment opponents===
Sen. [[Mitch McConnell]], the [[Senate Majority Leader]] in the [[116th United States Congress]], was criticized by [[Chuck Grassley]] in December 2019 for halting a bill sponsored by the latter that would lower drug prices.<ref>[https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/475183-grassley-accuses-mcconnell-of-blocking-progress-on-drug-pricing-bill Grassley accuses McConnell of blocking progress on drug pricing bill]</ref> As the Majority Leader, McConnell wields the power to effectively block any legislation he opposes and has done so numerously, frequently blocking [[leftist]]-backed bills, but also oftentimes stalling important legislations that would have great benefits for ordinary Americans.

It was reported in March 2020 that establishment senators [[Thom Tillis]] (R-NC) and [[Chris Coons]] (D-DE) received plentiful donations from the [[pharmaceutical]] lobby after leading an anti-[[free market]] patent "reform" that would unfairly target and hurt businesses that compete against the pharmaceutical industry.<ref name="Senators Who Led Pro-Pharma Patent Reform Get Drugmaker Cash"/>

==Coronavirus impact/Democrat obstructions==
[[File:COVID19 virus.jpg|thumb|right|325px|[[Coronavirus]] cells. While the [[COVID-19]] strain has and currently is killed hundreds, Democrats seek to exploit the ‘tremendous opportunity’ to ‘restructure’ [[America]] in their radical worldview, as [[Jim Clyburn]] admitted.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/economy/2020/03/23/democrat-clyburn-on-coronavirus-bill-this-is-a-tremendous-opportunity-to-restructure-things-to-fit-our-vision/ Democrat Clyburn on Coronavirus Bill: ‘This Is a Tremendous Opportunity to Restructure Things to Fit Our Vision’]</ref>]]
Amid the [[coronavirus]] outbreak in the [[U.S.]] and the hundreds of deaths that followed, a [[bi-partisan]] relief bill was written by Senate [[Republicans]] and [[Democrats]] to provide funding for hospitals as a necessary emergency measure in a crisis. However, a ‘phase three’ Republican measure to provide aid was blocked by Senate Democrats,<ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/23/senate-democrats-again-block-procedural-vote-coron/ Senate Democrats again block procedural vote on coronavirus bill]</ref> many of whom, along with the [[liberal media]], falsely claimed that the legislation was a “bailout”.<ref>[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-republican-corporate-bailout-is-obscene/ar-BB11BhoK The Republican Corporate Bailout Is Obscene]</ref> The Democrat blockade was strongly condemned by Senate Republicans, including [[Lindsey Graham]], [[John Neely Kennedy|John Kennedy]], [[John Barrasso]], and [[Ted Cruz]].<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osQbpRTkszQ&t= Dems Block Coronavirus Relief Bill, Delaying Key Aid to American Families]</ref>

While the [[Republican]] measure was being blocked, [[Nancy Pelosi]] flew in her private jet from [[California]] to [[Washington D.C.]] to introduce an irrelevant $2.5 trillion far-left ‘wish list’ that sought to require allowing early voting, raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour, and enact [[affirmative action]] programs.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/23/nancy-pelosi-coronavirus-stimulus-package-socialis/ GOP details Pelosi's $2.5 trillion 'socialist wish list' in coronavirus aid package]
*[https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2020/03/23/here-are-the-details-of-nancy-pelosis-leftist-wish-list-and-it-has-nothing-to-do-with-wuhan-coronavirus-n2565543 Here is the Far-Left Wish List Nancy Pelosi Just Blew Everything Up For]
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/shame-on-you-republicans-slam-pelosi-economic-aid-package-as-a-liberal-wish-list 'Shame on you': Republicans slam Pelosi economic aid package as a liberal wish list]
*[https://www.nationalreview.com/news/taking-hostages-sasse-slams-pelosi-for-adding-liberal-wish-list-to-emergency-coronavirus-bill/ ‘Taking Hostages’: Sasse Slams Pelosi for Adding ‘Liberal Wish List’ to Coronavirus Bill]
*[https://www.foxnews.com/media/pelosi-defends-coronavirus-relief-bill-wish-list Pelosi defends coronavirus 'wish list' on CNN, says climate measure brings 'shared value']</ref> The sheer partisan effort was strongly condemned by Senate [[Republicans]] such as [[Tom Cotton]] and [[Ted Cruz]].<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BYHO3iZbrQ Tom Cotton Unleashes On The Democrats]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ls26rmOl91Y Ted Cruz Rages Against Dems For Blocking Coronavirus Aid Bill]</ref>

During the debate in the Senate chamber held on March 23, 2020, [[Senate Minority Leader]] [[Chuck Schumer]] objected to the floor being yielded to [[Susan Collins]] in an attempt to block her from speaking ([https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1242129378852720641 video clip here (warning: profanity)]), prompting outrage from the latter and other Republicans, such as Sen. [[Tom Cotton]], who called it ‘bull****’.<ref>Two references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/susan-collins-tears-into-schumer-democrats-in-floor-speech-ahead-monday-vote-on-coronavirus-bill Sen. Collins unloads on Dems in coronavirus floor speech: ‘We don't have another minute to delay acting’]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/23/senate-coronavirus-rescue-package-144233 ‘This is bulls---’: Bitterness takes over Senate as lawmakers clash on rescue]</ref>

Senate Democrats on September 10, 2020 blocked a [[GOP]]-led [[coronavirus]] relief proposal.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/10/coronavirus-stimulus-update-senate-relief-bill-fails.html Senate Republicans fail to advance coronavirus stimulus bill as stalemate drags on]
*[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/09/10/coronavirus-senate-set-vote-bill-democrats-vow-block/5762727002/ Senate Democrats block $300 billion coronavirus stimulus package, leaving little hope for relief before November]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/515867-senate-democrats-block-gop-relief-bill Senate Democrats block GOP relief bill]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/10/senate-coronavirus-relief-package-411635 Senate Democrats block Republican Covid relief proposal]
*[https://nypost.com/2020/09/10/dems-block-gop-covid-19-bill-that-included-unemployment-relief/ Senate Democrats block GOP COVID-19 bill that included unemployment relief]</ref>

===Other events/occurrences===
It was reported on March 22, 2020 that [[Rand Paul]] tested positive for the [[coronavirus]].<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sen-rand-paul-tests-positive-for-coronavirus Sen. Rand Paul tests positive for coronavirus]
*[https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2020-03-22/rand-paul-is-1st-senator-to-report-positive-test-for-virus Rand Paul Is 1st Senator to Report Positive Test for Virus]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/22/sen-rand-paul-tests-positive-for-coronavirus-142326 Sen. Rand Paul tests positive for coronavirus and more GOP senators quarantine]</ref> It was later announced on April 7, 2020 that the senator had tested negative in an indication of having fully recovered, and quickly proceeded to volunteer at a local [[Kentucky]] hospital to help others who have the coronavirus.<ref>Multiple references:
*[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/together-we-will-overcome-coronavirus-free-rand-paul-volunteers-at-hospital-after-testing-negative 'Together we will overcome!': Coronavirus-free Rand Paul volunteers at hospital after testing negative]
*[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/07/rand-paul-recovers-coronavirus-171969 'I am negative': Rand Paul recovers from coronavirus]
*[https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/491573-rand-paul-volunteering-at-hospital-after-negative-coronavirus-test Rand Paul volunteering at hospital after negative coronavirus test]</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:United States Senate]]
[[Category:United States Politics]]
[[Category:2020s]]