2020 Elections - Trump FIRED

[jhu72]

Damn military losers and suckers are nothing but vote fraudsters according to the GOP.

[calourie]

It seems perfectly reasonable to me to do recounts and check out problems in the voting process. We are only in November, what's the hurry for?

People can do all the vote checking they want for as long as they want to fix the system, but with the numbers skewed as emphatically as they are towards Biden there is no numbers related reason not to acknowledge that he is the POTUS-elect in the meantime and to treat him as such.

I wouldn't agree with you here. There seem to be a number of states that were pretty close.

In every presidential election there are always a number of states that are pretty close. Without voter fraud on a scale never before seen this election is well out of reach for Trump.

[CU88]

IMPOTUS o d should have courted that small percentage of Libertarian voters...

[CU88]

November 12, 2020

By David Leonhardt

Good morning. A president is trying to undo an election result: How would you describe that situation in another country?

The political scientist Brendan Nyhan has often responded to events during the Trump presidency by asking a question: What would you say if you saw it in another country?

Let’s try that exercise now. Imagine that a president of another country lost an election and refused to concede defeat. Instead, he lied about the vote count. He then filed lawsuits to have ballots thrown out, put pressure on other officials to back him up and used the power of government to prevent a transition of power from starting.

How would you describe this behavior? It’s certainly anti-democratic. It is an attempt to overrule the will of the people, ignore a country’s laws and illegitimately grab political power.

President Trump’s efforts will probably fail, but they are unlike anything that living Americans have experienced. “What we have seen in the last week from the president more closely resembles the tactics of the kind of authoritarian leaders we follow,” Michael Abramowitz, the president of Freedom House, which tracks democracy, told The Times. “I never would have imagined seeing something like this in America.”

It is “one of the gravest threats to democracy” the country has faced, Ryan Enos, a Harvard social scientist, wrote yesterday. He added in an email, “The result is crystal clear and, yet, the incumbent is creating ambiguity by baseless claims.”

I asked political scientists and historians for analogies, and they offered a few. The ruling party in Mexico probably reversed the true election result in 1988, as did ruling parties in Zimbabwe in 2002, Iran in 2009 and maybe Russia in 1996, Steven Levitsky, a co-author of “How Democracies Die,” told me. The details were different — the fraud sometimes occurred before the results were announced — but all were cases of politicians stealing an election mostly without military force.

The closest U.S. comparisons are more than a century old. The Federalist Party considered depriving Thomas Jefferson of the presidency in 1800 and used the courts to weaken him. During Reconstruction, parts of the South overturned election results, sometimes through violence. And of course multiple states responded to Abraham Lincoln’s 1860 victory by seceding from the union. (Thomas Edsall’s latest Times column has more details on each of these.)

What happens next? Republican officials seem to be trying to finesse the situation. They want to avoid angering Trump, who remains popular with Republican voters, as Liam Donovan, a party strategist, notes. That helps explain why most Republican officials have refused to recognize Joe Biden as the president-elect and have made vaguely supportive comments about Trump’s false claims.

But this support seems halfhearted. Few Republicans are taking their own steps to reverse the election result.

The two crucial next steps are the certification of state election results and the appointment of Electoral College voters, as Andrew Prokop of Vox explains. Both must happen by mid-December. If Republican officials in some states interfere — say, by trying to appoint electors who ignore the election results and vote for Trump in states he lost — it will be a sign that his attempt to undo the election has reached a more serious stage.

Eventually, Republican officials will be forced to make a choice, The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent writes — between breaking with Trump and breaking with democracy. Democracy seems much more likely to prevail, but in a damaged state. “Millions of his supporters,” my colleague Maggie Haberman writes, “will believe what he says.”

[cradleandshoot]

November 12, 2020

By David Leonhardt

Good morning. A president is trying to undo an election result: How would you describe that situation in another country?

The political scientist Brendan Nyhan has often responded to events during the Trump presidency by asking a question: What would you say if you saw it in another country?

Let’s try that exercise now. Imagine that a president of another country lost an election and refused to concede defeat. Instead, he lied about the vote count. He then filed lawsuits to have ballots thrown out, put pressure on other officials to back him up and used the power of government to prevent a transition of power from starting.

How would you describe this behavior? It’s certainly anti-democratic. It is an attempt to overrule the will of the people, ignore a country’s laws and illegitimately grab political power.

President Trump’s efforts will probably fail, but they are unlike anything that living Americans have experienced. “What we have seen in the last week from the president more closely resembles the tactics of the kind of authoritarian leaders we follow,” Michael Abramowitz, the president of Freedom House, which tracks democracy, told The Times. “I never would have imagined seeing something like this in America.”

It is “one of the gravest threats to democracy” the country has faced, Ryan Enos, a Harvard social scientist, wrote yesterday. He added in an email, “The result is crystal clear and, yet, the incumbent is creating ambiguity by baseless claims.”

I asked political scientists and historians for analogies, and they offered a few. The ruling party in Mexico probably reversed the true election result in 1988, as did ruling parties in Zimbabwe in 2002, Iran in 2009 and maybe Russia in 1996, Steven Levitsky, a co-author of “How Democracies Die,” told me. The details were different — the fraud sometimes occurred before the results were announced — but all were cases of politicians stealing an election mostly without military force.

The closest U.S. comparisons are more than a century old. The Federalist Party considered depriving Thomas Jefferson of the presidency in 1800 and used the courts to weaken him. During Reconstruction, parts of the South overturned election results, sometimes through violence. And of course multiple states responded to Abraham Lincoln’s 1860 victory by seceding from the union. (Thomas Edsall’s latest Times column has more details on each of these.)

What happens next? Republican officials seem to be trying to finesse the situation. They want to avoid angering Trump, who remains popular with Republican voters, as Liam Donovan, a party strategist, notes. That helps explain why most Republican officials have refused to recognize Joe Biden as the president-elect and have made vaguely supportive comments about Trump’s false claims.

But this support seems halfhearted. Few Republicans are taking their own steps to reverse the election result.

The two crucial next steps are the certification of state election results and the appointment of Electoral College voters, as Andrew Prokop of Vox explains. Both must happen by mid-December. If Republican officials in some states interfere — say, by trying to appoint electors who ignore the election results and vote for Trump in states he lost — it will be a sign that his attempt to undo the election has reached a more serious stage.

Eventually, Republican officials will be forced to make a choice, The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent writes — between breaking with Trump and breaking with democracy. Democracy seems much more likely to prevail, but in a damaged state. “Millions of his supporters,” my colleague Maggie Haberman writes, “will believe what he says.”

I would think that most every single establishment republican out there would consider it a badge of honor to break with trump. The people that support him have to understand it is time to move on. The republicans should be concerned about the 2 senate runoffs in Georgia. No matter how much trump whines, he is gone in 3 months. There are bigger fish for the republicans to fry.

[ggait]

Only way to win in Georgia is to get all the trump voters to turn out in January.

You break with trump now, guaranteed loss.

Party over country.

[cradleandshoot]

Only way to win in Georgia is to get all the trump voters to turn out in January.

You break with trump now, guaranteed loss.

Party over country.

I think the trump voters will come out in georgia no matter what. I would think this is less about trump and more about the importance of keeping the senate to the republican party. Checks and balances is a good thing. I would think all Republicans understand what the bottom line is.

[MDlaxfan76]

Because of my disdain and repulsion from the core nativist, authoritarian, isolationist strains of Trumpism and the depredations of man-child himself, (yes, TDS), I was hoping this election would be a crushing, ignominious loss for him.

The numbers, while overwhelming and historic, fall short as the fever had not actually broken yet among 70 million voters and this election was not yet a rejection of the GOP enablers of Trump. The GOP has not yet been punished by the voters.

And yet, Trump appears determined to turn the loss into historical ignominy for himself, his toadies, and the cult followers.

[MDlaxfan76]

Only way to win in Georgia is to get all the trump voters to turn out in January.

You break with trump now, guaranteed loss.

Party over country.

I think the trump voters will come out in georgia no matter what. I would think this is less about trump and more about the importance of keeping the senate to the republican party. Checks and balances is a good thing. I would think all Republicans understand what the bottom line is.

The question is what % of those voters are Trump Cult versus "Republican". Even a small portion of those who voted for Trump becoming angry at the GOP "Establishment" could mean they stay home... and if the Dems show up...

[dislaxxic]

Thanks for throwing the term "nativist" in there MD...i've been thinking about that alot lately as we try to make sense of the 70+ million Trump votes that stunned the world.

That's not exactly thought of the same way the word "racist" is, is it? Maybe kinda close though, right? When i think nativist, i invariably come around to the absolutely HATEFUL character played by Daniel Day Lewis in Gangs of New York something that could be made roughly analogous to many on the Boogaloo movement, no? Lewis plays him so well i end up cursing at the tv screen as he "acts" in the times depicted in the film...a masterful performance.



Now Salty and 6 and other Trumpists around here will chortle at the thought that there are 70+ million Bill The Butchers out there...no...but it may be the nativist sentiment writ large that showed up in many ways in voting booths on November 3rd...

..

[Typical Lax Dad]

Thanks for throwing the term "nativist" in there MD...i've been thinking about that alot lately as we try to make sense of the 70+ million Trump votes that stunned the world.

That's not exactly thought of the same way the word "racist" is, is it? Maybe kinda close though, right? When i think nativist, i invariably come around to the absolutely HATEFUL character played by Daniel Day Lewis in Gangs of New York something that could be made roughly analogous to many on the Boogaloo movement, no? Lewis plays him so well i end up cursing at the tv screen as he "acts" in the times depicted in the film...a masterful performance.



Now Salty and 6 and other Trumpists around here will chortle at the thought that there are 70+ million Bill The Butchers out there...no...but it may be the nativist sentiment writ large that showed up in many ways in voting booths on November 3rd...

..

Bill had a lot of followers. I didn’t like that film the first time I saw it but watched it a second time and loved it. I have seen it maybe 6 times. I have thought of it often during these Trump years.

[ggait]

I wouldn't agree with you here. There seem to be a number of states that were pretty close.

2020 is the same close as 2016. 306 EVs to the winner. 3-4 states with 5 figure margins. Hillary conceded at 3 AM on election night within hours of the call. The only recount was initiated by Jill Stein weeks later, which Hillary then joined.

The outcome was never in doubt in 2016 or 2020. Because the margins were way outside of "recount close" where the outcome could change. And because at least three states would have to flip to make a difference.

Bush v Gore in 2000 was recount close -- 500 votes in one state.

Trump is within his rights to contest. Because in America, even whiny little beyotches have rights.

[kramerica.inc]

I wouldn't agree with you here. There seem to be a number of states that were pretty close.

2020 is the same close as 2016. 306 EVs to the winner. 3-4 states with 5 figure margins. Hillary conceded at 3 AM on election night within hours of the call. The only recount was initiated by Jill Stein weeks later, which Hillary then joined.

The outcome was never in doubt in 2016 or 2020. Because the margins were way outside of "recount close" where the outcome could change. And because at least three states would have to flip to make a difference.

Bush v Gore in 2000 was recount close -- 500 votes in one state.

Trump is within his rights to contest. Because in America, even whiny little beyotches have rights.

For posterity gotta save this one.

Because in America, even whiny little beyotches have rights.

-ggait

I'm sure all the lawyers here love this fact.

[dislaxxic]

Does ANYONE doubt that Bill would be somewhere high up in a Trump government were he alive today??



..

[cradleandshoot]

Thanks for throwing the term "nativist" in there MD...i've been thinking about that alot lately as we try to make sense of the 70+ million Trump votes that stunned the world.

That's not exactly thought of the same way the word "racist" is, is it? Maybe kinda close though, right? When i think nativist, i invariably come around to the absolutely HATEFUL character played by Daniel Day Lewis in Gangs of New York something that could be made roughly analogous to many on the Boogaloo movement, no? Lewis plays him so well i end up cursing at the tv screen as he "acts" in the times depicted in the film...a masterful performance.



Now Salty and 6 and other Trumpists around here will chortle at the thought that there are 70+ million Bill The Butchers out there...no...but it may be the nativist sentiment writ large that showed up in many ways in voting booths on November 3rd...

..

Come on Dis, it was those damn Irish that were the problem.

[cradleandshoot]

Only way to win in Georgia is to get all the trump voters to turn out in January.

You break with trump now, guaranteed loss.

Party over country.

I think the trump voters will come out in georgia no matter what. I would think this is less about trump and more about the importance of keeping the senate to the republican party. Checks and balances is a good thing. I would think all Republicans understand what the bottom line is.

The question is what % of those voters are Trump Cult versus "Republican". Even a small portion of those who voted for Trump becoming angry at the GOP "Establishment" could mean they stay home... and if the Dems show up...

Would that not be called biting off your own nose just to spite your face? The hardcore trump folks are not stupid. Of course maybe giving the keys to the steamroller over to the democrats will be a beautiful thing to them?

[Cooter]

Because of my disdain and repulsion from the core nativist, authoritarian, isolationist strains of Trumpism and the depredations of man-child himself, (yes, TDS), I was hoping this election would be a crushing, ignominious loss for him.

The numbers, while overwhelming and historic, fall short as the fever had not actually broken yet among 70 million voters and this election was not yet a rejection of the GOP enablers of Trump. The GOP has not yet been punished by the voters.

And yet, Trump appears determined to turn the loss into historical ignominy for himself, his toadies, and the cult followers.

A few weeks to check the result would just be a blink in the annals of history.

Your wanting to wreak revenge on people just because they believe differently than you is disgusting. You would fit in well with Stalin.

[dislaxxic]

The hardcore trump folks are not stupid.

"Stupid" maybe not? I dunno...we report, you decide...



..

[a fan]

I would think that most every single establishment republican out there would consider it a badge of honor to break with trump. The people that support him have to understand it is time to move on.

Not a chance. You can't put the cat back in the bag, and I tried to explain this to posters like OS when Trump got elected.

Establishment Republicans think that Trump was an anomaly. They think that when he's gone, "Republican can get back to normal".

Nope. Too late for that. Trump has done more damage to the US that anyone seems to understand.

To wit: 70% of Republican voters think the election was fraudulent. If you see that number, and understand that there is zero----none----evidence of widespread fraud in multiple States...and (snicker) only for the box marked "Trump", and the other races are perfectly fine? You understand the serious trouble our nation is in.

I wagered with Old Salt that that 70% number wouldn't dip below 50% after the fake investigations into fraud are finished.

Today? I'm feeling like that number might go UP, not down.

Lost. Republicans are completely and utterly lost at sea.

[seacoaster]

Only way to win in Georgia is to get all the trump voters to turn out in January.

You break with trump now, guaranteed loss.

Party over country.

Exactly right. Perdue and Loeffler desperately need high turnout, and that comes from the GOP base, which is now the Trumpist base. That core group of supporters IS the GOP now. And I'm not seeing that unravel any time soon, and certainly not before January 7.