Politics Thread

[XU_Lou]

Maybe he's just a chronic liar like you:

Seriously, is that the best you can do? Project onto me what I've already defined you as?

I'm beginning to feel like I'm talking to one of those UD losers up north....

[XU '11]

It seems to me that dragging out the transition is going to be damaging to our country.

In 2016, Hillary lost by:
Mich 11,000
Penn 44,000
Wiscon 23,000

I would guess that in any of those state she could have asked for a recount.
But, she conceded the day after the election, and the transition from Obama to Trump started immediately.

In 2020, Trump is currently behind:
Mich 146,000
Penn 47,000
Wiscon 20,000

They may discover a few ballots here or there that aren't correct. But it's very unlikely to change the result.
So far the lawsuits have been dismissed by the courts (except I think for one where observers were allowed to move from 10' away to 6')

I can only hope they don't drag this out much longer and really damage us by creating difficulties that don't need to happen.

In 2016, recounts were called for in all 3 of those states plus Nevada. Clinton just had the optics cover because Jill Stein technically requested them.

Generally, I agree that Trump has no shot and the recounts and legal challenges are a waste of time. But if you’re comparing numbers to talk about the closeness of the election, you should use the closest states that would get Trump to 270.

Georgia 14,000
Arizona 13,000
Wisconsin 20,000

The margins are pretty similar, just in different states.

[paulxu]

Good point. I think in some of those states the campaign may have to pay for the recount now.

[boozehound]

You know it's funny that both sides have such selective memory. All the republican chants of an illegitimate election kind of sound familiar - this is from the Wall Street Journal:

Here’s Hillary Clinton from September 2019, nearly three years after her defeat: “He knows he’s an illegitimate president. I believe he understands that the many varying tactics they used, from voter suppression and voter purging to hacking to the false stories, he knows that there were just a bunch of different reasons why the election turned out like it did.”

Or Jimmy Carter in June 2019. “There’s no doubt that the Russians did interfere in the election. And I think the interference, although not yet quantified, if fully investigated would show that Trump didn’t actually win the election in 2016. He lost the election and he was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf.” Asked if that meant he regarded Mr. Trump as an “illegitimate president,” Mr. Carter said yes.

In January 2017, Rep. Jerrold Nadler said he was boycotting Mr. Trump’s inauguration (along with one-third of his fellow House Democrats) because, though the president was “legally elected,” he wasn’t “legitimate.” During impeachment, another effort to reject the 2016 election, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the House had no choice but to act because Mr. Trump was “trying to corrupt, once again, the election for his benefit.” Not to mention the ridiculous attempts to paint a candidate who attracted more minority votes than any Republican in recent history as a champion of white supremacy.

Mr. Biden piled on with the rest of them. In the first debate he called Mr. Trump a “racist,” building on his earlier claim that Mr. Trump was America’s first racist president. During a May 2019 campaign stop in New Hampshire, a woman came up to Mr. Biden and said Mr. Trump was “an illegitimate president in my mind.” Mr. Biden’s response? “I absolutely agree.”

I know a certain segment on here are going to gloss right over this and go on with their finger pointing at the other side, but until both sides realize they're part of the problem this crap will only escalate.

I agree with most of this, but I do think the the 'both sides do this' approach normalizes a lot of (extremely) abnormal shit that Trump has done, and continues to do. For example, the consistent refusal to acknowledge the election results, refusal to commit to a peaceful transition of power, and attacking the vote is fundamentally flawed without evidence. Now we seem to be reaching the part where he is firing the remaining people who push back on him (See: Mark Esper) and installing his loyalists. That's a strange thing to do with 2 months left in power.

When the Democrats lost in 2016 they (relatively quietly) asked for a recount in key states, then conceded. There was no noise about Barack Obama ceding power to Hillary Clinton because they felt the election was unfair. They had him to the White House for a transition meeting. Several people then made one-off comments (after peacefully transitioning power) that they felt the legitimacy of the Trump Presidency was in question due to the evidence of Russian collusion. This all occurred well after Trump took office.

Key Difference (in my mind): The Democrats were alleging that an individual (the President, but still an individual) committed an act of serious wrongdoing. They did not attack the institution like Trump is doing right now. I think that is a pretty significant difference.

This sounds like Trump vs Democrats thing, but it's really a Trump vs Everyone else thing. No Republican has behaved in a similar manner before either, and actual Republicans with Principles are appalled at what is going on.

[XU_Lou]

I agree with most of this, but I do think the the 'both sides do this' approach normalizes a lot of (extremely) abnormal shit that Trump has done, and continues to do. For example, the consistent refusal to acknowledge the election results, refusal to commit to a peaceful transition of power, and attacking the vote is fundamentally flawed without evidence.

Umm, see posts 8659 and 8660 - there's a real good reason why there's no concession. Additionally, even RCP doesn't have Joe at 270: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/el...020/president/

When the Democrats lost in 2016 they (relatively quietly) asked for a recount in key states, then conceded. There was no noise about Barack Obama ceding power to Hillary Clinton because they felt the election was unfair. They had him to the White House for a transition meeting. Several people then made one-off comments (after peacefully transitioning power) that they felt the legitimacy of the Trump Presidency was in question due to the evidence of Russian collusion. This all occurred well after Trump took office.

This is completely delusional - and a re-writing of history. The coup/conspiracy against Trump started well before any ballots were cast. Afterwards, there was a pounding of drums for over three years that Trump colluded with the Russians - by the media and the Democrats in Congress. Have you ever heard of Adam Schiff (as just one example)??

[XU_Lou]

As a follow-up to posts 8659 and 8660, here's a series of 4 very short clips showing "The statistical case against a Biden win":

https://twitter.com/CortesSteve/stat...98952774381575

https://twitter.com/CortesSteve/stat...99601574522880

https://twitter.com/CortesSteve/stat...00100742828033

https://twitter.com/CortesSteve/stat...00733998764033

Let me be perfectly clear: the Democrats absolutely committed massive fraud in this election. Did they commit enough fraud to actually overturn it? Obviously I don't know. However, Trump has every right to challenge the results and have them reviewed by the courts before conceding, if indeed he lost when all the dust has settled.

[boozehound]

Umm, see posts 8659 and 8660 - there's a real good reason why there's no concession. Additionally, even RCP doesn't have Joe at 270: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/el...020/president/




This is completely delusional - and a re-writing of history. The coup/conspiracy against Trump started well before any ballots were cast. Afterwards, there was a pounding of drums for over three years that Trump colluded with the Russians - by the media and the Democrats in Congress. Have you ever heard of Adam Schiff (as just one example)??

I'm sorry, I'm just not going to engage with you. You have repeatedly shown either an inability, or an unwillingness, to consider any alternative viewpoints coupled with repeated posting of links to fringe media sources stated as fact. I do think it's important to give you the courtesy of explaining why I'm not going to respond to your post, though. Go Muskies!

[Xville]

I'm sorry, I'm just not going to engage with you. You have repeatedly shown either an inability, or an unwillingness, to consider any alternative viewpoints coupled with repeated posting of links to fringe media sources stated as fact. I do think it's important to give you the courtesy of explaining why I'm not going to respond to your post, though. Go Muskies!

Hi kettle, I'm pot...you're black

[boozehound]

Hi kettle, I'm pot...you're black

I think if you read the content of my posts you would find that I'm pretty moderate, as I have explained several times. Feel free to never respond to me again if you feel otherwise.

[XU_Lou]

I'm sorry, I'm just not going to engage with you. You have repeatedly shown either an inability, or an unwillingness, to consider any alternative viewpoints coupled with repeated posting of links to fringe media sources stated as fact. I do think it's important to give you the courtesy of explaining why I'm not going to respond to your post, though. Go Muskies!

In other words, you can't handle the truth....