commander in chief

[mykc14]

I also saw a post that up to 40% of republicans don't believe it was a fair election...of course, had they won, would they feel differently?

Of course they would and the Dems would be the one's crying about voter fraud and Russian involvement, etc.. The only difference between right now and 4 years ago was the fact that the sitting president wasn't up for re-election. If Hillary would have been president do you think she would quietly bow out right now? Of course not, she would have been doing something similar to what Trump is doing.

[mykc14]

Fraud? Says who? Are you saying there are politically motivated employees within the election process doing harmful actions to benefit their own interest?

The election process needs to be as clean as possible. Do you think voter fraud isn't happening? Of course it is. Both sides are going to take advantage of any possible path to victory.

[Aseahawkfan]

Of course they would and the Dems would be the one's crying about voter fraud and Russian involvement, etc.. The only difference between right now and 4 years ago was the fact that the sitting president wasn't up for re-election. If Hillary would have been president do you think she would quietly bow out right now? Of course not, she would have been doing something similar to what Trump is doing.

This is the era of graceless defeat and graceless victory. And lots of crazy.

[mykc14]

Yeah "massive" voter fraud is a myth. It's always small scale and sporadic if it exists at all.

Like I said earlier I don't think there was enough fraud to change the outcome of the election, but don't you think voter fraud should always be investigated and those who were involved be punished harshly?

[mykc14]

I agree with that take, too. There is absolutely no justifiable reason not to start the transition process, and I, too, am outraged at Trump's attitude during the aftermath of the election. It's having a tangible effect on the country.

He has almost no justifiable reason to do a lot of the stuff he does. He has responded exactly like anybody would expect. He is going to beat this dead horse until he dies. There won't be a time that this election comes up around him where he doesn't blame cheating on his loss. This is not going to be a clean transition or succession, he's going to do everything he can to make Biden's first few months in office as difficult as possible trying to clean up his mess.

[RiverDog]

Yeah "massive" voter fraud is a myth. It's always small scale and sporadic if it exists at all.

A myth? Chicago has been notorious for voter fraud in the 20th century:

Where There's Smoke, There's Fire: 100,000 Stolen Votes in Chicago

Chicago, however, is known for its fires, and there was a roaring one there in 1982 that resulted in one of the largest voter fraud prosecutions ever conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice. The telltale smoke arose out of one of the closest governor's races in Illi­nois history; and as for the fire, the U.S. Attorney in Chicago at the time, Daniel Webb, estimated that at least 100,000 fraudulent votes (10 percent of all votes in the city) had been cast.[2] Sixty-five individuals were indicted for federal election crimes, and all but two (one found incompetent to stand trial and another who died) were convicted.

Over 60 people going to jail for election crimes sounds pretty massive to me. And it's not limited to Chicago:

Recent cases in Wisconsin and Tennessee show that the tactics used in Chicago to steal votes have not been forgotten and are still in use today, despite the election "reforms" of recent years.

In Wisconsin-a state that John Kerry won by only 11,000 votes-the technique of running com­parisons between the voter registration list and other databases was employed in a 2004 investiga­tion of possible voter fraud in Milwaukee.[61] The Milwaukee Police Department's Special Investiga­tions Unit, working with the U.S. Attorney's Office, the local district attorney, and the FBI, used Google databases, motor vehicle records, telephone direc­tories, Assessor's Office records, and U.S. Postal Service records to investigate allegations of voter fraud. They uncovered a variety of problems:

5,217 "students" who were registered to vote at a polling place located within the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee who listed as their resi­dence an on-campus dormitory that housed only 2,600 students;

At least 220 ineligible felons who had voted;

370 addresses that were not legal residences in the city;

Residents of other states (such as a voter from Chicago) who registered and voted in Milwaukee;

Numerous staffers from out of state who were working for the Kerry campaign or the Environ­mental Victory Campaign, a political action committee, and who illegally registered and voted in Milwaukee; and

Hundreds of homeless individuals registered as living at office buildings, at store fronts, and in multiple locations who were "able to vote in different districts and, by sheer number, could have an impact on a closely contested local election."

https://www.heritage.org/election-integ ... es-chicago

[RiverDog]

Mind you, I am not subscribing to Trump's conspiracy theories. There is absolutely no evidence of voter fraud occurring in this election of the type of which I referred to above. There is no "smoke" in this election, at least not so far.

[I-5]

don't you think voter fraud should always be investigated and those who were involved be punished harshly?

No one would ever disagree with this, given if there was evidence to show for it. Of course fraud, if it's shown, should be investigated and punished. It simply doesn't apply here. We know Trump is being Trump by fighting it all the way to inauguration. What is the rest of the party's excuse, though? I'm talking about McConnell, Pompeo, Pence, Graham, etc. I remember Riv saying that once Trump lost, the party leaders wouldn't be able to wait to dump him overboard. It's almost a week after, and they're still hanging on. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

[mykc14]

No one would ever disagree with this, given if there was evidence to show for it. Of course fraud, if it's shown, should be investigated and punished. It simply doesn't apply here. We know Trump is being Trump by fighting it all the way to inauguration. What is the rest of the party's excuse, though? I'm talking about McConnell, Pompeo, Pence, Graham, etc. I remember Riv saying that once Trump lost, the party leaders wouldn't be able to wait to dump him overboard. It's almost a week after, and they're still hanging on. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

In no way am I saying that there is evidence that enough fraud has happened to change the results of the election, but there *some* evidence of fraud. I would say there's as much evidence of Fraud in this election than there was last election and in previous elections and I think it needs to be investigated. I'm not saying it should stop Trump from admitting defeat or anything like that. I think we should look for fraud after every major election. There is a chance that the Republicans will lose the Senate. Those Republican leaders that you mentioned above still are holding onto the idea of fraud, just in case. As far as distancing themselves from Trump, I hope it happens but I wouldn't think it would until Biden has firmly been inaugurated. I hope Biden brings the parties together, there's certainly more hope of that with him than Trump, but if he let's the squad run rampant politically you might still see the Republicans following Trump's blueprint. I hope level heads prevail on both sides after Trump is long gone.

[I-5]

Mykc14, if there is as much evidence of fraud in this election as last election, was this something that youwanted to see in 2016 when Trump won, and in the elections that led to a Senate majority for the republicans the last 6 years?

[RiverDog]

No one would ever disagree with this, given if there was evidence to show for it. Of course fraud, if it's shown, should be investigated and punished. It simply doesn't apply here. We know Trump is being Trump by fighting it all the way to inauguration. What is the rest of the party's excuse, though? I'm talking about McConnell, Pompeo, Pence, Graham, etc. I remember Riv saying that once Trump lost, the party leaders wouldn't be able to wait to dump him overboard. It's almost a week after, and they're still hanging on. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Trump hasn't officially lost until the electoral college votes in mid December, at least not in the minds of a lot of Republicans. Let's wait until then to see how many actually stay on the sinking ship.

But I agree, a lot of the Republicans, like Lindsey Graham, are completely irrational in their defense of Trump.

[Aseahawkfan]

No one would ever disagree with this, given if there was evidence to show for it. Of course fraud, if it's shown, should be investigated and punished. It simply doesn't apply here. We know Trump is being Trump by fighting it all the way to inauguration. What is the rest of the party's excuse, though? I'm talking about McConnell, Pompeo, Pence, Graham, etc. I remember Riv saying that once Trump lost, the party leaders wouldn't be able to wait to dump him overboard. It's almost a week after, and they're still hanging on. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

A perfunctory statement by McConnell is not support. I've read that many big Republican donors have moved on from Trump to other matters. Mostly they're appeasing the big crying baby in the White House with some perfunctory statement due to the reaction of a percentage of the 70 billion who voted for Trump. I haven't heard many except the crazies that are truly buying into any kind of election fraud.

It's easier to appease the baby and the looney percentage of his followers until The Baby gets tossed out.

I expect nothing less from Pompeo, Barr, and the other sycophants that joined the Trump team knowing loyalty to the bitter end was required.

[Aseahawkfan]

Trump hasn't officially lost until the electoral college votes in mid December, at least not in the minds of a lot of Republicans. Let's wait until then to see how many actually stay on the sinking ship.

But I agree, a lot of the Republicans, like Lindsey Graham, are completely irrational in their defense of Trump.

Some Trump supporting loon was telling me he thinks the electors will somehow throw their votes to Trump on December 14. I told him Trump's all done.

If some looney situation like that happened, then I guess we would have a Civil War. I wouldn't tolerate faithless electors deciding this election. I'd be on Biden's side at that point. Just like I'd be on the Republican side if the Democrats try to take power via popular vote in a Republic. The electoral college is a system that allows a balance of power for smaller states and minority groups in rural and suburban areas. Cities and large population centers should not get to decide everything for the nation. And faithless electors should not get to vote against what their states have decided they should do.

[Aseahawkfan]

Trump hasn't officially lost until the electoral college votes in mid December, at least not in the minds of a lot of Republicans. Let's wait until then to see how many actually stay on the sinking ship.

But I agree, a lot of the Republicans, like Lindsey Graham, are completely irrational in their defense of Trump.

I lost all respect for Lindsey Graham. I can't believe he supports Trump like he does. Ted Cruz either. Ridiculous.

[mykc14]

Mykc14, if there is as much evidence of fraud in this election as last election, was this something that youwanted to see in 2016 when Trump won, and in the elections that led to a Senate majority for the republicans the last 6 years?

Yes, I think we should look for evidence of voter fraud in just about every election. I absolutely was for investigating the possibility of Russian involvement in the 2016 election. Now the time, money, etc that it took seemed extreme and ridiculous looking back, but the initial investigation seems justified to me. Obviously these investigations need to be done within reason.

[I-5]

Of course they would and the Dems would be the one's crying about voter fraud and Russian involvement, etc..

In 2016, Russian interference in the election was raised via wikileaks, fake news on facebook etc, which the FBI agreed with. I am not aware of any claims of voter fraud within the actual election, even though the democrats lost. The only complaint I heard was that we should do away with the electoral system, which is still a valid topic of discussion, but not an accusation of fraud. That is far, far different than what some republican voters are saying now. It’s not the same argument by a long shot.

So if Hillary has won in 2016, and lost in 2020, I see no evidence to suggest the democrats would be crying fraud. Show me evidence where they would. Hillary even gave a classy concession speech on election night. Remember, Trump was already hedging before the 2016 election that the system was rigged, until he won. There is no equivalency to be made here.

[mykc14]

In 2016, Russian interference in the election was raised via wikileaks, fake news on facebook etc, which the FBI agreed with. I am not aware of any claims of voter fraud within the actual election, even though the democrats lost. The only complaint I heard was that we should do away with the electoral system, which is still a valid topic of discussion, but not an accusation of fraud. That is far, far different than what some republican voters are saying now. It’s not the same argument by a long shot.

So if Hillary has won in 2016, and lost in 2020, I see no evidence to suggest the democrats would be crying fraud. Show me evidence where they would. Hillary even gave a classy concession speech on election night. Remember, Trump was already hedging before the 2016 election that the system was rigged, until he won. There is no equivalency to be made here.

Really? We must remember it differently. I remember many Democrats complaining that the Russians directly messed with the election, including voter fraud. There were discussions that Russia stole voter information, hacked voting systems in some states, and were responsible for 'fake' votes. I see that as similar to what is being thrown out there right now, but on the domestic front.

As far as Hilary goes she did concede and actually made a pretty good speech. I was impressed. That she conceded the race doesn't mean that the Democrats didn't cry fraud and in fact spent the next 4 years trying to get Trump out of office.

[I-5]

I do not recall any accusations that the Russians actually hacked into the voting rolls. You heard that? I'd like to know where/who said that.

To say that there is fraud, in that election workers are actively trying to sway an election...that's a pretty big claim. Again, what evidence? Do I think there are mistakes made? Of course. But I have never accused or thought that a republican or democrat was actively committing election fraud. This needs evidence if you're going to claim that.

During election night, when Trump had the early lead due to the delay in counting mail in ballots, a lot of my democrat friends were upset that Trump might win, but they were more disappointed in their country...I didn't hear accusations of cheating or fraud, just sadness at what they thought might happen. This claim from republicans who think it's fraud, would not be saying that if Trump won, and I don't think there is any evidence to say the dems would do the same other than to argue doing away with the electoral college.

Despite ASF's rampant belief system about me, I still believe in the system, and I don't think people are intentionally committing fraud.

[RiverDog]

Trump hasn't officially lost until the electoral college votes in mid December, at least not in the minds of a lot of Republicans. Let's wait until then to see how many actually stay on the sinking ship.

But I agree, a lot of the Republicans, like Lindsey Graham, are completely irrational in their defense of Trump.

S

Some Trump supporting loon was telling me he thinks the electors will somehow throw their votes to Trump on December 14. I told him Trump's all done.

If some looney situation like that happened, then I guess we would have a Civil War. I wouldn't tolerate faithless electors deciding this election. I'd be on Biden's side at that point. Just like I'd be on the Republican side if the Democrats try to take power via popular vote in a Republic. The electoral college is a system that allows a balance of power for smaller states and minority groups in rural and suburban areas. Cities and large population centers should not get to decide everything for the nation. And faithless electors should not get to vote against what their states have decided they should do.

It's not going to happen. The reason we see faithless electors is because they know that their vote won't change the outcome. It's purely symbolic.

But I absolutely agree that they need to get rid of the actual college and make the vote automatic. That part of it has been antiquated for 150 years.

[Hawktawk]

Really? We must remember it differently. I remember many Democrats complaining that the Russians directly messed with the election, including voter fraud. There were discussions that Russia stole voter information, hacked voting systems in some states, and were responsible for 'fake' votes. I see that as similar to what is being thrown out there right now, but on the domestic front.

As far as Hilary goes she did concede and actually made a pretty good speech. I was impressed. That she conceded the race doesn't mean that the Democrats didn't cry fraud and in fact spent the next 4 years trying to get Trump out of office.

You are way behind the 8 ball on russian interference and Trumps welcoming of it. Hillary Clintons campaign wasn't aware of the investigation until after the election. It was true including Trump asking if Russia would please find the missing E mails(they hacked them the very same day) He praised cyber terrorist organization Wikileaks dozens of times and they leaked the e mails. Gates and Manafort shared precinct by precinct polling data in swing states with a russian Oligarch and intelligence asset in a cigar bar owned by Jarred Kushner(why woould they do that?). Trump perjured himself in WRITTEN answers, committed obstruction of justice on numerous occasions. The republican chaired senate intelligence report of over 1000 pages detailed over 240 clandestine contacts between Trump operatives and russian agents and described Paul Manafort who ran the Trump campaign during the convention an "extreme national security threat" NSA director Dan Coates, an indiana R senator said "russia has something on him"
Trump should have been impeached the day the Mueller report was released.He remains a national security threat and always will be as long as he's alive.

[RiverDog]

You are way behind the 8 ball on russian interference and Trumps welcoming of it. Hillary Clintons campaign wasn't aware of the investigation until after the election. It was true including Trump asking if Russia would please find the missing E mails(they hacked them the very same day) He praised cyber terrorist organization Wikileaks dozens of times and they leaked the e mails. Gates and Manafort shared precinct by precinct polling data in swing states with a russian Oligarch and intelligence asset in a cigar bar owned by Jarred Kushner(why woould they do that?). Trump perjured himself in WRITTEN answers, committed obstruction of justice on numerous occasions. The republican chaired senate intelligence report of over 1000 pages detailed over 240 clandestine contacts between Trump operatives and russian agents and described Paul Manafort who ran the Trump campaign during the convention an "extreme national security threat" NSA director Dan Coates, an indiana R senator said "russia has something on him"
Trump should have been impeached the day the Mueller report was released.He remains a national security threat and always will be as long as he's alive.

I am somewhat with mykc on this one, at least to a point. There were rumors circulating for months prior to the 2016 election about possible Russian involvement, and Hillary complained vociferously about it shortly after the election. She also aired lots of complaints about the electoral process, about the alleged timed release of emails, and made very few if any admissions that she ran a very poor campaign against what was widely considered to be a very weak candidate. I did not regard her response, or that of most Democrats, as a dignified one and helped set the tone for the very acrimonious 4 years that followed.

However, as much as I despise that old hag, I think it's a huge assumption that she would refuse to concede an election in a manner anywhere close to how Trump is behaving in this one.

[mykc14]

You are way behind the 8 ball on russian interference and Trumps welcoming of it. Hillary Clintons campaign wasn't aware of the investigation until after the election. It was true including Trump asking if Russia would please find the missing E mails(they hacked them the very same day) He praised cyber terrorist organization Wikileaks dozens of times and they leaked the e mails. Gates and Manafort shared precinct by precinct polling data in swing states with a russian Oligarch and intelligence asset in a cigar bar owned by Jarred Kushner(why woould they do that?). Trump perjured himself in WRITTEN answers, committed obstruction of justice on numerous occasions. The republican chaired senate intelligence report of over 1000 pages detailed over 240 clandestine contacts between Trump operatives and russian agents and described Paul Manafort who ran the Trump campaign during the convention an "extreme national security threat" NSA director Dan Coates, an indiana R senator said "russia has something on him"
Trump should have been impeached the day the Mueller report was released.He remains a national security threat and always will be as long as he's alive.

No, I’m not way behind the 8-ball. We were talking about how the Dems reacted around the 2016 election, not what the Mueller report turned up. The Mueller report came out 3 and a half years after the election. I was speaking to the fact that had the dems lost this election there would be crying of fraud, which did happen 4- years ago. I’m not saying Biden wouldn’t have conceded or they would be acting as childish as Trump, but they would have fought it. I mean Pelosi threatened to impeach Trump if he nominated a SCOTUS 2 months ago. You can’t honestly believe that the Dems would just take the result. They spent 4 years trying to get rid of Trump and you’re telling me they wouldn’t be looking under every rock possible for fraud?

[mykc14]

However, as much as I despise that old hag, I think it's a huge assumption that she would refuse to concede an election in a manner anywhere close to how Trump is behaving in this one.

Yeah, I agree, and I don’t think Biden would refuse to concede either. I don’t know where Hawktalk got the idea that I felt that way. I’ve said numerous times I don’t think anybody would act like Trump.

[RiverDog]

However, as much as I despise that old hag, I think it's a huge assumption that she would refuse to concede an election in a manner anywhere close to how Trump is behaving in this one.

Yeah, I agree, and I don’t think Biden would refuse to concede either. I don’t know where Hawktalk got the idea that I felt that way. I’ve said numerous times I don’t think anybody would act like Trump.

To his credit, Biden is handling Trump's foot dragging very well, trying to defuse the outrage that many of his supporters rightfully feel and has downplayed the value of being made privy to intelligence briefings by saying that he doesn't have any decisions to make anyway.

However, I saw a piece today that noted how in the 9/11 commission's report, they noted how the Democrat's delay in conceding the 2000 election by some 37 days put the incoming Bush Administration at a disadvantage that caused a security risk. There's no good reason why Biden and his closest advisors shouldn't have access to the President's daily security briefings. Trump doesn't read them anyway.

McConnell indicated yesterday that Republicans would start to acknowledge the results of the election once states started certifying their votes. Pennsylvania certifies theirs on 11/23, and without PA, Trump is without a path to the Electoral College.

[I-5]

had the dems lost this election there would be crying of fraud, which did happen 4- years ago.

I will have to keep pushing back. I did NOT hear of any claims of fraud when Hillary lost the 2016 election, not from Hillary, not from the news media, and not from my social media. Russian disinformation is disinformation, but it's not fraud. The complaints that I DID hear was about the problems with the electoral system. Again, this isn't fraud.

Biden said at the last debate that if the votes don't go his way, he would accept that. Of course, Trump will only say 'we'll see'.

So I'm not buying any claim that the democrats would have claimed fraud had they lost, because I haven't seen any evidence to suggest it.

[RiverDog]

I will have to keep pushing back. I did NOT hear of any claims of fraud when Hillary lost the 2016 election, not from Hillary, not from the news media, and not from my social media. Russian disinformation is disinformation, but it's not fraud. The complaints that I DID hear was about the problems with the electoral system. Again, this isn't fraud.

Biden said at the last debate that if the votes don't go his way, he would accept that. Of course, Trump will only say 'we'll see'.

So I'm not buying any claim that the democrats would have claimed fraud had they lost, because I haven't seen any evidence to suggest it.

HRC may not have used the word "fraud", but she has been using some of the exact same terms that Trump has been using, like "stolen" and "shenanigans" :

“I was the candidate that they basically stole an election from,” Clinton said Monday on the New York Times podcast “Sway.”

“I was the candidate who won nearly three million more votes. So no matter how they cut it, it wasn’t the kind of win that people said, ‘OK, it wasn’t my candidate, but OK.’ This election is still front and center in people’s psyches. And people fight about it every day online, because there is a deep sense of unfairness and just dismissiveness toward his victory, and he knows it,” Clinton said.

Clinton blamed her loss in certain key states on former FBI Director James Comey’s letter Congress announcing the existence of emails under investigation. “I absolutely thought I was going to win. So did everybody else. I mean, I know people look back now and say, well, it wasn’t — we were going to win. We were absolutely going to win.”

Her election loss, Clinton complained, was partially due to a disinformation campaign stemming from “vast right-wing conspiracy.”

“There were academic studies done afterward, lots of them, about why people ended up not voting for me, and it was shocking what they believed. I mean, the disinformation was incredibly pervasive,” Clinton said.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/26/fo ... -from-her/

And then there's this:

"There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level,” Clinton said during an interview for the latest episode of The Atlantic’s politics podcast, The Ticket. “We still don’t know what really happened.”

“There’s just a lot that I think will be revealed. History will discover,” the Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential nominee continued. “But you don’t win by 3 million votes and have all this other shenanigans and stuff going on and not come away with an idea like, ‘Whoa, something’s not right here.’ That was a deep sense of unease.”

In August, Clinton said Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden should not concede the upcoming November election “under any circumstances” because she believes “this is going to drag out, and eventually I do believe he will win if we don’t give an inch, and if we are as focused and relentless as the other side is.”

https://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton- ... 16779.html

HRC is essentially saying that should Biden have lost, that he should be doing exactly the same thing that Trump is doing now. I don't think using her as an example helps your case.

[RiverDog]

And here's another example of Hillary's avoidance of accepting the outcome of the 2016 election:

I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference. And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.

The Washington Post Fact-Checker team basically breaks out the separate keys held by separate operators, verifies the launch codes, and nukes her alternate history:

There’s an important debate to be had over voter ID laws and their effect on turnout, considering how rare voter fraud cases are in the United States and the risk of disenfranchisement. We’re looking at something different here. Clinton made a series of specific claims that were way off-base.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in 2013 had no bearing on Wisconsin. The University of Wisconsin-Madison study she relied on for her 40,000 estimate says its findings from two counties should not be extrapolated to form statewide conclusions. Her spokesman did not cite any study for the 80,000 estimate. Voter registration in Georgia did not decline from 2012 to 2016.

Wrong on multiple levels, seriously misleading, and worth a cumulative Four Pinocchios.

How different from this is Donald Trump’s claim, “I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally”? If the mainstream media could offer some belated acknowledgement that the 2016 campaign was between two dishonest, egomaniacal narcissists prone to rewriting history to please their egos, it would be appreciated.

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morn ... -election/

The bold part explains exactly why I voted for Gary Johnson in 2016. Those two deserved each other.

[mykc14]

I will have to keep pushing back. I did NOT hear of any claims of fraud when Hillary lost the 2016 election, not from Hillary, not from the news media, and not from my social media. Russian disinformation is disinformation, but it's not fraud. The complaints that I DID hear was about the problems with the electoral system. Again, this isn't fraud.

Biden said at the last debate that if the votes don't go his way, he would accept that. Of course, Trump will only say 'we'll see'.

So I'm not buying any claim that the democrats would have claimed fraud had they lost, because I haven't seen any evidence to suggest it.

You can push back all you want, at the end of the day it is just an opinion. Whether the situations are exactly the same or not is irrelevant. After Trumps win in 2016 many Dems were crying foul and the Democratic leadership continued to look for Russian involvement. Included in that involvement was accusations of voter fraud, which investigations showed the Russians at least attempted.

You can deny that the Dems didn’t accept the results of the 2016 election all you want but the 3 years spent investing Russia, the continued claims that the election was stolen, Pelosi claiming she would impeach Trump for nominating somebody to a SCOTUS position, and Dems overall hate red of Trump leads me to believe that they wouldn’t accept these election results without looking at any perceived fraud. I don’t know why you keep bringing up what that Biden would accept the results, that is irrelevant. There is no way Pelosi and the rest of the Dems leadership would accept the results without thoroughly investigating any allegations of voter fraud in my mind.

At the end of the day these are both opinions and I don’t think it matters much. Do you think that if somehow after the investigations, hand recounts, and court decisions that Trump is declared the winner that the Dems would just accept it? I highly doubt it. And just to be clear I don’t think there is ANY chance of that happening. It’s a hypothetical to give a different perspective. I have stated multiple times that I do not think Biden win due to voter fraud.

[I-5]

HRC may not have used the word "fraud", but she has been using some of the exact same terms that Trump has been using, like "stolen" and "shenanigans" :

“I was the candidate that they basically stole an election from,” Clinton said Monday on the New York Times podcast “Sway.”

“I was the candidate who won nearly three million more votes. So no matter how they cut it, it wasn’t the kind of win that people said, ‘OK, it wasn’t my candidate, but OK.’ This election is still front and center in people’s psyches. And people fight about it every day online, because there is a deep sense of unfairness and just dismissiveness toward his victory, and he knows it,” Clinton said.

Clinton blamed her loss in certain key states on former FBI Director James Comey’s letter Congress announcing the existence of emails under investigation. “I absolutely thought I was going to win. So did everybody else. I mean, I know people look back now and say, well, it wasn’t — we were going to win. We were absolutely going to win.”

Her election loss, Clinton complained, was partially due to a disinformation campaign stemming from “vast right-wing conspiracy.”

“There were academic studies done afterward, lots of them, about why people ended up not voting for me, and it was shocking what they believed. I mean, the disinformation was incredibly pervasive,” Clinton said.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/26/fo ... -from-her/

And then there's this:

"There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level,” Clinton said during an interview for the latest episode of The Atlantic’s politics podcast, The Ticket. “We still don’t know what really happened.”

“There’s just a lot that I think will be revealed. History will discover,” the Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential nominee continued. “But you don’t win by 3 million votes and have all this other shenanigans and stuff going on and not come away with an idea like, ‘Whoa, something’s not right here.’ That was a deep sense of unease.”

In August, Clinton said Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden should not concede the upcoming November election “under any circumstances” because she believes “this is going to drag out, and eventually I do believe he will win if we don’t give an inch, and if we are as focused and relentless as the other side is.”

https://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton- ... 16779.html

HRC is essentially saying that should Biden have lost, that he should be doing exactly the same thing that Trump is doing now. I don't think using her as an example helps your case.

I read the above, and despite the soundbite of Hillary saying 'stole' and 'sway', the argument came down to Russian disinformation, and the electoral collage. Neither of which constitutes fraud in the actual elective process. I did forget to mention voter disinfranchisement, which is a euphymism for efforts by some to make it harder for blacks from some areas to vote, but again that's not election fraud per se....just people being dicks.

I myself was resigned to the idea that Biden might lose the election on the election night, and I wasn't going to cry foul or fraud but just be sad at my fellow americans....but I decided to not think about it too much, and wait for the mail in ballots to begin to be counted. Glad I did.

Bottom line, I believed in the system when Gore lost, even though I disagreed with the Supreme Court's ruling, when Obama beat Bush and Romney, and even when Trump beat Hillary. The system works, despite some mistakes that are made. I don't think anyone is sabotaging the voting mechanism to insure one candidate wins over the other. I believe americans want a fair election, despite the nastiness of politics.

[RiverDog]

I read the above, and despite the soundbite of Hillary saying 'stole' and 'sway', the argument came down to Russian disinformation, and the electoral collage. Neither of which constitutes fraud in the actual elective process. I did forget to mention voter disinfranchisement, which is a euphymism for efforts by some to make it harder for blacks from some areas to vote, but again that's not election fraud per se....just people being dicks.

I appreciate your taking the time to read what I posted. BTW, "Sway" was the name of the NYT podcast. It wasn't a term used by Hillary.

I think you're getting hung up on semantics. There's not a lot of difference between the terms "fraud", "stolen", "shenanigans", and "disenfranchisement". They all suggest some sort of illegal or unethical conspiracy. I agree that Trump is taking it to a completely different and unprecedented level like he always does, but it's still a valid point that the Democrats have in the past accused their opponents of misdoings without a lot of evidence and a reasonable assumption that they might have been acting similarly had Biden lost a close election.

Bottom line, I believed in the system when Gore lost, even though I disagreed with the Supreme Court's ruling, when Obama beat Bush and Romney, and even when Trump beat Hillary. The system works, despite some mistakes that are made. I don't think anyone is sabotaging the voting mechanism to insure one candidate wins over the other. I believe americans want a fair election, despite the nastiness of politics.

I agree, except for the part of the SCOTUS ruling in Bush v. Gore.

I will say that I am very pleased with the way Biden has been reacting to all of this. He's going forward with putting together his Administration and trying to keep his followers from being incited by Trump and the Republicans refusal to accept the results. Considering the coronavirus crisis, he needs to hit the ground running on Jan. 20th. And to be fair, there have been a number of Republicans that have come out and said that they accept the results and will work with a Biden administration. It's not like the entire party is revolting.

[I-5]

I think you're getting hung up on semantics. There's not a lot of difference between the terms "fraud", "stolen", "shenanigans", and "disenfranchisement".

I don’t think it’s semantics. I’m talking about what literally happens to ballots once they’re submitted, and the people whose job it is to tally the votes once the polls have closed and mailing deadlines have been reached. I don’t believe there is any substantiated fraud claims in THAT part of process unless someone can show evidence.

[RiverDog]

I think you're getting hung up on semantics. There's not a lot of difference between the terms "fraud", "stolen", "shenanigans", and "disenfranchisement".

I don’t think it’s semantics. I’m talking about what literally happens to ballots once they’re submitted, and the people whose job it is to tally the votes once the polls have closed and mailing deadlines have been reached. I don’t believe there is any substantiated fraud claims in THAT part of process unless someone can show evidence.

"Fraud" is a general term that includes a lot of things besides tampering with a ballot. An impersonation of a voter is fraud. An illegal registration, such as a felon, is fraud. Voting multiple times is fraud. Voting outside your precinct is fraud. All of those possibilities have to be examined during the ballot validation process.

I agree that there is no evidence of any kind of fraud in this election, ballot tampering, as you mentioned, or otherwise. But that's not what we've been arguing about. As I understand it, our disagreement comes from a hypothetical statement that was made claiming that the Democrats would be crying foul had the election not gone their way, and IMO there is plenty of evidence that suggests that they might have. It is not an unreasonable assumption.

[Aseahawkfan]

Election fraud or manipulation is usually a tactic of the loser to make the winner seem illegitimate. It's foolishness. Trump is engaging in his usual selfish behavior because it's always all about him. I read he is begging for money to continue his legal fight because he doesn't even want to use his own money to fight. He loves using other people's money for his personal ego driven BS.

[I-5]

"Fraud" is a general term that includes a lot of things besides tampering with a ballot. An impersonation of a voter is fraud. An illegal registration, such as a felon, is fraud. Voting multiple times is fraud. Voting outside your precinct is fraud. All of those possibilities have to be examined during the ballot validation process.

I'm fine with this broader definition as well, and simply see no evidence of widespread fraud, no matter if Trump or Biden won.

[mykc14]

I'm fine with this broader definition as well, and simply see no evidence of widespread fraud, no matter if Trump or Biden won.

I don’t think anybody on here is arguing that there is any evidence of widespread fraud.

[mykc14]

But that's not what we've been arguing about. As I understand it, our disagreement comes from a hypothetical statement that was made claiming that the Democrats would be crying foul had the election not gone their way

That is what I understand the disagreement is as well.

[I-5]

The losing party always whines and that's to be expected...but I don't think the democrats would be claiming fraud had Trump won. When it was apparent that Trump was leading election night, none of my democrat friends on social media cried foul, just shock that we were about to elect this dangerous fool once again. When it comes to whining and complaining even BEFORE the election, Trump has no peer.

[Aseahawkfan]

The losing party always whines and that's to be expected...but I don't think the democrats would be claiming fraud had Trump won. When it was apparent that Trump was leading election night, none of my democrat friends on social media cried foul, just shock that we were about to elect this dangerous fool once again. When it comes to whining and complaining even BEFORE the election, Trump has no peer.

Trump is the worst whiner. He's a big , whining baby. We'll see if anyone can talk him into doing the right thing in the end, but I wouldn't put money in Vegas on it. Trump hasn't seen a petty, vindictive grudge he didn't want to grind.

[RiverDog]

The losing party always whines and that's to be expected...but I don't think the democrats would be claiming fraud had Trump won. When it was apparent that Trump was leading election night, none of my democrat friends on social media cried foul, just shock that we were about to elect this dangerous fool once again.

I'm not sure what, if anything, that underlined statement proves.

The reason the Republicans were crying foul on election night in this election is because Trump, seeing that he was trailing in the polls and needing an excuse to protect his ego in the likely event that he lost, had primed the pump for months prior. Had he not done so, I doubt that you would have heard any of them complaining on election night. It certainly wasn't the case in other recent close elections in 2000, 2004, and 2016.

Whether or not the Democrats would have claimed fraud had Trump won is speculative and likely based on our own political leanings. But when you have the former nominee out there behaving in the manner that HRC was, it's just as logical to conclude that they would have as you are claiming that they wouldn't.

When it comes to whining and complaining even BEFORE the election, Trump has no peer.

Agreed.

[RiverDog]

Election fraud or manipulation is usually a tactic of the loser to make the winner seem illegitimate. It's foolishness. Trump is engaging in his usual selfish behavior because it's always all about him. I read he is begging for money to continue his legal fight because he doesn't even want to use his own money to fight. He loves using other people's money for his personal ego driven BS.

Trump's getting a freebie in Georgia, but he needs Pennsylvania to flip if he wants to overturn the election and he's likely going to have to plop down some big bucks with little chance of success:

A wider challenge that would seek to have the statewide results thrown out on grounds that the election was somehow illegal would have to be filed by Nov. 23 in state Commonwealth Court.

At least 100 voters would have to sign on, including five who have signed affidavits about why they think the election was illegal, or that there was something wrong with the voting or counting.

That process requires a bond to be posted. When Green Party candidate Jill Stein went that route four years ago, the bond was set at $1 million. She subsequently withdrew her challenge.

After Nov. 23, Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar must tabulate, compute and canvass votes for all races, with no specific deadline. Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf will in turn certify the winning presidential candidate's slate of Electoral College electors and send it to the national archivist. Four years ago, both actions occurred on the same day in mid-December.