Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 57

Thread: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

  1. #1
    Senior Member welch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    505
    Thanks
    786
    Thanked 269 Times in 176 Posts
    Rep Power
    8

    Default How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    I have asked that question several times. The only answer has been that we -- the majority of Americans -- must coddle right-wing delusion. That is a silly answer. We see that Trump-believers fasten ever more tightly to their disbelief in reality. Pseudo-conservatives continue to practice an extreme post-modernist thinking that "reality" is whatever power says.

    Maybe it will wear off. It seems more likely to continue as a new stab-in-the-back myth to give life and soul to far right-wingers, to the people who said and acted "yes" when Trump suggested they follow him to the Capitol to stop the formal counting of electoral votes. These right-wingers should be deplored, but they have demonstrated that they cannot be convinced by experience, evidence, and logic.

    Perhaps this is a start. A small one, but a start:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...6d6_story.html

    After months of stoking anger about alleged election fraud, one of America’s largest talk-radio companies has decided on an abrupt change of direction.

    Cumulus Media, which employs some of the most popular right-leaning talk-radio hosts in the United States, has told its on-air personalities to stop suggesting that the election was stolen from President Trump — or else face termination.

    A Cumulus executive issued the directive on Wednesday, just as Congress met to certify Joe Biden’s election victory and an angry mob of Trump supporters marched on the Capitol, overwhelmed police and briefly occupied the building, terrorizing lawmakers and leading to the deaths of five people.

    “We need to help induce national calm NOW,” Brian Philips, executive vice president of content for Cumulus, wrote in an internal memo, which was first reported by Inside Music Media. Cumulus and its program syndication arm, Westwood One, “will not tolerate any suggestion that the election has not ended. The election has been resolved and there are no alternate acceptable ‘paths.’ ”

    The memo adds: “If you transgress this policy, you can expect to separate from the company immediately.”

    A Cumulus representative did not respond to repeated requests for comment on Sunday.

    During the weekend after the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol, Apple and Amazon suspended cut off Parler, a platform popular with President Trump's supporters. (Reuters)
    The new policy is a stunning corporate clampdown on the kind of provocative and even inflammatory talk that has long driven the business model for Cumulus and other talk show broadcasters. And it came as Apple, Google and Amazon cut off essential business services to Parler, the pro-Trump social media network where users have promoted falsehoods about election fraud and praised the mob that assaulted the Capitol. Apple and Google removed the Parler app from the offerings for its smartphones, while Amazon suspended it from its Web-hosting services. (Amazon founder and chief executive Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post.)

    Since the election, Cumulus has remained silent while its most popular hosts — which include Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro and Dan Bongino — have amplified Trump’s lies that the vote was “rigged” or in some way fraudulent.

    On his program on Tuesday, the day before the march on the Capitol, for example, Levin fulminated about Congress’s certification of electoral votes for Biden, describing the normally routine vote as an act of “tyranny.”

    “You think the framers of the Constitution … sat there and said, ‘Congress has no choice [to accept the votes], even if there’s fraud, even if there’s some court order, even if some legislature has violated the Constitution?’ ” Levin said, his voice rising to a shout.

    Atlanta-based Cumulus owns 416 radio stations in 84 regions across the country. Many of its stations broadcast a talk format, a medium that has been dominated by a conservative point of view for decades. In addition to its national personalities, it employs local talk-radio hosts in many of its markets.

  2. #2
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    993
    Thanks
    468
    Thanked 715 Times in 352 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    These various forms of censoring will just fuel outrage and conspiracy theories. Even the ACLU is against it. First you lose Dershowitz, and now the whole ACLU.

    During the first year of Trump’s Presidency, a common meme/theme was “Do you want more Trump? Because this is how you get more Trump”.

    Libs still haven’t learned the lesson, and won’t as long as they keep reading the WashPost for advice.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Ray-VIgo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    326
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 182 Times in 98 Posts
    Rep Power
    8

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    The rioters were Trump voters, but not all Trump voters rioted. Isolate the hardcore "cult of personality supporters" who will never believe Biden won from those who were merely pro-Trump because they were put off by the policies of the left (people who could accept that Biden won, but who voted for Trump). Pursue consensus and common ground with people on the right who might have just voted for Trump, but remain firm against the hardcore loyalists and Q-Anon people.

    Where I live, many Trump voters were disaffected Democrats from blue collar backgrounds. They're not Q-Anon, not neo-nazis, not KKK'ers, but are really good people who otherwise are cut from the same cloth as everyone else in the community. Trump was a "hold your nose and vote" for many people, not a god-emperor. But if you now try to add states to skew the Senate, or add justices in retribution for Garland, it will only make things much, much worse because it alienates even reasonable people. Most of the opposition needs to be viewed humanely and as having a difference of opinion. But if we are reduced to "socialists" and "Trumpers" only as our thinking, then civil war is around the corner. Voting for Trump does not make one a neo-nazi and voting for Biden does not make one a Marxist. Yet, the narrative continues...
    Last edited by Ray-VIgo; January 11th, 2021 at 01:57 PM.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Ray-VIgo For This Useful Post:

    TSherbs (January 11th, 2021)

  5. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,348
    Thanks
    781
    Thanked 977 Times in 544 Posts
    Rep Power
    9

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    Quote Originally Posted by dneal View Post
    These various forms of censoring will just fuel outrage and conspiracy theories. Even the ACLU is against it. First you lose Dershowitz, and now the whole ACLU.

    During the first year of Trump’s Presidency, a common meme/theme was “Do you want more Trump? Because this is how you get more Trump”.

    Libs still haven’t learned the lesson, and won’t as long as they keep reading the WashPost for advice.
    That's ok. There is prison space for criminals who act out on their disgruntlement. Government does not need to make people happy or content. Just generally compliant and lawful. And felonies are a serious matter (thus the term).

    I'd love to see a standoff between radical right and law enforcement. I have suspected all along that Blue Lives Matter (in response to Black Lives Matter) has been a racist ruse, at heart. I'm not sure, but recent violence against the overwhelmed police in DC tends to confirm my suspicions. We'll see.

  6. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,348
    Thanks
    781
    Thanked 977 Times in 544 Posts
    Rep Power
    9

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ray-VIgo View Post
    The rioters were Trump voters, but not all Trump voters rioted. Isolate the hardcore "cult of personality supporters" who will never believe Biden won from those who were merely pro-Trump because they were put off by the policies of the left (people who could accept that Biden won, but who voted for Trump). Pursue consensus and common ground with people on the right who might have just voted for Trump, but remain firm against the hardcore loyalists and Q-Anon people.

    Where I live, many Trump voters were disaffected Democrats from blue collar backgrounds. They're not Q-Anon, not neo-nazis, not KKK'ers, but are really good people who otherwise are cut from the same cloth as everyone else in the community. Trump was a "hold your nose and vote" for many people, not a god-emperor. But if you now try to add states to skew the Senate, or add justices in retribution for Garland, it will only make things much, much worse because it alienates even reasonable people. Most of the opposition needs to be viewed humanely and as having a difference of opinion. But if we are reduced to "socialists" and "Trumpers" only as our thinking, then civil war is around the corner. Voting for Trump does not make one a neo-nazi and voting for Biden does not make one a Marxist. Yet, the narrative continues...
    Well put.

  7. #6
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    993
    Thanks
    468
    Thanked 715 Times in 352 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    Quote Originally Posted by TSherbs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dneal View Post
    These various forms of censoring will just fuel outrage and conspiracy theories. Even the ACLU is against it. First you lose Dershowitz, and now the whole ACLU.

    During the first year of Trump’s Presidency, a common meme/theme was “Do you want more Trump? Because this is how you get more Trump”.

    Libs still haven’t learned the lesson, and won’t as long as they keep reading the WashPost for advice.
    That's ok. There is prison space for criminals who act out on their disgruntlement. Government does not need to make people happy or content. Just generally compliant and lawful. And felonies are a serious matter (thus the term).

    I'd love to see a standoff between radical right and law enforcement. I have suspected all along that Blue Lives Matter (in response to Black Lives Matter) has been a racist ruse, at heart. I'm not sure, but recent violence against the overwhelmed police in DC tends to confirm my suspicions. We'll see.
    That's sick and disgusting. I'll assume now that your "outrage" at the Capitol protests is bullshit. There was your taste of standoff. At least one cop dead, and at least one protestor dead. But hey, it's ok since you don't agree with their politics.
    Last edited by dneal; January 11th, 2021 at 03:16 PM.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to dneal For This Useful Post:

    TSherbs (January 11th, 2021)

  9. #7
    Senior Member welch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    505
    Thanks
    786
    Thanked 269 Times in 176 Posts
    Rep Power
    8

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    Quote Originally Posted by dneal View Post
    These various forms of censoring will just fuel outrage and conspiracy theories. Even the ACLU is against it. First you lose Dershowitz, and now the whole ACLU.

    During the first year of Trump’s Presidency, a common meme/theme was “Do you want more Trump? Because this is how you get more Trump”.

    Libs still haven’t learned the lesson, and won’t as long as they keep reading the WashPost for advice.
    Still not much of an answer. Trumpists continue to believe, even through all of Trump Campaign's failure to prove anything in court. They failed everywhere and at all times, except when they could rattle claims without being questioned. That was their problem in every court case: their expert witnesses turned out to have no expertise; their statistical proofs are silly; their eye-witnesses crumbled when examined.

    Overall, Trump's spouting has sounded insane. Did Trump win Georgia by a landslide, or by hundreds of thousands of votes? In 2018, the Georgia governor's election was nearly even, indicating that statewide elections there should be close. The triple-counted vote there was won by about 12,000 votes. Further, why has Trump howled about Georgia, of all the states? Why did Trump badger election officials there to "recalculate" another 12,000 votes for him?

    Since Trump Believers don't believe in reality, should we just expect them to dive deeper into conspiracy theories? Perhaps, at least, they will split into several squabbling theories, with some believing that President Biden is a lizard person, some that the attack on the World Trade Center was a plot by George Bush to undermine Trump twenty years later, some finding links to the assassination of JFK. I have, not long ago, come across right-wingers who insist that "of course" FDR allowed the Japanese to bomb Pearl Harbor because Roosevelt wanted to declare war on Hitler. Wacky thinking lasts.

  10. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,348
    Thanks
    781
    Thanked 977 Times in 544 Posts
    Rep Power
    9

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    Quote Originally Posted by dneal View Post

    That's sick and disgusting. I'll assume now that your "outrage" at the Capitol protests is bullshit. There was your taste of standoff. At least one cop dead, and at least one protestor dead. But hey, it's ok since you don't agree with their politics.
    Fair enough. I do not want anyone to die, and I was not thinking well when I suggested a standoff. But I actually meant it literally, "a standoff" where people stand off. I don't deny my level of sickness over this topic. And I mean what I said about a racist vein in the Blue Lives Matter motto in reaction to Black Lives Matter.

    But since the FBI has said that armed demonstrations are now planned on 50 state capitals and attacks have been planned on both Biden and Harris (and perhaps others), let's put my "sickness" in some perspective. Looks like we are going to get some standoffs whether I want them or not, and probably more assaults, which I assuredly don't want.

    But if people come to the capitals with weapons and engage in assault, I believe that municipal and national forces should use force necessary to repel it. I have never believed otherwise, pertaining to any riots or assaults.
    Last edited by TSherbs; January 11th, 2021 at 05:14 PM.

  11. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,348
    Thanks
    781
    Thanked 977 Times in 544 Posts
    Rep Power
    9

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    Quote Originally Posted by welch View Post
    Overall, Trump's spouting has sounded insane. Did Trump win Georgia by a landslide, or by hundreds of thousands of votes? In 2018, the Georgia governor's election was nearly even, indicating that statewide elections there should be close. The triple-counted vote there was won by about 12,000 votes. Further, why has Trump howled about Georgia, of all the states? Why did Trump badger election officials there to "recalculate"?
    Trump also claimed that he "won the House."

    Delusion or lie or or a mixture of both (that's Orwellian doublethink, for you).

  12. #10
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    993
    Thanks
    468
    Thanked 715 Times in 352 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    Quote Originally Posted by welch View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dneal View Post
    These various forms of censoring will just fuel outrage and conspiracy theories. Even the ACLU is against it. First you lose Dershowitz, and now the whole ACLU.

    During the first year of Trump’s Presidency, a common meme/theme was “Do you want more Trump? Because this is how you get more Trump”.

    Libs still haven’t learned the lesson, and won’t as long as they keep reading the WashPost for advice.
    Still not much of an answer. Trumpists continue to believe, even through all of Trump Campaign's failure to prove anything in court. They failed everywhere and at all times, except when they could rattle claims without being questioned. That was their problem in every court case: their expert witnesses turned out to have no expertise; their statistical proofs are silly; their eye-witnesses crumbled when examined.

    Overall, Trump's spouting has sounded insane. Did Trump win Georgia by a landslide, or by hundreds of thousands of votes? In 2018, the Georgia governor's election was nearly even, indicating that statewide elections there should be close. The triple-counted vote there was won by about 12,000 votes. Further, why has Trump howled about Georgia, of all the states? Why did Trump badger election officials there to "recalculate" another 12,000 votes for him?

    Since Trump Believers don't believe in reality, should we just expect them to dive deeper into conspiracy theories? Perhaps, at least, they will split into several squabbling theories, with some believing that President Biden is a lizard person, some that the attack on the World Trade Center was a plot by George Bush to undermine Trump twenty years later, some finding links to the assassination of JFK. I have, not long ago, come across right-wingers who insist that "of course" FDR allowed the Japanese to bomb Pearl Harbor because Roosevelt wanted to declare war on Hitler. Wacky thinking lasts.
    As for the title of the thread, I've given you an answer repeatedly. You just don't like it because your TDS automatically refuses to process it, because it suggests there might be just a hint of circumstantial evidence that makes them believe this crap. You then mischaracterize with "The only answer has been that we -- the majority of Americans -- must coddle right-wing delusion. That is a silly answer." So why should I bother with someone as close-minded as you?

    Then you post an article about Cumulus telling people "shut up, or else" - which is what I was addressing.

    Work on a thesis and supporting argument, and I'll have a better idea what you're talking about. You're all over the place with this thread, which is just another rant and a WashPost article attached.

  13. #11
    Senior Member Ray-VIgo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    326
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 182 Times in 98 Posts
    Rep Power
    8

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    The other thing that helps is to move the focus in politics back down to the state and particularly the local levels. Local offices, races, and politics force people to come face-to-face with others in their communities. It can certainly be hotly contested, but there's a certain human touch to engaging in-person. The problem we have now is that, at least on the national level, it's easy to vilify an abstract "other". The lockdown hasn't helped in this regard in that it sends people to the computer and the internet where they then go and fight over national politics and vilify the "other side". There's a certain "sizing up" of the opposition in local politics. And if you run a door-to-door campaign on the local level you meet all kinds of people with different views and concerns. It has a humanizing effect. Unfortunately the national news media don't profit enough from this sort of thing, so we get the sorts of pundits we have now who stoke hatred on both sides and peddle theories that boil people over and line the pundits' pockets.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Ray-VIgo For This Useful Post:

    dneal (January 12th, 2021)

  15. #12
    Senior Member welch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    505
    Thanks
    786
    Thanked 269 Times in 176 Posts
    Rep Power
    8

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    Still no answer from dneal. You simply repeat the Trumpist fantasy that election workers all over the country conspired to magically cheat Trump out of the landslide victory he claims. You claim "circumstantial" evidence that such a conspiracy happened. Trump lawyers presented nothing, and you should have read the court decisions that tossed Trump lawsuits in fifty or sixty times.

    Every "circumstantial" claim got a fair hearing. They failed. In Pennsylvania, as you should know already, Judge Brann rejected Trump-Giuliani claims in US District Court. That's the trial court. You complained that the Circuit Court did not re-hear Trump-Giuliani evidence. So what?

    You have ignored the trials in Michigan that, like Pennsylvania, dismissed Trump claims.

    You ignored the decision in Nevada that dismissed Trump Campaign, Inc. claims. In that one, the judge, a Judge Stewart, was so annoyed that he ordered Trump Inc. to pay court costs. That's rare.

    You ignored the decision in Wisconsin.

    You ignored the fumblingly silly attempts to overturn the election in Georgia, even insisting that Trump's demand that the Georgia Secretary of State "recalculate" the vote count, or merely "find" an extra 12,000 Trump votes, was an innocent request.

    You ignore the decisions in Arizona.

    So, sure, the "circumstantial" evidence is that Trump screamed for months that he would win by a landslide and that only fraud could deny him the election. Trump-fanatics repeated Trump's claims, and he repeated whatever they repeated, as in "people are saying".

    Do you, dneal, really mean that sane people should take Trumpist election-conspiracy fantasy seriously? That has been done. Sixty times. What else can sane people, people believing in an evidence-based reality, do for them?

    Finally, to pass off my reading of all these court decisions as deriving from "TDS" is just plain crazy. The Trump-conspiracy phrase "TDS" has always been lying garbage, and nothing more.

  16. #13
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    993
    Thanks
    468
    Thanked 715 Times in 352 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    Quote Originally Posted by welch
    Still no answer from dneal...
    Your derangement prevents you from considering my answer, evidenced in your diatribe that follows.

    You confuse my presenting what Trump supporters see with my approval of it. I have not ignored the counterpoints. I see those too. There's little need to list them since you and TSherbs do a good job of that. I tried to explain to you how they are ineffective to the person that believes there was election fraud, but you seem unable to consider any perspective but your own. Just as I understand the Trumper's perspective, I understand yours. Sorry, but you come across to be just as looney as they are; feeding on emotion and ignoring reason. They dismiss Raffensperger's claims. You dismiss Navarro's claims. You understand your belief in your "evidence", but fail to understand their belief in their "evidence". Understanding is not acceptance.

    It does not matter what the truth is when people (left or right) drink only the kool-aide of their own narrative.

    You repeatedly ask what it will take to make them believe, and dismiss the answer. What will it take for you to believe they are as convinced of their viewpoint as you are of yours? Ask yourself the hypothetical of what it would take to convince you there was election fraud.

    I'll reiterate. Iraqis believed our sunglasses had x-ray properties. How do you prove them wrong? Just calling them crazy, delusional, ignorant, deranged, etc... doesn't do that. Letting them examine the sunglasses to their own satisfaction does. It's absolutely that simple, but you still seem to fail to grasp it.

    Lest you argue that sunglasses are trivial, I assure you that they were not. The outrage that infidels were looking at their (effectively) naked mothers, wives, daughters, sisters, etc... was plenty enough for them to shoot at us. All because of an irrational belief.
    Last edited by dneal; January 12th, 2021 at 11:43 AM.

  17. #14
    Senior Member Empty_of_Clouds's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Aotearoa/New Zealand
    Posts
    2,217
    Thanks
    540
    Thanked 1,800 Times in 830 Posts
    Rep Power
    9

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    To use your sunglasses story, how many Iraqis did you let examine them? What level were these Iraqis? Did they represent all Iraqis with sunglasses paranoia? You see where this is going. Those sunglasses weren't offered for examination to every Iraqi who had doubts. The same applies to the Trumpers.

    For the election process in the US as I understand it, from non-partisan global news sources, both parties have had ample opportunity to examine the process, and no evidence of widespread or even significant fraud has been found. What you are kind of suggesting is that every individual dissenting Trumper must have the opportunity to investigate the election themselves. That's never going to happen.

    The solution here is not to allow the Trumpers to investigate election stuff, but for the responsible party members to do so. And that has already happened. The GOP and the President are the ones who should be reassuring their followers, but they are not doing so. Is it evidence that is preventing them from doing so? No, because as we have all seen, there is insufficient evidence of fraud.

    What we are seeing from the POTUS and those in the GOP who are 'loyal' to him, is a willingness to sink to any depths to keep hold of power. Even to the detriment of the people of the US, if that's what it takes. It is nothing more than extremely unenlightened self-interest, and Trump is perhaps the worst such offender I've seen in years - and there's some stiff competition I can tell you.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Empty_of_Clouds For This Useful Post:

    welch (January 12th, 2021)

  19. #15
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    993
    Thanks
    468
    Thanked 715 Times in 352 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    Quote Originally Posted by Empty_of_Clouds View Post
    To use your sunglasses story, how many Iraqis did you let examine them? What level were these Iraqis? Did they represent all Iraqis with sunglasses paranoia? You see where this is going. Those sunglasses weren't offered for examination to every Iraqi who had doubts. The same applies to the Trumpers.
    Personally maybe a couple of dozen. An analogy is to foster understanding, not to provide proof. Conversely, disproving an analogy or pointing out its shortcomings doesn't disprove what the analogy is referring to.

    Quote Originally Posted by Empty_of_Clouds View Post
    For the election process in the US as I understand it, from non-partisan global news sources, both parties have had ample opportunity to examine the process, and no evidence of widespread or even significant fraud has been found. What you are kind of suggesting is that every individual dissenting Trumper must have the opportunity to investigate the election themselves. That's never going to happen.
    Again, I'm not advocating what is and what isn't true. I'm talking about what a large portion of people believe. If they still believe it (and of course the true conspiracy theorists will never believe, but we're not really talking about them), then the attempt at dispelling disinformation is unsuccessful.

    I am not suggesting that every dissenting individual should have the opportunity to investigate themselves.

    Look at the percentages of the American public that don't have faith in the election process. Normally around 40% or so (including both parties), with big swings after an election. 70+% of republicans this time, with a smaller percentage of democrats; and the inverse when Hillary lost. This is the problem that needs fixed (which I keep saying and people keep ignoring because they can't open their cognitive aperture wider than today's headlines).

    Quote Originally Posted by Empty_of_Clouds View Post
    The solution here is not to allow the Trumpers to investigate election stuff, but for the responsible party members to do so. And that has already happened. The GOP and the President are the ones who should be reassuring their followers, but they are not doing so. Is it evidence that is preventing them from doing so? No, because as we have all seen, there is insufficient evidence of fraud.
    What I've been posting is what they believe responsible party members to have been doing. Sure there's Lin Wood crazy (and some listen to him). There are also individuals and groups "proving" there is fraud. John Lott, Peter Navarro, Russell Ramstad, etc... I suspect partisanship in a lot of those conclusions and "proof" as well, but it's plausible and compelling enough for the average Trump supporter to believe - just as the talking point about "60 court cases" 'proved' no issues is plausible and compelling enough to the average Biden supporter. I say talking point because there were not 60 cases where a judge heard all evidence presented by both sides. Most were withdrawn or denied - a point that Trump supporters use to "prove" their assertion that there have been no fair hearings.

    Quote Originally Posted by Empty_of_Clouds View Post
    What we are seeing from the POTUS and those in the GOP who are 'loyal' to him, is a willingness to sink to any depths to keep hold of power. Even to the detriment of the people of the US, if that's what it takes. It is nothing more than extremely unenlightened self-interest, and Trump is perhaps the worst such offender I've seen in years - and there's some stiff competition I can tell you.
    There's some truth to that, but there are literally millions of honest, decent people who honestly have doubts. Characterizing them all as rabid, kooky loyalists is neither fair nor objective.

  20. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,348
    Thanks
    781
    Thanked 977 Times in 544 Posts
    Rep Power
    9

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    The most effective "solution" would be for Donald Trump to state openly that he was mistaken, that upon reconsideration, the court reviews and lack of persuasive evidence of miscounting or fraud has convinced him that he was wrong in believing in and then promulgating a false narrative of an illegitimate election. He would then ask his followers to refocus on engaging with their local Republican (or another of their choosing) party and trying to effect the change that they seek.

    And then repeat this for the next 4 months, which is about how long he has amplified this present false narrative.

    This kind of refusal to participate in conspiracy would be like what John McCain did when he shot down that woman at the town hall meeting who wanted to claim that Obama wasn't a legitimate American. John McCain just wouldn't have anything to do with that lie (even when he could have benefited from it).

  21. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,348
    Thanks
    781
    Thanked 977 Times in 544 Posts
    Rep Power
    9

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    This reminds me of the whole "birther" stuff, again, started in the kooky corner of the internet and then amplified and pioneered by Trump. What happens is that a very unlikely, but nefarious, possibility is speculated where there is a lack of evidence to the public of the contrary, and then in that space trust is intentionally undermined and rumor of evil is amplified until it becomes hardened into a "truth" that is believed simply because certain prominent people on the internet keep repeating it and enough others also repeat it in the general population. Add to this the power of the cult of personality (in Trump's case), and then you get a willingness, or even ardor, to do the bidding of the leader for his or her praise (Trump: "We love you.")

    After Obama released his birth certificate, every one kept waiting for Trump to recant because he had been proven wrong and wise persons knew the importance of the recantation in neutering the power of the lie. And then more conspiracies arose even about the valid birth certificate. Deluded beliefs that have been amplified for months or years at the highest levels of cultural prominence are hard to defeat, and in the case of the machines, there is no way to recreate the election nor have any auditing of its accuracy beyond what the states have already conducted themselves. That IS the quality control process, and it was done. Mail in ballots have also been checked and recounted for accuracy. ALREADY. The evidence has been checked by the professionals of both parties. The law and common sense does not just let average joe citizens take apart a machine to see how the reader works nor actually do a manual recount themselves or check signatures. That is against the law. And this is not a nefarious arrangement. This is regulated to protect the privacy of your vote from the public to keep the voter (relatively) free from coercion or consequence of their vote. The states are in charge of this, conduct their own reviews, contract out the machine support, etc. They train their workers in the practice and the law. This is not secrecy; this is freedom and respect.

    More audits is not the answer because no further audits (beyond those already done) can actually recount real votes from real citizens with real signatures. Everything would have to be "hypothetical," and these reviews have already been done, too (states look at these in making reviewing vendor bids, etc).

    All that can happen now--and this would have a positive effect--is for Trump and the other promulgators to recant their insistence on this "steal" and reject the use of that language going forward every time they encounter it.

  22. #18
    Senior Member Empty_of_Clouds's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Aotearoa/New Zealand
    Posts
    2,217
    Thanks
    540
    Thanked 1,800 Times in 830 Posts
    Rep Power
    9

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    dneal, we are talking past each other somewhat.

    My point is that the most reasonable path to bringing about a change of perspective in Trump supporters (the public, not elected officials), is to have the GOP/POTUS accept the results and issue statements to the effect that the election was free and fair with no fraud. Much as has been proposed by TSherbs above, and me a little earlier.

    The problem is that POTUS and at least 147 Republican senators/congressman are still pushing the fraud story, when I personally believe - based on observations of their behaviour, various speeches, and mannerisms - that few if any of these people actually think there was any fraud, and that their posturing is not about finding truth but more centred on power-grabbing for its own sake.


    An analogy is to foster understanding, not to provide proof. Conversely, disproving an analogy or pointing out its shortcomings doesn't disprove what the analogy is referring to.
    I am well aware of this, and was merely using your example to help define limits to similar issues connected to the election.


    What I've been posting is what they believe responsible party members to have been doing. Sure there's Lin Wood crazy (and some listen to him). There are also individuals and groups "proving" there is fraud. John Lott, Peter Navarro, Russell Ramstad, etc... I suspect partisanship in a lot of those conclusions and "proof" as well, but it's plausible and compelling enough for the average Trump supporter to believe - just as the talking point about "60 court cases" 'proved' no issues is plausible and compelling enough to the average Biden supporter. I say talking point because there were not 60 cases where a judge heard all evidence presented by both sides. Most were withdrawn or denied - a point that Trump supporters use to "prove" their assertion that there have been no fair hearings.
    With this I disagree. I haven't seen anything that qualifies as proof of significant levels of fraud. As for the legal process... if lawyers cannot present properly supported cases they can hardly whine about being dismissed. The onus is on them to prove fraud occurred. They haven't, and in any case that was heard or read, not one single lawyer would go so far as to make a fraud accusation under oath. That in itself implies that they had no supporting evidence to make an argument. A legal case cannot be just a fishing expedition.

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to Empty_of_Clouds For This Useful Post:

    welch (January 12th, 2021)

  24. #19
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    993
    Thanks
    468
    Thanked 715 Times in 352 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    I agree that we are talking past each other, and this has been going on for over 30 pages of posts (although very little of it is from you).

    There seems to me to be confusion with actual proof and perceived proof. I agree completely that there is little to no actual proof, and there's circumstantial evidence at best. That seems to be what everyone is getting hung up on, as if I'm asserting that there is proof. I'm not.

    What I'm asserting is that the argument from the opposing side is extremely compelling to the Trump supporter. I don't know how many times I have to say this, but it doesn't matter if it's actually true or not. What matters is whether or not they perceive it to be true. You have to change their perception. First, one has to understand what is they believe and why. You won't get that from The Washington Post or international news sources. You get that from their "news" sources.

    Look at NTD on Youtube. It's part of the Epoch Times, an outlet that "Leans Right" according to All Sides. That makes it appear relatively credible.

    Here's testimony to a State level legislative election committee. Suspend judgement for a moment and watch some of it. Surely you can see how this appears to be credible, particularly to one in a right-leaning echo chamber. I'm not vouching for the veracity of it. I am skeptical. These are "results", but I want to see the data and methodology. These people have appealing credentials, but how do we know their actual expertise. Why is there no "Data Integrity Group" on the internet? This is an example of what you're fighting against when you attempt to convince Trump voters. "Courts ruled otherwise" is insufficient to them. They assume no judge has heard this. They'll point out that it was "discovered" after the majority of cases were denied/dismissed/lost/whatever. It reinforces their narrative, and discredits the opposing narrative. This situation is best viewed in the context of information operations. Like Russell Brand points out in the clip I posted, a "you guys are crazy" doesn't suffice; especially to someone who is predisposed to believe in this sort of thing.

    Last edited by dneal; January 12th, 2021 at 04:40 PM. Reason: gaahhh. I still can't link on the first try

  25. #20
    Senior Member Empty_of_Clouds's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Aotearoa/New Zealand
    Posts
    2,217
    Thanks
    540
    Thanked 1,800 Times in 830 Posts
    Rep Power
    9

    Default Re: How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

    Granted, and it's easy to see why these followers hold these beliefs. What I would say though, and echoing my previous post, is that responsibility for encouraging change in these beliefs needs to come from a group or person that the followers trust and accept the word of. In this case that surely has to be the POTUS/GOP and nobody else. Simply put, these followers are never going to accept any evidence, proof or similar if it is coming from a source that they've already decided to distrust.

    I agree with the need to change perception. It's how that appears to be problematic but really is only so because key players are stubbornly sticking to their guns and further inflaming the situation.

    That's my take on it. I don't think the problem in general is difficult to understand, nor the solution. What does worry me a bit is that there are now more people out there who may resist any attempts to change their perception, no matter what the source.

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to Empty_of_Clouds For This Useful Post:

    dneal (January 12th, 2021)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •