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.
@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'.
