I Cannot Fathom This Election

[Freddie]

More of your TDS, as you’ve demonstrated since the second post of the thread.

Fascinatin‘

Yo Pal Same BS from day one... I'm sure you'll respond...With usual BS.....

Still your friend and mine,

Fred

[kazoolaw]

The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously.

Fred-

Appreciate your self-deprecating humor: this helps not only with your posts, but TS's too.

Be well!

[Chuck Naill]

The problem with this discussion is we are not really trying to connect and understand the other sides position. When Trump won in 2016 the feelings I had are probaby the same as many Trump voters are feeling now. Then it was a Russian involvement and now it is voter fraud. Why cannot we see that it is possible to think the reason our side won or lost is rooted in what most voters wanted? Why do we believe some other reason exists?

Trump lost the popular vote in 2016. He lost it this time as well. He also got the second most votes of a candidate in US history. He must appeal to a lot of people, just not enough to win the electorial college. So, in 2016 Trumpians were joyful he won without the majority, but now it is different???

[dneal]

Chuck,

I am a member of a gun forum where the politics lean much to the right. Like here, many of the posters are upset with me because I offer opinions contrary to theirs. In that case, I point out that there is no proof of fraud, and that it's circumstantial evidence at this point. That alone is enough to launch people into tirades of various intensity. It doesn't matter that I also say I agree it needs to be looked into (for the same reasons I say it here). Here, it is insinuated I'm a Trumpist. There, it's insinuated I'm an anti-Trumper. Each forum has members with equal bias, only on the opposite political spectrum. Like most forums, there is a spectrum of civility exercised. There, just like here, I respond with the same amount of respect and consideration I receive.

I don't think the popular vote is an issue for "Trumpians" either way. To understand the other side's position, or to use "strategic empathy" I mentioned in an earlier post; the Trump supporter sees many novel occurrences that they believe constitutes "proof" of a rigged election. It's exacerbated by pollsters who go into detail on just how supposedly improbably these novel occurrences are. It's exacerbated by political historians and pundits that point out the historical (Democrat) corruption of a few of those cities - Philadelphia and Detroit in particular. It's exacerbated by a change in voting rules (mainly mail-in ballots) that occurred this year (again, a novel incident). It's exacerbated by media and the echo chambers they retreat to which only further reinforces their belief(s). It's exacerbated by the opposite media that dismisses or "fact-checks" (poorly, I might add) their "evidence". I see clearly why they suspect fraud. I see that their argument has some plausibility, however improbable it may be.

Yes, there are similarities with 2016 when all we heard from one side was "Russian Collusion". That notion was reinforced in much the same way this year's conspiracy is. Three years after that election, several million dollars spent, a special prosecutor unable to make a case and yet many still believe it. It's not surprising to anyone paying attention to the polarization and reinforcement of it. In my former profession we would call it an "information campaign", and there is an entire career field dedicated to influencing populations.

Mark Twain wrote: "We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking". That's the reason we look for some other reason for our candidate's loss. It's a form of cognitive dissonance, and we let our emotions override our reason. Curiously, it seems that some believe I'm trying to convince them of the validity of the pro-Trump argument. I'm actually just trying to crack the door to their echo-chamber, and get them to see the other side's view and why that side thinks it has merit. No good will come of our continued polarization, and should either side reach a tipping point it will be particularly painful. The right reaching that tipping point is much more dangerous than the left.

You might find the 2016 election thread interesting

[dneal]

More of your TDS, as you’ve demonstrated since the second post of the thread.

Fascinatin‘

Yo Pal Same BS from day one... I'm sure you'll respond...With usual BS.....

Still your friend and mine,

Fred

Fred,

Has it dawned on you that my responses to you are nearly identical to what you post? Surely you see by now that there's no value in that sort of exchange. I get a chuckle out of it, but I'd rather engage in something more substantial than our reiterations of "BS" and "TDS".

D

[TSherbs]

My discussion isn't at all about "appeal." I grant the appeal of all sides. I accept the vote count of both sides. I did so in 2016 also. Whatever the Russian influence was on the votes via their media mucking about (this is established), I don't think that it swung the election. My upset about 2016 was only that the Russians were mucking about in our shit at all and we were none-the-wiser. I later became upset that Trump was denying their actions when his own intelligence agency conclusions were to the contrary. The 2016 result was legit, and HC conceded. I have/had no belief that outside or inside agency actually changed the outcome of that election. Same as I feel about this one. The investigation into "collusion" does not require that the possible coordination actually have a determining effect on the result of the election.

I didn't blame the Russians; I blamed the Dems for not exposing Trump's giant con more effectively and for not getting out more of their voters. Fortunately, the Dems did not make that mistake again. Trump and his cadre just can't take the loss with any grace, maturity, or rationality.

[TSherbs]

And I should add that the intelligence community concluded that Russian interference in 2016 was real. The state reviews and gov't reviews this time around determined that the conspiracies of voter fraud were false.

So, let's not make false equivalencies here. In fact, the whole debate is about what is actually real and what is not. I am not interested in coddling or massaging or otherwise nurturing conspiracy theories in order to assuage their stubbornness or fears. Truth is the virtue.

[Chuck Naill]

Nothing new under the sun.
"“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.” Charles Dickens

Heck yes it was real and Trump's boy was in up over his head as he's always been according to the "fam".

When has it been strange for a boy/son to be president....AKA George Bush Tw0

[TSherbs]

And NOW, the best thing that any one person could do to calm the waters would be for Trump to concede and say this: "Joe Biden has won the presidency with a legitimate and fair and accurate election. I was driven by ambition to question and undermine my followers' confidence in the result. I concede to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and will work to assist in the transition for the good of our country."

I checked Trump's Twitter feed to see if he shared my sentiments on this.

Nope.

More lies and divisive entrenchment.

Atta boy, Donnie. Way to lead!

I am aware, by the way, that Donnie wrote in his book "never apologize." Awesome, that.

[dneal]

And I should add that the intelligence community concluded that Russian interference in 2016 was real. The state reviews and gov't reviews this time around determined that the conspiracies of voter fraud were false.

So, let's not make false equivalencies here. In fact, the whole debate is about what is actually real and what is not. I am not interested in coddling or massaging or otherwise nurturing conspiracy theories in order to assuage their stubbornness or fears. Truth is the virtue.

James Clapper, 2017 testimony to the House Intelligence Committee:

"“I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election,”

“That’s not to say that there weren’t concerns about the evidence we were seeing, anecdotal evidence. … But I do not recall any instance where I had direct evidence,”

So do we want to talk about delusional conspiracy theories, or not?

[dneal]

Nothing new under the sun.
"“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.” Charles Dickens

Heck yes it was real and Trump's boy was in up over his head as he's always been according to the "fam".

When has it been strange for a boy/son to be president....AKA George Bush Tw0

Chuck, you should stop pretending. You're not interested in seeing another side or engaging in reasonable discussion.

[TSherbs]

And I should add that the intelligence community concluded that Russian interference in 2016 was real. The state reviews and gov't reviews this time around determined that the conspiracies of voter fraud were false.

So, let's not make false equivalencies here. In fact, the whole debate is about what is actually real and what is not. I am not interested in coddling or massaging or otherwise nurturing conspiracy theories in order to assuage their stubbornness or fears. Truth is the virtue.

James Clapper, 2017 testimony to the House Intelligence Committee:

"“I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election,”

“That’s not to say that there weren’t concerns about the evidence we were seeing, anecdotal evidence. … But I do not recall any instance where I had direct evidence,”

So do we want to talk about delusional conspiracy theories, or not?

Go for it.

I was referring to the evidence of Russian presence and influence in social media.

I don't believe in the "collusion" theory.

But you can write about it all you want. Maybe start a separate thread on it and see if anyone wants to debate that. This thread is on this election.

[dneal]

But you can write about it all you want. Maybe start a separate thread on it and see if anyone wants to debate that. This thread is on this election.

HA!! Why in the world would I want to do that? To hear more hyperbole on the evil of the orange one? To demonstrate your contradictions, only to have you evade, or quibble semantics? No thanks.

And I should add that the intelligence community concluded that Russian interference in 2016 was real. The state reviews and gov't reviews this time around determined that the conspiracies of voter fraud were false.

For posterity, it was you who found it "necessary to add". BTW, the gov't reviews also determined that Russian Collusion was false.

[TSherbs]

HA!! Why in the world would I want to do that?

I guessed you might because you keep bringing it up.

[TSherbs]

Best political analysis I've seen yet

https://youtu.be/GP_K5czbny4

[dneal]

HA!! Why in the world would I want to do that?

I guessed you might because you keep bringing it up.

I'm pretty sure that you're the one who gave it credence. I've pointed out the ridiculousness and hypocrisy of it.

[Chuck Naill]

You two should give each other a phone call.

[dneal]

You should stop trying to moderate the forum.

[welch]

What can cause deeply-believing Trump-voters to admit to themselves that the US elections of 2020 have been, as have all American national elections (except 1877), honest, fair, and almost hum-drum in all states and counties?

We have seen the Trump Campaign file suit after suit -- almost sixty suits by now -- and lose over and over as it attempts to present evidence. I have read ruling after ruling. Each one demonstrates that the judges has carefully considered the Trump case and ruled against it.

- Again and again, the Trump Campaign stipulated that same facts as the defending states. We do not claim fraud, said Giuliani in court. No matter what he said in front of TV cameras outside a court.

- Again and again, the Trump campaign presented affidavits that judges ruled inadmissible because the Trump campaign did not -- neglected to -- depose their affidavit-makers to examination or cross-examination. (See, for instance, Judge Stewart's detailed ruling in Nevada).

- Again and again, as in Michigan, judges evaluated Trump Campaign witnesses and found them not credible. In the rulings the judges explain why.

- Again and again, the Trump Campaign introduced expert witnesses who do not appear to be experts and who could not justify their opinions. (Again, easiest to spot in Judge Stewart's Nevada case)

What else can we conclude but that true-believing Trump followers will not believe anything except whatever comforts their beliefs that Trump was defeated by "libtard" magic?

Having lost every case they brought to court, Trumpists have vowed to:

- hold their believe in non-reality as long as Trump asks them,

- fight the results of the honest 2020 election in the House and Senate in January

- file more cases, I think, even though the Electoral College is voting right now (at 1:38pm, EST, Biden leads Trump 166 - 103)

- ask Trump to declare martial law and to overthrow the election.

All of that seems madness. It seems oblivious to reality. Conclusion: only Trumpists can stop this, and probably only Trump can stop his followers. Ordinary, "hum-drum", Republicans have spoken with realism throughout the Trump Campaign's campaign against the elections. Reading up from county and state elections officials, it is impossible to tell, without looking up party labels, whether those officials are officially members of the Democratic Party or the Republican Party. I doubt that even senior Republicans can speak election reality to the country without directly contradicting Trump. By specifics, by detail of every Trump tweet and speech. When they do it, they seem to lose standing as senior Republicans. Perhaps after the Electoral College vote more will be free to do it, but not so far, judging from the irrational howls from the two Republican candidates for US Senate in Georgia.

Any other ideas?

[TSherbs]

...All of that seems madness. It seems oblivious to reality.

Yup. It's a mass psychological problem that I have called delusion. There is a fervent belief in what is not real. Either that, or a very cynical massive manipulative lie.

Any other ideas?

Nope. Maybe just wait for the GOP to tear itself apart and put itself back together again. That will probably take a while. But maybe, if voter turnout stays high and the Dems keep winning, the GOP will come to its senses, become more inclusive, give up the idea that it has to veer right in order to win, and get back to more mainstream and professional values and practices. Electing Trump was a dead-end.