Will the November election be clear?
-
Actually it has nothing to do with Jan 6 and everything to do with what happened in the two months before then. Also the fear is unrelated to them winning, like in 2020, the problem will be in the elections they lose. (so you managed to be literally 100% wrong)
The actual risk is local officials either (a) refusing to certify the vote in districts that went voted the wrong way, thus overturning the election results, or (b) refusing to certify delegates and/or sending in their own competing slate.
The chances of these happening successfully have increased since 2020, quite a bit, especially in a handful of key states.
"You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
-Cormac McCarthy -
Actually it has nothing to do with Jan 6 and everything to do with what happened in the two months before then. Also the fear is unrelated to them winning, like in 2020, the problem will be in the elections they lose. (so you managed to be literally 100% wrong)
The actual risk is local officials either (a) refusing to certify the vote in districts that went voted the wrong way, thus overturning the election results, or (b) refusing to certify delegates and/or sending in their own competing slate.
The chances of these happening successfully have increased since 2020, quite a bit, especially in a handful of key states.
@jon-nyc said in Will the November election be clear?:
Actually it has nothing to do with Jan 6 and everything to do with what happened in the two months before then. Also the fear is unrelated to them winning, like in 2020, the problem will be in the elections they lose.
The actual risk is local officials either (a) refusing to certify the vote in districts that went voted the wrong way, thus overturning the election results, or (b) refusing to certify delegates and/or sending in their own competing slate.
The chances of these happening successfully have increased since 2020, quite a bit, especially in a handful of key states.
As I said, a total meltdown would be just fine.
-
TDS is real. You have a bad case.
We're talking election integrity and you're fixated on Trump. That's not a cogent thought, it's an agenda.
@Jolly said in Will the November election be clear?:
TDS is real. You have a bad case.
We're talking election integrity and you're fixated on Trump. That's not a cogent thought, it's an agenda.
We know with complete certainty that actual election integrity issues need not be present. It is sufficient for someone, anyone, to simply make the accusation in MAGA-TV land. It doesn't matter how ridiculous the accusations are, as we saw so clearly in 2020.
And the incentive structure guarantees we will see this again - Maga grifters are incentivized to get on TV. Maga-TV is incentivized to give their audience what they want. Maga audiences want their feels confirmed and will turn the channel until they get what they want. This is 100% predictable and shall happen, regardless of how tight or loose elections are run.
-
See, that's where your logic fails. Unlike you, I actually live among people in MAGA-land, in Tea Party-land. A lot of people call it small town and rural America. You know, the people who aren't shakers and movers, the ones not into arbitrage, bitcoin or buying stock options.
No, these are the guys with conservative values that still believe the ideal America is one that still has values that are in tune with most of the values we have had since our founding.
You know, the Sons of Martha.
They're pretty level-headed. They don't need to google what fraud looks like or have Trump give a speech, they know.
The solution is very simple...Hold elections with an absolute minimum of fraud. I've talked about it ad nauseum for years. I think most of these Ultra-MAGAs (is that Joe's pet word for the day?) would have no problem with a free and fair election.
It seems to be people on the Left that keep inventing excuses as to why we can't have fair elections...
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
Actually it has nothing to do with Jan 6 and everything to do with what happened in the two months before then. Also the fear is unrelated to them winning, like in 2020, the problem will be in the elections they lose. (so you managed to be literally 100% wrong)
The actual risk is local officials either (a) refusing to certify the vote in districts that went voted the wrong way, thus overturning the election results, or (b) refusing to certify delegates and/or sending in their own competing slate.
The chances of these happening successfully have increased since 2020, quite a bit, especially in a handful of key states.
@jon-nyc said in Will the November election be clear?:
Actually it has nothing to do with Jan 6 and everything to do with what happened in the two months before then. Also the fear is unrelated to them winning, like in 2020, the problem will be in the elections they lose. (so you managed to be literally 100% wrong)
Well my point was that your opinion would seem fringey absent Jan 6, regardless of why you feel as you feel. And I can be forgiven for thinking you’re afraid of Republicans winning, when actually you’re more afraid of them losing. I’m sure that makes sense to you in your own head, but out here in everybody else’s, I suspect we’re satisfied that you’re afraid of Republicans winning.
The actual risk is local officials either (a) refusing to certify the vote in districts that went voted the wrong way, thus overturning the election results, or (b) refusing to certify delegates and/or sending in their own competing slate.
The chances of these happening successfully have increased since 2020, quite a bit, especially in a handful of key states.
Duly noted hand wave about increased but unquantifiable possibilities. You’re fringe in the extent you worry about that particular thing, and of course it’s overwhelmingly likely you will never be proven prescient about the risk. But you can still be satisfied that you recognized the risk where few others ever did.
Education is extremely important.
-
Or....
Maybe the average working stiffs finally get enough. Maybe we get that next civil war. Some folks have wondered what it might look like.
How about a slogan from one I think might be similar...
Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité
-
Or....
Maybe the average working stiffs finally get enough. Maybe we get that next civil war. Some folks have wondered what it might look like.
How about a slogan from one I think might be similar...
Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité
@Jolly said in Will the November election be clear?:
Or....
Maybe the average working stiffs finally get enough. Maybe we get that next civil war. Some folks have wondered what it might look like.
How about a slogan from one I think might be similar...
Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité
Which is more probable, the Republicans stealing the republic using mechanisms available to either party (but with Republicans being the threat because they have no principles), or a Civil War?
I guess Republicans win either way. Sucks to be a Democrat! Losers.
-
See, that's where your logic fails. Unlike you, I actually live among people in MAGA-land, in Tea Party-land. A lot of people call it small town and rural America. You know, the people who aren't shakers and movers, the ones not into arbitrage, bitcoin or buying stock options.
No, these are the guys with conservative values that still believe the ideal America is one that still has values that are in tune with most of the values we have had since our founding.
You know, the Sons of Martha.
They're pretty level-headed. They don't need to google what fraud looks like or have Trump give a speech, they know.
The solution is very simple...Hold elections with an absolute minimum of fraud. I've talked about it ad nauseum for years. I think most of these Ultra-MAGAs (is that Joe's pet word for the day?) would have no problem with a free and fair election.
It seems to be people on the Left that keep inventing excuses as to why we can't have fair elections...
@Jolly said in Will the November election be clear?:
See, that's where your logic fails. Unlike you, I actually live among people in MAGA-land, in Tea Party-land. A lot of people call it small town and rural America. You know, the people who aren't shakers and movers, the ones not into arbitrage, bitcoin or buying stock options.
No, these are the guys with conservative values that still believe the ideal America is one that still has values that are in tune with most of the values we have had since our founding.
You know, the Sons of Martha.
They're pretty level-headed. They don't need to google what fraud looks like or have Trump give a speech, they know.
The solution is very simple...Hold elections with an absolute minimum of fraud. I've talked about it ad nauseum for years. I think most of these Ultra-MAGAs (is that Joe's pet word for the day?) would have no problem with a free and fair election.
That might have been convincing in 2019. But since then we all witnessed Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, the pillow guy, and various other comic book grifters weave the most outlandish tales on Maga TV, keeping millions of Cult45 members glued to their spittle-flecked TV screens, all the while being encouraged by the Fat Man himself.
"You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
-Cormac McCarthy -
@jon-nyc said in Will the November election be clear?:
Actually it has nothing to do with Jan 6 and everything to do with what happened in the two months before then. Also the fear is unrelated to them winning, like in 2020, the problem will be in the elections they lose. (so you managed to be literally 100% wrong)
Well my point was that your opinion would seem fringey absent Jan 6, regardless of why you feel as you feel. And I can be forgiven for thinking you’re afraid of Republicans winning, when actually you’re more afraid of them losing. I’m sure that makes sense to you in your own head, but out here in everybody else’s, I suspect we’re satisfied that you’re afraid of Republicans winning.
The actual risk is local officials either (a) refusing to certify the vote in districts that went voted the wrong way, thus overturning the election results, or (b) refusing to certify delegates and/or sending in their own competing slate.
The chances of these happening successfully have increased since 2020, quite a bit, especially in a handful of key states.
Duly noted hand wave about increased but unquantifiable possibilities. You’re fringe in the extent you worry about that particular thing, and of course it’s overwhelmingly likely you will never be proven prescient about the risk. But you can still be satisfied that you recognized the risk where few others ever did.
@Horace I'm not "afraid of Republicans losing", of course, I'm afraid of what some among them might do if they do lose.
As for hand-waviness, do you really expect a numerical estimate for the possibility of such things?
Suffice it to say it was unthinkable in 2020 for people to use these largely ceremonial certification roles for partisan ends, which is why they withstood the pressure from Trump at the time. Since then there are people who are seeking out these roles precisely because they'd have the "courage" to use them in support of their Leader.
"You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
-Cormac McCarthy -
@Jolly said in Will the November election be clear?:
See, that's where your logic fails. Unlike you, I actually live among people in MAGA-land, in Tea Party-land. A lot of people call it small town and rural America. You know, the people who aren't shakers and movers, the ones not into arbitrage, bitcoin or buying stock options.
No, these are the guys with conservative values that still believe the ideal America is one that still has values that are in tune with most of the values we have had since our founding.
You know, the Sons of Martha.
They're pretty level-headed. They don't need to google what fraud looks like or have Trump give a speech, they know.
The solution is very simple...Hold elections with an absolute minimum of fraud. I've talked about it ad nauseum for years. I think most of these Ultra-MAGAs (is that Joe's pet word for the day?) would have no problem with a free and fair election.
That might have been convincing in 2019. But since then we all witnessed Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, the pillow guy, and various other comic book grifters weave the most outlandish tales on Maga TV, keeping millions of Cult45 members glued to their spittle-flecked TV screens, all the while being encouraged by the Fat Man himself.
@jon-nyc said in Will the November election be clear?:
@Jolly said in Will the November election be clear?:
See, that's where your logic fails. Unlike you, I actually live among people in MAGA-land, in Tea Party-land. A lot of people call it small town and rural America. You know, the people who aren't shakers and movers, the ones not into arbitrage, bitcoin or buying stock options.
No, these are the guys with conservative values that still believe the ideal America is one that still has values that are in tune with most of the values we have had since our founding.
You know, the Sons of Martha.
They're pretty level-headed. They don't need to google what fraud looks like or have Trump give a speech, they know.
The solution is very simple...Hold elections with an absolute minimum of fraud. I've talked about it ad nauseum for years. I think most of these Ultra-MAGAs (is that Joe's pet word for the day?) would have no problem with a free and fair election.
That might have been convincing in 2019. But since then we all witnessed Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, the pillow guy, and various other comic book grifters weave the most outlandish tales on Maga TV, keeping millions of Cult45 members glued to their spittle-flecked TV screens, all the while being encouraged by the Fat Man himself.
Quit reading the Left-wing rags and go walk among the unwashed masses...
-
@Horace I'm not "afraid of Republicans losing", of course, I'm afraid of what some among them might do if they do lose.
As for hand-waviness, do you really expect a numerical estimate for the possibility of such things?
Suffice it to say it was unthinkable in 2020 for people to use these largely ceremonial certification roles for partisan ends, which is why they withstood the pressure from Trump at the time. Since then there are people who are seeking out these roles precisely because they'd have the "courage" to use them in support of their Leader.
@jon-nyc said in Will the November election be clear?:
@Horace I'm not "afraid of Republicans losing", of course, I'm afraid of what some among them might do if they do lose.
As for hand-waviness, do you really expect a numerical estimate for the possibility of such things?
Suffice it to say it was unthinkable in 2020 for people to use these largely ceremonial certification roles for partisan ends, which is why they withstood the pressure from Trump at the time. Since then there are people who are seeking out these roles precisely because they'd have the "courage" to use them in support of their Leader.
I am sure everybody on this forum would like to see any such loophole closed. I am not sure anybody on this forum is as worried about those loopholes as you are. Maybe that’s because you recognize the risks more clearly than anybody else. But as far as I’m aware, absent the notion that Republicans are the only party devious enough to use those loopholes, we should expect bipartisan support for closing them.
I would not expect your existential risk estimation of the existence of the Republican Party to lower, after those loopholes closed. Something else would rush in to fill the existential risk void. And your choice of who to publicly support in elections, will continue to be no choice at all. The simplest pro/con formulation of all. All that nuance you’re capable of, and it boils down to an existential risk, and therefore, no choice at all. And it alway will. Don’t take my word for it, just watch.
-
The thing that frustrates me is that you can have A) numerous court cases dismissed, B) numerous judges saying the court cases dont have any meaning, C) numerous state/local officials (from both sides) saying that they elections were okay, D) nobody offering any "hard" evidence of fraud that courts/lawyers have agreed and accepted, E) when people who say the election was stolen are asked to provide such evidence, well...... nothing ever is shown, etc.
and yet when a part time postal worker (who has been called mentally unstable by his mother) claims that his boss, hundreds of other postal workers and truck driving company employees are part of a conspiracy to overthrow the election, he is shown as "proof" that the election was "stolen". :woman-shrugging:
(Weird that all of these hundreds (thousands?) of people involved in this election overthrow, no one has spoken. And this, in the modern world where people will spill their most inner secrets and scandals for 5 minutes on TV)
-
“There are enough election deniers out there — candidates running that are going to lose and going to claim that they won, and they won’t accept the election results. I am scared to death,” Luntz said.
“We are going to have a problem in this country, if Senate candidates, governor candidates, secretary of state candidates lose by 2% or 3% and claim the election is stolen.”
Concerns about election deniers are persisting as former President Donald Trump continues to make false claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.
Ahh the legacy of a sitting President denying his own landslide loss. Repeat the lie that "election fraud is substantial and needs to be fixed" enough and you get many who believe it's real. Heck, during the 2020 recounts, the results were either verified or Biden picked up even more votes.
Now there is an unfortunate ripple effect of sore losers (on both sides) not accepting their results, their constituents believing every excuse why the results aren't valid... And discussions about overhauling a system based on an unsupported diagnosis of it being sick.
I'd be more than fine with the election process taking advantage of technology to make it easier to track, validate, etc. <Insert idea of using blockchain> But it's a very sad chapter in America when the fundamental idea of an election is no longer trusted because of how Trump handled his loss 2 years ago.
-
America johnson is still claiming that he won by a large margin.
-
“There are enough election deniers out there — candidates running that are going to lose and going to claim that they won, and they won’t accept the election results. I am scared to death,” Luntz said.
“We are going to have a problem in this country, if Senate candidates, governor candidates, secretary of state candidates lose by 2% or 3% and claim the election is stolen.”
Concerns about election deniers are persisting as former President Donald Trump continues to make false claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.
Ahh the legacy of a sitting President denying his own landslide loss. Repeat the lie that "election fraud is substantial and needs to be fixed" enough and you get many who believe it's real. Heck, during the 2020 recounts, the results were either verified or Biden picked up even more votes.
Now there is an unfortunate ripple effect of sore losers (on both sides) not accepting their results, their constituents believing every excuse why the results aren't valid... And discussions about overhauling a system based on an unsupported diagnosis of it being sick.
I'd be more than fine with the election process taking advantage of technology to make it easier to track, validate, etc. <Insert idea of using blockchain> But it's a very sad chapter in America when the fundamental idea of an election is no longer trusted because of how Trump handled his loss 2 years ago.
@89th said in Will the November election be clear?:
“There are enough election deniers out there — candidates running that are going to lose and going to claim that they won, and they won’t accept the election results. I am scared to death,” Luntz said.
“We are going to have a problem in this country, if Senate candidates, governor candidates, secretary of state candidates lose by 2% or 3% and claim the election is stolen.”
Concerns about election deniers are persisting as former President Donald Trump continues to make false claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.
Ahh the legacy of a sitting President denying his own landslide loss. Repeat the lie that "election fraud is substantial and needs to be fixed" enough and you get many who believe it's real. Heck, during the 2020 recounts, the results were either verified or Biden picked up even more votes.
Now there is an unfortunate ripple effect of sore losers (on both sides) not accepting their results, their constituents believing every excuse why the results aren't valid... And discussions about overhauling a system based on an unsupported diagnosis of it being sick.
I'd be more than fine with the election process taking advantage of technology to make it easier to track, validate, etc. <Insert idea of using blockchain> But it's a very sad chapter in America when the fundamental idea of an election is no longer trusted because of how Trump handled his loss 2 years ago.
There is also the mainstream idea the trump was a meteor level disaster. With that idea successfully cultivated, what cheating could occur, would occur. To not cheat, if given the opportunity, would be to abandon one’s duty to humanity. Personally I believe the opportunities to cheat were not sufficient to matter.
-
Hear, hear!
Election integrity, FTW!
-
'We did a report on it, but we can't tell you what it says because politicians would use it'.
